Home » Community » Sedona Verde Valley Red Rock National Monument Proponents Mislead Public

Sedona Verde Valley Red Rock National Monument Proponents Mislead Public

SedonaEye.com financial columnist J. Rick Normand

SedonaEye.com financial columnist J. Rick Normand

Sedona AZ (September 1, 2015) – Keep Sedona Beautiful, the Sierra Club, the Monument Workgroup, Tom O’Halleran, U.S. Congresswoman Ann Kirkpatrick, Sedona’s last Mayor, a former Councilor now running for our School Board, Sedonadotbiz, and the current City Council proponents of the Sedona-Verde Valley Red Rock National Monument (“SVVRRNM”) designation seem to be running an advocacy campaign for the subject National Monument designation with no concern for constitutional law, or any semblance of a fairness doctrine similar to that of the FCC for broadcasters which requires fair and equal presentation of the points of view of two opposing parties. The SVVRRNM proponents, mentioned above, all seem to believe in the engagement of the unconstitutional power of misinterpretation thus leading the public to believe that President Obama alone can decide this issue and that his decision is final.

WRONG, WRONG and INTENTIONALLY WRONG!

Arizona Congressperson Ann Kirkpatrick has apparently been asked by the nefarious Monument Workgroup to petition President Obama to fast-track an execution of an Executive Order to install the SVVRRNM with little or no public input or debate as to whether or not it should be so ordered. Under President Obama, the Executive Branch has swelled into a monolithic web of lawmaking agencies that circumvent the lawmaking power of Congress. Rather than working with Congress, the President has implemented his federalist/anti-state’s rights agenda by repeatedly issuing new regulations through Executive Branch agencies in order to avoid public-issue debate. The legal status of all these Executive Orders has not been court tested to any large degree, but they will be. Notwithstanding, the states of the union are successfully fighting back!

Is there anything the not consulted and discarded public can do to refute the complete disregard for Constitutional Law by the federal Executive Branch, especially as it may relate to the SVVRRNM designation proposal that should be debated under the Antiquities Act of 1906? YES, THERE IS AND IT’S POWERFUL.

U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington DC

U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington DC

It is called the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, Nullification Clause. The Tenth Amendment reads “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

The Supreme Court has long held that states do NOT have to be active participants in the enforcement or effectuation of federal acts or regulatory programs. I’ll bet most readers have never known that. The basis for what is now known as the legal doctrine of “anti-commandeering” was based upon the advice of James Madison, writing in Federalist #46, and is the foundation cornerstone of nullification.

To imply that the states do NOT have the Constitutional power to resist unconstitutional actions of the Federal government is to ignore the clear language of both the 9th and 10th Amendments. Resisting unconstitutional acts of the Federal government is a reserved power. The Constitution establishes the limits of Federal power, not the limitation of states powers!

These days we’re seeing a lot of newspaper columns condemning the idea of state nullification of unconstitutional federal laws. A common claim is that nullification is “unconstitutional.” The most common claim is that the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause precludes nullification. “Federal law trumps state law” is the rather inane way we hear the principle expressed these days by ignorant media talking heads.

What the Supremacy Clause actually says is: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof…shall be the supreme law of the land.”

Our Founding Fathers were dedicated to the idea that only the Constitution and laws, which shall be made in pursuance thereof, should be the supreme law of the land. Citing the Supremacy Clause merely begs the question. A nullifying state, historically, maintains that a given federal law is not “in pursuance thereof” and therefore that the Supremacy Clause does not apply in the first place. This concept has always been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court (see below).

Nullification is not secession or insurrection, but neither is it unconditional or unlimited submission. Nullification is not something that requires any decision, statement or action from any branch of the federal government. Nullification is not the result of obtaining a favorable court ruling. Nullification is not the petitioning of the federal government to start doing or to stop doing anything. Nullification doesn’t depend on any federal law being repealed. Nullification does not require permission from any person or institution outside of one’s own state.

Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor

Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor

So just what IS nullification and how does it happen?

Nullification is any act or set of acts, which has as its end result, a particular federal law being rendered null and void, or just plain unenforceable in a localized area.

Nullification often begins with members of your state legislature declaring a federal act unconstitutional and then committing to resist its implementation. It usually involves a bill, passed by both houses and signed by your Governor. In some cases, it might be approved by the voters of your state directly, in a referendum. It may change your state’s statutory law, or it might even amend your state constitution. In this case, it is quite simply a refusal on the part of your state government to cooperate with, or enforce a particular federal law it deems unconstitutional. Arizona has done this several times.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ALWAYS supported the Tenth Amendment and its Nullification Clause.

The three seminal Supreme Court cases and rulings, which have never been overturned, are:

In New York v. United States (1992) the Court held, with Justice Sandra Day O’Connor writing for the majority in the 6-3 decision:

“As an initial matter, Congress may not simply “commandee[r] the legislative processes of the States by directly compelling them to enact and enforce a federal regulatory program.”

Justice O’Connor later expounded on this point.

