Winery owners and neighbors press Napa County for clarity on trade tastings and visitation rules

Dozens of winery owners, vintners and neighbors told the Napa County Board of Supervisors on March 25 that the county’s treatment of trade tastings and visitation limits is confusing, inconsistently enforced and harming small producers.

Supporters of trade tastings said those visits are business meetings — not tourism — and are essential for small wineries that rely on trade relationships to sell their products. Stuart Smith, founder of Smith Madrone winery (speaking in public comment), said the county’s rules and enforcement have made operating a small winery difficult: “Many of my friends have been waiting over 6 years to get a use permit from the county, and that is really just unacceptable.”

Why it matters: Trade tastings affect how small, often family-run, wineries market and sell wine. Commenters said the county’s current approach — including an interpretation that trade visitation should be regulated like public tourism — threatens the viability of small producers and the agricultural economy. Several speakers urged the board to clarify or revise the county’s implementation of the 1990 winery definition ordinance (WDO) and related permit rules.

What speakers said and asked - Stuart Smith (Smith Madrone) said the county’s rules are inconsistent and that smaller wineries face longer waits and stricter limits than larger operations. - Spencer Hoops and other small-producer speakers said prolonged enforcement actions and litigation impose heavy costs; Hoops said his family has spent “over 2 and a half million dollars” defending their business. - Kevin Bloch, an attorney for neighbors in litigation with Dalla Valley, said a pending trial will resolve the legal question of whether trade visitation requires a use permit but urged the board to think carefully before reopening policy: “That policy issue is for you, the elected officials, to decide.” - Multiple small winery owners and vineyard operators — including Julia Vander Venk (Bridal Estate), Linda Neal (Tierra Roja Vineyard), Martin Winters and Alexander Pitts — described trade visits as occasional, business-focused visits (often a single salesperson or sommelier), not public events or tourism.

County response and next steps - Brian Bordona, Napa County Planning Director, said there are no proposed changes to the WDO and that the county has not been directed to draft ordinance amendments: “There are none contemplated, nor have I been given direction to do so.” He said staff continue conversations with industry representatives, county counsel and stakeholders to “look into this issue as it relates to wine trade, tastings, and visitation, and marketing.” - Board members repeatedly urged continued outreach between county staff and industry representatives and asked staff to return with clarifying language or options during the general plan update process.

Context and outstanding legal questions - Commenters and some former county staff contend the WDO and past practice distinguished trade visits from public visitation; neighbors and county staff say the county may regulate trade visitation as an accessory use requiring explicit permit authorization. Bloch said the legal question will be decided at trial next month; county staff and board members emphasized that litigation constrains some communications while the case is pending.

Ending: Several supervisors asked staff to keep meeting with industry and community groups and to bring clearer, written options back to the board as part of the broader general plan update process.