FWWS is now on Twitter!
Stay informed with FWWS Twitter posts. Join now to get updates sent directly to your mobile device.
http://www.twitter.com/FWWSorg
In addition, our home page now boasts a Twitter widget that displays our current Twitter updates and our blog feed automatically posts to Twitter.
Enjoy the new features...
Friday, February 19, 2010
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Response to WWI Legislative Update
Dear FWWS Members,
It has come to our attention that a recent legislative update report from the Washington Wine Institute (WWI) to its members focused entirely on Family Wineries of Washington State and our response to the WWI’s Special Occasion Events bill, a bill which we support. We regret that the text of this document, forwarded to us by a WWI member, is inaccurate and inflammatory enough to require a response.
The opening remarks contain the following statement: “Our bill to make it easier for wineries to participate in charitable events was stalled in the House Commerce Committee after The Family Wineries of Washington proposed amendments to the bill.” This is nonsense.
Here are some facts with regard to the WWI’s Special Occasion bill: First, we support this bill which we made clear in our comments to the Executive Director of the Wine Institute.
Special Occasion Bill Comments in Outlook format
Special Occasion Bill Comments in HTML format
Our support of the bill with or without our suggested improving amendments incorporated is contained in bold text to make it perfectly clear. This bold text statement was included in our written comments to both the House and Senate before which we testified, and was reiterated in our verbal testimony.
Second, we have been aware of this issue being in play not since last fall as the WWI claims, but in fact since last spring when the WSLCB determined that the existing business models for third parties offering organizational services to charities for licensed special occasions were an illegal violation of the money’s worth restrictions between wineries and the charity/retailers.
Third, since we became aware that the WWI was working with stakeholders and the WSLCB on this proposal, we repeatedly asked for an advance copy to review in order that our comments could be incorporated in the bill, and to ensure our unequivocal support. Regrettably, our first opportunity to see this bill was after the Wine Institute introduced it, which was after the start of the already short current Legislative session.
Absent the opportunity to review and comment on this bill in draft form we offered three suggested amendments to improve the bill:
The first amendment would have clarified that wineries could directly pay the third party organizer (which is the common current practice), rather than the charity as stated in the bill. We withdrew this amendment after the WWI stated in the record that it was their intent that the charity and the organizer be considered one and the same.
The second amendment seeks to delete the word “reasonable” from the text as it refers to payments to be charged for attendance or table fees. In their update the WWI criticizes this amendment by asking, “What’s wrong with requiring only ‘reasonable’ fees in the law?” This is best answered with another question: “What is ‘reasonable,’ and who decides?” FWWS believes that in voluntary transactions such as these, the free market should determine what price is reasonable, not government agencies. This is a matter readily and fairly decided in the marketplace. If wineries do not think the fee is reasonable, they will not attend the event and the organizer will have to lower the price. The imposition of “reasonable” in the bill is a solution in search of a problem.
Our final suggested amendment would allow one business day for payment to be processed and checks to be written. This would make the bill consistent with the language in our proposed Payment Parity Act and would make the bill more useful for larger charities. The need for this amendment was driven home last Sunday night after our successful Enumclaw Wine & Chocolate Festival event. It was fully three hours after the event that the last invoice was double checked and the last check written. The WWI said of this proposed amendment: “While we understand that it sounds like a simple convenience, WWI opposes this amendment because its acceptance would make it much more difficult for us to defeat efforts to allow credit terms for other retailers.” We believe that the “credit terms” they are referring to may be those in our “Payment Parity Act” which would allow you the option of delivering wine and having the retailer send you a check the next business day exactly like those terms extended last year to the wholesalers for Electronic Funds Transfers (EFT’s). We say “extended to the wholesalers” because they broadly use EFTs for this purpose and wineries rarely if ever do. The WWI vehemently opposed our bill and it did not receive a hearing this year. It’s worth noting that the Wine Institute’s “Coalition of Stakeholders,” which included the Washington Beer and Wine Wholesaler’s Association, not only was the source of the EFT exception to money’s worth but also drafted a bill, now law, which contained the allowance for wholesalers to extend credit on food and non-alcoholic beverages up to thirty days with Liquor Board sanction for non-payment. This is not only identical to the terms proposed as optional in our Craft Wineries bill that the WWI also strongly opposed, but puts the WSLCB in the current and rather bizarre position of regulating non-alcohol trade.