“While Congress has substantial powers to govern the Nation directly, including in areas of intimate concern to the States, the Constitution has never been understood to confer upon Congress the ability to require the States to govern according to Congress’ instructions.”

scales of justice courtPrintz v. United States (1997) serves as the lynch pin for our nation’s “anti-commandeering doctrine.” The Supreme Court held that:

“… [in New York v. United States (1992)] Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. Today we hold that Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the States’ officers directly. The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program…such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty.”

In Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012), the Supreme Court held that:

“…allowing Congress to essentially punish states that refused to go along violates constitutional separation of powers.” Said Justice Roberts for the majority “the Constitution has never been understood to confer upon Congress the ability to require the States to govern according to Congress’ instructions.” New York, supra, at 162. Otherwise the two-government system established by the Framers would give way to a system that vests power in one central government, and individual liberty would suffer.

To prove the point that the Constitutional Tenth Amendment Nullification Clause is the law of the land, voters in Arizona approved a ballot measure that follows James Madison’s advice to stop federal overreach. Approved was Proposition 122, a state constitutional amendment that enshrines the anti-commandeering doctrine, discussed above, in our state’s constitution. The language amends the state constitution to give Arizona the ability to “exercise its sovereign authority to restrict the actions of its [state] personnel and the use of its financial resources to purposes that are consistent with the [U.S.] Constitution” [as interpreted by the state of Arizona through its legislature]. The seminal Supreme Court rulings above support the legal status of Proposition 122 and statutes like it in a majority of states. (See this link http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/)

Sedona Cathedral Rock

Sedona Cathedral Rock

Thus, grounds for a Tenth Amendment nullification of the SVVRRNM in the state of Arizona would be the denial to the public of input of information, and resulting Congressional feedback, that would affect their support of an Executive Order (providing they even understand what that is) authorizing the subject National Monument designation! In other words, if the subject National Monument is shoved down the throats of 80,000 residents of the Verde Valley and its cities and townships without their collective voices being heard, then our state legislature can pass a law requiring our state government to refuse to assist the National Monument federal management agency which will make it nearly impossible for the Feds to administer and enforce the designation created by Executive Order.

Therefore, I would suggest, that in the interests of fairness, fair reporting, true environmentalism, truthful advertising and marketing, that KSB publish the following as a fair offset to your current SVVRRNM handouts, with bullet points, entitled “Honoring the Past…Preserving the Future,” as follows or face the prospect of Tenth Amendment nullification:

*Keep Sedona Beautiful (KSB), The Sierra Club, several City of Sedona City Councilors and its Mayor, several former Councilors and Mayor, all endemic to the City of Sedona, are all allies called to action by the CITY of SEDONA MONUMENT WORKGROUP, who have the intent of forcing the SVVRRNM designation upon the entirety of the Verde Valley, its environs which include parts of the Flagstaff area along I-17 and the Village of Oak Creek, as well as the cities of Cottonwood, Camp Verde, Clarkdale and Jerome.

This is a case of a few dozen unidentified people attempting to force their will on better than 80,000 people without input from any of you. The activists of said MONUMENT WORKGROUP are not unidentified nor is their source of funding.

*There is no difference between the federal land and natural resources oversight and management capabilities of one federal agency and another.

*The KSB Handout and RRN full-page ad both state that the USFS will manage the SVVRRNM. They only manage 9 out 117 U.S. National Monuments and they will not provide an absolute GUARANTEE that they will be the Monument’s management agency in perpetuity.

What’s worse, if that statement is true, then what will change with a National Monument designation unless the National Park Service is the manager?

*The track-record of federal land and resources stewardship needs only to be looked at under the microscopic view of the recent ecological disasters of Durango, Colorado, the Rodeo-Chediski Fire in ARIZONA (the most destructive wildfire in American history), and the utter destruction of ARIZONA’s formerly magnificent Organ Pipe National Monument.

*The SVVRRNM designation will create a federal choke hold on the regional economy of the Verde Valley by virtue of publishing onerous access and use rules to be applied, at agency will, to visitors who must buy permits at, as of yet, unknown cost.

Sedona Arizona Bell Rock would become part of the National Monument

Bell Rock and Village of Oak Creek will become part of the Sedona Verde Valley National Monument area

*The SVVRRMM designation, subject to an emergency declaration of the federal government could create a threat to local self-governance by virtue of the imposition in the VERDE VALLEY of the U.S. Constitution’s Property Clause (Supreme Court upheld) “Inholding rule.” See http://sedonaeye.com/damn-all-of-you-who-want-all-the-facts/

*Current usage rights of the proposed area of the SVVRRNM designation by locals will be severely curtailed from what we have now. KSB says, though, that the designation will prevent vandalism to the Monument’s antiquities. Yes, the Feds have certainly demonstrated their competency in that regard relative to prevention of Mexican drug cartel physical invasion and control of ARIZONA’s Organ Pipe National Monument, haven’t they?

*The SVVRRNM designation proposal assures no protections to locals against extreme unaddressed and unchallengeable permit fees.

*The ecology of U.S. National Parks and Monuments bordering Mexico has been literally trampled and is severely at risk from the illegal aliens coming into the U.S. who enter through those parks (such as ARIZONA’s Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument).

