Sedona AZ (April 9, 2012) – The following is a Letter to the Sedona Eye Editor:

Dear Mayor Adams and Members of the Sedona City Council:

Acknowledging that the Sedona Community Plan has contained a “Housing Element” section for many years which I believe was last updated in 2002, it’s troubling to me that consideration to purchase “cheap” land by the city during the unfortunate decline in property values is a wise decision.

Is taking obvious advantage of the misfortune of others, those being folks who lost their homes through foreclosure, really an image you care to risk taking on? Where were the members of the Housing Commission and their offers to financially assist the many struggling home owners in their real, not perceived, hour of need? And now you intend to capitalize and consider purchasing their losses at bargain rates, which obviously is the direction you’re headed, leaves me in disbelief and shaking my head.

Of course, none of you had anything to do with previous “deals” cut with developers in order for them to waive incorporating into their projects their fair share of “affordable” housing. They proceeded onward and upward, diverting their responsibility to mitigate the need for providing service worker housing in a logical, sensible manner. . . that being to provide on-site accommodations. However, you must now realistically admit those concessions served only as part of the problem and not the solution.

When the matter of approving ADU’s was the hot issue, I personally attended three of those meetings: Library, Jewish Community Center, and Poco Diablo. All were well attended, and the clear-cut public consensus was “NO. We live in single-family residential zoning.” It was made public at the time that the code, if approved, would be unenforceable unless neighbors served as whistle blowers. It was also disclosed that many of the so-called people in need of “affordable” housing such as policeman, fireman, school teachers, and city workers didn’t necessarily prefer living in Sedona. Therefore, the real need was reduced pretty much to where it started: housing accommodations for service workers in the lodging and resort business. In spite of a majority of public opposition and questionable need, of course the code was approved.

For a moment, let’s look back at Nepenthe. Had it materialized as originally proposed, affordable, this perceived ongoing Sedona problem would have been mitigated to at least some extent. But no. Conveniently provisions initially agreed upon somehow failed to be included in the Development Agreement and the original purpose was ultimately scrubbed.

Likewise with the Fairfield timeshare development. Oh, I was publicly crucified after leaving a meeting whereby I related that the project had originally been conditional based on providing affordable units. After volumes of e-mail correspondence, I located the documentation I needed which, indeed, confirmed that the Fairfield folks were granted an Amendment to the Community Plan, conditional on providing some 40 affordable units. Well guess what. I suppose I deserved being mocked and jeered at by Community Development because I wasn’t aware that stipulation had not been required and/or included in the accepted Development Agreement.

Why is all this an issue? Because, in my opinion, it’s a direct reflection of how the Department of Community Development has manipulated the process whereby, had proposals been followed to the original intent, Sedona probably wouldn’t have a perceived need for affordable housing at this time.

Too many words, I know. But this attempt by the Housing Commission to snatch the development fees for a mission to make money for realtors does not pass the smell test. Or, is it possible, that the city intends to establish yet another commission or create their own real estate division and hire their own licensed contractors and realtors to handle facilitating the disposition of the newly acquired real estate? Not to be overlooked is the fact that the Chair of the Housing Commission is, herself, connected with the development and construction industry.

To avoid acknowledging there’s something drastically wrong with this picture would be shirking off the obvious. For one thing, the money set aside, if anything, should it not have gone to those losing their homes? Of course, it’s a bit late for that. However, isn’t there a more honorable way to use that $200,000 than on an obvious quest from those who intend to make a buck? For heaven’s sake, due to times and conditions there must be a way to divert the funding to those poor people who have had nothing done to mitigate damage to their properties as they await potential flooding during the next monsoon season.

As Sedona continues to become the laughing stock of the Verde Valley, this episode will surely add another chapter to the book, which is strictly my opinion.

If nothing else, please consider issuing a cease and desist on putting aside any more development fees for specified housing purposes at least until a thorough and updated study and evaluation of existing circumstances is in hand.

The mess has been created by diversions recommended by city planners, approved by P & Z Commissioners and former City Council Members. And who pays the price? Residents whether or not our areas are presently included in the proposed housing district. Once the precedent is approved, what will prevent future expansion?

Please, don’t add your names as contributing to this ongoing comedy of errors.

Sincerely,

Eddie S. Maddock

Sedona resident speaking my own opinions and on my own behalf.

For the best Sedona Arizona News and Views? Subscribe now to SedonaEye.com!