The Sonoma Independent reached out to the seven candidates for this year’s Sebastopol City Council races: Five candidates, Sandra Maurer, Brandie Solovay, Jill McLewis, Kyreen Jorgensen, and James Woodruff, responded with written answers. Two others, Ian Hoff and Erin Mitchell , did not respond to repeated requests over the course of one week. But they answered two of the questions asked by Bike Sonoma, and then the Sebastopol Times during a Q&A at the Grange on October 16, and those answers are provided below.
Based on what you know at this point in time, how do you think you would vote on these five issues and why?
-
Changing Main St and Petaluma Ave. from a one way to two way street?
Sandra Maurer
Since I am on Council I cannot say how I will vote. That would show bias and be illegal. Before we vote we need to hear from staff, hear public comments, hear from other Councilmembers, and then vote on the dais at a public meeting. However, I can tell you other things, for example if a vote already happened and why I voted the way I did. I can tell you what I’m hearing from the public and offer both sides of an issue. I can explain how I make decisions when the residents are sharply divided, which is I learn as much as I can, gather as many facts as possible, and “brown up” with one other Councilmember so we can discuss it.
I voted to approve the plan to widen the sidewalks downtown and to switch to two-way streets because the team of traffic engineers who studied it stated the two way option would slow traffic down and be safer. We were also told it would be better for the downtown businesses. As I understood it the public survey did not offer a choice for wider sidewalks and two way streets, only wider sidewalks and one way streets. Cal Trans has switched their priority from moving traffic to safer roads. I support safer roads. Ideally, I would like there to be a way to test the two way before it’s permanent, if that’s feasible.
Brandie Solovay
Changing Main St and Petaluma Ave from one-way to two-way
I oppose it. Safety comes first. One-way traffic is more predictable for pedestrians and bicyclists, and crossing one direction of traffic is safer for people with disabilities, seniors, and families with young children. It’s also part of the unique flavor of the area. A conversion would also mean a costly, disruptive construction project in the heart of downtown. We don’t need this change at this time. I’d rather invest in better crossings, accessibility, and bike safety within the current layout.
Jill McLewis
I already voted no on this. It was a 4-1 vote with me dissenting. The night of the meeting I stated: Residents don’t feel heard or that their input was truly considered, and some used the word “railroaded.” I expressed concern that it’s another plan that’s down the road and a hurdle to more immediate, practical improvements. I also expressed concern about how much it’s going to cost to go through this process with consultants.
Kyreen Jorgensen
The short answer is that I’m against converting Main Street and Petaluma Avenue to two-way traffic. In a town like ours, where people value walkability, safety, and a slower, more neighborly pace, shifting to two-way traffic would create more congestion than we already see. When you add left-turns, pedestrians in the crosswalk, and signal timing that doesn’t always match real-time conditions, the result is predictable: more backups and more accidents, especially for people walking or biking. Half of the residents surveyed said they want a walkable downtown with a one-way street, and I agree. Our downtown is one of the things people love most about living here. It’s where we gather, shop local, bump into neighbors, and enjoy the small-town character that makes Sebastopol special. If we’re going to invest in this area, it should be in ways that make it safer, greener, and more welcoming, not by removing 10–15 parking spaces or narrowing sidewalks just to push more cars through. I do believe we can make meaningful improvements without a full conversion. There are practical steps we can take right now to calm traffic, improve safety, and reduce congestion. That includes better mitigation measures and stronger investment in public transportation. If we work with our community partners to help people get where they need to go without relying on one person per vehicle, we reduce traffic, cut emissions, and support the kind of sustainable, hometown feel people consistently say they want. For me, the goal is simple: a downtown that feels safe, walkable, and true to Sebastopol’s character and a transportation system that supports our environmental values rather than working against them.
James Woodruff
I do not think Sebastopol should change back to two way streets. I believe that this would make traffic worse. Left hand turns would be much more difficult and would back traffic up with no way to get around the cars wanting to turn. Pedestrians would likely be at more risk as they have to watch cars coming at them from both directions.
Ian Hoff (from Bike Sonoma question
Being honest, this from a professional standpoint, I see the City’s current path towards implementing two-way streets and more four-way intersections as something dangerous and reckless to implement. This is maybe not the typical answer you’ll receive but I sincerely believe it is the correct one. Engineering is based on science and math. Four-way intersections and two-way streets are dangerous. Congestion creates dangerous, reckless drivers. Google “intersection conflict points” and you’ll see why. I would like to see the City maintain its current road layouts, to continue to work with the County on the development and usage of the Joe Rodota Trail, and NOT implement major traffic changes that put bike riding in quiet neighbors at risk.