The Sierra Club, partner of KSB, responded to this threat, not by supporting the border fence, but by filing lawsuits against the fence claiming it would disrupt animal habitats when, in fact, the flood of illegal aliens has already disrupted those animal habitats. See http://www.desertinvasion.us/

*The Sierra Club’s opposition TO JUST THE FEAR of logging, including any selective logging at all, on public lands has caused an excessive fuel buildup in forests and wild lands. This was the reason for the severity of ARIZONA’s massive Rodeo-Chediski fire in 2002 which became the most destructive, by far, in U.S. history.

While periodic fires are a natural part of the ecology and most forest and grassland types are dependent on fire to one degree or another, the fires resulting from excessive fuel buildup are neither natural nor environmentally benign but are extraordinarily dangerous. This fact is stated in light of the fact that the Sierra Club also prevented for decades the incutting of fire control roads for future fire fighting equipment in the area of the Rodeo-Chediski fire near Cibeque, AZ.

*The National Forest Service, which KSB SVVRRNM promotional literature says will manage our proposed National Monument, is an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

Meanwhile, the Africanized Honey Bee, aka “Killer Bee,” has migrated into the U.S. while the USDA was supposed to find ways to prevent that from happening. ARIZONA is the only state in the union that is now 100% infested with the insects who’ve caused this ecological disaster. We have them in the Verde Valley as a result of federal land stewardship. See, at the USDA government website “Honey Bee Research: Africanized Honey Bees.”

*Prove that the SVVRRNM designation will prevent antiquities vandalism and improve the quality of life of Verde Valley residents.

Please readers, demand accountability in the National Monument marketing materials of KSB, the Sierra Club, the City of Sedona spokespersons, the nefarious Monument Workgroup and the political proponents of the SVRRNM.

What can you do?

You can contact your Arizona State Senators and House Representatives and tell them that if President Obama issues and Executive Order establishing the Sedona-Verde Valley Red Rock National Monument, you want a bill introduced in the Arizona Legislature to invoke the Nullification Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s Tenth Amendment ordering the state government of Arizona not to cooperate with the U.S. SVVRRNM management agency which will parallel Arizona Proposition 122.

Sylvia Allen LD6 (R) sallen@azleg.gov Ph 602-926-5409 Fax 602-417-3105
(President Pro Tempore)
Steve Pierce LD1 (R) spierce@azleg.gov Ph 602-926-5584 Fax 602-417-3101
Brenda Barton LD6 (R) bbarton@azleg.gov Ph 602-926-4129 Fax 602-417-3010
Bob Thorpe LD6 (R) bthorpe@azleg.gov Ph 602-926-5219 Fax 602-417-3118
Noel W. Campbell LD1 (R) ncampbell@azleg.gov Ph 602-926-3124 Fax 602-417-3287
Karen Fann LD1 (R) kfann@azleg.gov Ph 602-926-5874 Fax 602-417-3001

Read www.SedonaEye.com for daily news and interactive views!

Read www.SedonaEye.com for daily news and interactive views!

84 Comments

  1. J. J. says:

    Couldn’t help but notice that Sedonabiz has closed all comments for Rob Adam’s piece, To Find the Truth, You Must Peel The Onion. What are they so afraid of?

  2. Michael says:

    I attended a dinner party with neighbors last night. There were approximately 20 people in attendance. When the subject of the National Monument came up, not a single person was in favor of this designation. No one wants this as it will add nothing but bureacracy, red tape, more rules, more regulations, more taxes, more fees. If I wanted to change the zoning of my property, I must send a notice to every homeowner in a five mile radius. The way this designation is being pushed through circumvents the democratic process. My question is, who died and made O’Halleran emperor of Sedona and the Verde Valley?

  3. Subject: SGRCA-Information regarding Red Rock National Monument

    Reply-To: “Website Sedona Golf Resort”

    Please click on the link at the bottom of the page to view a message from Steve Nelson, president of Big Park Regional Coordinating Council. The message contains information about upcoming public meeting regarding the proposed “Sedona Verde Valley Red Rock National Monument”.

    Download File Now – http://www.sedonagolfresort.org/sedonagolf/email_attachment.asp?attachmentId=95606

    Please click HERE to visit the Sedona Golf Resort web site –
    http://www.sedonagolfresort.org/sedonagolf

  4. Join us! Two public forum meetings of the VOTE NO National Monument Designation issue. Two sessions have been scheduled due to expected attendance. Arrive early for the Town Hall meetings at the Christ Center Wesleyan Church, 580 Brewer Rd, Sedona AZ 86336, from 12:00 to 1:30 PM or join the evening forum from 7:00 to 8:30 PM. The public is asked to attend the forums and become familiar with this important local issue. Use search words “national monument” on this site to read articles, opinions and comments for background information. Please show your opposition to create a Sedona Verde Valley Red Rock National Monument. LET’S SHOW THE KSB WORKING GROUP THAT PEOPLE DESERVE MORE INFORMATION AND A MORE IN DEPTH DISCUSSION; WE WANT A VOICE IN THIS DECISION. THANKS FOR COMING OUT TO SUPPORT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ARGUMENT: VOTE NO! The meeting is open to the public and will include comments by Arizona Representative Bob Thorpe, LD6. THE CITIZENS OF THE VILLAGE, SEDONA, COTTONWOOD, CAMP VERDE, CLARKDALE AND SURROUNDING AREAS DESERVE TO HEAR THE “OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY”. WE PROPERTY OWNERS AND BUSINESS OWNERS IN THE VERDE VALLEY DESERVE FULL DISCLOSURE AND AN OPEN DISCUSSION. THIS DECISION SHOULD NOT BE MADE VIA EXECUTIVE ORDER. PLEASE JOIN US FOR BOTH MEETINGS! YOU HAVE A VERY PERSONAL STAKE IN THIS OUTCOME SO GET INFORMED! PLEASE BRING NEIGHBORS AND FRIENDS. This is Government by the People and We Have a Voice in This! FIGHT THIS; IT IS IN OUR OWN BACKYARD. We need all the help we can get! There is more information on what you can do on our website: Stop the Federal Government from Taking Over More of Our Land Rights. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT A QUESTION USE THE FORM ON THIS LINK http://www.ConcernedCitizensforAmerica.com . Thank you for your attention and your help. Sponsors: Concerned Citizens for America at contact@concernedcitizensforamerica.com

  5. Please attend the KSB town hall meeting being held at VOCA clubhouse at 5:30 on the 15th.

    As you can see below, this Big Park Council flip flops, has no right to vote on behalf of our Big Park Community for ANY issue!!!.
    They are a small group not representative of our community. It is a play group.
    They must be stopped from speaking on our behalf and held accountable.
    I will personally organize a group of homeowners to sue these people if the monument is passed for misrepresenting and assuming the wishes of our population.

    ———————————————

    Message to the Representatives:
    At the September Council, a motion to rescind the Council’s support for the Sedona Verde Valley Red Rock National Monument was made but the Council voted not to rescind its support. The original proposal to support the National Monument was passed unanimously at the June Council meeting. The outcome of the September meeting was the encouragement for the Representatives as well as all residents to attend two meetings next week on this matter. On Tuesday September 15, there will be a public meeting at the VOCA Community Center at 690 Bell Rock Blvd in the VOC from 5:30 to 7:30 PM that is being organized by supporters of the National Monument. There is a second public meeting on Thursday September 17 at the Christ Center Wesleyan Church at 580 Brewer Rd, Sedona from 12:00 to 1:30PM or 7:00 to 8:30PM that is being organized by those opposed to the National Monument. After the Representatives have assimilated the information from these meetings, the Representatives at the October Council meeting will decide if there should be any modification or amendment to the approved motion of support from the June meeting.
    I have attached a flyer for each side of the question, i.e. the pro and con.
    Steve Nelson, President BPRCC

  6. Jim says:

    nobody but you is misleading public normand, it’s time uppity rich guys get homes bulldozed, you need to buy modest size homes and don’t need big houses stuck in our views and up our asses, yahoos around here in politics need a comeuppance that’s you Littrell Lefevre Williamson Martinez DiNunzio Adams and the others, their homes, businesses & organizations need disbanding because they cause poor to be disenfranchised, park will close uptown down, long due in our groups eyes!!! artists sold out with barn & creative life center & brewer road, time to put a stop to it. Tear down Tlaqapaque!! Tear down Hillside!! Tear down that rich woman eyesore house with lights!! Tear down Burger King monstronsity, get rid of ugly real estate building, move post office out and crappy looking Hyatt mall, and on and on. Welcome pristine wilderness back again like it was when I was a kid.

    Yes to National Monument!

  7. Kristin Elizabeth Regina says:

    Why a National Monument is a Monumental Mistake!

    A national monument is only one step below a national park in terms of restrictions and are often turned into national parks later.

    Property rights; a national monument is a federal parkland or conservation unit. All Sedona, Oak Creek and VOC homes would be landlocked inside a federal park. Federal parklands are much more restrictive than US Forest. Case law in the last twenty years shows the government uses the Property Clause of the U.S. Constitution to restrict what you can and cannot do on your private property near federal park lands and you may be required at any time to perform a NEPA Study or an EIS Environmental Impact Study; these studies cost between hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars and take years to perform. You may have any kind of restriction imposed in your private land if any species of wildlife enters your area; our area is home to near-endangered animals. The National Monument will have a directive to protect wildlife and this includes insects.

    New Layer of Control over private property in addition to county, in the form of the Local Land Use Program Administration, and the Jurisdictional Inquiry Unit, which provides advice to landowners and potential project sponsors regarding Agency jurisdiction, including informal phone advice and written jurisdictional determinations. Staff help citizens determine if an Agency permit or variance is required. Determinations often require a full deed history and other legal and factual research. The Jurisdictional Inquiry Unit also handles referrals from other agencies, telephone calls and walk-in members of the public. When a park land locks private property those properties are called “inholders” and bordering properties are called outholders. ALL NATIONAL MONUMENTS HAVE A DIRECTIVE TO BUY UP INHOLDINGS. Private organizations will start buying property in order to sell it back to the federal government. The Sedona you see today will likely become a shell of it’s former self in the coming decades, i.e.; less homes and more hotels to serve the needs of the “park.”

