LAKEPORT – The committee that created an agriculture element for the county's draft general plan voted Thursday night to keep the minimum parcel size for agriculture at 40 acres.
However, the decision was far from unanimous, and the issue is likely to be widely discussed in public hearings planned for this fall.
It was the last of six meetings for the Agriculture Element Committee, said facilitator Rick Rust, who has led the meetings.
The discussion about minimum parcel sizes came toward the two-hour meeting's end.
Committee member Greg Hanson suggested reducing the minimum from 40 to 10 acres, which was the only alternate number offered during the discussion. He said if a farmer had a 79-acre parcel they couldn't even split it to get down to two smaller parcels.
Toni Scully of Scully Packing Co. asked what the recourse was for a farmer who currently wanted to split large parcels.
Community Development Director Rick Coel said that it's a complicated process that can require a general plan amendment and rezoning or a lot line adjustment, which means acquiring property from a neighbor in order to get enough property to split into even 40-acre parcels.
The 10-acre size drew immediate fire from other committee members.
“I see the whole county getting paved over and turned into Santa Rosa,” said Juliana Vidich, a committee alternate.
Steve DeVoto, a Kelseyville-area farmer, said it's difficult to have a viable farming operation on less than 40 acres, especially considering the amount of investment needed.
Bob Dutcher, a committee member and Realtor, countered that there are many pear farmers who aren't making ends meet despite the fact that they have 40-acre parcels.
“The one thing I don't want to see in my neighborhood is more McMansions,” said Finley pear grower Phil Murphy.
That's just what will happen if lot sizes are changed and land is sold off in smaller parcels, he added, which in turn will impact neighboring farmings.
Victoria Brandon, chair of the Sierra Club Lake Group, said the issue they were discussing was really about subdividing land. The committee was tasked with finding ways to sustain and promote agriculture, she said, but subdividing land likely would result in it no longer being used for agriculture.
Ken Barr, who owns Adobe Creek Packing and considerable pear acreage, said only 53 of the 719 agriculture parcels located in class one and two soils in the Big Valley area are compliant with the 40-acre minimum.
Ron Bartolucci, a winegrape grower, asked if that meant they should start subdividing as some areas in the state's southern half have done.
Barr responded that he wanted to know how the 40-acre parcel size promotes agriculture.
Another pear grower, Diane Henderson, said there is a trend toward more intense farming on parcels much smaller than 40 acres. She agreed with Hanson that a 10-acre parcel size was a better alternative.
Cattle rancher and veterinarian Dr. Tim Strong offered another perspective in explaining his support of the current parcel sizes.
“I support it for future generations and future agriculture,” he said, explaining that Lake County has a unique environment with clean air and great soils, and huge opportunities for new crops.
Strong said the county shouldn't sacrifice the potential of its agricultural land and pave it over just because times are tough right now.
Bartolucci added that he thought it was pointless to spend so much time creating an ag element and then destroy agriculture by altering parcel sizes.
Dutcher replied that just because the parcel sizes would be reduced, it wouldn't necessarily result in all parcels being split.
Community members who attended offered suggestions including increasing the parcel sizes, rather than reducing them, and keeping the county's “vastness” in order to prevent Lake from becoming a clone of Napa and Sonoma.
Pear grower Ray Mostin said he thinks the 40-acre parcel size is “ridiculous,” and that he's unable to retire and take care of his bedridden wife because he can't sell off his land.
Dan Springer, who said he's struggled through hard times with both pears and winegrapes, agreed with Mostin. “Ag is on the ropes in Lake County,” he said, adding that the thinking that arrived at the 40-acre parcel size is obsolete.
When Rust called for a vote, 11 committee members voted to keep the ag parcels at 40 acres, while four others voted for a reduction.
After the vote was taken, Barr again raised his concerns that the current sizes don't support agriculture. He wouldn't offer an alternate size, but said the issue needed reconsideration. “Things are always changing,” he said.
After DeVoto interrupted him and asked to wrap up the meeting, Barr got up and left.
Rust said the agriculture element, and the parcel size issue, will go through a series of public hearings before the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors beginning this fall.
For more information about the general plan update, visit www.co.lake.ca.us/Page2193.aspx.
E-mail Elizabeth Larson at
{mos_sb_discuss:2}
How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
