(Wine-Searcher) - Vineyard representatives pull out of the committee set up to plan the region's future growth.

Napa County's latest attempt to slow down winery growth hit a big snag last week, and it sounds like something out of a famous sci-fi movie.

A matrix called Proposal X turned out to be a pill that Napa Valley Vintners was unwilling to swallow. So the attempted redraft of Napa Valley's reality may have to go back to the drawing board.

This "matrix", rather than being filled with unconscious humans being harvested for their bioelectricity, was to be composed of nothing but numbers. The idea is to limit winery growth by assigning limits to everything a winery can do – from the size of its building to the number of parties it can hold – based on the size of the land parcel on which it sits. In other words, if you have 30 acres, you can make this much wine and host that many visitors.

The Vintners have only one representative on the 17-member committee that thought up the matrix, Stony Hill Vineyard owner Peter McCrea. In June he voted with everyone else to unanimously support the idea.

But when the Agricultural Protection Advisory Committee met Monday to start filling in the matrix, McCrea and the NVV abruptly withdrew their support.

Their objection wasn't the idea, or the numbers themselves. Instead, they fear that, based on statements by some members of the committee, the matrix might be applied not only to new wineries, but to existing wineries that already have use permits allowing them more than the matrix provides.

"We heard loud and clear from our members that they weren't interested in that," NVV spokesman Rex Stults told Wine-Searcher. "Why go down that path? The legal vested-use permits that our 500-plus members have, on which they've built their businesses, on which they've taken out bank loans, all that would be jeopardized."

The committee spoke only of potentially applying the new limits to existing wineries that seek a modification of their permit – in other words, if they want to expand. But in development-averse Napa County, a use-permit modification is required for practically any new building, even if a winery just wants to put a roof over outdoor tanks.

Without NVV's support, the summer-long effort to reach consensus among Napa's various constituencies, some of whom are not friends of the wine industry, might stall completely.

APAC was created at a huge community meeting in March to try to address Napa's ongoing development concerns, with 17 members appointed in June. It is supposed to deliver a proposal by September to the Planning Committee. Any actual new laws would also have to pass the Board of Supervisors in November.

APAC, unanimously in favor of a matrix just two months ago, voted 8-8 on it Monday if it doesn't include existing wineries, and 10-6 against if it does. A super-majority of 12 votes out of 17 is required to send any proposal to the Planning Committee.

Stults says it's not surprising that the Vintners' announced withdrawal of support would change more than the one vote they control.