    More restrictions on public land usage in the federal we currently enjoy: You have a right to be in your public land, but being inside a national monument is a privilege!
    You would see a loss of some trails & an inability to create new trails, loss of some back country travel in your vehicle, more roads closures and no new roads, loss of ability to hike with your dog in some or all areas; dogs may chase wildlife and are mostly unwelcome inside national monuments, unless the monument is devoid of wildlife like White Sands. A national monument in Colorado said, “no dogs allowed,” they have 400,000 acres of land and no dogs. I asked why? Response: “Dogs may chase lizards or other wildlife!” I guess coyotes don’t chase wildlife? As if dogs are a big menace to 400,000 acres of land while on a leash with their owners. Sedona has black jaguar, mtn. lions, bobcat, lynx, coyotes, bear, deer, antelope, lizards, rabbits, squirrels, raccoon, skunk, otters, ferret, fox, javelina, Peregrine falcon, Bald Eagles, etc. plenty of excuses could be found at any point to restrict dogs from the forest or us for that matter, in the name of protecting and preserving the land. That trail you have from your back yard to the US Forest will become illegal; you must stay on designated trails, there will be no more walking around the USFS freely. The future of any hunting or target practice in the forest will be in jeopardy and at a minimum restricted.

    FEES FOR BASIC ACTIVITIES – MORE BUREAUCRACY AND CONTROL- LESS FREEDOM PRIVILEGES – NOT RIGHTS!
    Payment of $50 per day fees to take photos if you are someone who sells any photos; many mom and pop Sedona businesses and people do. Other monuments state: “The privilege of being given the opportunity to have your wedding at the monument.” Right now we have the right to have weddings and enjoy OUR public land. Monuments are a privilege to be in!

    Our ranchers lose access to graze cattle as they cannot comply with the new NEPA requirements. Cattle keep our grass short to prevent wildfires and supply jobs and food. Why should ranchers who have been here for generations be forced out and lose their family businesses? Who does that serve? Except to take away one more local food producer and force us to buy from large factory farms?

    Water rights, loss of senior water rights as the monument takes them away from us and owns the entire watershed and all surface water inside the monument. Arizona has a first right in use law, instead the federal government will own the water -not you! We live in a dry part of the country in a dry state but most of the water in Arizona is in Northern Arizona and we have senior water rights that no one can take away from us now, unless the federal government takes it using a national monument designation.

    Do you want the federal government installing a meter on your private well that you paid for so they can charge you by the gallon? This was idea was already pushed Tom O’Halleran admitted at the Sedona Library that, “those who have wells near the creek could have legal problems,” as the monument would own the entire watershed and surface water here!”
    HOMELAND SECURITY: National Monuments and Icons Sector-Specific Plan. An Annex to the National Infrastructure Protection Plan. 2010.
    Sedona becomes part of the National Monument Icon Program as an “asset” needing protection under Homeland Security. This affects the security of our school system and all the towns inside the monument, requiring further protection by Homeland Security because National Monuments are targets for Terrorists!
    Why would you want to turn your town into an international target for terrorist attacks?
    National Monuments and Icons Sector-Specific Plan 2010
    https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=691263

    School Funding: The USFS pays several hundred thousands dollars per year to our school district, there are questions that the national monument will be exempt from giving that money to our school system. Why does the USFS give us money for our schools? Because only 13% of Arizona land is privately held leaving us with a shortfall of money from property taxes.

    FENCING: National monuments are fenced, this will be discussed at the meeting on Sept 21st at the Elks Club. The cost to fence would be $10,000 per mile.

    NO PUBLIC PROCESS, Keep Sedona Beautiful, Inc., is acting as the elected officials for 80,000 residents and they are proud they can step around Congress in order to try and get their agenda passed.

    NO CITY OR TOWN HAS EVER BEEN LAND LOCKED INSIDE A NATIONAL MONUMENT! The needs of a busy city are incongruent with the restrictions of a national monument. Some people who study the economic impact of monuments on an area have stated that, “land locking a monument is not legal;” no one is sure as it has never been done. Water, sewer, power, roads, insecticides, herbicides, firefighting all become a point of contention and may be banned or require EIS and NEPA studies costing up to millions of dollars for the city! We can be forced to pay for those studies, even on our private land, KSB will not pay our bills. No new utilities or roads are ever allowed in a national monument; repairs can require NEPA studies.
    WE PAY FOR NEPA STUDIES AS INHOLDERS! The President is not required to do the NEPA studies that Congress would do if they declared a national monument, leaving the local citizens left footing the bill.

    Over one thousand lawsuits have been fought against the federal government and the plaintiffs always lose to the federal government whether it is the State or a private land owner. NEPA study lawsuits occur every year and law firms specialize in dealing with NEPA lawsuits as well. Monuments are great when they are out in the middle of nowhere, not so great when you forced to live inside one. We can only look at previous treatment of inholders

    The City and County have a fiduciary responsibility to protect property owners, citizens and the city itself from current and future threats to its security and to ensure it’s ability to properly function.
    A National Monument’s restrictions are incongruent with the needs and functioning of a busy town or city. Who will pay our legal fees, NEPA and EIS costs?
    I thought National Monuments were good? National monuments can be good, all large land monuments are away from towns and cities, where they are appropriate and they never land lock a population. If you ask any national monument what they think about land locking your town, they will tell you, “it is too restrictive!”

    What about land trades? The only land trades allowed here are parcels inside Amendment 12 land, for instance you could trade a Jordan Park piece of property for a Red Rock Loop piece of property. There is very little land left to trade and the USFS cannot just offer land to developers here.

    What about mining Sedona, how do I know a big mining company won’t show up here someday and get a mining permit? Mining is not allowed inside Amendment 12 land and there is nothing to mine in Sedona. This is why there was no mining here when Jerome was mined. Uranium is found in the land north of here on the Utah border and around Bluff, Blanding, Monticello and Moab, Utah and that land is 5 millions years behind us in erosion and that strata holds uranium.

    What about our traffic problem? I don’t like this traffic, it is blocking 179 and Oak Creek Canyon residents. National Monuments unfortunately bring more attention to an area and more tourist business, resulting in more traffic. The National Park Service and USFS are powerless to control roads, ADOT, the city and the counties must deal with our roads and traffic.
    Traffic at the Grand Canyon is up 25% this year over last, the park is under staffed and over crowded, it takes 3- 3.5 hours to get into the park, the Grand Canyon needs $500 million in repairs, as it is highly used. The NPS is $12 billion dollars behind in money to pay for park up keep.

    What about our trails, don’t they need maintenance? We have some of the best trails in the entire country, walk on any trail and you will see what condition they are in. Most trails are maintained by locals, many of them are mountain bikers who originally built the trails here. A national monument doesn’t bring more money for trail maintenance but it will bring more usage of our trails and parking lots, usage is what KSB members and those who oppose the monument wish to curtail.

    What about protecting antiquities? Antiquities are already protected under Amendment 12.

    I was told that the states are stealing all the land from the federal government and we will lose our land to the state and it will be developed? This is completely untrue, the US federal government will never turn over it federal lands to states.

    I was told we could get more money if we are a national monument? Other national monuments are not getting the money they need and the federal government does not give more money to an area that is a national monument. Grants and donations are harder and harder to get as there are so many competitors for grants in a non robust economy. Montezuma’s Castle National Monument in Camp Verde is not doing well financially.

    More tourism means, we will have more strain on our infrastructure and we will be left paying for the road repairs and sewer bills, police and rescue services, not the USFS or Dept. of Interior, as an ever increasing stream of people come see our national monument on the way to the Grand Canyon.

    I was told we are already landlocked as inholders in federal land so nothing will change?

    Arizona Fish and Game is against the national monument in the Grand Canyon because it will affect local residents in a detrimental manner. Read this why : http://azgfd.net/artman/publish/NewsMedia/Game-and-Fish-Commission-votes-to-oppose-proposal-to-create-Grand-Canyon-Watershed-National-Monument.shtml

    Homeowners are unwelcome in parks and monuments and are called inholders, an inholder is viewed as something that must go in both of these designations; all national monuments and national parks have a directive to buy up inholdings! The federal government can force you to sell your property to them or any developer. http://www.independentsentinel.com/government-celebrates-ten-years-of-stealing-private-land/
    Sedona would make a fine park, with more hotels, restaurants, stores, buses and tourist traps.

    Current management plan in place:http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5420017.pdf
    Here are some examples:
    • By forest order, camping and campfires restricted around Sedona and VOC (closed road accessible areas on Schnebly Hill, near the communities and along Boynton Pass Road)
    • Implemented a several year process to manage outfitter-guide permits. The Forest Service now has authority to limit commercial use. Now no new ones will be allowed unless they meet a specific need designated by the Forest Service. For example, mountain bike guide permits were issued based on a prospectus process.
    • Closed 60 miles of roads to motorized use and prohibited off-road vehicle travel under the travel management regulations.
    • Greatly reduced forest access using engineering such as boulders to block roadside parking and off road access, curbs along Highway 179 that have blocked all the old points where people could pull off and park to access the forest.
    • Re-engineered the trail system and created a larger and more hardened trail system working with volunteer groups. Worked to clean up and stop unauthorized trail building.
    • Created several paved parking areas for forest access. When these are full, as they often are, that limits visitor use in the popular areas.
    • Created Red Rock Pass program to obtain funds for managing high use impacts, for education, signs and trailhead toilets, Red Rock Recreation Guide and patrolling.
    • No glass in Oak Creek Canyon forest order to protect the stream corridor and wildlife
    • Developed trail head vistas, parking and signage and information
    • Non-commercial permits are issued for the 4WD Casner Mountain corridor.
    • Limited helicopter activities associated with filming around most of Sedona
    Partnerships with Private and Public Groups
    “We continue to work to balance scenery values with needed recreation and community needs and facilities. We have worked with the Chamber of Commerce and Arizona State Parks (and others) through partnerships and grants to improve education and interpretation through new kiosks, interactive displays at the visitor information office, having the ranger station constructed on 179 to reach visitors as they enter the community.”
    (Judy Adams, Lands Team Leader Coconino National Forest)
    The Red Rock Ranger district has extensive partnerships with the Oak Creek Watershed group who gets grants for watershed protection and public information; with Friends of the Forest who help build and maintain trails; with the Verde Valley Archaeology Society who is obtaining grants for archaeological site protections; Keep Sedona Beautiful who provides volunteers, expertise and funding such as in support for obtaining high value private properties; and many, many more groups.
    In the future, if needed, the national forest can implement a reservation system for high use trails, parking or camping areas such as they are doing at Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic management area. This action would require public meeting and comment process.

  8. Paul Kroenke says:

    Comments are outstanding additions to this discussion and conversation and more is better.

  9. Matt Wayne says:

    Fan of Sedona. Don’t like federal government getting hands on us.

  10. @Kristin Regina Took time to read it all. Then read all the comments. Then read article. To find this depth of coverage? Never before. To find this degree of experience and analysis? Priceless. This site? Priceless x Priceless like never before. Great writers. Great comments. Great thinkers. Wish I’d known about you sooner. Count me as a loyal reader.

  11. Land, water,money and everything else……..including your life force.

    Buckle up, this is why you are here on earth right now. Stay in your light, in your truth and bow to no man but your creator.
    Stay in the light. There can be no dark where there is light.

    http://beforeitsnews.com/prophecy/2015/09/huge-two-devils-converging-on-september-23rd-what-they-discuss-will-have-serious-implications-2473160.html

  12. I’m questioning my support of the designation since becoming aware of information that was not presented prior to my inclination that it was a good deal for Sedona and the VV. Mr. Normand you need to get in front of JCSVV. Angela’s a member of the congregation, why not have a give and take discussion as speakers offering both sides? Talk to the rabbi. It would be interesting for all of us to hear both sides of this alarming issue.

  13. magickj says:

    Read this document. Unfriggin believable what Washington DC is doing to the west!

    http://naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedfiles/doimonumentdesignationdocs_revised062910.pdf

  14. magickj says:

    No matter the opposition, once the National Monument proposal was on his desk, the area became one. Democratic? NO WAY!

    http://www.taosnews.com/news/local/article_ca8ac0fe-506b-11e2-b099-0019bb2963f4.html
    http://crosscut.com/2012/09/national-monument-san-juan-islands/
    http://wtvr.com/2014/12/12/national-parks-to-get-biggest-expansion-in-decades-thanks-to-defense-bill/
    http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico44/2013/03/obama-designates-new-monuments-draws-gop-criticism-160152
    http://www.delcotimes.com/general-news/20141222/woodlawn-property-in-delaware-designated-as-national-park

    Obama stated many times that he “wasn’t through” making National Monuments, which under the Treasured Landscapes agenda, is for the sole purpose of creating Federal control for “important properties” through “willing sellers.” This is Agenda 21 at work. Welcome to the New World Order.

  15. Phil says:

    go to http://www.arizonaliberty.us/ today and order a Tee shirt saying where you stand ! And get a bumper sticker for you and your neighbors !

  16. Arizona Republic, Monday September 28, 2015, page 8A: “My Turn” by Kurt R. Davis of Phoenix, Chairman of the Arizona Game and Fish. Title of his editorial is “Why new Grand Canyon monument is a bad idea.”

    More valid testimonial about why consideration of the Sedona Verde Valley Red Rock National Monument is a BAD idea. Especially the references to federal funding for these land grabs. Very interesting.

    http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/2015/09/28/grand-canyon-monument/72633850/

  17. William C says:

    Does anyone here know of any PRO momument organizations I can contact and get involed with:?

    Everyone here seems to think its a bad idea….. I’m all for it
    Thanks

  18. Daisy says:

    Like you, William C, I was all for the National Monument. Then I started attending meetings and reading the comments. I’ve changed my mind after realizing there was much NOT being said. I’ve looked into other areas that became a National Monument and found that the people living in the area saw fewer trails, less access, and more taxes and fees. Furthermore, private property owners in many cases were forced to sell their property to the government.

    I suppose you can join KSB where there are other sheeple like you – still sound asleep – ignoring the negative impact of a National Monument designation. You must not like living in Sedona/Verde Valley very much.

  19. William c says:

    Actuall I love living in Sedona…

    Thnks for the info I’ll contact KSB

    Not asleep BTW

  20. Tina Brumley says:

    Looks can be deceiving because under sedonans noses is beautiful untouched land and they don’t want it to stay nice? No building timeshares or franchises or mass chain restaurants!!!!!!! why did you allow a cvs or walgreens???

  21. Kristin Elizabeth Regina says:

    There is no CVS or Walgreens and private property on 89A can be built and developed, it’s part of living in a city. A CVS would be better than another hotel chain; hotels are always welcome in national monuments and national parks but inholders are not (homeowners are inholders). The people who support the national monument in spite of all the dangers to People, view People as the Problem,i.e.; the Land is Good, People are Bad. This is an ideology that they are married to like a religion. This is why you still see irrational comments from a few radical environmentalists. They unknowingly work for Big Green and don’t even know it.

  22. steve Segner says:

    Kristin Elizabeth Regina says:
    I agree with Kristin,
    Zoning dictates land usage, and the first city council set up zoning.
    Sedona is a city and (a )tourist town, and it will grow.
    We are lucky to have all we have ,and have our government paid for by others.
    Just because we live in Sedona does not mean we own it, most of us came first as visitors and got Red Rock fever, and moved in.
    Sedona is one of the most beautiful places in America and who are we to say stop coming.
    Get out and meet the visitors, welcome them, help them, guide them and make some new friends,
    Or you can sit home and bitch about change, and you will be the one the losses.
    steve

  23. @steve says:

    @steve segner if that were the case then the lodging chamber should have asked the city to give the 14 plus million you stolen to the forest service and for parking to accommodate the tourists. Instead you steal the money to pay for your advertising. Loser!

  24. Steve Segner says:

    Please $ 14,000,000 tell us how you got that number?
    As for stolen, please fill us all in, in detail better yet , call the state if in fact it was stolen they should be told.
    Oh, by the way the city had a meeting last week on marketing, 17 people came , only two from chamber to plan marketing for next year…. Did you attend? Open meeting,
    Loser, great name talk is cheep please give us details, allways happy to correct.
    Steve

  25. magickj says:

    Think about the big picture, and not your little dramas, SS.

    What does the National Weather Service, Social Security Administration and now, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), all have in common? These government agencies are all hoarding weapons and ammunition. DHS now has 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition. WHY? To protect National Monuments?

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (16,000 rounds of .40 Smith & Wesson hollow point bullets), as well as the Social Security Administration (174,000 rounds of hollow point bullets that were delivered to 41 locations across the country).

    According to the Fed Biz website: “The US Department of Agriculture, Office of Inspector General, located in Washington, DC, pursuant to the authority of FAR Part 13, has a requirement for the commerical (sic) acquisition of submachine guns, .40 Cal. S&W, ambidextrous safety, semi-automatic or 2 shot burts (sic) trigger group, Tritium night sights for front and rear, rails for attachment of flashlight (front under fore grip) and scope (top rear), stock-collapsilbe (sic) or folding, magazine – 30 rd. capacity, sling, light weight, and oversized trigger guard for gloved operation.”

    Why on earth would the USDA need sub-machine guns? Are free-range cattle SUCH a threat? Let’s NOT forget that the US Forest service is under the direction of the USDA. Why would the US Forest Service need sub-machine guns? To protect National Monuments?

    Think about what is happening to our country.

  26. steve segner says:

    Magickj

    Who better to over throw the government then the National Forest Service, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). NO one would ever suspect .

    They could hold Yellowstone and the Whitehouse hostage, till the government

    folds, As an FYI, Forest Service also manages the Whitehouse grounds!!!

    Yes, Yes, Yes. Now it all makes sense.

    Thank you

    magickj
    steve

  27. BLM says:

    I am FOR Our Verde Valley National Monument Protections. We are growing. Lets grow in a healthy way. This land is NOT your land to DESTROY. Develop along the freeways. NOT in our back yard and America’s Treasures.

  28. I would like to thank Rick Normand for connecting the dots about about the National Momument…

    So the city of Sedona is involed in a conscripacy with the federal government!!!!
    Create a National Monument so the US government can secretly mine uranium from us, funnel that money back to Sedona City Council so they can secretly fund thier pet projects!!!! Wow what insight!!!
    Thank you so much Rick…. Wow your a frigging genius..AKA a Tea Party conscripacy theorist…

  29. J. J. says:

    Magickj – you bring up an interesting point. It seems all our governmental agencies are being armed to the teeth. The government — and not the armed forces — is stockpiling hundreds of millions of rounds of ammunition for domestic use. It’s been reported that DHS alone has 2.7 BILLION rounds of ammo. Why is the Post Office buying bullets? The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation says it plans to purchase 54000 rounds of ammunition in a move that’s now raising eyebrows. Agencies like the Department of Education, the Social Security Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Internal Revenue Service continue to purchase large amounts of tactical weapons and ammunition, they say, to build up their law enforcement divisions. I can’t understand why no one but me has an issue with the IRS training with tactical weapons in DC.

    Under a National Monument, we’d be one step closer to a Federal – government run police state. Homeland Security, now armed with 1.7 BILLION rounds of ammo, have law enforcement jurisdiction over ALL federally run agencies, such as National Monuments, as Steve Segner has pointed out above. Under a National Monument, Sedona will lose home rule under the “layer of protection” a National Monument brings.

    We are NOT destroying the land. There’s NO ONE developing in your forest and the red rocks are in tact. To say we are destroying the red rocks, forest, and important ancient artifacts is a slap in the face to our Red Rock Ranger District, a team of volunteers, and in the past before they turned into environmentalist dictators, even KSB did a good job protecting our home.

    All that development you’re seeing was approved by your city and county zoning commission. If you are having an issue with a ton of hotels and timeshares tearing up the place, NOW is the time to get involved with the LOCAL government. This is your home – don’t turn it over to a nameless bureaucrat 2000 miles away to use as a political pawn the next time they can’t pass their budget.

    There are hidden, and not so hidden consequences of turning our red rocks, local government, property rights, and water rights over to a BIG GIANT UNKNOWN.

  30. And thus the post by JJ above proves my point…

    Tea Party conscripacy theorist
    Thnks for the backup JJ

    Sedona city is out to get you….yea man

Leave a Reply

Copyright © 2008-2017 · Sedona Eye · All Rights Reserved · Posts · Comments · Facebook · Twitter ·