How’s the One Percent Wine Fee Working for Santa Barbara Wineries? 

Though the one percent fee on wine sales didn’t generate as much money as originally estimated by the Santa Barbara County Vintners Association, the organization did put the $1.1 million generated over the past year to good use, according to the Vintners CEO Alison Laslett. 

In a presentation on Tuesday to the county Board of Supervisors about the wine improvement district (WID), which began collecting payments in April 2025, she outlined the progress made in the program’s inaugural year: hiring a national PR firm, expanding its media-hosting program, creating an informational website for district members, and launching a digital marketing campaign. She provided numerous metrics for the resulting impact, including 3.1 billion digital impressions since the work began. Read the report here.  

The proceeds were about $500,000 short of the original predictions because they were based on a robust sales period following COVID, said Laslett. But amid so many headlines reporting struggling wine sales globally, Laslett delivered hopeful news. 

“Santa Barbara County, unlike some other regions, is holding steady or has a very slight increase in sales, whereas other counties this year have declined,” said Laslett. “I do think the work we do is protective for the wine industry right now.”

Supervisor Joan Hartmann was profuse in her support of the program, explaining that the county’s other tourism marketing efforts are fragmented into four different agencies, from Visit Santa Barbara and Visit the Santa Ynez Valley to similar organizations in Lompoc and Santa Maria. “This is precisely … the gap that the wine improvement district fills,” she said. “It’s the only marketing organization in this county that operates at a countywide scale…. They are telling one consistent story of Santa Barbara County.” 

The presentation did not bring up the lawsuit filed earlier this year claiming that the WID is unconstitutional. But two familiar public commenters who have long hated the WID concept did. (The claim could possibly dismantle any business improvement district-like program in the country, from regional tourism bureaus to redevelopment agencies for neglected neighborhoods.) 

Vineyard owner Stephen Pepe primarily warned that the cash-strapped county was opening itself to disastrous financial damage from the suit, which he predicted would last four to eight years. He claimed the winery owners were all “millionaires and billionaires” that don’t need such support anyway. 

And then came Kate Griffith, who co-owns Flying Goat Cellars, which is the official plaintiff in the lawsuit that was filed by Arizona’s Goldwater Institute. She contradicted Pepe’s wealthy-owner characterization, saying that many wineries were boutique operations, and made a number of allegations that Laslett was able to untangle. In response to Griffith’s concerns, the county did say that it would work to track down the wineries that aren’t paying their fees and Laslett agreed to air the WID meetings on Zoom, at Hartmann’s request.

Hartmann also asked for a more structured relationship between the county and the Vintners Association when it comes to making marketing decisions related to the WID fees. Then the board unanimously approved the report.