Reconsider Broadway site
Editor: I remember when I first came to Sonoma Valley; I drove past the hospital and thought, “What in the heck is a hospital doing in the middle of a residential neighborhood?” I only recently stopped in at the hospital and noticed the plaque that states the land was donated by the Sebastianis to the town way back when. Can we all say a collective “thank you” to the family for the donation? How nice that they just gave land for such a valiant purpose.
Alas, that was a long time ago and things have changed. That site is no longer ideal for a growing Sonoma. I was really surprised to hear that October decision keeping the hospital “in town” – everything seemed perfect at the Broadway site, a great entrance to our fair city, and the logical place for it. I assumed we would sell the current hospital site to some builder and single-family homes (along with the mandatory low-income housing) would replace it.
I agree with Bruce Stephens’ recent letter to the editor – board members please reconsider the Broadway site. It’s the right place for our town, it’s economically feasible and Barry Swenson the proposed builder is a very reputable Bay Area builder. The Caranalli site is gaining increased opposition and I am starting to agree with that group – we need to stake a claim here and do what is best for our city. That site is so, so small and the future requirements are much better met at the Broadway site. And we don’t need a Taj Mahal either – a simple hospital will do, thank you, with the emergency room we need.
Can we please have a fair evaluation of the site before we junk the whole idea? Simply because no one has heard anything about the Broadway site for 30 days and the hospital fund has no money to pursue anything yet until the bond is approved, this is no reason to close the door here.
The world is run by those who show up. Sonoma, let’s be sure we are heard and that we know what we are doing before we approve another darn tax on us landowners for something we really don’t want or need. Let’s pay for what we want, what is needed and what the public, not the Board, decides.
Joe Hebel
Sonoma
Prevention of animal cruelty
Editor: I am a Sonoma resident who is volunteering for the U.S. Humane Society in its efforts to collect enough signatures by Feb. 28 to get the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act on the November California ballot. It would provide more humane treatment of animals by giving them bigger enclosures so that they may extend their limbs or wings, lie down, stand up, and turn around. This would affect veal, egg-laying hens, and pregnant pigs.
Wayne Pacelle, President of The Humane Society of the United States, sent an e-mail out last week that stated: “If our campaign doesn’t dramatically pick up the signature-gathering pace right now, voters won’t be given a chance to help the nearly 20 million California animals suffering in tiny cages. We’re behind in our goals to qualify this ballot initiative. We have never failed to gather enough signatures to qualify a measure for a ballot that we’ve launched.”
I think this is news that would definitely be important to our politically active valley, given that we live in an agricultural area.
To offer your support to the animals, please drop by the Sonoma Whole Foods Customer Service counter and asking to sign. They will have petitions on hand until February 28th. For more information, you may also visit Californians for Humane Farms (www.humanecalifornia.org) or the Humane Society of the United States (www.hsus.org).
Cathy Fisher
Sonoma
What’s wrong with just a few hens?
Editor: I would like to comment on the expected forced removal of a few hens from the property of a woman in El Verano. Anyone who has driven through our neighborhood knows that feral chickens have roamed the streets of El Verano for years. Does it make any sense to remove a few that were actually given a home?
Curious about the anticipated removal of her chickens, I recently introduced myself to Doreen and got a tour of her yard. The yard is tidy and the chickens well cared for. They co-exist beautifully in this Master Gardener’s haven along a little winter creek in El Verano. It’s ludicrous to find that a simple request to keep a few chickens in an area already populated with feral chickens is denied because of county bureaucracy. A forced removal of six hens from Doreen’s yard will not even make a dent in the local population. As it is, everyone in our neighborhood is likely to have a small flock of feral chickens briefly roam through their yards on a daily basis.
The irony is that if you go a few blocks to within the city limits of Sonoma, permits can be obtained for raising chickens. In fact, there are many “chicken friendly” cities including San Francisco, Oakland, Portland, San Diego and New York.
As someone in the landscaping business, I see a shift in thinking about land usage and I witness daily the desire for people to put their property (however small) to more practical use. With the growing awareness to live more sustainably and eat food from local sources, what could make more sense? Forcing someone to get rid of a few hens that are lovingly cared for is simply ridiculous. What is the harm in keeping a small number of hens and being able to gather a few eggs? We should all be so lucky.
Judy Olin
Sonoma