By Barry Eberling | Napa Valley Register | Sep 5, 2024 |
Three wineries are suing Napa County in federal court to try to overturn county rules that restrict how many visitors they can host for tastings and events, and the county’s 75% grape rule, among other regulations.
Hoopes, Summit Lake and Smith-Madrone wineries filed the suit in the United States Court Northern District of California on Thursday. They allege some of the county regulations violate federal and state laws.
County laws are based on an “ever-changing patchwork of undocumented ‘polices’ and procedures.” Wineries can’t decipher what is and is not allowed, the filing said.
“Napa County’s actions have violated numerous Constitutional rights of county wineries, including plaintiffs, and it is time they end,” the filing said.
Among the regulations being challenged is one requiring wineries established after 1990 to use at least 75% Napa County grapes in their wine production. The lawsuit considers this to be unlawful economic protectionism.
Napa County officials early Thursday afternoon said they can’t comment on the lawsuit, as the county had yet to be formally served with the complaint. But the county stated its position on its rules in a 2022 lawsuit it filed against Hoopes winery in county Superior Court for allegedly hosting visitors illegally.
The county seeks to protect the Agricultural Preserve where farming is to be the dominant use, the county said in that lawsuit.
“Because most commercial uses and services are directly at odds with this agricultural purpose, permissible land use in the agricultural preserve district, even at Napa County’s most famous wineries, are quite limited and are carefully spelled out in the county’s zoning code,” it said.
Attorney Joseph Infante of Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone is representing the three wineries in the federal lawsuit.
“We have seen the same sort of restrictions Napa County has put in place in other jurisdictions around the country and those wineries who have finally had enough with the government overreach have been very successful in having federal courts strike down unconstitutional ordinances,” Infante said in a press release.
Infante has represented wineries in Peninsula Township, Michigan, that are trying to overturn winery regulations there. The township has said the rules are designed to protect agriculture.
There had been talk in Napa Valley for several months that the Michigan attorneys had approached Napa County wineries about filing a similar lawsuit. One vintner mentioned this at a county Board of Supervisors meeting during public comments.
Napa County’s winery world is highly regulated. Wineries obtain use permits, usually after Planning Commission hearings, that stipulate how much wine they can produce, how many visitors they can host and how many events they can hold.
But the rules have changed over several decades. That leaves some wineries with rights grandfathered in that other wineries don’t have, depending on when the winery was established.
A landmark came with the 1990 winery definition ordinance. It does such things as require tasting room visitation to be by appointment-only and 75% of wine production to use Napa County grapes. This applies only to rights granted subsequent to the ordinance.
The three wineries in the lawsuit are all in different situations.
Smith-Madrone was established by a use permit in the early 1970s at 4022 Spring Mountain Road near St. Helena. The lawsuit says the use permit allows for no drop-in visitation, but allows by-appointment tasting and event visitation with no restrictions mentioned.
However, vintner Stuart Smith last fall said he looked at the county’s winery database and found it stated his winery is limited to zero visitors daily but 10 visitors weekly.
“This is insane government overreach. Kafka would be pleased,” Smith said in a news release.
The Summit Lake and Hoopes cases are different. Both were established in the 1980s under the county’s now-defunct small winery exemption program. According to Napa County, applicants in the program in return for streamlining agreed to such limits as 20,000 gallons of annual wine production and no visitors.
But both wineries have had visitors for years and don’t concede they are barred from by-appointment only visitation. Napa County says they must obtain use permits to do so legally.
Summit Lake winery is located at 2000 Summit Lake Drive near Angwin. It owners say to obtain a use permit, the winery would be required to improve a private road at a cost of $1 million. That is due to the county’s interpretation of state-imposed road standards in fire-prone areas.
“We are a small family-owned business trying to protect our constitutional rights,” said Heather Brakesman-Griffin of the winery in the news release.
The county in 2022 filed suit against Hoopes winery in Napa County Superior Court for allegedly hosting visitors illegally, among other code violations. The trial was in February and Judge Mark Boessenecker has yet to announce the verdict.
Hoopes winery is located at 6204 Washington St. near Yountville.