The notion that these proposed FWWS amendments have “stalled” the Special Occasion bill in committee" is silly. This bill is scheduled for “executive session” in both the House and Senate where we understand that our amendments will be introduced for consideration. We fully expect that by the time you read this the WWI bill will have passed either as a good bill without our suggested amendments, or as a significantly better bill with our amendments.
For the record FWWS has never opposed any bill that the WWI has put forward. For their part the WWI has never supported any bill the FWWS has put forward, nor have they offered any constructive criticisms or suggestions as to how to make our bills acceptable to them. The WWI’s comments on our legislative proposals, offered only after a request for comment from a legislator, are attached for your review in the link which follows, as is our rebuttal to their response.
WWI Comments on FWWS Legislative Proposals
FWWS Response to WWI Comments
We have offered no fewer than five times to sit down with the WWI and discuss these and other issues, to find areas of possible agreement, or accommodation of differences. Every offer has been refused. We will continue to extend the invitation, but in the interim we will not apologize for offering suggestions to the legislature to improve bills submitted by the WWI for which no other courtesy for comment is offered.
As always, we value your feedback and comments. Please email us at board[at]familywineriesofwashington.org.
Sincerely yours,
The FWWS Board
John Bell, Paul Beveridge, John Morgan, Tim Narby, Alistair Sloley
It has come to our attention that a recent legislative update report from the Washington Wine Institute (WWI) to its members focused entirely on Family Wineries of Washington State and our response to the WWI’s Special Occasion Events bill, a bill which we support. We regret that the text of this document, forwarded to us by a WWI member, is inaccurate and inflammatory enough to require a response.
The opening remarks contain the following statement: “Our bill to make it easier for wineries to participate in charitable events was stalled in the House Commerce Committee after The Family Wineries of Washington proposed amendments to the bill.” This is nonsense.
Here are some facts with regard to the WWI’s Special Occasion bill: First, we support this bill which we made clear in our comments to the Executive Director of the Wine Institute.
Special Occasion Bill Comments in Outlook format
Special Occasion Bill Comments in HTML format
Our support of the bill with or without our suggested improving amendments incorporated is contained in bold text to make it perfectly clear. This bold text statement was included in our written comments to both the House and Senate before which we testified, and was reiterated in our verbal testimony.
Second, we have been aware of this issue being in play not since last fall as the WWI claims, but in fact since last spring when the WSLCB determined that the existing business models for third parties offering organizational services to charities for licensed special occasions were an illegal violation of the money’s worth restrictions between wineries and the charity/retailers.
Third, since we became aware that the WWI was working with stakeholders and the WSLCB on this proposal, we repeatedly asked for an advance copy to review in order that our comments could be incorporated in the bill, and to ensure our unequivocal support. Regrettably, our first opportunity to see this bill was after the Wine Institute introduced it, which was after the start of the already short current Legislative session.
Absent the opportunity to review and comment on this bill in draft form we offered three suggested amendments to improve the bill:
The first amendment would have clarified that wineries could directly pay the third party organizer (which is the common current practice), rather than the charity as stated in the bill. We withdrew this amendment after the WWI stated in the record that it was their intent that the charity and the organizer be considered one and the same.
The second amendment seeks to delete the word “reasonable” from the text as it refers to payments to be charged for attendance or table fees. In their update the WWI criticizes this amendment by asking, “What’s wrong with requiring only ‘reasonable’ fees in the law?” This is best answered with another question: “What is ‘reasonable,’ and who decides?” FWWS believes that in voluntary transactions such as these, the free market should determine what price is reasonable, not government agencies. This is a matter readily and fairly decided in the marketplace. If wineries do not think the fee is reasonable, they will not attend the event and the organizer will have to lower the price. The imposition of “reasonable” in the bill is a solution in search of a problem.
