Napa Valley Versus Napa Valley
It may be hard to imagine, considering Napa’s moniker as the preeminent luxury wine region in the United States, but it wasn’t that long ago that the valley was a small agricultural area populated with bootstrapping farmers.
Today, the valley is renowned for its premium wines and grand estates. Four million tourists visit annually. While many visit the gleaming tasting rooms and cellars of corporate-owned wine brands, plenty of small family wineries still make up the fabric of the valley. In 2015, 68 percent of Napa wineries produced fewer than 20,000 cases per year.
But there is a growing concern that the county is not supporting its biggest economic draw, especially when it comes to small wineries. In 1968, vintners and local officials teamed up to create the Napa Agriculture Preserve, the first preserve of its kind in the nation. The idea was that the best way to protect the land from excess development was to zone it for farming. But a growing number of Napa residents don’t see grapegrowing as the best way to protect the land and wineries. Some Napa residents complain that wineries have become more like tourist attractions and event spaces than small farms. The county already has some of the country’s most complex rules for gaining approval, and local groups are increasingly fighting those approvals.
Multiple parties have filed lawsuits over use permits and water rights. Many small winery owners are grumbling of grievances with the county government, including approvals for new construction and wastewater treatment upgrades. There’s also a federal investigation over possible corruption in the permitting process.
Some worry that this will only make the Valley less attractive to small wineries. “The county’s approach will further stratify the market in favor of larger entities and push smaller wineries out of business,” said Hoopes Vineyard owner Lindsey Hoopes, who has become an unexpected poster child for the simmering frustrations within the valley.
[article-img-container][src=2024-04/ns_napa-battle-hoopes-041624_1600.jpg] [credit= (Courtesy Hoopes Vineyard)] [alt= Lindsey Hoopes at her Napa winery.][end: article-img-container]
After Napa County officials slapped Hoopes with citations for allegedly conducting tastings without a proper permit, they filed a lawsuit against her in 2022. Hoopes, adamant that she was within her rights, has filed a countersuit, claiming officials abused their regulatory power.
Hayes Drumwright, founder of Vida Valiente and Memento Mori wineries, has been in a five-year battle with the county over building a winery home for Vida Valiente in rural St. Helena. Drumwright says he’s fulfilled all the required criteria, abided by all the rules and passed every necessary environmental survey, traffic study and more. He’s even received a thumbs-up from a public works official and fire marshal. Yet in a December 2023 hearing, he was still not approved to begin construction. “I know other wineries are going through the same thing,” said Drumwright. “Save me my time and money if following these rules doesn’t matter.”
Not far from where Drumwright aims to build, Jayson Woodbridge, founder and owner of Hundred Acre Wine Group, is also taking action against the county. Woodbridge has filed two lawsuits against the county over officials denying him permits for wells and to replant trees burned down in 2020 wildfires.
These are just a few examples of battles being fought in the public eye. Behind the scenes, the FBI has subpoenaed records from several wineries; environmental groups claim there’s evidence that local officials improperly approved certain projects.
“Some individuals voice frustration over what they perceive as an excessive number of wineries and a lack of regulations, while others contend that there are already too many regulations in place,” said Brian Bordona, Napa County’s director of Planning, Building and Environmental Services.
“There’s a rising tide of anger,” said Woodbridge. “I’m suing because I’ve watched so many people try to get things done—people who don’t have a lot of money and have a dream but just get crushed by the county. I have the ability and wherewithal to stand up to the county. I’m in this fight for all of us and for the future of Napa Valley.”
To Sell Wine in Napa, You Need a Tasting Room
In 1990, Napa County’s government enacted the Winery Definition Ordinance (WDO) to legally outline parameters for winery operations, including production, sales and marketing. New wineries were required to obtain a use permit before opening; existing wineries were grandfathered in but needed to obtain a permit if they expanded.
Small wineries, defined as those producing less than 8,500 cases annually, were exempted from obtaining a formal use permit, provided they adhered to rules in a certificate of exemption.
Lindsey Hoopes’ father began farming in Oakville in 1981. After taking over the family business in 2012, Lindsey started looking for a new home for the small winery and acquired the Hopper Creek Vineyard and Winery in Yountville in 2017. Like Hoopes, Hopper Creek had hosted visitors for decades thanks to their small winery exemption, and Hoopes believed that by taking over the location, she was entitled to continue doing so.
But Napa County’s records indicate that Hopper Creek was never permitted to host tastings: The facility’s certificate prohibits “public tastings.” Hoopes contends that she and her team exclusively provide private tastings by appointment.
