Napa Valley Register
Wednesday, March 3, 2004
In Napa County, Super Tuesday dealt a super defeat to every measure designed to tweak -- even in small ways -- county regulation of agricultural growth and development.
Measure O, a stream setback ordinance promulgated by environmentalists, was pounded.
Measure P, a more moderate proposal that would have become law without a vote of the public if not for an uprising before the Board of Supervisors last year, was also rejected.
Plus, three efforts by private individuals to change use of their lands in the county agricultural preserve -- measures Q, R and S -- failed.
The results on Measure O were practically a foregone conclusion. The O campaign was woefully underfinanced, and the environmental activists most closely associated with it have long since lost the support of some of their own ideological allies -- much less the vintners, business interests and other sectors of the political class in the county.
Likewise, measures Q, R and S never had a moment's traction. The electorate was in no mood to grant special favors to landowners in the agricultural preserve - one in Pope Valley, one in Oakville, and one in Carneros - who sought to expand their businesses.
Measure P was the true test of where the county stands at the moment.
Cast as a mild consensus measure that drew on ideas from environmentalists, vintners and lawmakers, it was seen as a power grab that made unconscionable exceptions for the vineyard barons who provided financial backing.
Confusion about the measure and resentment about exemptions for valley growers -- stirred to perfection by the Napa Valley Land Stewards Alliance -- doomed the measure.
The failure of Measure P is a blow to the many elected leaders, from Congressman Mike Thompson to the majority of members on the Board of Supervisors, who sought its victory. It is also a slap to the vintners on the valley floor. From the far reaches of Pope Valley to the semi-rural areas outside of Napa Valley's municipalities, other landowners showed that they are not to be taken for granted.
Ironically, large vineyard owners who backed Measure P can also benefit from its defeat, as they don't face any new restrictions if they expand. And some are unlikely to stand idle as smaller wineries earn stellar reputations for their "mountain fruit" from beyond the valley floor.
An existing 1991 stream setback measure is still in place. The county is working to get the State Board of Forestry to toughen rules on timber conversions. And a long-sought technical study of the Napa River's ailments continues.
Land use laws will certainly be back on the ballot. Next time, county leaders need to listen much more closely to the pulse of the public.