" We may as well wrap the noose around our necks and jump... These clowns are all gonna give us a push, anyway. "

" Uh? Isn't that why we have NEWSPAPERS and they have REPORTERS, to dig out this kind of information? "

" So, one guy who supposedly represents some mysterious group of people who can't find "affordable" houses to buy in Napa can bully Napa supervisors and council members into rolling-over and accepting a development project that will require new long-term services and financial burdens on our struggling Napa community?

If this gentlman needs "affordable" homes for his mysterious group, I have at least four to five houses on my street that have been sitting empty for 6 to 12 monthes.
These houses are in town, next to already existing schools, hospitals, businesses, fire and emergency services.
These houses are in the McPherson district which is pretty affordable by Napa standards. This is a nice middle class neighborhood.
If these mysterious home owners are so up-set at not being able to find a house that they are willing to "sue" our citizens and further depleat our coffers, I really doubt these will be responsible citizens and neighbors Napa will benefit from having.

This feels more like a take-over hostage situation to me;
"Let our development be built or see what happens to you next."
Is this the American way of housing "developers" doing business these days?
Feels more like some new kind of community terrorism to me. "

" I dunno, I think except for the backers of Measure N not identifying themselves, which I believe was illegal, the rest of the players are well known.

Grabill is acting consistenly with what he has been saying for years. No surprise there, and anyone who is surprised is not paying attention. Any interest group like Graybill's can always find someone to base a suit on.

The county can still negotiate with the city, they can take some of the cities affordable housing into Napa Pipe which they should have done all along anyway. The City wants to tank Napa Pipe so that obvious option is not even on the table. "

" Yeah, NB, kind of like the last time the county negotiated and arrived at the MOU with the city concerning housing?
Remember that agreement? I hope so, cuz all that's left of the agreement is memory.
And funny thing - that MOU unilaterally disappeared when the county was presented with Rogal's Pipe Dream.
No conspiracies, just typical greedy, inept county maneuvering. Basically, the county would like the "wine country lifestyle" to loom fat and large and stash the people that make it possible anywhere except in sight. Best of all? Stash 'em in densely packed concrete sky cells far removed from county wine types and McMansions and tourists. Toss some barnyard doodads on the buildings, give the inmates a couple miles of footpaths and UNFUNDED promises of light rail, and tell everyone else that the new red lights up and down the currently full highways and roads will facilitate traffic flow. Maybe even run to DC on the taxpayer's dime and pick up an award from Mike Thompson for being green and supporting smart growth!
Sure thing, the county can still negotiate with the city... "

" There are no schools in the area of Napa Pipe. We know than normal developer fees are insufficient to build the schools for the 2,000 to 4,000 children who will live there. The school officials are hiding during all of the talk about developing Napa Pipe into a residential community. School officials want the increased enrollment so they can raise teacher and administrator salaries but they have no idea how to build sufficient schools for Napa Pipe kids. There will be a need for at least 5 elementary schools, one or two middle schools and one or two high schools. The cost will exceed $500 million. If those schools are not built at Napa Pipe the traffic to bus the kids into Napa or American Canyon will be horrendous an the schools will be horribly crowed. If those schools are built and the developer fees are insufficient...guess what, good ole Napans will be on the hook again for huge bonds on our houses to build the schools...just like the $160 million we're paying for AmCan high school because our school officials were asleep and didn't require the developers of all those new houses to pay for the schools. "

" I think most of us are quite done for a good long while with any new bond measures for new schools, new desks, new tracks, etc.
It's not the cost of building a school that is killing us, it's the on-going staffing required and maintinance for running an individual school.
We are looking currently at closing multiple existing schools, and it's not the numbers of kids attending, it's NO money to run the number of schools and support the number of students we have now.
If you think mass housing at the Napa Pipe location is good, look at long-term busing throughout Napa for these students.
Nothing "green" or cost effective about that.
Look for larger class sizes, look for more stressed-out teachers, look for more campus fighting due to over-crowding.
And look for the next land developer who buys a big chunk of land and starts the next campaign of community hostage taking.
There was a time when developers bought land and waited for the right time to consider pitching their project to meet the community's true needs.
We can't afford to support a mass housing project at this location.
Someone telling us "Well, I don't think you can afford Not to support my project right now, and I'm going bleed you slowly until you see it my way"
...I don't know, but this just seems wrong and amoral.
Again, this feels like a new kind of community terrorism.
Is Napa's former Mayor Henderson an investor in this project? I hope not, that would be a retirement benefit package I don't think we owe any public servant. "

" At the beginning I thought I would support Napa Pipe just to make a better look to that area. But why do we need more housing when many of the new developments are vacant, advertising themselves occasionally with such oxymorons as "free rent". The apartments behind Knob Hill are clearly more vacant than occupied, the units across Lucky's on California Avenue are more vacant than occupied and so are the apartments of Hawthorn Village on Solano. These are only some that we pass by day after day and see how vacant they are. Do we need more vacant housing units in Napa? "

" Listen closely and you will hear the sound of circus music and a man shouting, “Step right up folks! See the most ferocious lawsuit on earth!”

Take a closer look and you will see a kitten playing with a ball of string. Such is the case with the lawsuit against the City of Napa. It's a distraction intended for us to focus on the City of Napa – not on the County and the proposed Napa Pipe project.

There is no proof that housing at Napa Pipe will be more affordable - nor a requirement that it serve Napa's workforce. Supervisor Luce has long contended housing for Napa's workforce is the reason he supported the project in the first place. But he doesn’t guarantee that.

We need more affordable housing in the city of Napa – housing for people of very-low to low income (income levels which are below 50% OR greater than 50% and less than 80% of the adjusted gross area median income). New housing at the Napa Pipe location may be a good idea. But 2,000 new homes all at once?

How will we accommodate children who need parks and schools? How long can we expect construction to last? How will it influence local traffic? Do we have enough water, police, fire, and public works staff to serve the area?

And what will be the cost to local taxpayers to serve the new homes and residents? Surely, they will not pay for themselves. Do we have enough new revenue coming into the County and City of Napa to offset the costs?

The lawsuit is a side-show. We need to stay focused. ~ MvG "

" Cadence, the MOU was done, the County paid close to $10 million to the city for the new parking lot on Main as part of it.

I am talking about a "reverse" agreement where the county takes some of the cities housing, unlike the previous agreement where the city took the counties housing. This would alleviate crowding up in the city and put the housing all at one location.

It would also help the county stay within the 1% growth limit.

Duck, this is all predicated on a long term plan over twenty years or so that presumes that within several years the economy and population will once again grow. "

" The core issue isn't who Grabill is representing, or why he's suing. Lawyers sue whenever they see an opportunity. The core issue is that Grabill thinks there is an opportunity, which means the city didn't include enough affordable housing in its housing element as it's obligated to do. We can either keep falling short of our obligations and be vulnerable to people suing, or we can meet our obligations. And if we want to meet our obligations, we've got to talk consider where new housing would go and what it would look like. Would it go in existing neighborhoods, would it go in undeveloped areas, etc? I'd rather put it close, but not too close, and I'd rather make it condos and townhomes instead of more single-family because we've got enough single family and they're expensive. So by those two measures, I think Napa Pipe is a pretty good idea. As long as they don't built it all at the same time, it'll give the community a chance to absorb it. "

" The lawsuit may be a distraction, but at least it's got us talking about affordable (or the lack of it) housing in Napa. Whether it's Napa Pipe or other developments, our housing has to go somewhere, and if we continue to ignore the state's mandates, we'll keep getting sued because we're not complying with the law. "

" Straightalk finally said something that indicates for the first time that he cares about Napa families and taxpayers rather than his typical political oddities. He said, "New housing at the Napa Pipe location may be a good idea. But 2,000 new homes all at once?
How will we accommodate children who need parks and schools? How long can we expect construction to last? How will it influence local traffic? Do we have enough water, police, fire, and public works staff to serve the area?
And what will be the cost to local taxpayers to serve the new homes and residents? Surely, they will not pay for themselves. Do we have enough new revenue coming into the County and City of Napa to offset the costs?" "

" I think we need to bring the conversation back to reality. The reality is we need to build State mandated affordable housing, not affordable homes. People are mentioning that homes prices are down and more affordable, but that is not the affordable homes we are talking about. These are affordable homes that you must apply and qualify for. As citizens we have a responsibility to ensure that we not only provide for ourselves, but those of us that are less fortunate. The Board of Supervisors has even greater responsibility to uphold this idea and by putting forth an affordable housing plan that they knew would be rejected to appease some no growth advocates is deplorable. They know that the right thing to do is to allow the housing to be built on Napa Pipe. It is time for them to take a stand and do the right thing. "

" I am a little surprised by Supervisor Dillion’s comment accusing Rogal and his partners of somehow “working against” the county. I think it is important to remember the Rogal and his partners bought Napa Pipe and have the right to build whatever they want on it, as long as it is approved by whatever body needs to approve it. The county should be counting their blessings that Rogal is offering the opportunity to place actual affordable housing on site and not pay some type of in lieu fee. The County is the one that had its’ unreasonable plan to place housing rejected by the State. And the property owners like everyone else has the right to express their opinion and that is what Rogal did when he contacted HCD. "

" Straightguy says "How will we accommodate children who need parks and schools? How long can we expect construction to last? How will it influence local traffic? Do we have enough water, police, fire, and public works staff to serve the area?

I believe Napa can not step up and defend that city parks are well designed to accommodate all age groups in our youth and in existing neighborhoods, some of our parks were improved but still lack what kids need. City of Napa and its past decade or so of planning, has provided this entire county with the visible traffic, going in Napa and out. taking accountability for that traffic is need,

Water? Did we ask all the hotels approved throughout downtown that question. Police, fire? I believe Napa police keep busy with gang activities. We are in need of new developments with 21st century thinking for how to reverse the habits in our population and behaviors in our children.

We need to think forward for future transportation needs, not just today and tomorrows. what will open up discussions for future alternative transportation? I believe any support in future for using river, ridership is key and a population at NP with NV College proximity to that river, should be a focus to everyone and I believe that is a need.





, "