[article-img-container][src=2024-04/ns_napa-battle-hoopes-winery-041624_1600.jpg] [credit= (Courtesy Hoopes Vineyard)] [alt= Lights at Hoopes Vineyard in Napa Valley.][end: article-img-container]
The county did not agree and issued citations to Hoopes for hosting tastings and other infractions, including hanging decorative lights, conducting yoga classes on-site and selling nonwine products. In 2022, the county filed a lawsuit.
Hoopes says the county is taking advantage of a lapse in time. “There are small wineries [like ours] that were vested with rights in the 1980s,” says Hoopes. “In order to sell wine, you have to get lips to glasses.” She has filed a countersuit against the county.
The county typically refrains from commenting on potential or ongoing litigation, but court filings show that officials believe Hoopes’ distinction of what “public tastings” are is a loose interpretation. Hoopes also has an O-2 license, in which the state alcohol authorities allow for a tasting room. State law prohibits local governments from eliminating such rights.
Hoopes, a former assistant district attorney in San Francisco, has an advantage in court. Still, she recognizes that other small wineries likely won’t have the money or legal resources to defend themselves.
She is not alone. Summit Lake Vineyards and Smith-Madrone Vineyards and Winery were similarly cited by the county for being in violation and hoped to join the lawsuit, but their request was denied. They have to navigate their legal battles independently. Like Hoopes, both wineries existed before the Winery Definition Ordinance and believed they were grandfathered in to conduct tastings and sales.
For Hoopes, her lawsuit goes beyond her need to survive as a small business. “This case isn’t about me. It’s about the precedent this will set.” A civil trial began Jan. 29 in a Napa County Superior Court. A ruling is pending.
Napa Winemakers Are Following County Rules but Still Being Denied Permits
Vintners are adapting to a changing climate, which has meant a higher risk of wildfires. The devastating blazes of 2020, which ripped through Napa, Sonoma, Solano, Lake and Yolo counties, prompted a shift in mindset about development, particularly in rural areas. In the past, wineries and their accompanying vineyards were seen as a plus in the face of fires, since vines tend to slow the flames’ advance. However, authorities have made development very challenging in recent years.
For his Vida Valiente wines, Hayes Drumwright has proposed a winery and tasting room on rural St. Helena’s Crystal Springs Road. In December 2023, after five years of working through all the necessary measures to get approval to build, he had checked all the boxes required by the county. But the Napa County Planning Commission voted against Drumwright’s project.
“We’re trying to abide by every rule. We did traffic and water studies we didn’t need because we wanted everything buttoned up,” said Drumwright. He noted that two commissioners opposed the winery because of its location along a rural road in a wildfire-prone area; Crystal Springs Road is not far from where the 2020 Glass Fire originated. Yet the public works agency and fire marshal approved the project.
“I’ve got five years and a million dollars baked into this,” said Drumwright. “So, I called all the county commissioners and asked them to visit the property. Two did. But one commissioner, Kara Brunzell, didn’t return any emails or phone calls. I tried four times to get ahold of her.” (All Wine Spectator requests for comment from Napa officials were forwarded to Bordona.)
Drumwright said that when it came time to present his case, several neighbors claimed that two cars couldn’t pass each other on the road near where Drumwright aimed to build. “But we’ve spent thousands on traffic surveys!” he lamented. Drumwright said in the end, Bunzell claimed she was uncomfortable with the project, citing too much traffic and potential water usage. Another commissioner, Megan Dameron, cited a letter from a Crystal Springs Road resident that claimed an inability for cars to pass and concerns about safety.
“The head commissioner stopped the hearing,” recalled Drumwright, “And he said, ‘I can’t believe this is happening. We need to trust the experts. If the rules don’t matter, then what are we doing?’”
Napa Winemakers Don’t Have Control over Their Land
Drumwright also highlights that as part of county ordinance, properties have had to reduce fire loads, including removing dead and dying trees and shrubs and creating defensible spaces around structures. Simultaneously, the county has an ordinance for new development stipulating that for however much forest a new winery would displace, the owner must plant three or four times as many new trees.
That rule is why Jayson Woodbridge is suing the county. Officials demanded that Woodbridge replant trees on his Napa Valley property, where 80 hillside acres burned during the 2020 fires. After clearing burned and dead trees from his property, Woodbridge intended to plant an experimental, dry-farmed vineyard using innovative non-erosive techniques. But in 2022 he received a citation for a potential violation of Napa County code. Court documents reveal the county issued a Stop Work Order, which Woodbridge claims he never received.
