City Council Orders "Impact Report" on Hotel Measure
The Hotel Limitation Measure, having now qualified for the ballot this late fall, resulted last night in a three vote majority of outspoken initiative opponents on the City Council ordering a so-called Impact Report, sending a disturbing signal about the role the City of Sonoma is likely to play in the upcoming campaign. No specifics about the scope or content of the Impact Report was determined although a budget of $17,500 (plus an undetermined amount of staff time) was approved. Only one consultant was willing to conduct the report within the 30-day limit required by law.
It is obvious that council opponents to the Hotel Limitation Measure (members Brown, Cook and Rouse), hope this report will bolster arguments against the initiative, and thus sided with the committee members of Protect Sonoma, the so-called "community group" funded by hotel developer Kenwood Investments, who during the meeting spoke in favor of initiating the report so that "people can get the facts."
Report scope and content unknown
At this point the questions the Impact Report is intended to answer are unknown; the council spent no time discussing its scope and content. Ironically, if its scope is narrowed enough to allow it to actually be accomplished, it may well be that its conclusions will erode and not support the position of Protect Sonoma. However, as a number of speakers as well as council members Barbose and Gallian noted, the likelihood of a high-quality and meaningful report is unlikely due to the limitation of a 30-day deadline, and that too many speculative unknowns about the future will render any report simply an aggregation of opinions, not facts.
Monitoring the process
Having been ordered by the council, Preserving Sonoma will now do everything it can to insure that this report is fair and unbiased, up to and including a review of the contract and project specifications signed with the contractor and even a potential Request for Public Records pertaining to emails and other correspondence the city has had surrounding the topic of this report altogether. The selection criteria (the chosen contractor was the least expensive of several with bids ranging from $17,500 to $55,000, according to the City Manager) will be reviewed alongside the credentials of the contractor for this type of study. We will also inquire as to who will be contacted by the consultant in preparing this report and will recommend that Preserving Sonoma be among those to be contacted since our group initiated the Hotel Limitation Measure in the first place.
Election timing an issue
Members of Preserving Sonoma argued in favor of setting the date for an election as soon as possible, which would have been November 5th, the same day as the general election in Sonoma County and nationally. With the request for an impact report, however, that special election date will now have to be pushed to November 18th, coming close to the Thanksgiving holiday, which is likely to reduce voter turnout. Special elections generally experience lighter voter participation, sometimes as low as 50%. Having gathered well over 1,300 signatures of supporters, Preserving Sonoma would appear to be close to already having a winning majority if a 50% turnout comes to pass. There are 6,781 registered voters in the City of Sonoma.
The People of Sonoma vs. City Hall?
It remains to be seen if the same City Council majority will exercise their prerogative to draft a ballot argument against the Hotel Limitation Measure, but if it decides to do so after getting the Impact Report, the upcoming election will in part morph into The People of Sonoma vs. City Hall. This would be regrettable, but the choice remains with the council. Some speakers, including Preserving Sonoma Chair Larry Barnett cautioned the council against this, and advised they step back and let the vote take place without interference or involvement on their part.
Once the Impact Report is completed in 30 days, the council will then meet once more and must either adopt the measure as written or order a special election. Thus the Impact Report is a temporary pause in an inevitable process in which the sitting council has no choice, according to election law in California.
A waste of time and money
Interestingly, no minds appear to have changed in the nearly three months that the measure has been before the community. The same people who objected to the measure when it was announced continue to object to the measure, and vice-versa. Accordingly, whatever its content, our opinion is that an impact report is unlikely to change any minds and is a waste of time and money. This conclusion is supported by statistics compiled by Preserving Sonoma during the petition signature gathering phase, which clearly indicate the Hotel Limitation Measure is supported by 70% of the registered voters in Sonoma; Sonoma's residents already have made up their minds. Barring unforeseen events the measure will be approved whenever the vote is taken.
