Winery to pay fine of half-a-million
Palmaz will rip out vines, restore areas altered without permits
By BILL KISLIUK
Register Editor
A Napa winery has agreed to pay $550,000, pull out 750 creekside vines, plant 160 trees and make other concessions to settle charges that it violated county and state land use regulations on its east Napa property.
The owners of Palmaz Vineyards agreed to the financial penalties and environmental upgrades after being sued by county officials in April. The Napa County Counsel’s Office and Napa District Attorney’s Office said, and the court found, that owners Amalia and Julio Palmaz improperly planted 750 vines too close to a stream and failed to get the proper permits before repairing or reconstructing two bridges over a stream, cutting back creekside foliage, spreading tailings from their wine cave onto open land and repairing a spring box — a water catchment device on a stream.
In the settlement approved Friday by Napa County Superior Court Judge Raymond Guadagni, the Palmazes agreed to pay a $375,000 civil penalty to the county for violating stream setback and other laws; $130,000 to the Napa County Fish & Wildlife Propagation Fund, $30,000 to the State Fish and Game Preservation Fund, and $15,000 to the Department of Fish and Game.
The Palmazes have hired experts and done environmental studies that, according to a press release from the county, make the winery’s overall cost to resolve the case about $1.25 million.
In a prepared statement, Napa County District Attorney Gary Lieberstein said the agreement “represents the largest monetary judgment by far, combined with equitable and restorative provisions and requirements, that we have ever seen in any case of this nature in Napa County. The county’s determination in pursuing the resolution should make it very clear that the county will not tolerate such conduct in the future.”
Napa County Counsel Robert Westmeyer, in a prepared statement, said, “This resolution is in the best interests of all concerned. The alternative would have involved years of protracted and expensive litigation, with no guarantees as to the outcome.”
Cathy Roche, an attorney at Napa’s Dickenson, Peatman & Fogarty who represented the Palmaz family in the case, could not be reached Tuesday. A winery spokeswoman said Julio and Amalia Palmaz were traveling and unavailable for comment.
In addition to the financial penalties, the settlement:
• Orders the Palmazes to restore a natural spring; plant willow, bay and live oak trees along a stretch of Hagen Creek where vegetation was cut back; and remove approximately 750 vines from areas protected by stream setback regulations;
• Prohibits the Palmazes from engaging in any future activities that would violate the county’s soil erosion control, stream setback and grading ordinances;
• Prohibits the Palmazes from violating Fish and Game regulations protecting stream beds, banks and channels;
• Places a moratorium on further development on the Palmaz property until the winery conducts and complete a wetlands and watercourse assessment;
• Requires the Palmazes to contact the county if they plan to acquire and develop any other property in unincorporated Napa County.
The Palmaz property near Mount George first received notoriety several years ago when the owners built the largest wine cave in the Napa, a more than 100,000 square-foot space with several levels and room for business offices, a tasting room, storage tanks, a bottling line and water treatment facilities.
Palmaz wines sell for between $45 and $120 a bottle.
According to the winery’s Web site, the facility was first known as the Cedar Knolls winery and was operated by Henry Hagen in the 1880s. The Palmazes acquired the property in 1996.
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our
virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact
online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
truth be known wrote on Jun 13, 2007 6:57 AM:
Mark M wrote on Jun 13, 2007 11:21 AM:
vineguyNYC wrote on Jun 13, 2007 12:14 PM:
Penny wrote on Jun 13, 2007 12:59 PM:
Annemarie wrote on Jun 13, 2007 2:18 PM:
Local Yokel wrote on Jun 13, 2007 2:59 PM: