Napa Launches General Plan Rewrite, Presses for Fresher Data and Wider Outreach

Napa County began its first full General Plan overhaul since 2008 on Sept. 15, 2026. Supervisors used the launch to demand fresher environmental data and outreach that reaches residents who rarely attend hearings. Earlier in the day, the board advanced a state-driven lot-split ordinance 5-0. It also heard immigrant advocates press the county jail to narrow ICE cooperation further and continued that forum to Sept. 29.

---

• General Plan rewrite launches with direction on equity, youth outreach and outdated 2016 vegetation maps
• Jail reports 9 ICE transfers in 2025; advocates seek a shorter look-back and a public defender immigration attorney
• SB 9 lot-split ordinance advances 5-0, with language saying "urban" changes no land use designation
• Groundwater-tracking software contract extended 5-0 while public data access remains unresolved

---

General Plan Rewrite Opens With a Data Fight

Why it matters: The $6 million-plus, multiyear rewrite of the 2008 General Plan will shape agriculture, housing, water and health policy for 20 to 30 years. Matt Ramey, a consultant with Alta Planning and Design, cited “250-plus new laws and regulations” closely tied to General Plan topics.

The basics: The Baseline Data Report, or BDR, is the factual foundation for the plan and its environmental impact report. “The BDR itself is not a policy document,” said Brian Bordona, Director of Planning, Building & Environmental Services.

Where things stand: Consultant Shannon Wages reported several findings:

• Countywide greenhouse gas emissions fell 27% from 2005 to 2019.
• Wine grape values topped $1 billion.
• The county completed its first SB 1000 environmental justice analysis.

Wages also answered questions from Howard Siegel of the Napa Housing Coalition. She said 1,321 housing units were destroyed in the wildfires and cited a 2025 homeless count of 374. Alta outlined a six-stage process with five board check-ins, starting with outreach that goes to residents rather than asking them to come to county events.

The other side: The BDR's vegetation and canopy data rely on 2016 imagery, which predates the 2017 and 2020 fires. Wine Growers of Napa County and others flagged the gap. “It seems difficult to build a strong future on an outdated baseline,” said Dr. Hannah Cantoras, public commenter. Bordona conceded, “We did fall short on the 2016 veg maps.” He said he plans to update the layer with Jim Thorne.

Industry groups want more than new maps. “The 4 industry groups have come together with one voice to tell you that changes are needed,” said Michelle Novy of Napa Valley Vintners. She was referring to the Winery Definition Ordinance. Public commenter Kelly Anderson called a remote presenter a poor start: “We have to have a person in the room.”

Decisions and stakeholder impacts: The board took no vote and instead gave staff direction.

• “I don't want a red line of the 2008 general plan,” said Belia Ramos, Supervisor, District 5. She also urged youth outreach, adding, “People who are financially secure show up because they can afford to show up.”
• Joelle Gallagher, Supervisor, District 1, asked for language access beyond Spanish and an approach for tracking equity.
• Anne Cottrell, Supervisor, District 3, wants a plan with as few technical terms as possible.
• Liz Alessio, Board Vice Chair, wants economic development listed among the priorities.
• Amber Manfree, Board Chair, backed the vegetation update. She said the county is “most likely going to have to recalibrate the kinds of land use that we have in our county areas in some kind of way going forward.”

Wine and grape groups now have a formal opening to revisit winery rules, and Napa Valley Grape Growers offered to help with outreach. Housing advocates and the Center for Biological Diversity both asked for a seat at the table. Lower-income residents and those who speak languages other than English stand to gain the most from broader engagement.

What's next: Staff will return through five planned board check-ins. No dates were announced.

---

Advocates Press Jail to Narrow ICE Cooperation Further

Where things stand: Under the TRUTH Act, the county holds a public forum on ICE access to people in county custody. At this year's forum, Corrections Director AJ Alarcon reported these 2025 figures:

• 3,284 bookings
• 145 ICE requests
• 36 cases that met the county's notification criteria
• 9 people taken into ICE custody

So far in 2026, the jail has received 84 requests and made 3 transfers.

The revised Policy 604 makes three changes:

• It drops misdemeanor convictions entirely as a basis for notification.
• It cuts the look-back for "wobblers," offenses that can be charged as either misdemeanors or felonies, from 15 to 10 years.
• It requires a preliminary hearing finding.

Applied to 2025 cases, “3 of those folks wouldn't have qualified,” said AJ Alarcon, Director of Corrections.

Why it matters: Speakers framed the stakes as economic and personal.

• Julia DiNatale of the Napa Valley Community Foundation cited Migration Policy Institute studies. They found immigrants make up 21% of residents and 29% of the workforce. She estimated $366 million in lost GDP and 4,300 lost jobs if undocumented workers were removed.
• “Students are directly reporting being afraid to come to school,” said Jody Kuik of the Napa Takes Action Coalition.
• Esmeralda Gil, Executive Director, Puertas Abiertas Community Resource Center, described the financial shocks households face after detentions.

