Home » City Council, Community » First Legal Battle for Stop Sedona Take Back of 89A

First Legal Battle for Stop Sedona Take Back of 89A

Sedona, Arizona (March 16 2011) – After organizing and pulling petition papers in very short order, the citizens of “Let the People Vote on 89A” filed papers Monday morning with Yavapai Superior Court requesting an official determination of the filing date for referendum petitions. 

Since the Sedona City Council vote to take back a five-mile stretch of the SR 89A highway in February 2011, there has been a grass roots effort to get the issue on the ballot and ultimately reversed. The LTPV89A group hit the streets, secured a store front, launched a website and now faces its first legal battle in determining when the thirty day window to obtain the necessary signatures for the referendum officially starts. 

According to Sedona City Attorney Michael Goimarac, the thirty days began the day the draft minutes of the meeting were posted on the City’s website which according to the city was February 23, 2011.  However, the LTPV89A group’s lawyer and former Sedona assistant city attorney, Jon Paladini, cites state law that disputes this date.  “The city cannot just pick and choose a date that benefits its own agenda.  Arizona law is very clear that the date for pulling referendum petitions begins on the day that the approved minutes are available to the public.  It’s the difference between drafted and approved.”

That date would be March 9, 2011 according to Paladini. This creates more than a two week time gap between the city’s due date of March 24, 2011 and the Let The People Vote on 89A group’s date of April 8, 2011. 

Sheri Graham heads up the LTPV89A group and says that could mean the difference of a lot of signatures which is all that keeps the referendum from seeing the light of day.  “It would be such a waste of people’s time and effort and donations. We have gotten such a great response from people who really care about this issue just to let it die over a discrepancy in dates.”

An emergency hearing is set for Monday, March 21, 2011 at 2 p.m. in the Prescott Arizona Courthouse in front of Judge David Mackey. Log on to www.letthepeoplevoteon89a.com for more information or visit the City of Sedona government web site at www.SedonaAZ.gov.

25 Comments

  1. Sheri Graham, Let The People Vote on 89A Chair says:

    “We need Sedona residents to stop by the office or call us at 928 300-3010 and sign the petition that will allow the voters to decide ownership of Hwy. 89-A. Our deadline for all signatures is March 23, 2011. If you care about this issue and want the people of Sedona to have a voice on the ownership of 89A then you must sign the petition. This is not a done deal, the arrogance of the city’s attempt to deny the citizen’s constitutional right to a vote on the ownership of 89a is unacceptable. Stop by our headquarters at 2030 Hwy 89A between Coffee Pot Restaurant and M&I Bank during your lunch break or while you are out running errands.”

    Please feel free to send this out to any and all. We invite all to attend our Court hearing regarding correct petition dates in Prescott on Monday, March 21st at 2 PM Div 1 room 301 with Judge Mackey. Or send a letter to either letthpeoplevoteon89a@gmail.com or to sheri@sedona.net.

  2. Serge Wright says:

    “We were disappointed that the city of Sedona seems determined to shut down the voice of the People by restricting our petition drive from 30 days to 2 weeks. Our attorney is petitioning the action of the city in court this coming Monday. Meanwhile we are moving ahead with gathering signatures by the March 23rd deadline.” Serge Wright 300-6462

  3. Warren says:

    “According to Sedona City Attorney Michael Goimarac, the 30 days started the day the draft minutes of the meeting were posted on the city’s website which according to the city was February 23.”

    And the last time he was right was?

  4. Bettye says:

    I don’t get it? Where were all the people that are signing the Petition, during the ‘Informational Meetings’? Where were You during the months before, during the City Council Meetings? How many times have You read the CIVTECH reports? I think that those of You that are signing, are doing it out of Fear, that You believe to be true… but isn’t. For example, daily I speak to people that believe the Sedona City Property Taxes will go up. People, We don’t have City Property Taxes. Then there are those that want lights on 89A. No problem, there most likely will be lights, just not huge Freeway lights. There are those people that believe We will run out of money for 89A. Not if it is secured, as promised, from even future City Councils. Do Your Own homework people, and stop listening to those that have an agenda that You really won’t be happy with. This whole thing is about Safety on the Highway that ADOT was not willing to give Us.

