Napa Weighs Tougher Groundwater Rules as Supervisors Demand More Debate
Board of Supervisors • Napa CountyOctober 13, 2026
Locunity is an independent informational service and is not an official government page for this commission. All information is sourced from public footage and an analysis of official agendas with the aid of responsible, fact-checked AI. to report an error or omission.
Napa County supervisors spent more than an hour Oct. 13 on proposed groundwater rules that would cut the baseline water allowance for new valley-floor wells in half. They took no vote and asked staff to return with revisions before any adoption. The board also sent a trimmed countywide bike plan back for repairs, voted 5-0 to keep winery wastewater oversight local and adopted a statewide wildfire and recreation strategy.
- Valley-floor well criteria would drop from 1.0 to 0.5 acre-feet per acre under the draft Water Availability Analysis; adoption is expected later this winter
- Bike plan pulled back after supervisors objected that staff struck on-street projects; $250,000 dedicated fund referred for mid-year budget review
- Winery wastewater ordinance advances 5-0, keeping oversight with county Environmental Health before state authority lapses in January 2027
- Statewide wildfire and recreation strategy adopted 5-0 as a voluntary, no-cost planning guide
Groundwater Rules Draw Growers, Environmentalists and Housing Concerns
Why it matters: The Water Availability Analysis, or WAA, sets the groundwater criteria for new and changed wells. It shapes what can be planted, built and pumped across Napa County, and how much water stays in streams.
The basics: The WAA dates to 1991. Patrick Ryan, Assistant Director, Planning, Building and Environmental Services, said three forces drove this update: the public trust doctrine, the county's Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP), which sets a sustainable yield of 15,000 acre-feet, and an update to the groundwater ordinance.
Where things stand: The draft uses a three-tier screen. Its centerpiece is the Tier 1 valley-floor standard, now 1.0 acre-feet per acre. "That is being reduced to 0.5 acre-feet per acre per year," said Ryan. A new Northeast Napa Management Area would be capped at 0.3, and tiered well seal depths would apply near significant streams.
Supervisors pressed on metering. "Why aren't we just asking for monitoring, metering too?" said Anne Cottrell, Supervisor, District 3, who asked why best management practices are required without it. "I think there's an opportunity here to make a stronger statement that that, in fact, is the preference," said Belia Ramos, Supervisor, District 5.
Residential allocations also drew questions. "We won't give them the 4 acre-feet if they can't demonstrate they need 4 acre-feet per year," said Ryan, describing the allocations as maximums that require a demand analysis. Cottrell requested a referral on residential development envelopes so the issue could return for discussion. Liz Alessio, Supervisor, District 2, Board Vice Chair, said the county should recognize and reward growers who already conserve.
The other side: Industry and environmental speakers pulled in opposite directions. Michelle Benvenuto of Winemakers of Napa County asked for adaptive management that can loosen limits as well as tighten them. "We ask that staff use the upcoming 5-year review to reexamine sustainable yield and update the limit if conditions have improved," she said. She also asked the county to confirm that a 10% reduction is a basin-wide goal. Deborah Dillman of Treasury Wine Estates asked that already-approved but unplanted entitlements not be treated as increased intensity of use, which would trigger new analysis.
Mike Hackett, speaking for environmental groups including the Save Napa Valley Foundation, urged the county to adopt the California Environmental Flows Framework and set a stronger public trust standard than "due consideration." "I think that is unsatisfactory and certainly not best practices," he said. Patricia Damry, a public commenter, urged the county to incorporate Water Audit California's suggestions. Public commenter Josh Devore said the guidance reaches existing wells and could collide with state ADU and housing mandates. "Do we care more about groundwater or housing?" he asked.
Staff responded on two points. "The 10% reduction is not found in the WAA," said Ryan, identifying it as a GSP matter. Vicki Kresinger-Graybert of the consulting firm Plutarch and Scalmanini said environmental flow requirements are not yet linked to WAA guidance. Brian Bordona, Director of Planning, Building & Environmental Services, said staff would prepare a table clarifying which legal framework governs each piece.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: No vote was taken. Growers want flexibility and protection for existing entitlements. Environmental groups want stronger stream protections. Rural housing advocates see a potential conflict with state law.
What's next: The GSP five-year evaluation returns Dec. 15. "When this comes back, let's bring it back for discussion before adoption, not just on consent," said Amber Manfree, Board Chair, Supervisor, District 4.
Bike Plan Sent Back After Projects Struck
Why it matters: The Napa Countywide Active Transportation Plan, led by the Napa Valley Transportation Authority (NVTA), has no money of its own. Projects left out of it may struggle to compete for future funding.
Where things stand: "There's no fiscal impact, but the plan also does not come with its own funding," said Steve Lederer, Director, Napa County Public Works. He pointed to a five-year roads plan with at least 100 miles of paving and green conflict markings. He also cited the Vine Trail, whose Yountville–St. Helena segment lacks construction funding. Lederer said county pavement condition is at its highest level in decades.
Kara Werner of the Napa County Bicycle Coalition praised the plan's connectivity analysis but said staff's changes simply recommit the county to existing processes. "We want to ask for a dedicated pot of funding to implement bike facility improvements that are not on the 5-year roads plan," she said. The coalition's ask was about $250,000 for gap closures, rumble strips and quick-build projects.
The other side: Supervisors objected that staff had struck most projects in Table 12.6, weakened the funding language and removed an equity statement. "And no on-street bike projects remain," said Joelle Gallagher, Supervisor, District 1. Gallagher also flagged that the plan's funding language, which said the county does not plan to apply for grants except under certain conditions, differed from the staff memo.
"Silverado Trail is sadly one of the deadliest roads for bicyclists in the entire Bay Area," said Ramos. She argued that the Vine Trail is a project, not a bike plan.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: Lederer agreed to restore language on funding, sidewalks, road widening and equity. He said $250,000 or more could be designated for bike projects if the board restores general fund support for roads. Alessio backed the $250,000 fund, and Manfree cited Vision Zero, a goal of eliminating traffic deaths: "I think that it's really important that we stick to our goals to be a Vision Zero county or as close to it as we can possibly get." County Counsel suggested bringing the revised plan back on consent so the changes are clear. Alessio then withdrew her motion to adopt the plan as amended, and no vote was taken.
What's next: The revised plan returns on a future consent calendar. Staff will assess a dedicated bike fund as part of a mid-year budget adjustment.
County Moves to Keep Winery Wastewater Oversight Local
Why it matters: Napa has regulated winery process wastewater since 1979. Under the state's 2021 Winery Order, that authority ends when an extension sunsets in January 2027 unless the county becomes the "local agency."
Where things stand: The state order sorts wineries into tiers by discharge volume and exempts those discharging under 10,000 gallons per year. Staff said local control keeps fees lower, permitting faster and inspections more frequent. The ordinance covers Region 2, the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board's area.
"We support this ordinance," said Benvenuto of Winemakers of Napa County, citing Environmental Health's responsiveness.
Supervisors asked about roughly 250 facilities that never enrolled under the state order. "We have not done any of the outreach with those facilities," said Kim Withrow, Environmental Health Supervisor. Questions also covered how exemptions are verified, wineries in Region 5 and pond releases during storms. Staff committed to outreach ahead of a predicted strong El Niño.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: Cottrell moved and Alessio seconded the motion of intent to adopt the ordinance amending County Code Section 13.16.010 (Matter 26-1773). It passed on a voice vote (For: 5, Against: 0, Absent: 0). Wineries keep a familiar local regulator. Non-enrolled facilities can expect county contact.
What's next: This was the introduction; the ordinance returns for adoption.
Napa Signs On to State Wildfire-Recreation Strategy
Why it matters: The strategy costs nothing to adopt. Officials said it complements the county's Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) and could help position projects for funding tied to Prop 4 and Measure B.
Where things stand: John Wentworth of the Mammoth Lakes Trail and Public Access Foundation presented the strategy's four goals and 31 key actions. About 15 jurisdictions have adopted it, including Napa's Open Space District in March. "There's nothing mandatory about this," he said. He also said there is currently no state money for recreation assets and pointed to overlap with climate bond funds. Staff reported no material impact on staff time.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: Gallagher moved and Alessio seconded the resolution (Matter 26-1736). It passed 5-0 by voice vote. Staff will fold the strategy's goals into planning and capital projects.
- Domestic Violence Awareness Month: Board proclaimed October 2026, honoring NEWS's 45 years; 5-0 vote.
- Consent calendar: Items 5.A–5.AD passed 5-0, including a 3.25% law enforcement COLA.
- Appointments: Board reappointed Dr. Harold Pierre and seated Jennifer Cook on the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council; Joshua Murillo joins the Arts and Culture Advisory Committee.
- PG&E outages: Cottrell sought a PG&E presentation after outages of more than 20 hours in Angwin, Pope Valley and Berryessa.
- Farm grant: Napa Green announced a $3M grant, with more than $2M in direct payments to growers for regenerative practices.
Looking ahead: The Napa County Bicycle Coalition hosts a family-friendly group ride Oct. 23 from Fuller Park. The board's next regular meeting is Nov. 3, 2026.