SoCal winery files furious lawsuit against Santa Barbara accusing it of trying to milk it dry

A small Lompoc winery is suing Santa Barbara County in federal court, alleging local officials forced businesses into a mandatory funding program that compels them to bankroll marketing and advocacy efforts they neither support nor agreed to fund.

Flying Goat Cellars, founded in 2000 and owned by Norm Yost and Kate Griffith (also identified in filings as Kathleen Griffith), filed suit in the US District Court for the Central District of California.

The complaint targets the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors, the Santa Barbara County Vintners’ Association, and Fourth District Supervisor Bob Nelson in his role as board chair.

At the center of the dispute is a Wine Business Improvement District created in February 2025. 

The Board of Supervisors approved the measure in a 5-0 vote, establishing a mandatory 1% assessment on winery sales, including tasting room purchases, wine club transactions, events, food, and merchandise.

County officials estimated the program would generate about $1.5 million annually, with all funds directed toward regional tourism and wine industry marketing.

But Flying Goat argues the structure goes far beyond a simple tax or fee.

The winery says the system forces participation in the Santa Barbara County Vintners’ Association, which administers the district and controls how the money is spent on promotional campaigns and industry advocacy.

According to the lawsuit, the arrangement effectively compels wineries to fund speech and lobbying activities they may disagree with.

The filing says the association’s marketing priorities focus on broad regional promotion and international reach, which Flying Goat claims does not match its own business model centered on direct customer relationships in Lompoc and surrounding areas.

Download The California Post App, follow us on social, and subscribe to our newsletters

“Flying Goat’s success is built on building direct relationships with the customers who walk through our winery’s doors, not on international markets and the kinds of broad campaigns the vintners’ association favors,” Norm Yost said. “Our vision for Flying Goat and the vintners’ association’s vision for the Santa Barbara wine industry are not the same.”

The lawsuit, supported by the Goldwater Institute’s Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation and Friedland Cianfrani LLP, argues the policy violates the First Amendment by compelling private businesses to subsidize speech and association with which they disagree.

It also raises Fifth Amendment concerns, claiming private revenue is being redirected to a private organization without a legitimate public use.

Goldwater Institute Senior Staff Attorney Adam Shelton said constitutional protections are being ignored.

“The Supreme Court has made clear that the government cannot force Americans to subsidize speech they disagree with,” Shelton told The Center Square. “It has also recognized a fundamental right not to be compelled into private associations. Santa Barbara County’s mandate violates both principles.”

The complaint further notes that Flying Goat attempted to opt out of the system by contacting the Vintners’ Association but received no response. 

It also cites objections raised by Griffith during the February 2025 Board of Supervisors meeting, where she warned wineries would face added costs to update systems in order to collect the new fee.

The filing says the Board never responded to earlier concerns raised by Goldwater Institute attorneys, leaving the winery with no option but litigation.

Flying Goat is seeking repayment of fees already collected, legal costs, and a symbolic $1 in damages for alleged civil rights violations.

The case adds new legal pressure to the county’s tourism-funded marketing structure and raises broader questions about how far local governments can go in requiring participation in industry-wide promotional organizations.