events – Enviro Updates

Sonoma County BOS passes new cannabis business regulations

December 9, 2025

Emma Murphy, PRESS DEMOCRAT

In the brisk early hours Tuesday morning, Scott Orr, Sonoma County’s planning and permitting director, posted outside the main administrative building yellow and orange signs showing the distance of proposed setback requirements for commercial cannabis farms.

Land-use policy discussions don’t often include such displays, but the signs were another signal of the sharp debate that was expected to prevail Tuesday as the Board of Supervisors was set to adopt revised and controversial regulations governing the commercial cannabis industry outside city limits.

The ordinance overhaul marks the first significant change to the county’s regulations of commercial cannabis cultivation, sales and distribution since 2018.

The board voted 4 to 1 to adopt the new rules, which will take effect July 1.

The vote capped a fractious and labored process launched by the county in 2021 to amend its rules governing commercial cannabis and settle years of criticism from the local legal industry seeking relief from what they called a burdensome permitting process. Residents, as well, have been outspoken, seeking stronger safeguards against noise, odor and strain on limited water supplies.

Agriculture/Food System, Land Usecannabis, cannabis industry, cannabis regulations, events, Farm Bureau, neighborhoods

Close to Home: Supervisors double down on ‘inebriation tourism’

November 2, 2025

Judith Olney, PRESS DEMOCRAT

Once again, the Board of Supervisors is ready to throw Sonoma County taxpayers under the proverbial bus — and then back over us.

On Oct. 28, the board will discuss a cannabis ordinance that would reduce permit fees for cannabis cultivation on properties of 10 acres or more with agricultural or rural resource zoning, with operations only 100 feet from neighboring residences. In addition, the ordinance would allow events with cannabis consumption and sales.

After lowering fees for cannabis growers, the county still must pay for infrastructure and other public services, which means increasing the burden on other taxpayers.

It was bad enough when the supervisors granted the cannabis industry significant tax breaks, leaving residential taxpayers and businesses to cover the shortfall in revenue. Now, contrary to state regulations, the proposed ordinance includes unmitigated rights to host cannabis events, even on parcels that don’t have permits for cannabis cultivation, which require safety measures and qualified on-site security personnel.

With up to 104 event days per venue, plus large-scale cannabis events under zoning permits, the cannabis industry is securing more rights than the wine industry.

Agriculture/Food System, Land Usecannabis, cannabis regulations, events, tourism impacts, traffic, Williamson Act

Sonoma County winery events could be limited by Planning Commission

May 31, 2021

Bill Swindell, THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

After years of wrangling, Sonoma County officials are moving forward this week with a measure that will spell out what wineries can and can’t do when it comes to hosting events.

It’s the latest chapter in a long debate that has pitted the politically powerful sector against local activists and residents who say an influx of tourists is threatening their quality of life with traffic congestion and noise.

The county’s Planning Commission will hold a Thursday meeting in which the panel intends to vote on a draft ordinance that has been crafted by staff.

Planning Commission Meeting information

Planning officials searched for a middle ground between the interests of a main economic driver in the county against mobilized community groups in the areas of Sonoma Valley, Westside Road and Dry Creek Valley where the issue has become a flash point. Permit Sonoma held a virtual forum in February to solicit suggestions from stakeholders and their input went into the document.

The ordinance would set new standards for winery events, spelling out rules covering parking and traffic management; food service; event coordination with neighbors; and noise.

Land Use, Transportationevents, events ordinance, tourism, tourism impacts, traffic, wineries

Why you should participate in the Local Coastal Plan process

November 21, 2019

Eric Koenigshoffer, SONOMA COUNTY GAZETTE

If you are wondering why you should participate in the process now underway to update the Local Coastal Plan let me offer my take on the core reason. The continuation of sound public policy protecting the coast from excessive development while ensuring access to the beach and care of the environment requires commitment. That commitment comes in the form of work…that’s right, work. Doing the work of learning the issues and the process and then showing up.

Sonoma County Permit & Resource Management Department (Permit Sonoma) recently released the Draft Update of the Local Coastal Plan (LCP). Meetings seeking community input are now underway. The draft document is available on-line at the PRMD website. Hard copies are available for review in public libraries around the county. There will be public hearings as the process unfolds.

The current LCP is 270 pages. Find it here.

The draft update LCP is 424 pages. Find it here.

In addition to the main body of the document there is also an appendix of a few hundred pages.

The work of wading through hundreds of pages of (let’s face it) sometimes boring text requires tenacity (and lots of coffee!).

One very basic point to remember when reviewing the Draft LCP is that the Coastal Zone is different than any other area of the county. You will see references made to conforming the LCP and the Sonoma County General Plan. Fact is, the two documents can conform with one another in most aspects but not completely. The Coastal Zone is subject to a variety of statewide policies which do not apply to the General Plan. These policies speak to issues which are unique to the coast. Here are a few examples:
Public Access:

At the core of the 1972 Coastal Initiative and reaffirmed in the 1976 Coastal Act is the public’s right under the California Constitution to access the states shoreline. All policies within the Coastal Zone are subject to this fact. Permits issued in the Coastal Zone often have special conditions applied to implement access.
Visitor Serving facilities:

Coastal access results in visitors. Visitors need services. These services include hotel rooms and other lodging, campgrounds, restaurants, groceries, gas stations, electric charging stations, etc. Implementing access to the shore includes making sure these services are available. This is state policy which does not apply elsewhere in the county. Of course, implementing this policy should be mindful of impacts on local coastal residents and communities while meeting state law.
Coastal Dependent use priority:

Use of land in the Coastal zone is subject to policy which sets priorities by type of use. Protecting environmental values and unique natural features is a high priority. Preserving coastal agriculture is too. Housing to meet local community needs is recognized as also important. A notable specific point is that “coastal dependent” uses are preferred over general commercial uses. For example, visitor serving use such as lodging is preferred over a non-coastal-dependent commercial use.