Our final suggested amendment would allow one business day for payment to be processed and checks to be written. This would make the bill consistent with the language in our proposed Payment Parity Act and would make the bill more useful for larger charities. The need for this amendment was driven home last Sunday night after our successful Enumclaw Wine & Chocolate Festival event. It was fully three hours after the event that the last invoice was double checked and the last check written. The WWI said of this proposed amendment: “While we understand that it sounds like a simple convenience, WWI opposes this amendment because its acceptance would make it much more difficult for us to defeat efforts to allow credit terms for other retailers.” We believe that the “credit terms” they are referring to may be those in our “Payment Parity Act” which would allow you the option of delivering wine and having the retailer send you a check the next business day exactly like those terms extended last year to the wholesalers for Electronic Funds Transfers (EFT’s). We say “extended to the wholesalers” because they broadly use EFTs for this purpose and wineries rarely if ever do. The WWI vehemently opposed our bill and it did not receive a hearing this year. It’s worth noting that the Wine Institute’s “Coalition of Stakeholders,” which included the Washington Beer and Wine Wholesaler’s Association, not only was the source of the EFT exception to money’s worth but also drafted a bill, now law, which contained the allowance for wholesalers to extend credit on food and non-alcoholic beverages up to thirty days with Liquor Board sanction for non-payment. This is not only identical to the terms proposed as optional in our Craft Wineries bill that the WWI also strongly opposed, but puts the WSLCB in the current and rather bizarre position of regulating non-alcohol trade.
The notion that these proposed FWWS amendments have “stalled” the Special Occasion bill in committee" is silly. This bill is scheduled for “executive session” in both the House and Senate where we understand that our amendments will be introduced for consideration. We fully expect that by the time you read this the WWI bill will have passed either as a good bill without our suggested amendments, or as a significantly better bill with our amendments.
For the record FWWS has never opposed any bill that the WWI has put forward. For their part the WWI has never supported any bill the FWWS has put forward, nor have they offered any constructive criticisms or suggestions as to how to make our bills acceptable to them. The WWI’s comments on our legislative proposals, offered only after a request for comment from a legislator, are attached for your review in the link which follows, as is our rebuttal to their response.
WWI Comments on FWWS Legislative Proposals
FWWS Response to WWI Comments
We have offered no fewer than five times to sit down with the WWI and discuss these and other issues, to find areas of possible agreement, or accommodation of differences. Every offer has been refused. We will continue to extend the invitation, but in the interim we will not apologize for offering suggestions to the legislature to improve bills submitted by the WWI for which no other courtesy for comment is offered.
As always, we value your feedback and comments. Please email us at board[at]familywineriesofwashington.org.
Sincerely yours,
The FWWS Board
John Bell, Paul Beveridge, John Morgan, Tim Narby, Alistair Sloley
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Friends of the Family Program Benefit Listing
Dear Members,
FWWS will be rolling out our Friends of the Family (FOTF) program soon. To recap, this program is designed to recruit enthusiastic consumers and allies to the cause of promoting and advocating for Washington's small wineries, as well as to supplement the financial resources of FWWS in order to reduce the burden on dues payments. In addition to quarterly newsletters we plan to offer content to FOTF members such an annual wine tasting and seminar, reduced entry fees to FWWS sponsored events, and, the subject of this email, specific winery provided benefits.
Our organization's non-profit status (not to mention our principle of volunteerism) does not allow the organization to require that all members provide set benefits to Friends of the Family in exchange for their membership dues. Each member winery is encouraged to list any benefits they will offer to FOTF. Dues-paid FOTF will be issued an annual ID card. Lists of benefits will be posted on the FWWS website on a special page. Hours and locations of member winery tasting rooms can be included. To aid in tour planning, we plan to link the FOTF page listings to our existing member winery locator map. An example of such listing information submitted by a board member follows:
Winery: Lost River Winery
Tasting Room Location: 26 Highway 20, just West of Winthrop WA
Telephone/Hours: (509)996-2888, 11:00-5:00 Friday, Saturday and Monday. Other days in season.
