Seven reasons to vote ‘no’ on B

Letter to the Editor

By I-T letters

Editor, Index-Tribune:

I will vote no on B because:

1. B is a very bad law, written for the benefit of some bed and breakfast owners.

2. It handcuffs city employees, who are paid to determine what should go in, where, how big, etc. They will be hogtied by a poorly-written and poorly-thought-out law.

3. It is unfair to property owners and devalues their investment.

4. It eliminates competition.

5. The West Napa Street hotel plan has been modified, redesigned and is spectacularly attractive. It deserves to be built and will be a big improvement over what is there presently.

6. Traffic will enter the site on West Napa and exit one block south. Hardly a bottle neck.

7. Each property should be evaluated by city authorities and citizen groups, and not be bound by a poorly-thought-out law that does not deserve to be passed. It will be trouble if it is.

No on “B” absolutely.

Robert H. Sherwood



  • Mike Stephens

    I agree 100% with Mr. Sherwood. #8: it eliminates the potential of an apartment building or strip mall that certainly will not add the character and charm of the Sonoma Town Square. If the building was not modified in such a tasteful way I would see reason to object, but it will be a class act and another building Sonoma can be proud of.

  • c.a. collier

    There is a rumor in our community that if we don’t allow a large hotel to be constructed in the Sonoma Town Square area, something infinitely worse will be built–a strip mall? or a giant apartment building? A big movie complex?
    This sounds like a threat and is no reason to vote against Measure B which only limits the size of new hotels. Fear should not drive our decision making. Rational thought processes lead to better outcomes. No one is being “hog tied” because the city council and the city planners work for us, the citizens.

    • Mike Stephens

      Fear is driving the YES on B Measure. Fear of B&B’s losing business. Let me tell you, the people staying at the new hotel would likely never stay at a B&B in Sonoma. Vote No on Measure B. Tourists will always come to Sonoma, why not bring in some that spend more money and perhaps add a nice new bar and restaurant to town. And believe me, a developer can easily get affordable housing approved on practically any site as well as so more low end apartment buildings that Sonoma certainly has enough of. Vote No on Measure B.

    • Mike Stephens

      Well those voting Yes are voting out of Fear. Be fearful and Vote No on Measure B to protect against all the distasteful architecture that will pop up in proposed spaces where hotels are proposed. Anyone with 1/2 brain can see that this is a much better option financially for the town/community as well as an opportunity to create some significant and appropriate architecture. This is a concept Sonoma has not been familiar with since the Mission or City Hall were built. Vote No on Measure B to protect Sonoma’s future.

  • Anne Shapiro

    The city employees who are paid to determine what goes in where were all for the huge 1999 Rosewood project offering to ruin the view above our beloved Plaza in exchange for $900 a night rooms with it’s exclusive convention center. The people had to put that on the ballot where it was turned down by75% of the voters. We now have a beautiful overlook trail there for all to enjoy. The city employees also were for the great big Sonoma Lodge on Broadway (where the rooms are only $300-$400 a night). This hotel was supposed to be built with it’s back end activities on Leveroni Rd….garbage collection, deliveries, loud clean up at all hours of the night. At the last minute, the city allowed them to flip the plans, without another EIR, putting the business end of the hotel right across the street from an established neighborhood that has dealt with noise issues ever since..devaluing THEIR property values and investment. The city even GAVE the Lodge tax money to mitigate some of these issues. My confidence in that process is shot. The character of historical Sonoma needs to be protected by a new process. YES on B!