By Barry Eberling | Napa Register | Feb 7, 2024 |
Napa County’s attorneys put Lindsay Hoopes of Hoopes Family Vineyard in the witness stand to question her about alleged winery rule violations.
The county accuses Hoopes winery of a variety of offenses, among them hosting tastings and events without county use permit approvals. The winery’s 1984 approval under a prior owner doesn’t allow for hospitality guests, the county claims.
The Hoopes family bought the former Hopper Creek winery near Yountville in 2017. Attorney Arthur Hartinger on behalf of the county questioned Lindsay Hoopes on Monday and Tuesday, days six and seven of the trial in Napa County Superior Court.
For Lindsay Hoopes, going into the witness box was a change in perspective. The former San Francisco assistant district attorney spent most of the trial sitting along a desk with the Hoopes legal team. She cross-examined some county witnesses.
There’s no dispute that the winery can sell bottles of wine onsite. But the county legal team alleges that Hoopes goes beyond retail sales and holds tastings that the county says are illegal without a use permit.
“Where is the tasting room located?” Hartinger asked Hoopes at one point.
“I’m not going to call it a tasting room because that seems to be point of contention here,” Lindsay Hoopes responded.
The Hoopes legal team has said state law allows wineries to make retail sales. People coming to Hoopes winery must make appointments. Each person must buy a minimum of two bottles of wine.
Witnesses testified they drank wine on the Hoopes winery grounds. The Hoopes website mentions an animal sanctuary, regenerative farm and garden experience at the site, which it calls Oasis by Hoopes.
Napa County claims Hoopes winery is simply doing tastings by a different name. The Hoopes side says country rules are “arbitrary, vague and unintelligible,” and leave “no room for compliance.”
“Is it still your testimony you don’t have a tasting room?” Hartinger asked.
“We don’t do tastings in the conventional sense,” Lindsay Hoopes said.
Hartinger presented a May 23, 2017 email from Lindsday Hoopes to a real estate broker sent when the Hoopes family was considering the Hopper Creek winery purchase.
“So as I thought, looks like they are not allowed to do tastings, but can sell retail from the location morning through afternoon. No ‘visitors’ permitted, so kind of weird,” she wrote in that email.
Lindsay Hoopes testified she was trying to figure out county rules, given the county seemed to agree the winery can make retail sales.
“How can you have a retail operation if you don’t have visitors?” she said. “That didn’t make sense to me.”
Hartinger presented a number of emails and social media postings associating Hoopes winery with the word “tastings.”
“We just can’t wait until you come and join us for tastings in our gorgeous garden,” a Hoopes Instagram posting said.
Hartinger suggested Hoopes winery didn’t seek county approval to have tastings because of the potential time and expense, such as possibly having to upgrade a wastewater system. Lindsay Hoopes said the winery didn’t want to seek rights it believed it already had.
Also, the Hoopes legal team has not conceded that the winery is barred from all types of tastings. It sees a difference between public tastings that involve customers dropping in and private, by-appointment-only tastings.
“Today, do you believe Hoopes Family Winery can have tastings?” Hartinger asked Lindsay Hoopes.
“I believe we are allowed to provide private wine tastings, yes,” Lindsay Hoopes said.
The defense also called Lindsay Hoopes as a witness. Lindsay Hoopes on Wednesday talked about how the Hoopes label several years ago — when the family didn’t own a winery — was looking for a place where potential customers could acquaint themselves with the brand.
“You can make the best wine in the world, but if you can’t sell it, it doesn’t matter,” she said.
She recalled approaching the county to clarify the visitation entitlements that went with the Hopper Creek winery. She said the answer was the winery couldn’t charge for 2-ounce flights of wine, but had retail sales rights that allowed consumption on the property.
The county has disputed Lindsay Hoopes’ interpretation of what a county official may have told her, saying the winery may not charge for wine to drink onsite.
In related news, the county Board of Supervisors on Tuesday agreed to increase the amount of money paid annually to Renne Public Law Group from $800,000 to $1.5 million for one year only. That temporary increase is due largely to the Hoopes case, a county report said.
Renne Public Law Group is representing the county in the Hoopes case. It also offers legal services to the county in land use, labor and employment, juvenile dependency and other areas. Next fiscal year, when the Hoopes case should be over, the annual amount is to revert back to $800,000.
Hoopes attorneys have filed 24 motions and ex parte applications, not counting letter briefs to a discovery referee, compared to 10 by the county, a Jan. 16 county report said. In addition, the parties conducted about 36 depositions in advance of the trial.
Should the county prevail in the Hoopes case, it can recover attorney fees associated with the case, the county report said.