    So, let’s say the Petition is signed, and a vote by the people is taken, and the Majority of the voters, that placed the City Council in office, vote to keep the Highway…. How much City time and money have You wasted. I don’t get it?

  5. Jim Stitley says:

    “What is the objection? New here and thought residents would not like all the typical street lights. What about the dark skies?”

  6. P. Revere says:

    Look at who is collecting signatures on this petition:

    Temp Job – Today, March 18, 19,20, 21. We need Petition Carriers. Call 928 300-3010 -Ron Volkman http://www.homefinder.com/broker/4333719d_Ron_Volkman_Realty/

    Must be 18 or older, conservitive in dress and have own transportation to Sedona.

    · Location: Sedona, AZ

    · Compensation: $10.00 per hour

    · This is a contract job.

    · Principals only. Recruiters, please don’t contact this job poster.

    · Phone calls about this job are ok.

    · Please do not contact job poster about other services, products or commercial interests.

    PostingID: 2272158317

  7. Eddie Maddock says:

    My question to Bettye is why would four people even want to assume the responsibility to make this vast in perpetuity financial commitment? These people were elected to represent all of the people and not just the 115 who responded to the DORR poll wherein the four self-appointed omnipotent ones hang their hat that they finally achieved the poll results which suited their purpose.

    Clearly they knew the direction they intended to take regarding the route transfer from the moment they were elected. So, therefore, why did they waste city funds on the CIVTECH reports as well as the $14,675 paid to Behavior Research Center Inc. in Phoenix for the professional survey? Maybe those who voted for them without realizing they would be betrayed by having the State Route forced upon us had more confidence in their judgment. For sure it wasn’t because we were all deaf, dumb, and blind, even though it may have taken the conclusion of the mighty four’s actions to bring us to our senses and see the light.

    I would much prefer to have had the money already wasted be spent on a voter Referendum than frittered away on something as useless as an obvious attempt to brainwash Sedona residents into thinking this route transfer is a good deal.

    It will still be a State Route, as DORR clearly stated in one of their publicity bulletins, insofar that VOC, Cottonwood, and Verde Valley will also enjoy provisions from an improved road. However, they failed to include the hundreds of tourists as well, all of whom will benefit from a safer State Highway at the expense of only those of us living within Sedona City Limits.

    The money would have been better spent on a special election in the first place. If you’re so certain your side is correct, then what is there to gripe or worry about except more wasted money which is nothing compared to the financial disaster looming before Sedona’s future.

  8. Marv says:

    As are many others in this sluggish economy, I’m in need of a job. Thanks, P. Revere, for the heads-up.

  9. Bettye says:

    Eddie, Eddie… I see My name in Your comment, but Nothing about My comments. Guess I must have pushed Your Rambling Button.

    DORR? I don’t know anything about a DORR poll, or DORR. Regarding the CIVTECH Report, You should read it sometime, and You would understand about the Safety of Our roads. But then, You don’t even live in West Sedona, so this whole thing doesn’t really effect You, does it. Or, are You one of those that’s collecting Your $10 an hour for getting signatures?

    In closing, I would like to point out that Those four people that You refer to, personally care more about Sedona, the Residents, and the surrounding Forest, then anyone You’ve spoken to in a long time. Their working hard to make this a better place, not ripping it apart for the agenda of an elite few.

  10. Eddie says:

    DORR = Democrats of the Red Rocks. Check with your four members of the city council for details about the results of their poll. Paraphrasing B.Litrell on KAZM Dynamic Duo last Thursday morning, two polls reflected support for the turn-back. However, when asked by Tom Tayback who sponsored the polls, the only one to which she referred was the Sedona.biz which reflected only a slight increase in support. However, shortly thereafter B. Litrell alluded to an 80% approval on another poll which she did not specify the source. I have in my possession the results of both of those polls which it will please me to forward for your observation and confirmation.

    We’re all entitled to our opinions. I, however, respect that availability for others even when they disagree with me. If by informing you of the source by which the city council ascertained their high percentage of voter approval pushed my “rambling button” again, I apologize but it is for clarity. My previous rambling was a Constitutional Right of Free Speech, same as the Constitutional Right afforded by use of the Referendum Process.

    If there aren’t others besides Marv who might be in need of a job, it would surprise me. However, my time will come, providing I’m still alive when I, too, will be seeking gainful employment when a City Property Tax will become necessary to maintain a State Highway, also acknowledged as such by the Democrats of the Red Rocks in another of their publicity mailings when inferring that VOC and Cottonwood will benefit from improvements which only the residents within Sedona City Limits will be footing the bill. They neglected to count the thousands of tourists who will also be using the State Route, financially burdening approximately 10,000 people instead of the entire population of the State of Arizona.

  11. Jerry Reynolds says:

    All: I am exercising my right to free speech and expressing my opinions herein: We (Sedona) have been incorporated since 1988. That’s 22+ years.

    Could someone (anyone) please list 22 good things (one per year) that the city council, planning commission and city staff (including city managers) have accomplished in that time which can be considered a benefit to the citizens of Sedona? Just 22. One per year of our incorporated history. Surely there must be some justification for incorporating besides the incomplete sewer system, which cost over 6 times the estimated cost (so far).

    So far, the argument has been that the cost has been borne by the tourists…really? You would think that after 22 years of collecting sales taxes from those “millions of tourists” we’d have more to show for it other than hundreds of time-shares, a huge debt for the cost of the incomplete sewer system, a clogged traffic problem which can only get worse, and a planning commission (and city council) who seem to think that allowing new developments without requiring a place for customers to park is the smart way to go …all to the benefit of the citizens?

    Now, these ‘brilliant’ people want us to own (and pay for) a here-to-for free major highway that is the core of the west Sedona commercial, which serves mostly it’s residents. Be careful, very careful…these characters want to put a median down the middle of 89A (an undisclosed desire) which will probably destroy the commercial efficacy of many of those commercial enterprises (ask those in VOC if their divider has had a negative effect on their businesses).

    Think about it. The owners of the ‘prime’ southwest corner of the major intersection in Sedona’s west side (Coffee Pot and 89A) which used to be occupied by KFC for over 25 years couldn’t find a more suitable tenant than Sedona Pines (a time-share company) which has put a “Tourist Information” banner across the front of the building. How astute of our city staff and Chambeof Commerce. Thanks to the actions of our city government major national tenants don’t want anything to do with the ‘reborn’ Sedona. They can’t trust the demographics (traffic, population and tourist visit counts) given by Sedona’s Chamber of Commerce nor the city hall.

    Sedona has no identity. It is neither a good tourist destination nor a good retirement community. Why? Because the ‘professional’s’ who migrate to Sedona to do our ‘business’ have no real world experience and the folks who hire them don’t want anyone smarter than they are, people who might expose their incompetence. Oh, I forgot…Sedona’s new national identity has been established as a haven for “new age” seekers of truth and the parasites who feed on their insecurity. Keen!

  12. Jerry Reynolds says:

    I am posting here an article which occurred Jan 29, 2010 which gives a more thorough picture of the ineptitude of Sedona’s city management and will appeal to the nit-pickers who need authentication of my opinions as stated hereinabove (a lawyers term) and which Mr. Nash covered in this missive. The bottom line here is the same as mine.

    Thanks to Mr. Terry Nash.

    The Future of Sedona
    Guest Writer / January 29, 2010 / 1 Comment

    By Terry Nash — I recently wrote an article for Carl Jackson at Sedona.biz entitled, Sedona – The Future is Now, in which I gave a detailed financial overview of the current and future financial woes Sedona faces due in large part to gross financial mismanagement by current and past City Councils and City Staff.