Erin Mitchell: I am saying yes because it was originally that way.
2) Allowing the former Rite Aid site to be used as a Grocery Outlet?
Brandie Solovay
Grocery Outlet at the former Rite Aid site
I support it. Sebastopol needs an affordable grocery store, and a vacant storefront downtown hurts our local economy. The Lucky’s site, if it becomes available, could be an ideal location, but we have no guarantee Grocery Outlet would wait for it, and our residents need affordable options now. I would also support reasonable signage limits so the store fits the character of our beautiful downtown rather than overwhelming it.
Jill McLewis
I’m not legally allowed to comment on this due to being on the council and the possibility that it could be brought to the council for a decision.
Sandra Maurer
I have been listening to residents and researching this for the past year. Here’s what I’ve learned: The local independent grocery stores, some downtown businesses and residents are strongly opposed to Grocery Outlet moving into the Rite Aid building. Sebastopol already has 7 grocery stores within 3 miles and it’s a chain store which hurts the local economy. While they think it will hurt the downtown, others love Grocery Outlet as see it as an asset.
Supporters say Grocery Outlet serves people who need more affordable food; it’s an independently run chain store; you often can’t find the same item week to week and need to shop at other grocery stores too.
I appreciate that they save tons of food from going into the landfill. There’s likely a risk of a lawsuit either way the Council votes.
Kyreen Jorgensen
This is really a two-part question for me. First, I’m in favor of Grocery Outlet as a concept. I used to shop at the Fourth Street Santa Rosa location years ago, and I’ve always appreciated what they offer. Food insecurity is a real issue in our region, and Grocery Outlet provides healthy, affordable options that fit within the budgets of families who need that support. I also love the idea of diverting food waste — taking perfectly good products that might otherwise be thrown out and making them available at a reduced cost. That aligns with our environmental values and with the way small towns look out for one another. I also believe competition is healthy. If Sebastopol truly had “too many” grocery stores, the market would have already corrected for that. The fact that seven stores continue to operate tells me there is demand and that residents value having choices. The second part is the location, and that’s where I have concerns. Because I’ve shopped at the Fourth Street store, I know the footprint and parking layout are very similar to what’s being proposed here. It’s difficult to find parking, and entering or exiting the lot can be frustrating and sometimes unsafe. Bringing that same level of congestion into Sebastopol’s core doesn’t feel consistent with our goals for a walkable, environmentally conscious, small-town downtown. If Grocery Outlet could locate north of town near Lucky’s, I would be fully supportive. That area already handles higher-volume traffic, has better access, and wouldn’t require squeezing a large grocery operation into a tight downtown parcel. So my position is simple: yes to Grocery Outlet, no to this location. I support affordable food access and reducing waste, but I also want to protect the walkability, safety, and hometown character that make Sebastopol special.
James Woodruff
I am a blue collar worker and affordability is critical so that we don’t price out the workers who keep things running and lower income residents. If the Grocery Outlet wants to find a home in Sebastopol they are welcome to find a place outside of our downtown core. There is plenty of availability and even open storefronts ready to be rented other than at the Rite Aid. I am a believer in the core policy of the Sebastopol General Plan that says chain and formula stores have no place in the downtown core. Our town center is meant to be unique and local. It is a place to wander and see things on offer that are not found elsewhere.
Erin Mitchell: No
Ian Hoff: Yes. I’m in favor of an affordable grocery store option in a vacant commercial building.
3) Clahan Field: When the City Council approved a lease extension for Sebastopol Little League to use Clahan field about five years ago, it did so under the condition that the Little League allow this, the largest green space in the city, right next to the Community Center, to be used off season (July to December) by other parties, and reasonable guidelines and pricing for such rentals to be published on the city website and on the Little League website. This was never done. Would you support the city compelling the Little League to publish such guidelines?
Brandie Solovay
Clahan Field off-season use guidelines
Yes. The Council attached that condition to the lease extension for a reason, and conditions are meant to be honored. I would support directing the city to require the Little League to publish clear guidelines and pricing for off-season use. Our largest green space should serve the whole community and generate revenue when it isn’t in use for baseball.
Sandra Maurer
I support having community events in this area, and have attended big musical events here in the past. I would need to investigate, talk to the City manager and public works to better understand what was agreed on with the Little League and what needs to happen in order to be able to hold events there again.
Jill McLewis
Sebastopol Little League has been a cornerstone of our community since 1957. Its volunteers have put countless hours and significant funds into Polley Field and the Clahan fields, and we are grateful for that partnership. These fields are also public parks. When the City Council approved the 25-year lease with the League in 2023, as you noted it includes a provision that …”LEAGUE shall be responsible for the scheduling, renting, or use of the ball diamonds by other groups and shall permit reasonable use of facilities by other responsible groups and organizations when not in use by LEAGUE. When not in use by LEAGUE or other scheduled events, the property shall be available for use by the public. Information regarding leasing of the ballfields shall be made available at each of the ball field locations, on the LEAGUE’s website, and to the City of Sebastopol.” I am not aware whether this has been happening, but I will ask City staff to follow up with the League regarding this provision and ensure that the reservation information is current and easy to find, and that residents and groups have a clear path to use the fields. We all want a thriving Little League, and fields that serve the whole community. Those two goals work together.
Kyreen Jorgensen
From what I’ve reviewed, the Sebastopol Little League requested amendments to their lease, and the City Council approved those changes on February 7, 2023. Since Clahan Field is City-owned property, any rentals or major event use would naturally need to go through the City’s permitting process. Public Works already has a section where people can apply for a permit to use that green space, which tells me the City has taken responsibility for managing access. The amendment also required that information about renting the fields be posted at the ball field sites, on the City’s website, and on the Little League’s website. I haven’t inspected the physical signage myself, but I can imagine how this may have become complicated. The Little League doesn’t own the property and doesn’t have the authority to rent it out directly, so they may have struggled with how to provide information while still directing people to the correct agency. Without an enforcement clause in the agreement, the City doesn’t have a clear mechanism to compel compliance. That said, this is the largest green space in town, right next to the Community Center and a place where families gather, where we host hometown events, and where our community spirit really shows. It’s important that residents know how to access it, especially during the off-season when it can support environmentally friendly, community-building activities that bring people together and generate local revenue. I would be happy to reach out to Sebastopol Little League and have a conversation about why the information hasn’t been posted and how we can work together to make sure residents have clear, accessible guidance. My goal is always collaboration first, by supporting our youth sports programs while also honoring the community’s need for shared green space and transparent public access.
James Woodruff
I would support the City enforcing the conditional lease extension requiring the Little League to post the guidelines and pricing for others to use the fields during the off season.
4) Electric Vehicles for City Fleet: About 11 years ago, the Sonoma Independent published a story about the fact that 20 years ago, the City Council voted twice to compel city agencies to purchase fully electric vehicles for the city fleet of nearly 50 vehicles, as reported here. The city of Sonoma recently added two ford F-150’s for its public works department, for its fleet for park work, which was exactly the type of purchase we had hoped for here. Yet to this the city still has never purchased one of these (excluding hybrid police cars given as a gift years ago). Would you vote to compel the city agencies to comply with this resolution?
Sandra Maurer
For financial reasons, I support a phased in approach, maintaining the current vehicles till the end of their useful service, before switching to electric. A former City Manager had discussed his desire for a City fleet study, but this has not happened.
Brandie Solovay
Electric vehicles for the city fleet
Yes. When the Council adopts a resolution, city departments are expected to follow it. Electric work trucks are now proven in municipal fleets, including in Sonoma. I would vote to direct staff to comply, starting with the next scheduled vehicle replacements and pursuing every available state and federal grant to offset the cost.
Jill McLewis
The short answer is: I support the goal of the resolution and want our fleet to go electric when it makes sense, but simply compelling departments to comply without funding, infrastructure, or suitable vehicles won’t get us there. I’d rather put the city on a realistic path to actually doing it.
- Charging infrastructure is the biggest barrier. We don’t currently have budget to install it, and EVs can’t be added without a place to charge them.
- Funding has gotten harder. Federal EV incentives have been cut. It’s my understanding the city is actively looking for grants to help cover infrastructure costs.
- The right vehicles aren’t always available.
- Heavy-duty trucks don’t yet have reliable electric options.
