According to the article published in the Index-Tribune on July 26, 2018, "When faced with two clear paths – to approve a validated petition to legalize cannabis businesses in Sonoma, or put the measure up for a vote in November – the City Council chose the third. At the council meeting on Monday, July 23, the cannabis petition was the major agenda item that drew a sizeable audience to the Council Chambers. Following a series of options outlined by city attorney Jeff Walter, and bypassing the choice of either approving the petition as city ordnance or putting it on the ballot for voters to decide, the council instead opted to order a 30-day, $25,000 study on the proposed ordinance, a study that would be delivered well beyond the Aug. 10 deadline for placing the measure on the November 2018 general election ballot. The next firm opportunity for a public vote, according to Walter, would be in 2020, as there are no statewide elections scheduled in 2019." The article continues at http://www.sonomanews.com/news/8571830-181/sonoma-city-council-votes-to?artslide=0&sba=AAS Sonoma County resident Jon Early successfully circulated a petition to put a cannabis measure on the November 2018 ballot. Unfortunately for city residents, his poorly conceived ordinance took most control out of the hands of the city council, prompting the majority of the council to delay putting the measure on the ballot until 2020. Reportedly, Jon Early was “gobsmacked” over the decision. That Mr. Early believes he was blind-sided shows he has little sense of the makeup of the city council and what motivates it. Gary Edwards, David Cook and Mayor Madolyn Agrimonti have always voted against any notion of a dispensary within the city limits of Sonoma. There was no good reasoning that would suggest any of the three would swing the other way. Meanwhile, Rachel Hundley and Amy Harrington continued to support permitting a dispensary, but were the minority. Our response to the Index-Tribune article was posted to the Comments section: “That the city council would choose option 3 was a very easy call. Jon Early has no sense of this town and who the city council really is. Nor did the attorney who represented him, nor those who supported that measure. We're not certain why they thought the city council would support an ordinance that opened Sonoma up to all manner of cannabis businesses without allowing it any real control. And the irony is, Mr. Early’s measure never included a clause for personal outdoor cultivation because he thought *that* might be a deal-breaker. Let us remind that the Sonoma Valley Cannabis Group played an instrumental role in the city’s decision to permit personal outdoor growing. Councilwoman Rachel Hundley made great effort to fashion a competing ordinance that would have been a much better fit for the city of Sonoma. The majority of the council should have taken her up on it, but instead continued to cling to each other in their backward-thinking certainties. Let’s be clear. The three council members can’t keep running for cover because there is very little of it left. The more they dig in their heels, the shakier the ground becomes. The Sonoma Valley Cannabis Group has worked tirelessly over the past year to convince the city council of the need for a local medicinal dispensary, to no avail. We will now turn our focus to helping elect new council members who will actually understand the issue and enact Councilwoman Hundley’s ordinance. Gil Latimer Sonoma Valley Cannabis Group