Update of the LCP and General Plan take place every 20 years to so. This is equivalent to the generally accepted definition of a generation as being 20-years. It is important that each update cycle engage each new generation and explore the policies at issue and the history of how these important policies came to be.

I’m confident Supervisor Hopkins will make sure the public engagement process is truly open and transparent she’s good about such things!

Source: https://www.sonomacountygazette.com/sonoma-county-news/changes-to-our-coast-the-local-coastal-plan-lcp

Sonoma Coastdevelopment, events, Local Coastal Plan

Studies criticize wineries’ effect on rural Sonoma County

November 9, 2019

Tyler Silvy, THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Click here for links to traffic studies

Sonoma County wineries should bear the bulk of the responsibility for improving relations with rural neighbors, according to a pair of recently released county studies calling for fewer events, more coordination and a higher standard of review for new or expanding wineries.

The studies, which waded into the county’s most persistent land-use fight, encompass three of the most popular wine growing and tasting areas: Dry Creek Valley and Westside Road, as well as Sonoma Valley. In the reports, GHD, a private company with offices in Santa Rosa and Walnut Creek, looked at traffic counts, crashes and other symptoms of a long-running battle over the character of rural Sonoma County and expansion of its signature industry.

The reports include some of the strongest criticism of the industry to emerge from the county’s prolonged look at wineries’ rural footprint, including the profusion of events and promotional activities now held by many winemakers. About 450 wineries exist in unincorporated Sonoma County.

Many in the wine industry are not convinced of the need for more strict regulations.

DaVero Farms and Winery owner Ridgely Evers said it’s about balance. The No. 1 problem is a lack of enforcement for current rules, he said. And bad actors will ignore more restrictive rules just like they do now, he added.

“This is a classic issue that you run into any time you intermingle residents and commerce,” said Evers, a 35-year county resident whose winery sits at Dry Creek Road and Westside Road, near the epicenter of the fight. “If you look at it from that perspective, obviously the right thing is some kind of balance.”

But neighbors say the study recommendations don’t go far enough to reduce cumulative impacts, and say many of the suggestions already are standard practice for nearly the past decade.

Judith Olney, co- chairwoman of Preserve Rural Sonoma County and chairwoman of the Westside Community Association, two organizations at odds with continued winery growth in rural areas, said recommendations like expanded shuttle service could actually increase traffic.

And she worries about undue influence from industry leaders, who want to authorize more winery events — and with them, more traffic, Olney said.

Land Use, Transportationevents, tourism, tourism impacts, wine industry, wineries

Sonoma County wine industry seeks to sway county planners on land-use regulations

October 21, 2019

Tyler Silvy, THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Leaders of Sonoma County’s wine industry on Monday fired a new volley in the protracted, cyclical battle over the expansion of their industry, hosting political appointees and county staff for a “mobile educational workshop” in an effort to inject industry-friendly language into long-delayed land-use policy.

Sonoma County Vintners, an industry trade association, organized the unique public meeting of the county’s Planning Commission, with stops including a recently completed 24-person, dormitory-style farmworker residence near Cloverdale, MacRostie Winery Estate west of Healdsburg and Kendall-Jackson Wine Estate and Gardens north of Santa Rosa.

In Cloverdale, it was housing; at Kendall-Jackson, code enforcement. But the backdrop for the meeting was Permit Sonoma’s move to update an ordinance related to agricultural promotional activities — wine tastings and other events that fuel traffic and other impacts in rural areas.

Milan Nevajda, deputy director for Permit Sonoma, the county’s planning department, said the goal is to create an ordinance that balances the tension between what the industry needs and ensuring it can be a good neighbor.

The tension has existed for two decades, as hundreds of new wineries have come on line since the turn of the century, and the business model has shifted to seek more direct-to-consumer sales that have brought forth wine clubs, more tasting rooms and weddings and special, members-only dinners.

Opponents of that expansion have complained about the noise and the traffic, which they say detracts from the bucolic feel of the countryside.

Agriculture/Food Systemevents, events ordinance, Permit Sonoma, tourism impacts, wine industry

Napa County takes first step to rein in wineries that break the law

December 5, 2018

Bill Swindell, THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

After years of wrangling, Napa County took a first step to better police its more than 500 wineries with an updated code enforcement program approved by its board of supervisors on Tuesday.

The board by a 4-0 vote approved a resolution that would revamp the county’s winery enforcement program that has been criticized as ineffective and having no teeth for violators. For example, county officials found in 2014 that almost half of the wineries audited did not comply with code requirements, such as exceeding their production or visitor limits.

The vote comes with increasing backlash to the wine sector that wields considerable political influence through the Napa Valley Vintners trade group and as the dominant economic driver in the county of more than 140,000 residents.

In recent years, industry opposition has been bubbling up, especially over greater traffic on Highway 29 and the Silverado Trail. In June, local voters narrowly rejected an amendment that would have limited vineyard development on hills and mountains to provide greater protection to the environment.

Agriculture/Food Systemevents, tourism impacts, traffic, wineries