The other side: An organized group of speakers asked the county to go beyond the revised policy. They came from Napa Takes Action, Puertas Abiertas, IIBA, Napa Valley Together and the League of Women Voters.

• Sudie Shank of Napa Takes Action asked for a 7- or 5-year look-back.
• Madeline Hernandez urged no notification for cases with only pending charges. She also asked for a full-time immigration attorney in the Public Defender's Office.
• “We believe the evidence says there is room to do more,” said Madeline Hernandez, North Bay Regional Directing Attorney, IIBA.
• “Compliance should be the floor, not the ceiling,” said Adrian Maldonado of the Community Leaders Coalition.

Decisions and stakeholder impacts: The board took no vote, but several supervisors signaled interest in further narrowing.

• Law enforcement's job “is to enforce the law and is not in any way to expedite deportation,” said Supervisor Gallagher.
• Supervisor Cottrell noted that “SB 54 allows us to communicate more than we are.” She called the attorney request “definitely a cost, a budgetary cost.”
• Vice Chair Alessio also supported studying changes.
• Alarcon said further narrowing could go to the board's ad hoc committee.

Immigrant families and employers have the most at stake. The Public Defender's budget would carry any new attorney position.

What's next: At the request of Chief Executive Officer Ryan J. Alsop, the forum resumes Tuesday, Sept. 29, 2026, at 6 p.m.

---

SB 9 Lot-Split Rules Advance With 'Urban' Caveat

Why it matters: State law requires ministerial approval within 60 days for eligible lot splits and two-unit projects. Ministerial means staff-level approval with no discretionary hearing. Supervising Planner Trevor Hawks estimated “about 1,531 parcels” may qualify.

Where things stand: The ordinance updates Chapter 17.17 and Section 18.104.440 to match SB 450, AB 1061 and state housing department guidance. Hawks said prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance disqualify a parcel. No one spoke during public comment.

The other side: Ramos objected to the term "urban lot split." “I would like some language that says we continue to be allergic to it, notwithstanding the fact that SB 9 gives rights to the property owners to subdivide,” she said. Staff agreed to clarify that the wording “isn't changing the underlying land use designation.”

Chair Manfree asked about Agricultural Preserve parcels, septic and groundwater limits, and whether the adjacent-parcel rule can be enforced. “I foresee some potential conflict here, and I am concerned about that,” she said. Alessio and Cottrell asked for public outreach, updated maps and FAQs.

Decisions and stakeholder impacts: Ramos's amendment was added to the ordinance. Cottrell moved intent to adopt, and Alessio seconded. The motion passed by voice vote (For: 5, Against: 0, Absent: 0). Property owners gain a by-right path to more units. Without outreach, neighbors may be caught off guard.

What's next: The ordinance requires a second reading at a future meeting.

---

Groundwater-Tracking Software Extended Amid Disclosure Fight

Cottrell pulled item 5P from the consent calendar. The remaining consent items, A–U, passed 5-0. Amendment No. 1 to agreement 250418B with Byrne Software Technologies extends the contract through June 30, 2027.

Where things stand: Staff said the software will:

• Replace spreadsheets
• Map approval conditions using GIS
• Let applicants submit monitoring data online
• Flag exceedances

Staff said none of this changes any conditions of approval. Assistant Director Patrick Ryan said exceedances already trigger enforcement and a groundwater management plan. “This is only the contract to start having those conversations with the consultant,” he said. Questions about public access to the data would involve County Counsel.

The other side: Water Audit California submitted a letter, and Cottrell said she pulled the item to get staff's response to it. Michelle Schell, speaking for an agricultural group, supported accurate monitoring. She objected to a private litigant shaping disclosure: “A private company shouldn't be dictating what the county collects and discloses.”

Decisions and stakeholder impacts: Cottrell moved approval, and Alessio seconded (For: 5, Against: 0, Absent: 0). Questions about what data becomes public, which matter to both water advocates and growers, are deferred until the system is designed.

---

Minor Items

• Garbage rates: Zone 1 rates rise about 0.5% effective Oct. 1, 2026. A 35-gallon can will cost $49.10 a month. Passed 5-0.
• Event fees: Temporary event fees were renamed to match new categories, with no change in amounts. Effective Jan. 1, 2027. Passed 5-0.
• CMSP seat: The board re-nominated Solano County Supervisor Cassandra James after a tie with Sonoma's Chris Corsi. Passed 5-0.
• Proclamations: The board recognized Suicide Prevention Month and Hispanic Heritage Month. The county has trained 2,050 residents in QPR, a suicide prevention model, since 2023. Passed 5-0.
• Steele Fire: Chief JC Greenberg said fuel breaks kept the 51-acre fire near Berryessa Highlands from triggering evacuation orders.

---

Looking Ahead

Supervisor Ramos referred rules on excessive cat populations kept at homes to staff for review. Vice Chair Alessio asked for hardship alternatives for owners of neglected vineyards. Agricultural Commissioner Tracy Cleveland described a new AB 732 penalty of $500 to $1,000 per acre, which the county has not yet used.