Nov. 14–Larry Barnett likes the village Sonoma, the heart of the county’s Wine Country, just the way it is.

But the former mayor is concerned that if residents don’t put the skids on hotel development, Sonoma will go from quaint and small to commercialized and congested.

“As the economy turns around, Sonoma is in the crosshairs of development,” he said. “So far we’ve retained our charm, authenticity and genuineness. But no one wants to become the next Yountville or Carmel.”

That’s why he and the grassroots Preserving Sonoma Committee spearheaded Measure B. The legislation, if passed by a majority vote during a special election Tuesday, would make it difficult, and some say impossible, for hotels to expand to more than 25 rooms, or for new lodging with more than 25 rooms to open within city limits.

The impetus behind the measure was a proposal by lobbyist Darius Anderson, who owns the development company Kenwood Investments, for a 59-room hotel on downtown Sonoma’s historic square. Barnett said it would have been the largest single structure on the plaza. Once developers learned of the grassroots effort to stop the hotel, they pulled out.

Closely watched debate

The measure has caused tension between neighbors and has even divided households. It’s not uncommon to see “No on B” and “Yes on B” signs in the same front yards. The skirmish is being watched closely by other bucolic communities in Northern California that are alluring to tourists.

Sonoma, with a population of about 10,850, is not the only village having an identity crisis, Barnett said. “Everyone is paying close attention and waiting to see what happens,” he said.

No one is waiting and watching more than the California Hotel and Lodging Association.

“We’re unaware of any other area that has taken up this sort of measure,” said Lynn Mohrfeld, president and CEO of the hotel trade group. “Certainly the limit of 25 rooms is unprecedented.”

Impossible number?

The proposal calls for allowing permits for hotels larger than 25 rooms only if the town’s annualized hotel room occupancy rate exceeded 80 percent in the previous calendar year. There are 500 hotel rooms in Sonoma. Over the past 10 years, the annualized occupancy rate peaked at 66 percent in 2006, according to a private research consultant hired by the city.

Opponents, including Protect Sonoma, a group of local residents that has the support of the Sonoma County Deputy Sheriff’s Association and the Chamber of Commerce, argue that the 80 percent occupancy rate for the year is an impossible number to reach.

“There are only three cities in the country — San Francisco, Honolulu and New York — that have that annual rate,” said Steve Burns, chairman of the opposition. “There are times of the year we have a 100 percent occupancy rate, but it’s seasonal.”

Furthermore, he says the measure is simply unnecessary. No new hotels have been approved by the city in the past decade — “so it’s not like we have a hotel problem.”

And barring future growth would limit the amount of hotel taxes going into the city’s coffers, Burns said. Currently, it’s the second-largest revenue generator for the city, money that could help fund the increasing costs of public services.

Backers of tourism

Area vintners and grape growers, who rely on tourism to sell wine, are also against the measure. More than 7 million people visit Sonoma County a year and spend $1.4 billion, according to county government.

“Tourism is the lifeblood of Sonoma,” said Bill Blum, general manager of MacArthur Place, a 64-room hotel, four blocks from the town square. Blum said that if the measure passes, it would discourage luxury hotels from coming into the area.

“It’s very unusual for even a boutique hotel to have fewer than 26 rooms,” he said. “In the meantime, it’s difficult to find a vacant room in Sonoma on a weekend in summer and fall. Visitors who would otherwise stay overnight go elsewhere. And it’s common knowledge that overnight visitors spend more than day visitors. So that’s revenue the city is losing.”

For Ned Forrest, a Sonoma architect and proponent of Measure B, it shouldn’t be about money, but about preserving the town’s humble agricultural roots. If something isn’t done to protect it, homogenization will kill that flavor, he said.

“You can’t make this place,” he said. “You can’t find it in a catalog. This is not about hotels or about tourism. This is about commercialization. It’s about sucking something out of Sonoma that we can never get back.”

Stacy Finz is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: sfinz@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @sfinz