I’m voting yes on Measure Y

Posted on September 30, 2020 by Sonoma Valley Sun

As you might know, there’s controversy in the City of Sonoma over something which the voters decided about years ago: cannabis businesses operating in the City limits.

When I say ‘cannabis businesses’ I’m not referring to the great Dispensary Controversy (that’s another topic) but rather the ability for well regulated business like: certification and testing labs, wholesale distributors or even co-packing operations.

These are examples of the types of cannabis businesses which the current City regulations prohibit from operating. Not only are the current regulations short-sighted, they limit the City’s ability to generate significant tax revenue, as well as provide jobs for local Sonomans.

Not too mention the fact the current regulations are a direct slap-in-the-face of the more than 60 percent of City of Sonoma Voters who support cannabis businesses in the City.

The response to this, in my opinion, is to say Yes on Measure Y. This simple adjustment to the City’s Zoning Regulations will allow cannabis-centric businesses to operate within the City limits. Where will these businesses operate, you ask?

In 2018, the City identified five properties within the City limits which meet all the rules zoning requirements IF Measure Y passes.

This is a simple economic decision for the City and the Voters: Yes on Measure Y means more tax revenue, more jobs and more businesses in Sonoma. I’m Voting Yes on Measure Y.

— Van Solkov, Sonoma 

6 thoughts on “I’m voting yes on Measure Y

  1. For the record, the author of this letter is not identified as a local cannabis tour operator and a signatory to the Rebuttal to Argument Against Measure Y that will appear on the ballot. This is a misrepresentation that leads readers to believe this author is just a concerned citizen.

    1. You make an interesting point. But in the spirit of Letter to the Editor, we do not arbitrarily add additional info about the writer, who has every right to a personal opinion. (As opposed to a statement on behalf of a group or committee). Agree with it or or not, clearly this is his chosen statement as “just a concerned citizen,” regardless of motivation. We have yet to receive any letters againt Measure Y — Why not argue the points instead of how a guy chooses how to sign a letter?

  2. I have another idea. The Sun could do an analysis of the City Council’s ordnance and progress toward cannabis, as it is today and Measure Y and what the differences are. For example many voters do not even know the the city has approved a comprehensive ordinance, selected an operator and a location for a dispensary. The author of measure Y really does not want voters to know. As to tax benefits of cannabis businesses for municipalities that the writer touts, much research and data have been presented that show that projections are not reality. This was a major point of discussion in all the city council meetings on cannabis. The city council knows full well that they will not get a giant windfall in taxes from cannabis in the city in any case. I believe Gil’s point is well taken and I am happy that he pointed it out, so readers are better informed.

  3. No one has yet pointed out the nepotism on the Sonoma City’s Council’s part regarding this measure, a fact that led to a council member needing to be recused on the issue, or the “no on Y” petitioners who have a monetary interest in Y not passing because they want to sell their cannabis to SOSPARC. The Sonoma politics around this are putrid.

Leave a Reply to Sonoma Valley Sun Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Sonoma Sun | Sonoma, CA