Please read Measure C for yourself.

Letter to the editor - Napa Valley Register by Lori Stelling

"We must have the courage to let go of fear-based thinking, to say no to fear-based mailers, and to see clearly what many around the world are now recognizing: we can no longer continue to destroy our forest ecosystems. Our current way of living on the planet is unsustainable...

Before you vote, please take a moment to read Measure C for yourself. Our children do not have the opportunity to vote on this measure. We must vote for them. We must take responsibility for the future of our water, today."

Read the entire letter here:

Question for Measure C opponents.

Letter to the editor - Napa Valley Register by Jeremy Wilder Fitch

"...no sensible Napa vineyard owner would propose to remove our oak woodland, key to the summer’s water supply.

Why then would they oppose Measure C, which restricts oak woodland cutting and riparian corridor conversion, and therefore protects the water supply on which they depend?

Read the entire letter here:

Just the usual baloney

Letter to the editor - Napa Valley Register by Lenore Hirsch

False and misleading claims by No on C: "the usual baloney spewed by hired hands to scare voters and make them imagine that every possible negative outcome will happen."

Read the entire letter here:

Don't fall for these arguments.

Letter to the editor - Napa Valley Register by David Heitzman

"The anti-watershed group has no argument, so they are resorting to clever and repetitive deception, hoping that voters will not think it through. I expect that voters will see through this and understand that the interests of the rich and mega-corporations are not aligned with a sustainable Napa.

What is clear to me is that the Napa Valley Vintners, the Winegrowers, and the Farm Bureau do not have a sustainable Napa as their focus. They are betraying the trust of the citizens of the valley"

Read entire letter here:

Don't be fooled by the arguments of lawyers.

Letter to the editor - Napa Valley Register by Carl Bunch

This is a legal perspective on the nonsensical claim by the no on C side that Napa Superior Court validated their argument. Baloney. They were forced to rewrite "objectively false and misleading statements" and were ordered to pay our legal costs. And they have the gall not only to claim they won, but they continue to repeat the same false and misleading claims in signs, mailers and in person when they speak. Shame!

Read the entire letter here:

Everyone benefits by saving watersheds.

Letter to the editor - Napa Valley Register by Olav E. Lejnieks

Opponents of C have lost all credibility. Why are current and former public officials colluding in this scheme to confuse the voters?They are so clearly serving some other interest than the public good with this strategy of outlandish, nonsensical claims - including, still, those they were forced to remove from the voter information pamphlet. We have to ask, loud and clear, who or what is being served?

"Not having a real or logical agenda upon which to attack this water security measure, the opponents of Yes on C are brazenly and irresponsibly attempting to confuse our voters. They are working diligently to remove the environmental issue that is Measure C from a comprehensive, environmental, ecological, bi-partisan issue that affects every living entity in the Napa Valley to one of issues solely of the wine industry.

The anti-watershed lobby appears to be desperate in protecting its issues, which they avoid honestly stating, and instead are focusing on the fears of the population of the valley. Their public relations team is attempting to disrupt honest dialogue with issues that have no bearing in reality. This measure is about water sustainability and its far reaching and broad effects on our water supply."

Read the entire letter to the editor here: