SedonaEye.com columnist Eddie Maddock
Sedona AZ (February 9, 2015) – The Open Meeting Law, a work in progress or regress?
The following was added at the conclusion of a recent e-mail response from a member of the Sedona City Council:
“City of Sedona
102 Roadrunner Dr.
Sedona AZ 86336
Direct Contact: (Omitted)
This e-mail, if received by members of the City Council is intended solely for the purpose of disseminating factual information and is not intended to propose any legal action. In order to comply with the State’s Open Meeting Law, please do not reply to this e-mail or engage in a discussion of it outside of a legally noticed meeting with other members of the City Council.” (end)
Seemingly it sends a message that maybe our city has specific reasons to notify the public of this policy and or it serves as an expression of their concern and acceptance to comply with the State Open Meeting Law.
Based on this curious turn of events, the following information is a brief accounting of how our Open Meeting Law came to pass.
Excerpts from Arizona’s Open Meeting Law:
History of Arizona’s Open Meeting Law. All fifty states have enacted some type of legislation providing the public with a statutory right to openness in government. In addition, the United States Congress in 1976 enacted the Federal Open Meeting Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552b. Arizona’s Open Meeting Law was first adopted in 1962 and has been amended several times since its enactment.
7.5.2 Circumvention of the Open Meeting Law. Discussions and deliberations between less than a majority of the members of a governing body, or other devices, when used to circumvent the purposes of the Open Meeting Law violate that law. Public officials may not circumvent public discussion by splintering the quorum and having separate or serial discussions with a majority of the public body members. Splintering the quorum can be done by meeting in person, by telephone, electronically, or through other means to discuss a topic that is or may be presented to the public body for a decision. Public officials should refrain from any activities that may undermine public confidence in the public decision making process established in the Open Meeting Law, including actions that may appear to remove discussions and decisions from public view.
For example, Board members cannot use email to circumvent the Open Meeting Law requirements. See Ariz. Att’y Gen. Op. I05-004 at 2. “[E]ven if communications on a particular subject between members of a public body do not take place at the same time or place, the communications can nonetheless constitute a ‘meeting.’” See Del Papa v. Bd. of Regents of Univ. and Cmty. Coll. Sys. Of Nev., 114 Nev. 388, 393, 956 P.2d 770, 774 (1998) (rejecting the argument that a meeting did not occur because the board members were not together at the same time and place.) Additionally, “[w]hen members of the public body are parties to an exchange of e-mail communications that involve discussions, deliberations, or taking legal action by a quorum of the public body concerning a matter that may foreseeably come before the public body for action, the communications constitute a meeting through technical devices under the [Open Meeting Law].” See Ariz. Att’y Gen. Op. I05-004 at 1. This may true (sic) even if none of the members of the public body respond to the email. Id. at 2-3. If the one-way communication proposes legal action, then it would violate the Open Meeting Law. Id. However, other one-way communications, with no further exchanges, are not per se violations, and further examination of the facts and circumstances is necessary to determine if there is a violation. Id. at 3.
OVERVIEW: It is the public policy of this state that meetings of public bodies be conducted openly and that notices and agendas be provided for such meetings which contain such information as is reasonably necessary to inform the public of the matters to be discussed or decided. Accordingly, Arizona’s Open Meeting Law must be construed in favor of open and public meetings.
Summarized this means Meeting Notices, Agendas, and Minutes of meeting are to be made public and laws have been enacted throughout the country “in response to mounting public concerns over informal, undisclosed meetings held by local elected officials. City councils, county boards, and other local government bodies were avoiding public scrutiny by holding secret ‘workshops’ and ‘study sessions’.” Source: Ralph M. Brown Act, 1953
Executive Sessions, as have been identified as discussions of privileged/confidential information due to legal technicality, have been deemed acceptable.
And so, after many, many years of genuine attempts to create trust among the masses, what do we have today in Arizona?
Republican Sen. Sylvia Allen of Snowflake introduced a bill which, if approved, will allow city councils, school boards, and other leaders to talk in secret. She seems to think it will improve government if elected officials are able to talk to each other privately before public meetings begin. Isn’t that what created the need for an Open Meeting Law in the first place?
And why would a bill relaxing open meetings mandate be a good thing? If private talks are allowed, doesn’t that translate to decisions being made behind closed doors? Why, then, even bother to have public meetings for the purposing of voting?
Shouldn’t conscientious elected officials be striving to alleviate mistrust, skepticism, and doubt among the ever declining number of voters? We are already aware that the public is not hearing everything, which is part of the problem.
If anything, consideration might be better directed toward reassuring the voting public that closed door, back room deals are unacceptable.
Transparency should prevail. Encouraging activities contrary to that should be deemed unacceptable if public trust is to be restored and sustained.
The Open Meeting Law: A work in progress or regress?
For the best Arizona news and views, read www.SedonaEye.com daily!
It is getting worse, trying to take all our rights away. Sharing this article…
The City of Sedona got around the Open Meeting Law by disbanding all but the two Commissions required by AZ law (P & Z and Historic Preservation) and instituting the Citizens Engagement Program. Wasn’t it City Manager Tim Ernster who wanted this done? Didn’t he claim the commissions took up too much staff time? Hey, how about all the staff time the Chamber of Commerce consumes?
Mr. Ernster has since hired and placed a full-time employee in charge of the Citizen Engagement Program. Do citizens know about City issues before they arrive on a City Council meeting agenda ready for rubber-stamping? Ha!
According to the rumor mill, there’s a secret group under former Mayor Rob Adams currently meeting behind closed doors concerning the development of the acreage (200?) at the Waste Water Treatment Plant. Don’t hold your breath about having your input heard.
If you want to see the results of breaking AZ State Statute open meeting laws, look no further than the present VOCA board down in the Village.
In our opinion, this board has done so many things to break the trust of 4000 residents with decisions made in the dark that it will take many good people to come in and bring it back to before these people were first elected based in trust.
Very interesting input @Jean J. Around the time former Mayor Rob Adams announced he wouldn’t seek another term, he indicated after having some time off he might be interested in running for Yavapai County Supervisor based on information that Chip Davis plans to step down. Of course, Mr. Adams would have to return to living in Yavapai County since he presently resides in Coconino.
It remains to be seen how the Red Rock/Dry Creek Association will react to whatever plans this “secret committee” is plotting. The area is outside city limits. For years they have been extremely active and successful in lobbying for their own “vision statement” which supports a National Scenic Area to prevent land trades and strongly opposes multi-family and further resort development in that area. Not having the legal clout of an incorporated city might be a deterrent for them in spite of their strong voices in the past. However, a lot will depend on the person who is elected to fill the slot left by C. Davis if, in fact, he does step down.
@JeanJ
You really should take guidance from Eddie M when it comes to doing your research. The young lady who handles the citizens group is PART TIME with no benefits at that. Having participated in a group recently, I can tell you first hand that we got a lot of work done in a very short time.
Why don’t you just admit that you don’t like change of anything and that you like to bit?ch about anything and everything just to feel like you know what you’re speaking about.
As far as your rumor mill is concerned, how about you look into the former mayor working for the “regional” chamber as a consultant after moving into his new house in Yavapai? Hay Eddie M, didn’t you see the moving truck driving past your house?
Call the city and request the list of all of the citizen engagement groups in progress and finished that operate outside of open meeting laws or being recorded by the way.
They are attended by those with a specific interest in controlling the outcome so sign up and place your two cents. Get your concerned citizens together, each attend one group and write notes for the others. This is how we are now watching committees in OUR town. They don’t like it either but it has effected change.
Isn’t it funny that the likes of Jean jenks and Eddie M love finger pointing/complaining at those that actually DO… Be them city concil or regular citizens joining engagement councils…
Yes there is sinister going on around town….it lives in the sick, negative, dark minds of these two and those other dark minded thinkers who post here…. Crazy is as crazy does!!!
Unfortunately what appears to be overlooked here is the proposed Bill discussed in the above article is much farther reaching than Sedona City Council and the governing board in VOC. This is State of Arizona, Folks.
Are you willing to relinquish control over any State Legislation, County Legislation, City or Town Councils, Fire or School Boards? Do you fully understand the broad-based implication the passage of such a Bill will mean?
Think about taking giving equal time to the five minutes or so it takes to make a comment here and contact State Legislators and request for an immediate halt to this public injustice about to befall us.
In my opinion, the Citizens Engagement Program is an example of City government controlling and manipulating information in an effort to deceive people into supporting positions that are wrong..
On 12/29/2014 I sent the Citizen Engagement Coordinator an email agreeing with a quotation from another citizen who wrote “the City is attempting to manipulate, direct and control the kind of ‘citizen engagement’ it wants or deems acceptable.”
Oddly, my email was before the City Manager on the same day. I received an unfair, unsolicited email and BS from him. He was erroneously tying me to smart meter matters–not my involvement–and certain events related thereto. As can be imagined, after having my email opinion handled very inappropriately, I’m no supporter of the CEP.
As to the Citizen Engagement Coordinator position, the City advertised the job opening at 30 hours per week. No matter what the City says, a 30-hour job is considered to be full-time, while workers are part time if they commonly work fewer than 30 hours per week. BTW, the bloated City staff is growing under the current fiscal year budget. It sets aside $50,000 for a Grant Writer and makes the part-time Administrative Assistant job with Parks & Rec full-time.
AB 1435, introduced by Repulican Sen. Sylvia Allen, allows secret government by gutting the state’s Open Meeting Law. But, hey, the City of Sedona is already accomplishing this. There’s a leak floating around from a reliable source about a secret CEP group under former Mayor Rob Adams (as mentioned earlier) that’s working on the development of the acreage at the Waste Water Treatment Plant..
Zip-a-dee-doo-dah, zip-a-dee-ay
My, oh my, what a wonderful day
Plenty of sunshine headin’ my way
Zip-a-dee-doo-dah, zip-a-dee-ay
@Just an observation sour grapes? I read all comments on Sedona Eye and articles. Never seen Mrs. Maddock point a finger. Mrs. Maddock accurately reports the facts. Maybe you got caught with your FINGER in the cookie jar.
Thank you Mrs Maddock, your the BEST! Thank you for keeping us informed.
Zip-a-dee-doo-dah, zip-a-dee-ay
My, oh my, what a wonderful day
Plenty of sunshine headin’ my way
Zip-a-dee-doo-dah, zip-a-dee-ay
@Just an observation. Excuse me? Just who is it pointing what finger at whom?
Fact: The city-owned acreage surrounding the Waste Water Treatment Plant is out of Sedona City Limits. Therefore any plans for development would have to be approved by Yavapai County.
Fact: The Red Rock Rural Community Association, a long established organization of property owners residing in a general area outside Sedona City Limits, has effectively provided their own suggested land use of property to Yavapai County for years. Their mission statement is:
“The mission of the Red Rock Rural Community Association is to maintain the rural lifestyle of the area, to protect Oak Creek riparian area which the state has designated a unique and scenic waterway. We are advocates for responsible development that respects the water supply, the roadways and the scenic beauty of the area.”
Fact: It’s public information that a Citizen’s Engagement group has been formed to discuss development of the City owned land. If that the same group to which Jean J. makes reference I do not know.
Fact: Former Mayor Rob Adams did suggest during an interview published in the Red Rock News that seeking the Yavapai County Supervisor opening in the event Chip Davis doesn’t run again might be a future consideration.
So what’s “finger pointing” about that? Do you suggest the Red Rock Rural folks should sit back and be invaded by City of Sedona encroaching on their quality of life without having a say? If so, then just who is it pointing what finger here?
No wonder you decline using your real name. And that, Sir or Madam, is my opinion.
Eddie S. Maddock
good work Jean
Time to stand up and make my first comment. Been reading for years. One can say things about local writers, but Eddie Maddock is far the best informed and the best for Sedona facts. I don’t miss her articles when they appear. I don’t always agree with her take which means she wouldn’t always agree with mine if we ever met. So be it. Don’t fault someone who makes you think. Those — or the disgruntled one or two — talking about the negative can’t possibly be reading the same articles and comments I do. They must have personal bones to pick? Seems maybe there’s Sedona Light being shined on their own filth ridden darkened cellars full of skeletons? Hear Hear SedonaEye! Hear Hear Eddie Maddock! Hear Hear all you comments and voices for the candle you keep burning to keep Sedona Light and Truth!
Speaking of transparency, what’s with the “executive session” held Feb. 10th to consider city negotiations to purchase 55 Sinagua Drive, the property next to City Hall owned by the Sedona Verde Valley Board of Realtors? Where will that money come from?
Here we have among priorities pending discussions about new ways to tax residents while in the meantime secret meetings under the legality of “executive sessions” continue to cause more concern to those of us expected to foot the bill for unknown reasons.
Won’t it be interesting to find that one side of that oak creek SID lies in Big Park. It has a special improvement district wrapped around the creek that was approved by WHOM?
I think when the magnifying glass looks over our Yavapai County when the going starts to get tough with water, lots of truths will start to surface.
It is not going to be pretty.
The main question we should all be asking politicians and future political applicants now is “Are Sedona and the Verde Valley politicians implementing UN agenda 21 and ICLEI without informing the residents of its existence or calling it by name? Is Sedona signed on? Do open meeting laws really mean anything with this as the foundation?
http://www.iclei.org/en/our-activities/projects-initiatives.html
@Just an observation – to quote you – “Isn’t it funny that the likes of Jean jenks and Eddie M love finger pointing/complaining at those that actually DO…”
“They” (and just who is They) DO WHAT? HUH? Makes zero sense. Are your suggesting that some others actually do Facts that we can all rely on? Are you suggesting that council is so much smarter than our fact finders? Are you suggesting that we must all dumb down to your level?
HA! Ain’t going to happen!!!
Can’t get any dumber or more hateful than you Sharlett/julianna!!! Loser!!!
@West sedona resident – I’ve no clue as to who Julianna is (and it sure as hell is not me!) so stop your stupid incorrect assumptions! Can you ever stay on track to the real issues rather than your rants? Sorry that you want to see everyone but you “dumber and more hateful”. Back at you buddy!!!
Why are you so adamantly opposed to freedom of speech without your attack just because You don’t agree? That’s a very sad hole you live in.
Please, got over your thinking I’m someone I’m not. And Please become a person with relevant comments rather than vitriolic and demeaning comments.
Right back at you Sharlett/ Julianna
Btw keep up your nonsense and you will be exposed on this blog like never before for the hateful disgusting person that you are… Keep it up
O good grief West Sedona Resident are you 10 years old?
The better question is what is to be done about closed doors and behind the scenes decisions? Is it true about the property next to city hall? Put it on an agenda and let’s all discuss it. There’s lots of property in city hall vicinity that might be a better investment and one that might be needed. I’m a Realtor and I know this is fact. Let’s talk about it openly. No one needs to get panties in a bunch. If it was needed then city government had ample opportunity to purchase it for years, there’s no rush. There’s unlisted properties available for purchase in that area too. Put it out there and the residents will get the best deal if one is to be made. Simple. Legal. Transparent. Democracy. Do it the ethical and moral way Mrs. Mayor and Council. Prove yourselves. It is a test.
I have placed the question and information about ICLEI on three articles and not one person has had the courage to comment on it. Instead conversation is diverted the sandbox name calling. Grow up
@”Rob”: thank you, thank you for reviving the subject to its original intent – addressing the Az. State proposed bill to gut the Open Meeting Law.
Yes, the question of the executive meeting about purchasing the property next to city hall has been overlooked by the trivial bickering between to unidentified people: West Sedona Resident & Sharlett/Juliana. What opportunists are both of them to take a legitimate article and spin it for whatever personal grudge or reasons seemingly exist between two very petty people?
If the city is considering purchasing property anywhere seems it should be done in open meeting. Suggestions have been made on this web site for purchasing the former floral shop or boys and girls club locations for the purpose of a legitimate Sedona Visitor’s Center.
It would be a win-win for saving face if the city’s farce of paying to promote the chamber of commerce for their own visitor’s center since it will continue to operate as it did prior to the incorporation of Sedona. That would provide our city with a visitor’s center at all proposed “gateways to Sedona”: The USFS to the south; the chamber of commerce to the north; and the Western Gateway, important to the revised Community Plan . . . a City of Sedona Visitor’s Center near city hall.
The closed door legitimate “executive meeting” is a good example of how secretive government is operating even with a pretty stringent open meeting law. Imagine what it will become of the State Legislature does away with it entirely.
@YOUR future : are you just not understanding the issue? Why are you talking about ICLEI rather than Az Open Meeting Laws. Will you please stay on track with the topic?
You and “West sedona resident” don’t seem to feel good or jingle your jollies until you take the original topic Off Topic with your little rants.
BTW, and for the last damn time – West sedona resident – Find a new hobby and target!!! You are so off base as to you calling me Julianne that all the rest of your words are brought back to zero basis.
Go for it West sedona resident – you have nothing to go for – except your own rants without facts.
@YOUR future; If you believe so strongly about ICLEI then why don’t YOU provide an article or letter to the editor revealing just exactly what the hell that means?
Where is your credibility?
As I recall, the title of the above article is all about Open Meeting Laws and all boils down to our Council – once again – discussing buying lands with moneys that they take away from us when they raise our sewer fees and the B&B taxes and give zillions away to the Regional Chamber and on and on!
Lest we forget: the main target of any Sedona Council is to simply maintain and promote Health, Safety and Health Issues – rather than their personal foibles.
How convenient that Citizen Engagement groups operate OUTSIDE the AZ Open Meeting Laws and that public access comes when the deal is done and the Sedona City Council is ready to vote.
Apparently public input at public meetings is no longer wanted by the City of Sedona. Meeting Notices, Agendas, and Minutes, if any, as well as the names of the participants, are not made public. The City provides a listing of the names of the groups (15 currently) and City staff contact info.
A few weeks ago a leak divulged how a group had been formed under Rob Adams to determine future development of the sewer plant acreage. Perhaps it goes by the confusing name of ‘The Dells Land Use Group’ ??? Interesting that this came not long after Mr. Adams’ term as Mayor ended.
As Jean J. points out, Citizen Engagement for sure doesn’t comply with the current Open Meeting Law and the question still remains why the city council met in Executive Session to discuss purchasing the Sinagua Dr. property. Once decisions are made behind closed door, why even bother to take an “official vote” at a public meeting?
Of course, if the State pulls it off and changes the law, it will be convenient for Sedona since that will make their current way of doing business legitimate.
@Jean J
You seem so in tuned with the rules, can you please explain to me what topics can be spoken about in executive session? There must be certain topics that are allowed and some that aren’t.
I would think that discussing buying land would be for just that type of meeting, no?
The AZ Open Meeting Law regarding Executive Session is located at A.R.S. 38-431.03. A public body may hold an executive session for seven purposes. I’ll just mention two here.
Discussions or consultations…..regarding negotiations for the purchase, sale or lease of real property.
Discussion or consultation for legal advice with an attorney, or attorneys.
I NEED TO CLARIFY that Citizen Engagement is not illegal. It is a lawful means of getting around AZ’s Open Meeting Laws, which apply to public bodies. As the Sedona City Council is not participating in Citizen Engagement meetings in any manner, the Open Meeting Law does not apply. Please know I am not an expert on this. The City Manager, whose office is responsible, could explain it in detail.
The Red Rock/89A/Dry Creek Corridor study dates back to 1992 and was updated in December 2014. Web site below tells all about it, a group of concerned citizens residing in an unincorporated area taking steps to protect their environment and quality of life. They do not need big city of Sedona folks with their big ideas telling them how they will be better off with resort hotels, performing arts pavilion, running tracks and ball fields to clutter their surroundings with more traffic, pollution, and disruptions. Pay attention to those elected to represent you when candidates run to replace Yavapai County Supervisor Chip Davis in the next election.
http://www.rrrca.org/rural/images/VisionStatement2014.pdf
I love it….
Same old cast of character promoting conspiracy theory’s … Not one of you… Sharlett, Jean jerks, Jim Harrington to Eddie Maddock have even sat in on one of these citizen engagement meetings… But once again fault is ALWAYS found..
I love it…..instead of REALLY being involved you throw stones and nonsense around from the sidelines…. How easy and cowardice that is…
Awesome for you .. When you really get in there and try to actually do something please report back…
Your spinning from here say and outright untruths only serve to SIMULATE the 8 or 10 of you on here who constantly complain about EVERYTHING ….
@West Sedona Resident – and when did I take a position for or against Citizen Engagement or previous City Commissions for that matter?
@JeanJ
Thank you for clarifying….So when Jim in Uptown say’s “Speaking of transparency, what’s with the “executive session” held Feb. 10th to consider city negotiations to purchase 55 Sinagua Drive, the property next to City Hall owned by the Sedona Verde Valley Board of Realtors? ” I guess that answers his question as to why that meeting was held in executive session, because it’s none of anyone’s business, YET!
With all of the questions about the citizens engagement and transparency, I did a bit of research from a while back and I saw lots of areas where the city people said that citizens engagement was instituted to save money because commissions used a lot of employees time and really didn’t accomplish what they were supposed to.
Since Jean J has been boasting her opinion all over this site, allow me to add my 2 cents; don’t we want out city employees to save money where they can????
While I agree with many on here that W Sedona Resident can be a bit over the top, he/she’s right why don’t you all stop your complaining and join a committee?
“lots of areas where the city people said that citizens engagement was instituted to save money because commissions used a lot of employees time and really didn’t accomplish what they were supposed to.” Obviously this passed because city staff got it passed. Democracy is time consuming and bureaucrats don’t like wasting time. Otherwise, what typically happened in the past was that the City decides how it wants to spend our money, irrespective of any residents’ opinions, then tries to stage its decision as being unanimous among everyone so no questions or road blocks are presented.
@West Sedona Resident
Please get over yourself! Aren’t you the same one sitting on council with the twinkles in your hair?
Why, on earth, do you think I or anyone else is not allowed our own opinions and all without having to join into the legal skating of the open meeting laws by circumventing of same by formation of a large number of Citizen Engagement committees that only respond to Staff? Guess you have little understanding of all the ways voters can be and are involved in our little towns issues.
If it isn’t to your liking than it is Wrong? Give me a break! Are you Wrong as you have no respect for freedom of speech – and if you are not wrong then Why not? How come you can’t come to grips with the constitutional rights of people expressing themselves – even if you don’t like their concepts that are against yours?
I do find many of your comments idiotic…you are not an idiot – just your refusal of allowing a full range of thoughts…..even tho some do not agree with yours!
I don’t recall any of us voting in Staff to delve through all the issues and come to any bottom line – what did I miss? I do recall the concept of Citizen Engagement committees was to save City money. Can some one at City tell us how much money has been saved to date as a result?
@Judy Stein -FYI and with all due respect; by not joining a committee doesn’t invalidate anyone’s research, thoughts and/or concepts. Jean J doesn’t boast – She states facts that the majority doesn’t want to take the time to research, as she does. By any of us Joining a committee doesn’t insure Council transparence on any level – or that they will ever hear our opinions.
@Operative words
so sorry, in governments where I’m from the people elect those that they “hope” will run their government to the best of their ability and then hope for the best. I didn’t know that in AZ those that are elected to office must listen to the berating of people on sites such as this in order to be bullied into running the government the way they’re told. I find if very disturbing indeed.
Response to Judy Stein:
“Our whole theory of government is that the people are the governors and they give limited power to the government. For the public to adequately assess what its government is doing, it needs as much transparency as possible.”
Quote from Dan Barr, Attorney with Perkins Coie LLP and counsel to the First Amendment Coalition of Arizona and other media organizations.
In other words, our elected officials in Arizona (and I thought elsewhere but apparently not according to Judy Stein) is to represent the will of the people even if they may not agree with what it is the public mandates.
That’s similar philosophy of that which allows folks to post their thoughts and ideas on this site. If you do not agree with Freedom of Speech and Open Meeting Laws then maybe you should move out of the country because all 50 states do have laws relating to transparency in government.
Hey @Judy Stein – What governmental area are you from? Russia? Your comments just struck a cord in me that was not very happy!
So, we are just supposed to agree with everything governmental words (on all levels) and all of their garbage as we “hope” and “hope” again they will actually make decisions that benefit the broad based vs the very narrow self serving base they represent?
In the United States, People elect their governments to represent them – not “hope” they will do their best to represent them!!! And, as we elect we also realize that we have the right to discloser and to speak our feelings….You call that “bullied” when it doesn’t agree with their ideas? WoW!!!! I call that freedom of Speech.
In my humble opinion, it is our very partisan dem government and our current president who does the Bully tactics as they tear down the very bastions of our Country!
I am a proud Christian – not a follower of the Muslim faith…..what faith does our president follow? ……and why does he not become a stand up guy to blow the Muslims over the top enemy out – once and for all?
Guess what Judy: In All our United States the Elected knowingly and willing place themselves in a position of Having to and (are supposed to) listen to All!….be those comments a plus or minus on how they function in their office – its called freedom of speech!
Your comment that in “AZ those that are elected to office must listen to the berating of people on sites such as this in order to be bullied into running the government the way they’re told. I find if very disturbing indeed.
You suggest The Elected don’t like any comments unless those agree with their lofty spews of governing nuts.
Arizona runs by the rules of Constitutional law – as do all those elected…and Freedom of Speech rules all of us.
Could you please explain, in more detail, your displeasure?
Oh, oh, Judy…you’ve run afoul of Sharlett. It’s what happens to most everyone who posts here. She asks you to explain your comment…that’s probably easier than trying to find something of value in what she posts.
Thank you Sharlett and Check It Out.
Currently, the City has fifteen Citizen Engagement Work Groups MEETING IN SECRET. None are public bodies, thus legitimately avoid the requirements of AZ’s Open Meeting Law.
“The Dells Land use Work Group,” rumored to be lead by Rob Adams, is charged with developing a proposed land use plan for the acreage which is to be no longer irrigated at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. Public access comes when the deal is done and the Sedona City Council is ready to vote.
Participants are Andrea Houchard, Max Licher, Gerhard Mayer, John Weisnitzer, Dana Greenwood, Mark DiNunzio, Rob Adams, Paul Chevalier, Mari Tonello, Jennifer Wesselhoff, Tim Ernster, and Charles Mosley.
Apparently, the City of Sedona no longer believes in open and transparent government.
Thank you very much, Jean J, for researching the information relating to acceptable reasons for Executive Sessions. That was exactly the purpose of my previous blog. Asking a question and hoping to receive an answer.
Additionally it’s my opinion, and since to my knowledge we haven’t yet been stripped of Freedom of Speech or Freedom of the Press, just because something is legal doesn’t necessarily mean it’s the right thing to do.
When the city hasn’t the funds for upgrading drainage and maintaining city streets unless they find a way to create new funding (and we all know what that means) just what business is being conducted in Execution Session to purchase property unless, perhaps, for a legitimate Sedona Visitor’s Center which would free up well over a million dollars being spent to operate a bogus example under the flag of the Chamber of Commerce. I know, same old, same old. But after all, it’s only money collected from taxes within Sedona City Limits.
Too bad those in charge aren’t passionate enough to insist on their own “pay to play” system.That translates for “them’s” that want all the frills for gathering places, creek walks, museums, ad infinitum to create their own “special districts” to pay for it. Oops, did I dare to make such a suggestion? Will await for sound thumping on my rear end with a cactus for being so brazen. Oh well.
By Jove, I think ‘e’s got it! @James Harrington
‘Ow about the scant 1,500 of Sedona’s population of 10,000 that voted approval of the revised Community Plan come together and finance it? They could also include the Chamber of Commerce members, most of which it’s said live outside City Limits and are recipients of such good financial cheer from City Coffers.
They could neatly form their own “Special Interest District” and finance their endless list of extravagant “wish list” items which, in their own grandiose way, they truly believe represent maintaining a “small town” atmosphere.
Grand idea, Old Chap (young chap?). No matter. ‘Tis a fine thought. Jolly good.
Cheerio
Judy Stien
Pay no attention to the rants hear attacking you.
It’s the same cast of characters that hate all and love to simulate themselves with thier rhetoric … It’s been going on for years they hate everything
Btw after Sharlett posts her nonsense she loves to back it up with 3 or 4 anonymous post using a different name..
So no worrys.. Thier only about 8-10 of these hate mongers ..
Welcome to Sedona BTW
w.sedona resident why not contribute something worthwhile, thanks for your help but we can read & determine comments for substance vs puffery & you’re starting to sound like that granny yelling where’s the beef, it’s clear you don’t like this sharlette & ok we get it, that’s your right, now get over the childish hissy fits that don’t serve you or us well
Judy lives in the VOC according to her early comments.
Hey Alan…
Don’t see any brilliant contributions by you…
So why not mind your buisness
Hey West sedona resident – what are your brilliant contributions? Guess we should nominate You for President or God or …… because you are sooooo knowledgeable and only want to shut up anyone who disagrees with your twinkles? opps did not mean the twinkles in your hair – meant the lack of twinkles in your brain.
Thank You once again Jean J. for Your research and sharing of information, always interesting. You may have touched on an answer to a question that I’ve had. Last Thursday while having lunch at Reds with some friends I noticed Jennifer Wesselhoff and Tim Ernster having lunch together. (That would have been the second to last day before He retired) and a small gift of Oreo cookies was given. Seemed innocent enough, but why would They have a relationship? Friends? Future endeavors? I was just left wondering.
BTW for those of You that feel You must respond to West Sedona Resident, I wish You would refrain and ignore It. As stupid as the comments may be, this person is smart enough to do exactly what they set out to do, and that is to dissuade the conversation and topic. Don’t Fall for It !!! And keep in mind that It’s rants of a ‘few people using many different names’ is exactly what this person is doing. There are many intelligent people and thoughts here, so let’s stay focused.
Sedona eye….
I know you won’t post this but thought you should know that Sharlett is (deleted by editor) .. Check it out… That Sharlett for you. Thought you should know the kind of vindictive person she is.. Wish you would post this.
Take care
Btw the above rant by just observing is Sharlett…
That’s exactly what I was talking about in my above post..
Pay no never mind..
Interesting comment @Just Observing. And it comes as no surprise. Even though the hired professional advisor at the recent city council meeting told the city council point blank the responsibility of any chamber of commerce is to their members, they will continue to throw money at them. Most of their members as has been pointed out time and time again do not collect Sedona city taxes. And the visitors center is for the chamber of commerce to promote their members, their legitimate responsibility. It’s an embarrassment but apparently not to those who publicly and privately flaunt their alliance. No secrecy here. No way.
Well look around to many businesses listed, moving or closing.
Why would any us stay? I can go outside the city limits and get all the benefits of being in the city. Moving to where my business is appreciated.
No Secrets, chamber takes credit for everything. @mary s