The Delicato Vineyards’ referendum to throw out Manteca’s general plan update adopted two months ago has qualified for the March 5 ballot.

City Clerk Cassandra Candini-Tilton confirmed Monday that the San Joaquin County Registrar of Voters was able to verify 4,733 City of Manteca voters’ signatures as being valid.

The winery collected 7,249 signatures. The verification process stopped after the county staff was able to verify the minimum number needed under state law to force a referendum, which is 10 percent of all registered voters.

Meanwhile, Manteca’s council members are meeting today at 4 p.m. behind closed doors to discuss the lawsuit Delicato Vineyards has filed against the city.

Delicato, the world’s fifth winery, has filed paperwork with San Joaquin County Superior Court to challenge the City Council’s approval of the general plan update and certification of the final environmental impact report for the document designed to guide municipal growth.

The filing assigned to Judge Erin Guy Castillo has been scheduled for a case management conference on Feb. 14, 2024.

That is 19 days before the referendum is scheduled for an election expected to cost Manteca taxpayers at least $236,000 to conduct.

The election may not be held, however, if the city can come up with a plan that Delicato accepts before ballots are locked in and printed.

There is precedence in Manteca politics for derailing a growth-related referendum via a compromise.

Back in 1985, a grassroots measure to limit growth to 2 percent had been countered by a proposal by developers to cap growth at 7 percent on an annual basis.

The City Council at the time hammered out a comprise both sides accepted that led to the current 3.9 percent growth cap.

The cap — tied to the number of sewer allocations that can be issued in a given year — was the first growth cap adopted in the San Joaquin Valley.

The last time a referendum election in Manteca took place was in 1983.

That is when then  Mayor Trena Kelley — who was the first woman mayor and the first mayor directly elected by the voters — was recalled along with council members Rick Wentworth and Bob Davis.

The recall was triggered by the council’s decision to dismiss Police Chief Leonard Taylor.

The  court filing by the San Francisco firm of Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger — that specializes in environmental, municipal and public agency, and local ballot measures  among other legal areas — is likely to be just the start.

An existing project already before the city for approval will bring a number of 1,472 homes proposed to within a half mile of Delicato orchards, vineyards, and open land they have set aside for land disposal of winery wastewater.

Developers behind the project have recirculated the environmental impact report in a bid to double down on making sure they have met or exceeded every legal requirement in a bid to make it more likely to withstand a possible legal challenge.

Although the general plan update is now being held in abeyance pending the outcome of a possible referendum, the residential projects can still proceed as amendments to the city’s exiting general plan.

Such action — if approved by the city — is likely to trigger more legal filings by the winery.

Land disposal of agricultural  processing waste water — legal under state laws — can generate smells that urban residents often find objectional.

The city, for its part, contends the general plan passes state muster. Every state regulatory agency involved in the process — from air quality to transportation to agriculture — had input. It also was backed by environmental justice advocates.

Delicato, though, believes the general plan sets the stage for incompatible uses — housing and agriculture processing — to conflict.

Specifically, they do not like the city’s general plan update that has agricultural zoning surrounding the winery and then residential uses next to that.

Winery representatives had indicated they believe the 24-hour operation that involves lights and noise will create issues if homes are built too close to the winery.

Delicato’s general arguments against the general plan is that is allows to too much growth, will generate too much truck traffic, and will creates issues for schools among other things.

To contact Dennis Wyatt, email dwyatt@mantecabulletin.com