Dear Governor Newsom,

The Sierra Club Napa Group supports the mission of creating more affordable housing in our expensive area. We are also aware that selecting sites is fraught with community reaction. NIMBY responses are strong, particularly in affluent areas where organized homeowners have a litany of reasons why people of more modest means would be better off elsewhere. We also understand that the elected officials who represent those areas will do their best to appease their constituents.

We welcome necessary housing being located near us, personally, particularly when the locations are in-fill, and not expanding the footprints of municipal areas into open spaces.

In Napa County, we are witnessing what we consider irregularities in the process of selecting sites for affordable/low-income residences. These irregularities are causing an extremely popular and well-used park, Skyline Wilderness Park, to be targeted for development. It has happened before, and this attempt seems more focused. We oppose converting an open space park, particularly the most used park in the county, into housing.

We particularly question a process that identifies this immensely popular park as a housing site and obscures that decision by mislabeling the site. It is widely known as Skyline Wilderness Park. If that is publicized, it gets the attention and outrage of the community. When labeled as “state owned property on Imola,” it passes without notice. It was thusly being walked through the decision process unbeknownst to the citizens of Napa. In fact, when we interviewed a member of the Housing Element Advisory Committee, they were unaware that the site in question was actually Skyline Park and that the parcel being targeted is a well-used location for beneficial community services, and essential to the operation of the whole park. The county planning director had successfully moved this decision well into the process without anyone being the wiser.

When the local paper correctly identified that Skyline Wilderness Park was on the list to be developed into housing, the community and many organizations challenged that decision. The planning director said that the state is requiring this parcel to be developed, so it cannot be taken off the list. When the vice chair of the Housing Element Advisory Committee moved that Skyline be struck from the list of sites, the planning director cut off discussion and said that it cannot be removed at this late date.

When reading the consultant report on the selected sites, one item on the report was “current use.” Nothing was listed. Nobody had bothered to visit the site and interview the park management and the Skyline Park Citizens Association, the volunteer nonprofit that administers the park. Had they done their homework, they would have found that the targeted parcel is essential to the operation of the whole park, even though it is a relatively small percentage of the park. They would have seen large group meetings and events, such as scout camping, equestrian events, indigenous tribal gatherings, youth mountain bike events, affordable camping for concerts, and other group events. It must be underscored, that without the income generated from these uses in this part of the park, the entire park would suffer. No other potential site had current uses, much less a host of community beneficial uses.

The process of selecting sites, while compliant, seems to have preordained that Skyline Park would be the favored location for development and done so in a non-transparent method.

Affordable housing tends to be dense, and those residents need nearby park space. Skyline has served that need for the larger community and would welcome new neighbors if affordable housing is developed nearby. Skyline serves a broad collection of users of all races and income levels and is proudly one of the few places in Napa where people of diverse backgrounds and interests happily share space and interact with one another.

Please challenge the Napa County process and strike Skyline Wilderness Park, listed as “state owned property on Imola” from the list for possible development.

Linked here are the Sierra Club formal comments in the process, and a Napa Vision 2050 set of links to prior attempts to take land from Skyline Park for development.

https://www.sierraclub.org/redwood/napa/blog/2022/05/red-flag-warning-save-skyline-wilderness-park-development-roland-dumas-phd

https://www.sierraclub.org/redwood/napa/blog/2022/07/sierra-club-napa-group-comments-county-plan-convert-skyline-park-acreage

https://mailchi.mp/44ce817800ec/alert-skyline-park-at-risk-again?e=7e46ed73e9&fbclid=IwAR1LLtzRNehfyCQlZNdMxjGCvYMNuBDM6h85xkdxmTs8_o-bAO7ijUOYZQg

On behalf of the Sierra Club and all residents of Napa County, we appreciate your attention to this matter. We would also appreciate the favor of a conversation in which we can share the experience of this highly irregular process.

Sincerely,

Sierra Club Napa Group

Nicholas Cheranich, Chair

Local Contacts: