Ironic turn for Plaza tribute

A plaque in Sonoma Plaza commemorating the man who staunchly opposed commemorative plaques in Sonoma Plaza? No one disputes that Sonoma Parks Supervisor Dave Chavoya deserves special recognition after 36 years of service to the city, particularly for his care of the Plaza. But exactly how to show that appreciation has the Community Services & Environment Commission, which wrote the no-plaque policy, on one side of the picnic table and the City Council, looking for an exemption, on the other.
“It’s ludicrous,” said commission chair Nickolai Mathison at the CSEC meeting Wednesday night. “It’s like building a fountain to honor somebody for saving water.”
Chavoya retires this month after a stellar career. He is credited with the look and feel of the Sonoma Plaza, having planted many of its trees and incorporated improvements to everything from the Visitors Bureau Building to the duck pond. So it makes sense that any tribute to him would center around his beloved Plaza. Only one problem … he was opposed to plaques, according to Public Works Director Melinka Bates.
In fact, he was the author of the unwritten rule that prohibited them, a policy the CSEC, the first stop for such requests, observed for many years and codified last spring.
So it was with some reluctance – and a definite sense of irony – that the CSEC’s June recommendation to the city council for a tribute did not include a plaque. The idea instead was to name City Hall’s distinctive driveway after him: The Dave Chavoya Horseshoe. A metaphysical plaque to live forever on city-printed maps and material … genius, right?
But like a pond duck chasing a piece of baguette, the idea took a sudden and drastic turn at the ensuing city council meeting. Mayor Ken Brown unexpectedly announced that Chavoya would indeed appreciate a plaque in his honor somewhere in the Plaza. The details were left to staff, namely Bates. She updated the CSEC Wednesday night, and members were none too pleased, figuring they had come up with a meaningful alternative that did not set a precedent.
“Why are we meeting if they disregard us?” wondered committee member Ilene Addison. She moved to urge city council “to follow our previous recommendation and not create exceptions to the no-plaque policy.” It was unanimously approved, and the saga continues.
Something else got lost in translation between the commission and city council lately – about 22 inches. On the council’s July 1 agenda was a proposed tree ordinance, which was developed at council’s request by the CSEC. Part of its language addressed the removal of trees with a minimum trunk diameter of two feet. In the council’s agenda package, though, the measure read “two inches.” The council postponed any decision for different reason but, presumably prepared to see both forest and trees, it will have the correct figure at its meeting next week.