- The Ford F-150 Lightning, the best fit we’d identified (and the one Sonoma purchased), has been discontinued.
- Range matters for the city standby crews. Staff who take vehicles home for after-hours emergencies often live outside town, so range has to be sufficient for public safety and service response.
It’s my understanding: As medium-duty vehicles come up for replacement, the city would like to purchase electric when suitable models are available and the charging capability has been installed. I believe the intent of the resolution referenced is right, and I’m committed to following through on it in a way that’s fiscally responsible and allows our public works employees to do their jobs.
Kyreen Jorgensen
I believe it’s important for municipalities to follow through on the commitments they make, especially when those commitments reflect our community’s long-standing environmental values. At the same time, I’m not unreasonable, I am aware budgets change, operational needs evolve, and technology shifts. Those realities deserve regular reassessment so we’re making decisions that are both responsible and forward-looking. I understand the concern about the recent purchase of the F-150s and the desire for more economical, environmentally friendly vehicles. The research I’ve done shows a cost difference of roughly $10,000 to $30,000 between traditional trucks and their electric counterparts, and that may very well have been a factor. Still, electric vehicles and hybrids are an important tool in fighting climate change, and Sebastopol has always prided itself on being a leader in sustainability. For me, the path forward is about collaboration and steady progress. I would absolutely begin discussions about how we can move toward a cleaner, more efficient city fleet such as one that reflects our environmental values, supports long-term sustainability, and feels true to the hometown character our residents care about. It’s about finding the balance between fiscal responsibility and environmental stewardship, and making sure we’re planning for the future in a way that honors both.
James Woodruff
I believe that it is important for the City to be a leader in both word and example when it comes to dealing with the climate crisis and attempting to mitigate pollution. Sebastopol already has a policy on the books directing for the purchase of electric vehicles and we need to follow it. If there are loopholes in the policy that are allowing for the recent purchase of more gasoline cars and trucks then those loopholes need to be closed. This is something we should stand absolutely firm on.
5) In the parking lot of the Laguna of Santa Rosa, for much of the year and at this time, our city’s Public Works Department has kept an ugly looking large dumpster with the hand-scrawled sign, “Cardboard,” on it. This detracts from one of the most beautiful vistas and public areas of our city. Would you vote to direct Public Works to move the dumpster to an area on its very large lots and parking areas across the street from the Laguna lot?
Sandra Maurer
The large cardboard dumpster was evaluated by Sonoma County Resource Recovery and City Dept of Public Works and an attempt to find another place was made but ultimately they did not move it.
Brandie Solovay
Cardboard dumpster at the Laguna parking lot
Yes. The Laguna is one of our city’s greatest assets, and its entrance should reflect that. Public Works has ample space across the street, and I would vote to direct the dumpster to be relocated there.
Thanks for pointing this out. As I understand it, the slope in front of the Public Works building makes it difficult for the waste hauler to service a bin there, and the back yard is locked and not open to the public. I do agree the signage could be better, and I’ll ask about getting it improved. It’s often the small things that make a difference, like the downtown trash cans I mentioned at the forum.
Kyreen Jorgensen
Short answer: yes. I’ve seen that dumpster myself, and it really does take away from one of the most beautiful natural vistas in Sebastopol. Because I don’t drive through that area often, I honestly assumed it was temporary, but if it’s been sitting there long-term, then it’s absolutely something we should address. The Laguna is one of our community’s most treasured spaces. It’s where people walk, birdwatch, take photos, and enjoy the quiet beauty of our hometown landscape. Having a large, hand-scrawled cardboard dumpster sitting front-and-center doesn’t reflect the care we try to show for our environment or our public spaces. Public Works has plenty of room across the street on its own lots and parking areas, and relocating the dumpster there would still allow staff to use it easily without impacting the Laguna’s natural setting. To me, that’s a simple, practical fix that respects both the needs of the department and the beauty of the area. So yes, I would support directing Public Works to move the dumpster to a more appropriate location. It’s a small change that makes a big difference in keeping Sebastopol’s shared spaces welcoming, clean, and true to the hometown character we all value.
James Woodruff
The issue of the cardboard dumpster being a visual blight is one that I have only just heard about, but I would be open to moving it to another area. If having the dumpster in the current location is not required for city employees to do their work and there is a better spot then I am all for it. I would want to have a discussion with the impacted employees to see how it would effect their work, and then take appropriate action.