FOTF Benefits: Complimentary wine tastings. Barrel tastings and tours for members and guests (requires appointment). 5% discount on all wines for FOTF card holders. Discounts may be combined with other case, sale, or club discounts up to a maximum of 30% off listed retail price.
Once again providing special benefits to FOTF members is entirely optional. However in order to make the roll-out as successful as possible, we encourage all members who wish to participate to respond with listings prior to the Enumclaw event if possible. Please send information to: Board@familywineriesofwashington.org.
Hope to see you at Enumclaw.
The FWWS Board.
FWWS will be rolling out our Friends of the Family (FOTF) program soon. To recap, this program is designed to recruit enthusiastic consumers and allies to the cause of promoting and advocating for Washington's small wineries, as well as to supplement the financial resources of FWWS in order to reduce the burden on dues payments. In addition to quarterly newsletters we plan to offer content to FOTF members such an annual wine tasting and seminar, reduced entry fees to FWWS sponsored events, and, the subject of this email, specific winery provided benefits.
Our organization's non-profit status (not to mention our principle of volunteerism) does not allow the organization to require that all members provide set benefits to Friends of the Family in exchange for their membership dues. Each member winery is encouraged to list any benefits they will offer to FOTF. Dues-paid FOTF will be issued an annual ID card. Lists of benefits will be posted on the FWWS website on a special page. Hours and locations of member winery tasting rooms can be included. To aid in tour planning, we plan to link the FOTF page listings to our existing member winery locator map. An example of such listing information submitted by a board member follows:
Winery: Lost River Winery
Tasting Room Location: 26 Highway 20, just West of Winthrop WA
Telephone/Hours: (509)996-2888, 11:00-5:00 Friday, Saturday and Monday. Other days in season.
FOTF Benefits: Complimentary wine tastings. Barrel tastings and tours for members and guests (requires appointment). 5% discount on all wines for FOTF card holders. Discounts may be combined with other case, sale, or club discounts up to a maximum of 30% off listed retail price.
Once again providing special benefits to FOTF members is entirely optional. However in order to make the roll-out as successful as possible, we encourage all members who wish to participate to respond with listings prior to the Enumclaw event if possible. Please send information to: Board@familywineriesofwashington.org.
Hope to see you at Enumclaw.
The FWWS Board.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Washington Wine Institute Fails to Support FWWS Legislative Proposals
Dear FWWS members,
FWWS board members attended a meeting two weeks ago with a State Representative who had agreed to consider sponsoring all of our legislative proposals in the State House of Representatives. Also in attendance were the Executive Directors of the Beer and Wine Wholesaler's Association, and the Washington Wine Institute (WWI). We regret to report that WWI was not only unwilling to support any of our bills but further expressed active opposition to our Craft Winery and Payment Parity bills. Subsequent to this meeting our prospective legislative sponsor withdrew his support for these two bills.
Based on comments from the Wholesaler's representative, trade credit has been removed from the Craft Wineries bill, and language has been proposed for inclusion in that bill in order to prevent large wineries from registering multiple brands as Craft Wineries. We are continuing our dialogue with the Washington Beer and Wine Wholesaler's Association. Unlike the Wholesaler's association the WWI refused to suggest any changes that might make the bills more acceptable.
We understand that the broad range of topics included in the Craft Wineries bill makes immediate support by the WWI less than certain. However their opposition coupled with their unwillingness to offer any constructive criticism is to say the least, unhelpful.
Even more disappointing is the stated opposition of WWI to the Payment Parity Act which is extremely simple and would extend exactly the same terms of transaction to business checks (which virtually all of our members use for self distribution activities) as were extended last year to Electronic Fund Transfers (EFTs, which to our knowledge none of our members use for sales to retail licensees. If you do use EFTs for this purpose we would like to hear from you so we do not misrepresent this point).
At this point we would like to ask those many FWWS members who are also members of the Wine Institute to contact them and politely ask for an explanation as to why they are not clarifying the specific reasons for their opposition to the Craft Wineries bill and why they are not wholeheartedly supporting the Payment Parity Bill. Since time is of the essence with the legislative session fast approaching, and further since the Wine Institute Director is presently on vacation, we encourage you to contact Mr. Marty Clubb, WWI Board Chairman at (509)525-0940 or by email to martyc@lecole.com. In your discussions please be aware that a position of "neutral" is not the same as "support" for a bill.
