Barry Eberling | Jan 30, 2024 | Napa Valley Register |
Atrial between Napa County and the Hoopes Vineyard winery is underway, with the county’s winery regulations being the focus.
The trial began Monday in Napa County Superior Court before Judge Mark Boessenecker. County attorneys gave opening statements, with Hoopes attorneys deferring until a later time. Both sides filed trial briefs last week.
Napa County sued Hoopes in 2022 for allegedly breaking several county rules. Among other things, the county says Hoopes holds wine tastings prohibited by the winery’s 1984 small winery exemption approval.
This isn’t a case of government overreach or vindictive enforcement, as the Hoopes side claims, said attorneys from Renne Public Law Group, which represents the county.
“In reality, Hoopes forced the county’s hand when it made a calculated decision to disregard multiple regulations designed to protect the environment, the health and safety of the community and to protect Napa’s agricultural heritage,” the county’s trial brief said.
Hoopes in 2022 countersued the county. Attorneys in the Hoopes brief claimed Hoopes, which is based near Yountville, can legally sell wine for consumption on the premises.
“The county cannot vitiate 30 years of approval by changing the rules of the game,” the trial brief said.
The court will settle the matter. The trial could unfold in several phases, with Boessenecker ruling on county’s allegations and Hoopes countersuit claims possibly going before a jury.
Much of the dispute involves the county’s small winery exemption law passed by the Board of Supervisors in 1980. The law allowed proposed wineries to avoid having to obtain Planning Commission approval for a use permit, if they agreed to certain conditions, such as not making more than 20,000 gallons of wine annually.
The county’s court case highlights one condition in particular — “a small winery does not conduct public tours, provide wine tastings, sell wine-related items or hold social events of a public nature.”
A previous owner established the Hopper Creek winery at the Hoopes site under a small winery exemption in 1984. Hoopes bought the winery in 2017.
The county claims Hoopes must seek a county use permit to legally hold wine tastings. But a consultant told owner Lindsay Hoopes this would involve making substantial upgrades, such as improving the wastewater system, the county’s trial brief said.
“It is undisputed to this day that Hoopes has not applied, and refuses to apply, for a permit that would authorize increased visitation and wine tasting,” the county’s brief states.
Hoopes produces little to no wine on the property. Instead, the winery is a commercial hospitality operation charging an “experience” fee, as well as a “tiered table fee” discounted by wine and food purchased, it said.
The Hoopes side in its brief outlined arguments it intends to make.
One point is to differentiate between public and private tastings. Hoopes argued that the 1980 small winery exemption prohibited drop-in, public tastings, but not private, appointment-only tastings.
The brief cited minutes from a 1979 county Planning Commission hearing on the then-proposed small winery exemption law. In them, then-Planning Director Jim Hickey talked about tastings.
“Hickey said if a winery is open 5-7 days a week for tasting, and it is advertised and a known fact, then it is a different category than a winery which is basically closed, except for tasting only by appointment,” the minutes said.
Hoopes is also taking another tack. The winery’s trial brief said it has a state license to sell wine. California law allows patrons to consume a bottle of wine they buy on site, the brief said.
Napa County wants Hoopes to go through “an extensive use permit process that would drive the winery out of business,” but the county can’t erase Hoopes’ property rights, the brief said.
The Hoopes dispute caught the attention of State Controller Malia Cohen. She sent the county a Dec. 18 letter requesting information, saying taxes have been paid on wine poured at the Hoopes site for 40 years.
Cohen cited state code allowing licensed wine growers to “sell wine to consumers for consumption on premises” and allowing local authorities to “restrict, but not eliminate such activities.”
County Counsel Sheryl Bratton responded in a Jan. 8 letter. She wrote to Cohen that the state law allowing wine growers to sell to wine for consumption on premises doesn’t apply to Hoopes.
State law allows the county to restrict, though not eliminate, the privilege through land use regulations. Napa zoning code restricts on-premises consumption of wine to wineries with use permits, she wrote.
“Hoopes winery could also serve wine to guests if it would get a use permit, as requested,” Bratton wrote.
Napa County also alleged Hoopes has chicken coops, a shade structure and other structures that lack either building permits, floodplain permits or both. Some of the alleged violations date back to 2020. The maximum penalty is $1,000 a day.
The county’s opening witness on Monday, Planning, Building and Environmental Services Assistant Director Patrick Ryan, answered attorney questions on the alleged building and floodplain code violations.
A couple dozen boxes of trial materials were stacked in the courtroom for the opening day’s proceedings.