    The City of Sedona fought back through its new City Manager Mr. Tim Ernster. In the course of 10 days there were three public relations articles written in response to my article. The first appeared in Sedona.biz.

    The next two articles showed up in the Sedona Red Rock News. In each article, Mr. Ernster was quick to note that my analysis of the City of Sedona’s financial matters was grossly inaccurate and/or purposefully manipulating financial information for some ulterior motive.

    Indeed, on at least two occasions he sent e-mails acting in his City Manager’s role, which both cast aspersions and assigned untoward motives to my writings.
    When I asked Mr. Carl Jackson the founder and publisher of Sedona.biz if I could rebut Mr. Ernster’s assertion both as to my character and my flawed (only in his perspective) analysis I was told I could not.

    When I wrote Mr. Larson, the owner and publisher of the Sedona Red Rock News, asking

    for an opportunity to pen an article refuting Mr. Ernster’s claims against me I received no response .

    And so it goes. . .

    That is the reason I paid Sedona Times for this page and I paid a regal sum. I think what I have to say, you will find interesting and if you pay particular attention, it might save you thousands of dollars a year in new taxes – that is if you get involved!

    Now let me begin.

    Many of us in the community held high hopes for Mr.Ernster upon his arrival in Sedona as the new City Manager. After his rebuttals to my previous article, Sedona – The Future is Now some of that hope has dimmed.

    Noteworthy within his rebuttals were a decided lack of factual data and a recounting of budget history which is inaccurate.

    It is important to note that while he states that “a healthy general fund and wastewater reserve (approximately $33 million) exists” he fails to point out that Sedona ranks 5th in the state for City debt of $65,000,000.

    Sedona’s cash reserves are $3,000 per capita while debt equals nearly $6,000 per capita.

    Also it is important to note that this debt was incurred without the benefit of the City owning its own water company and fire department as is the case in the other cities.

    He conveniently made no mention of the Capital or Street Funds which have no reserves whatsoever and have been relegated to a pay as you go system.

    More importantly, though, there is no mention of balancing the budget nor was there any mention of a ‘no new tax pledge’.

    Instead he mentions raising the sewer fee, which hasn’t been raised for nearly 14 years – that rate is currently $32.54 for a residential user.

    Indeed the City of Sedona has already commissioned and received the Final Draft Report of The Waste Water Rate Study for which it paid $42,640 and which is so seriously flawed in both methodology and conclusions that it should be discarded to a paper shredder immediately.

    I will address the flawed nature of this study at the end of this article.

    Near the end of one the articles he states “The FY 09-10 General Fund operating budget adopted by Council last June was 10.2% less than the FY 08-09 Budget.

    This is correct but he failed to mention that the actual FY 08-09 budget figures came in at $11,979,230 and the adopted FY 09-10 budget was adopted at $11,889,294— a net decrease of a mere $89,936 or ¾ of 1%.

    He also failed to state that the adopted FY 2010 General Fund Budget had ‘BUDGETED RED INK’ of $1,134,209. The Adopted Budget Revenue for the General Fund was $10,755,085 with the Budgeted Red Ink of $1,134,209 ‘balancing the budget’ but paid out of reserves.

    The General Fund actual income will fall into a range well below $9,500,000 perhaps to as low as $9,300,000 from the Budgeted Revenue adopted $10,755,085 or a loss of least $1,455,000.

    This loss was the direct result of a grossly overly stated revenue projection, which was the result of incompetent and misguided City Staff and a rubber-stamp style City Council.

    These revenues comprised 37% of all sales tax, all bed tax collected, shared income tax, sales tax and motor vehicle tax, franchise fees, community development income, municipal court penalties, non-operating interest income from General Fund Reserves, and various in sundry income items.

    The adopted FY 2010 General Fund Budgeted expenses were originally $11.9M and the deficit (Budgeted Red Ink) was $1.1M – Revenue $10.8M vs. $11.9M = ($1.1M).

    With serious revenue declines throughout the first 4 months of FY 2010, Mr. Ernster did respond in November, 2009 with budget cuts totaling $450,000.

    And, he is due to come to Council on January 27, 2010 with additional “substantial budget cuts” and the aforementioned Wastewater Rate Study, wherein he will propose to raise sewer fees and shift some of the sales tax currently deposited in the Wastewater Fund into the General and Capital Funds.

    Since this must go to press before the January 27, 2010 General Council Meeting, I can only speculate about his additional proposed General Fund Budget Cuts.

    For the sake of this article, I will presume that he can ‘find’ $1 million in budget cuts through unpaid furlough days and other means. This $1 million savings coupled with the previous mid-year cuts of $450,000 would yield a total savings of approximately $1.5M.

    Therefore, the adopted FY 2010 Budgeted Expenses would decline from $11.9M to $10.4M. With a projected actual revenue decline to $9.3M this would produce a deficit of $1.1M and would deplete the General Fund Reserve from current level of $9.2M to approximately $8.1M.

    The FY 2010 General Fund Budget projected outcome is not the real problem. The real problem is the FY 2011 General Fund Budget.

    A both prudent and conservative estimate of General Fund Revenues for the period July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011 must out of an ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION be projected to decline by at least another 10%.

    Thus the FY 2011 General Fund Revenue must be reduced to a level of $8,400,000 ($9.3M – 10% or $930,000 = $8,370,000).

    As is easily seen and assuming that Mr. Ernster meets his FY 2010 final expense goal of $10.4M, a deficit of $2M would exist in the FY 2011 period.

    Thus additional General Fund Budget cuts would have to be implemented in spring of 2010 during the new budget process.

    Given the aforementioned concerns I have raised in previous articles, why would the City of Sedona go to such great lengths to write public relation pieces in which they assert they are proactive in this looming budget crisis and cast aspersions as to both my motives and financial competency in City Budget matters?

    I think the answer to that question is simple: It is to divert the attention of our electorate away from the City of Sedona’s dire financial condition by soothing assurances and beneficial certifications before launching their real agenda of proposing new taxes and fees through threats of cutting services.

    What is mildly amusing about threatening to cut back on services is that except for the police and sewer we have no services – and it is important to note that 40% of dwellings are not connected to the sewer.

    In my opinion the Police Department is a fairly well-run organization financially which could not realistically absorb nor should have to suffer any budget cuts.

    So now we come to the Grand Plan – The Panacea -The Great Elixir – for all the years of financial mismanagement -THE WASTEWATER RATE STUDY!

    As an alchemist changes a rock into gold, this rate study will free us from out debts and all of our past financial dalliances.

    Where do I begin with this “Study?”

    City Staff with the blessings of the Council directed CDM Camp Dresser and McKee, Inc., and Mr. Grant Hoag, P.E. to conduct both a rate study (although there is only one table out of 25 Tables that is a Rate Study) and “several utility funding alternatives.”

    Essentially The Wastewater Rate Study is nothing more than a financial blueprint for the Wastewater Fund’s remaining attempt at solvency and potentially the solvency of the General and Capital Funds.

    The Study lays out three possible financial scenarios all intended to divert sales tax revenue from the Wastewater Fund to the General and Capital Funds (Wastewater Fund now receives 46% of all sales tax revenues approximately $5M in 2010).

    It will accomplish this by increasing Sewer Fees 20% a year for several years until they are doubled from $390 a year to $800 a year.

    However, the sewer fee will not begin to increase for two years, a hiatus if you will. But what will begin immediately is a new fee with an amazingly bizarre and convoluted name “CAPACITY STANDBY CHARGE.”

    Let me cut to the chase. Realtors, investors, and tourists who might want to move here will love this — this is a sewer fee which vacant land owners pay now and forever until they build even though they are not connected to the sewer – that is the reason they call it a Standby Charge – you standby with no connected sewer service and watch your $23.50 per month or $282 per year go down a figurative drain.

    Then once you decide to build, the Sewer connect fee will have increased from $5,150 to $7,669 and by then you’ll be paying an actual sewer fee for your ERU (Equivalent Residential Unit), which by then will have escalated to $800 per year.

    According to the other 24 Detailed Tables in this report sometime within 5 and 10 years all or part of the sales tax revenue, which had been flowing into the Wastewater Fund, will flow into all the other depleted Funds and we will be set financially free.

    In my review of these tables as to assumptions about future cash flows and Wastewater Utility Income it became painfully obvious that all of the Sales Tax Revenue Projections were seriously flawed.

    In Table 4, the FY 2010 sales tax was overstated nearly $1,000,000; in the period FY 2011 sales tax declines were 4% when they have been routinely ran at above 10% this year; in the periods FY 2012 and FY 2013 sales tax declines were only -1%.

    The result of all these seriously flawed revenue projections is that an overstatement of revenue well in excess of $5,000,000 occurs over a ten-year period.

    As Mr. Hoag, P.E., the author of this Study, so dutifully and prudently points out, all the data on sales tax, plant operations and maintenance expenses were supplied by City Staff.

    Mr. Hoag also gives the City notice that it still has to implement the Standby Capacity Charge, which is the cornerstone of this Study.

    Of course it must be enacted by law and then collected from undeveloped (land) property owners using a ‘billing and collecting mechanism.”

    A third serious flaw is found contained within Table 8 The Wastewater Capital Improvement Program for the period FY 2010 through FY 2020.

    This Table reflects Capital Improvement Programs only through FY 2014. From the Period FY 2015 – FY 2020 no Capital Improvements are listed, only Projected Replacement Projects which are non-specific as to the project and averaging only $2,000,000 per year, which is far less than previous years.

    In conclusion, this Study, which provides three financial scenarios, projects that with a doubling of fees by FY 2018, the imposition of a new sewer fee (Capacity Standby Charge) on vacant land, a 50% increase in Sewer Connect fees, will be able to achieve on the average a cut in sales tax subsidies to the Waste Water Fund of 50% of the $5 million currently deposited into the Fund.

    Further, it reduces the Wastewater Fund Reserve balances to $6,000,000 at the end of FY 2016, where it is projected to remain through FY 2020.

    However, as stated in the previous paragraph the Wastewater Capital Improvement Program is essentially not projected after FY 2014.

    Therefore, it can be concluded that this Study has relevancy only through FY 2014, if at all, given the serious flaws I have pointed out earlier in this article.

    What are the chances this flawed study will ever be implemented with the New Standby Capacity Charge as its lynchpin?

    I think given the onerous financial impact it will have on property owners throughout the City, that it would be difficult if not impossible for it to be accepted and passed given any form of public outcry.

    The typical residential user would find it be difficult to accept such rate increases given the fact that both Cottonwood and Flagstaff have already existing sewer rates lower than Sedona’s current rate, let alone new increased rates.

    We have now come full circle in this article. The real question all along was: Why is Sedona not better off financially and tittering on the brink of financial collapse?

    There is one simple answer – just old-fashioned Arizona Style Cronyism. It pervades Sedona.

    I recently reviewed the City salary structure – $80,000 to $150,000 plus salaries abound. The Chamber of Commerce, which receives over $600,000 as a direct payment from the City pays out over $530,000 in salaries.

    I recently asked the Sedona Chamber of Commerce to supply me with salary information for its personnel.

    So far it has been unwilling to supply that information in spite of the fact the City of Sedona funds 40% of the Chamber’s annual revenues.

    Over two years ago, when I started this quest to understand the City Budget and delve into the issues of the staggering debt Sedona carries, I had no knowledge that the economy would falter.

    Because of that fact alone we are now at a crossroads in Sedona’s future.

    In the interests of all citizens the City of Sedona must acknowledge fully the financial dilemma we face and work in a truthful and direct way to solve the problems without resorting to greater taxation and financing gimmicks as it has in the past.

    Why can’t we aspire to greater heights and move forward in diversifying our economy? Perhaps we can plan for a convention center, modernize our airport, convert the Wastewater Plant to solar and potable water, and even install a Solar and Wind Turbine farm on its adjoining property.

    If planned correctly we could create a business environment which would thrive.

    Perhaps on the same property as the Solar and Wind Turbine Farm we could interest research firms to establish facilities.

    There are many examples we can learn from – seventy percent of Aspen’s energy consumption is supplied by solar power. Aspen has less debt than Sedona and yet operates all the public utilities and has an abundance of high-tech and alternative energy research facilities.

    Durango, Colorado is a model for a diversified economy blending mid-size businesses while embracing and cherishing Tourism.

    Each of these Cities is known throughout the world for the Festivals they have created.

    Why can’t Sedona do the same?

    These are simply a few ideas to put Sedona back on the road to the future. There are hundreds if not thousands more ideas and I would be willing to bet that each of you as readers of this article could add dozens of your own.

    Well, if you’ve gotten all the way through this article, and if you are perhaps taken aback by my description of what the City of Sedona has become, you’ll do something about it at the ballot box.

    It is imperative that we elect Councilors who have vision and dedication in leading us away from the ways of old and into a 21st Century filled with promise.

    I fear that if business as usual continues in Sedona we can expect an outcome which will surely be a “bitter and inevitable conclusion to the tawdry financial life of Sedona.”

  13. You Bet I Vote in Sedona says:

    http://www.letthepeoplevoteon89a.com and a headquarters is in west sedona! now you know and let’s see if you go!!!!!

    this group of business zealots are giving incomplete information so folks–if you don’t support them, they will not go away without telling them to STOP!!!! because we voted them out of office last spring and they are like pests that can’t be swatted away so if you do support them, then sign the petition and go on the record so everyone else will know it. I am not for giving them any of my business dollars & will go out of my way to discourage others from doing the same. tit for tat folks!!! what’s fair is fair!!!!!!!! I’m getting ready to sell some property and know who won’t be getting the listing and I’m getting ready to do a few household honey-dos so know who won’t be getting the calls. If you support NO LIGHTS then cancel your Chamber of Commerce membership now!!!!! They are working against you & saying safety is the reason. let the season of largesse to line the chamber pockets be over!!!!!!!

  14. Chris S. says:

    stop the Chamber bashing/it spent $220,000 to promote Sedona recently/lots of my friends work at the Chamber who need those jobs in this economy

  15. Matt says:

    THANKS YOU BET CUZ I USED THE LINK THAT YOU GAVE TO GO TO THERE SITE. ONE FOR THEM & ZERO FOR YOU ECO & HIKING JACKBOOTERS

  16. Former Chamber Member says:

    The Chamber is a big problem. They take taxpayer dollars and work against the new city council. They are angling for a bigger percentage of bed tax. The Chamber the Chamber is corrupt and bloated with huge salaries and no success. The City should take the $500k given to the Chamber every year and set up a legit Convention and Visitors Bureau. One that represents all Sedona businesses not just the elite few Tourism members. Taxpayer dollars are being used for only those who are part of the elite chamber. The Chamber will claim “trickle” down economics. I feel the chamber trickling down on non member businesses. Or are they peeing on me using tax dollars to fund it. Funding the Chamber to do work they are not capable of doing is outrageous.

  17. Jerry Reynolds says:

    To All: Not a single comment regarding my request to name one good thing that resulted from the actions of incorporating, the city council, the planning commission or the city manager and his staff?

    To: You Bet I vote in Sedona,
    I can’t figure our which side you have taken up with…can you clarify your statement so it will mean something?

    Chris S. says…”the chamber spent $220,000. to promote Sedona..”
    I say “the remaining $280,000. of the $500,000 given to them by the city of Sedona went to pay the high salaries of your friends.”
    The chamber promotes Sedona as what? A jeep tour paradise? I hear all the arab cabbies in New York City are thinking of moving to Sedona…a more lucrative source of income and a chamber of commerce who will use taxpayers money (not donations and fees from the local merchants) to generate more business for them!