If you would like to discuss this issue further or would like more information as always, please email us and a Board member will contact you.
Thank you for your attention to this vital matter.
The FWWS Board
FWWS board members attended a meeting two weeks ago with a State Representative who had agreed to consider sponsoring all of our legislative proposals in the State House of Representatives. Also in attendance were the Executive Directors of the Beer and Wine Wholesaler's Association, and the Washington Wine Institute (WWI). We regret to report that WWI was not only unwilling to support any of our bills but further expressed active opposition to our Craft Winery and Payment Parity bills. Subsequent to this meeting our prospective legislative sponsor withdrew his support for these two bills.
Based on comments from the Wholesaler's representative, trade credit has been removed from the Craft Wineries bill, and language has been proposed for inclusion in that bill in order to prevent large wineries from registering multiple brands as Craft Wineries. We are continuing our dialogue with the Washington Beer and Wine Wholesaler's Association. Unlike the Wholesaler's association the WWI refused to suggest any changes that might make the bills more acceptable.
We understand that the broad range of topics included in the Craft Wineries bill makes immediate support by the WWI less than certain. However their opposition coupled with their unwillingness to offer any constructive criticism is to say the least, unhelpful.
Even more disappointing is the stated opposition of WWI to the Payment Parity Act which is extremely simple and would extend exactly the same terms of transaction to business checks (which virtually all of our members use for self distribution activities) as were extended last year to Electronic Fund Transfers (EFTs, which to our knowledge none of our members use for sales to retail licensees. If you do use EFTs for this purpose we would like to hear from you so we do not misrepresent this point).
At this point we would like to ask those many FWWS members who are also members of the Wine Institute to contact them and politely ask for an explanation as to why they are not clarifying the specific reasons for their opposition to the Craft Wineries bill and why they are not wholeheartedly supporting the Payment Parity Bill. Since time is of the essence with the legislative session fast approaching, and further since the Wine Institute Director is presently on vacation, we encourage you to contact Mr. Marty Clubb, WWI Board Chairman at (509)525-0940 or by email to martyc@lecole.com. In your discussions please be aware that a position of "neutral" is not the same as "support" for a bill.
If you would like to discuss this issue further or would like more information as always, please email us and a Board member will contact you.
Thank you for your attention to this vital matter.
The FWWS Board
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Goals of Family Wineries of Washington State
- Sell more Washington wine
- Promote small family wineries
- Economic stimulus for craft wineries through simplification of regulation
- Economic free market – the only truly level playing field
- Put the responsible consumer’s interests first
- Maintain effective public safety regulations
- Public safety basis for all regulation
- Align goals of small wineries and Liquor Control Board
- Cooperation with Liquor Control Board
- Eliminate unenforceable or unenforced regulations
- Freedom to create and innovate
- Freedom of contract
- Streamline tax payment
- Streamline wine shipping (set an example for other states)
- Pricing flexibility
- Elimination of money’s worth restrictions
- Responsible advertising
- Joint advertising and promotion
- Sales on credit as wholesalers get from wineries
- Consignment sales
- Remove economic restrictions on internet wine sales
- Discounts reflecting savings in cost of sale
- Delivered pricing
- Gifts
- Remove all limitations on investment between tiers
- Make it easier to promote craft wine in a responsible manner
- Remove economic restrictions on wine sampling
- Unlimited tasting rooms
- Distributor dock sales
- Central fulfillment operations
- Promotional partnerships
- Elimination of license category restrictions
- Simplify licensing
- No state label approval copy requirement
- Annual tax reporting instead of monthly
- No price posting (achieved)
- No price holding
- Put the responsible wine consumer first
- Provide opportunities for consumers to support small wineries
- Establish direct relationships between responsible consumers and our members
- Wine events off premises
- Facilitate holding wine events
- Refilling of recyclable wine containers at wineries and retailers
- The Perfect Legal Climate for Wine
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
