Supervisor Brad Wagenknecht’s prepared statement on why he will recuse himself from all Lake Luciana votes:

In light of the two lawsuits that have been filed over the Lake Luciana golf course project, and after consulting with county counsel and much careful consideration, I have decided to recuse myself from any further participation on the board’s decisions regarding the Lake Luciana project.

The lawsuits falsely allege that I was biased against Lake Luciana because of my friendship with former Planning Commissioner Jim King. There is no question that Jim King is a friend of mine. But so are many other people in this county, including several representatives and supporters of the Lake Luciana project who have appeared before the board of supervisors. Because the Wagenknecht family has been in the Napa Valley for generations, it is rare for me to consider a project that does not involve someone I know and often consider a friend. However, I have never let any of these acquaintances or friendships affect how I vote on an issue before the board.

I did state that I was troubled by the Jim King issue and I gave Lake Luciana proposers a chance to explain their part in the situation. They have used those statements, I feel, out of context.

I am fully aware, and county counsel routinely advises/reminds all board members, that use permit approvals are quasi-judicial in nature and must be decided based on the evidence presented to the board during the public hearings. While I was troubled by the events that ultimately led to Jim King’s resignation from the Conservation, Development and Planning Commission, those events had no effect on how I voted on the Lake Luciana project.

Additionally, the lawsuits object that I didn’t state on the record that I have been a member of the Sierra Club Political Committee. My longtime involvement with the Sierra Club hasn’t been a secret. In fact, it’s been a known fact for many years, reinforced by the club’s Web site. In addition, county counsel has advised that there is no requirement that I disclose such facts prior to a hearing.

I care deeply about this county and its reputation for engaging in “good government” and making fair and unbiased land use decisions. Maintaining the county’s reputation in this regard is essential in the land use arena where significant projects often generate strong feelings on the part of proponents and opponents of such projects.

The Lake Luciana project has created its share of controversy. Although misguided, the lawsuits that have been filed have raised the issue of whether bias exists and whether Brown Act violations have occurred, as well as the usual objections that the evidence doesn’t support the findings and that the board improperly interpreted the General Plan.

Each supervisor must make his or her own decision regarding how to deal with the situation that now confronts us all. In my case, I believe it is best if I decline to continue to participate in any future board discussion of the Lake Luciana project, therefore negating any charges that my friendship with Jim King played a part in the ultimate decision of the board.

Accordingly, while I continue to believe that I acted fairly in voting on the board’s decision to deny the Lake Luciana appeal, I have reluctantly decided to recuse myself from the board’s decision whether to redo the recently concluded appeal as well as from any further hearings on that appeal should the board decide to redo the appeal.