Measure B: NOBLE House

---

 The Krug/Noble House Agribusiness measure is on the ballot in November. It is up to the voters to decide whether to pass these measures. Here is some basic background information, as well as what I think are the most compelling arguments both FOR and AGAINST the measure.A “moving forward” statement is also provided.

Basics

Approval of the measure will allow construction of an up to 56-room resort at the Charles Krug Winery property, located just north of downtown. Guest rooms would be in a two-story estate house, 17 one-story villa buildings, 2 two-story villa buildings, and refurbished train cars along the (extended) Wine Train tracks. Measure B's sponsor, Washington-based Noble House Hotels & Resorts, would enter into a lease agreement with Charles Krug Winery to construct the project. By using a ballot initiative, the sponsor has bypassed the usual city planning and vetting processes. 

Considerations (FOR) 

• The project is expected to bring a much-needed new revenue stream to St. Helena. St. Helena needs new revenue streams to address the city’s budget shortfalls and infrastructure needs. The project is projected to increase the city's revenue by $1.8 million annually in the first five years. $1.8 million is about 60% of the city’s current shortfall. (Note: The $2 to $3.5 million cited by Noble House in their marketing materials reflects regional taxes - and does not all go to St. Helena.) 

• St. Helena lacks sufficient lodging options, which limits its ability to attract overnight visitors. Additional hotel guests would bring additional business to local restaurants and businesses. Currently, many Napa Valley visitors drive through St. Helena without stopping to spend money in the city, as many hotels and lodging options are located outside of the city in Calistoga, Yountville, and Napa. Visitors may pass through St. Helena while traveling between wineries and accommodations in other towns, but they have a reduced likelihood of staying longer and contributing to the local economy.

• We can’t keep saying “no” to everything and let perfection be the enemy of the good.
  
  

Considerations (AGAINST) 

• The fast-tracking of this project (via ballot measure) means that the usual city planning and vetting process, intended to protect and involve residents, is bypassed. If passed, the developers will likely pay lower impact fees than they would under the traditional city planning process.

• More information is needed to assess the effects on groundwater and water-saving measures for the project's wells. Groundwater is a vital resource for agriculture and residents, and over-extraction or poor management could lead to shortages, environmental harm, or long-term damage to the water supply. If St. Helena's groundwater levels get "too low," real implications include:

1. Insufficient water supplies for residential, agricultural, and commercial use, including the needs of local wineries, farms, and tourism businesses.
2. Degradation of local ecosystems - which can then have economic impacts on both farming and tourism. Additionally, the decline in biodiversity can affect agricultural production by disrupting pollination, pest control, and soil health, leading to reduced crop yields and increased costs.
3. Increased pumping costs. As groundwater levels drop, wells may need to be drilled deeper to access water, leading to higher costs for the city and private users. Existing wells may dry up, requiring costly repairs or replacements.
   
   

• The proposal to build workforce housing (which is required by all new developments in the city) has issues. The 65-unit plan might not fit the site. If the project can’t proceed, the developer would pay a $735,000 fee - which does not go far. However, the city council is currently taking steps to ensure all projects are mandated to contribute sufficient funds to affordable housing (if they don't do the building themselves). If this happens before the election, it could negate  the argument that developers aren't contributing enough to affordable housing. 

You can read the full text of the city’s Evaluation of the St. Helena Agritourism Initiative in the Elections Code Section 9212 Report, (This report sometimes takes a minute or two to load.)

Moving Forward

This ballot measure brings to light several areas for the city to address moving forward in order to avoid being in  a compromised position again. 

• Using a ballot measure, Noble House has avoided the planning process that all other projects must follow. As such, the city has lost the ability to negotiate on behalf of its residents and go to bat for community priorities. The city’s current financial state may have developers “sensing blood in the water.” If we don’t want to find ourselves in this position again, we must address our fiscal challenges to ensure better leverage in future negotiations. 

•  Noble House has used a ballot measure to move forward without going through the same planning process that other projects typically follow. As a result, the city has missed an opportunity to negotiate for the benefit of its residents and prioritize community needs. Given the city’s current financial state, there may be concerns about developers taking advantage of the situation. To avoid similar challenges in the future, it’s crucial that we address our fiscal issues and strengthen our position for upcoming negotiations. 

• St. Helena's water situation is extremely complex. While having Noble House use groundwater is concerning, it may actually be beneficial for the project to be connected to city water. Currently, the city's water enterprise is producing less water than projected. This means the revenue from the water enterprise is below projections - which impacts  the city's ability to maintain and upgrade critical infrastructure and  increases the potential for again raising consumers' water rates. The city must be doing forward-looking work to explore and secure alternative water sources. Not doing so leaves us in a Catch-22 situation—where the lack of investment in new water sources exacerbates the existing water shortages, leading to higher costs and fewer options for residents and businesses alike.