Woodbridge contends he was well within his rights to plant on the land. “We have every right to clean up the land after an apocalypse like the Glass Fire, and we shouldn’t have to be told by the county what we do with our private land,” he said. He also filed suit against the county after officials refused to issue permits for water wells on several of his vineyard properties. Woodbridge’s lawsuit alleges that the county disregards state water rights, which he is entitled to.
[article-img-container][src=2024-04/ns_napa-battle-woodbridge-041624_1600.jpg] [credit= (Courtesy Hundred Acre)] [alt= Jayson Woodbridge in a rocky spot at his winery.][end: article-img-container]
In California, water rights are administered by the State Water Resources Control Board, not local governments. However, within Napa, the county regulates wells through county code to ensure groundwater is not contaminated or polluted.
Under state and county laws, well permits should be granted as a matter of course and without excessive and discriminatory restrictions on water use. However, usage was among the county’s reasons for denying Woodbridge’s well permit. The county required Woodbridge to agree to strict usage limitations imposed on existing wells.
“Agriculture and vineyards require water, and landowners have a vested interest in using our water wisely,” said Woodbridge, citing gross regulatory overreach. “We have every right to efficiently use water under our rights that are vested with the properties we own or purchase.”
An FBI Investigation into the Napa Permit Process?
The battle over development has taken a darker turn. The FBI subpoenaed records in December from numerous vintners and the Napa County Farm Bureau, an advocate for wineries. That same month, the FBI raided the home of Alfredo Pedroza, a member of the County Board of Supervisors. Pedroza is a vocal advocate for wineries and has been a target of environmental groups opposed to winery expansion.
Leaks to local media identified several prominent names among the subpoenaed vintners, including Dave Phinney, Chuck Wagner and Kathryn Walt Hall. She and her husband, Craig Hall, were involved in perhaps the most tumultuous among recent development battles. They purchased Walt Ranch, undeveloped land on Atlas Peak, for $8 million in 2005, with plans for a 208-acre vineyard. Environmental groups opposed the project, but after a decade of wrangling and alterations to the plans, it was approved by the county board in 2021.
A year later, though, opponents accused Pedroza of a conflict of interest because his father-in-law had purchased land next to Walt Ranch with a loan backed by Pedroza. Tired of the battles, the Halls canceled the project.
The FBI and local U.S. Attorney have refused to comment on the subpoenas.
Will Things Get Better for Napa Wineries?
Carlton McCoy, president and CEO of Lawrence Wine Estates, which includes six Napa wineries, does not have any ongoing disputes with the county. But he understands the arguments from his peers and other residents and perceives a disconnect and a lack of mutual understanding. “We need to create a platform to solve issues and not play the blame game,” said McCoy.
He also asks why members of the public get to file objections even after a winery has met county regulations. “When building a winery, approval goes to public opinion. Why is that a thing? You can’t run a wine region that way. Not to discount homeowners, but that’s what you bought into, and the county has disproportionally allowed them to dictate things, which is counterintuitive to the agricultural preserve.”
Bordona says the county encourages open and constructive dialogue. “This may include engaging in discussions to review existing regulations, assess the impact of new wineries and explore potential solutions that align with the interests of our residents, businesses and the county as a whole.”
Several winemakers said they believe there’s an emerging narrative that wineries aren’t considered agricultural and thus are being held to a different standard than other businesses, including vineyards. “There’s a rising tide of people that think agricultural preservation is antithetical to winery operations,” said Hoopes. “But the Ag Preserve founders knew they were inextricably linked. They have to work hand in hand, because what is land if you can’t monetize it? It’s all tied to the value of the wine industry, which is tied to what the market needs, not just growing grapes. It’s making wine and hospitality.”
Many are concerned about upcoming local elections—three board of supervisor seats have the potential to change hands. “Everything I’m hearing is that it’s going to get significantly worse. If we don’t get something approved this year, there may be no shot next year,” said Drumwright.
Part of what upsets Drumwright is the idea that his vision for Napa doesn’t matter to local officials. “I’ve had a brand here since 2010, and I also care who comes into the valley. Visiting small wineries and seeing that Napa hasn’t gone corporate is important,” he said. “If we’re going to get on a course that who builds these brands doesn’t matter, can the magic of Napa hold for the next generations?”
-With reporting by Chris Cardoso
Stay on top of important wine stories with Wine Spectators free Breaking News Alerts.