Sonoma Activist: Show Me the Records

The leader of a Sonoma grassroots group that's fighting to limit hotel development in the city fired a shot across the bows of city government on Friday.

Larry Barnett's Preserving Sonoma has already gathered enough signatures to put the Hotel Limitation Measure to a vote - a special election will likely be held on Nov. 19 - wants to know more about an impact report on the measure the City Council approved earlier this week.

Barnett filed a public records request for documents related to the City Council's decision to commission an impact report on the measure.

Proponents of the study, which will cost the city $17,500, say it is a necessary step to provide voters the information they'll need to consider before rewriting a portion of the city's general plan.  

Barnett, a former Sonoma mayor and councilman who spent 12 years at City Hall, suggests officials may have violated state and federal constitutional requirements that they maintain a neutral stance in ballot measures.

“The expressed negativity of several council members to the initiative is worrisome," Barnett said in a prepared statement.

"Now that the City Council has decided to pursue this Impact Report, it is incumbent upon them and the city that it be impartial and fair. To this end, we are trying to ascertain the scope and boundaries of the report and will monitor the process as closely as the law allows.”

The measure would require the city's annual hotel occupancy rate to rise above 80 percent before the city would even listen to a proposal for a hotel of more than 25 rooms.

Even under those circumstances – the city's hotel occupancy rate last year was 64.8 percent – any proposal for a more expansive hotel would need the approval of a four-fifths majority on the City Council and the Planning Commission's approval.

The impact report will try to determine the impact on future tax revenues.

It is scheduled to be completed before the council meets on Aug. 12.

In a letter to City Manager Carol Giovanatto requesting access to the records that Barnett he sent to Patch, he questioned value of commissioning a report he describes as rushed and on the cheap.

"I hope you understand that this request is made solely out of a well-grounded concern that the study be properly and fairly conducted and for lawful purposes, to whatever extent a valid, meaningful and worthwhile study is even possible in 30 days and for only $17,500," Barnett said.