    To Matt: Your comment is incoherent.

    To: Former Chamber Member,
    Your last sentence says it all!!!

    I (am) waiting for someone to come up with “just one good thing….”

  18. Angela LeFevre, DORR President says:

    Dear Sedona Eye and fellow citizens of Sedona:
    I have tried to read all the comments on the ongoing conflict regarding 89A, its future, and who owns it.
    As President of Democrats of the Red Rocks (DORR), I am amazed that our Club is being cited as having any influence on this issue. I just want to set the record straight here. We have many members, including myself, who feel strongly about 89A, about the lights, the issue of safety and the needs of the populace in West Sedona. We encourage our members and base to be active and educated on issues. For that reason, we welcomed the invitation from the City to come and give DORR members a presentation of what is entailed in the route transfer. That happened many weeks ago. The same presentation was shown to the Chamber, the Realtors Association, KSB and others. It was a determined effort by the Council and City staff to enable folks in Sedona to educate themselves on what was involved in the ADOT offer (lights or route transfer). There was no voting at this meeting, but a chance was given for members to educate themselves. Subsequent to this, the DORR Board felt that a poll of our members and base might be of use. To that end, a poll was placed on the DORR website and the findings were present to the City Council. The Poll was not “rigged”, its questions (four of them) were very fair. Basically, it asked whether respondents were in favor of a take back, of lights or whether they needed more information. What was interesting was that most of our members were against continuous lighting, but less (though a majority) were in favor of the transfer. Many requested more information! DORR HAS NOT TAKEN A POSITION EITHER ON THE LIGHTS OR THE ROUTE TRANSFER. This has been left to invidual members to decide for themselves. We have encouraged members to educate themselves and voice their own opinions. This is the basis of a democratic society. Personally, I have pointed out to the Council that polls are very much a reflection on how the questions are asked and whom they are presented to. There were many flaws in the Council’s poll….I think we can all agree with that. Bottom-line, we are a representative democracy. We have many, many issues which confront us on a daily basis. We look to our elected representatives to represent us and make those decisions. Yes, we should be able to voice our opinions and let our representatives know how we feel. They, in turn, should do all they can to educate themselves, listen to the people, and come to an informed opinion. That is how our City Councilors should be conducting themselves. I have seen many councils and many elected officials who do not do this. What happens? They lose in the next elections. Yes! That is our true referendum. If we were to revert to referendums every time we did not like the result, we would end up never doing anything. Sad. Right now, we should be working together, as our Mayor has indicated, and make this work. I personally feel that there are so many advantages in a route transfer. However, this IS a personal opinion. I am concerned about such simple things as safety….sorry, but continuous lighting is not going to do it. But that is a personal opinion. DORR has NEVER expressed an opinion and I am amused at the charge that DORR was responsible for the election of the 4 councilors who voted for the take back. HMMMM. I would really like to know more about that! Mnay of our members supported Mayor Adams, who voted against the route transfer. Cliff Hamilton, a member of the “Famour Four”, was not on the ballot last year. Councilor Dan McIlroy voted against the transfer, and he was on the same slate as Barbara Litrell! This does not make sense. Councilor Mike Ward was very, very clear as to his reasoning and how he made his decisions. Read his reasons – all 53 of them! I doubt if DORR was mentioned! And then there is Councilor DiNuncio, who was not even elected. It is sad that a Club which is a vibrant contributor to the community here should be vilified this way. I would urge everyone who gets involved in this debate first get their facts right and please do not politicize this. This is not a question of Democrats or Republicans. this is a questions of how folks want to see their city develop, how they want to see the 89A corridor develop and who they want to ensure safety for the citizens who live here.

  19. k keller says:

    Thanks Angela, for your clear explanation and good thoughts!

  20. Jerry Reynolds...Opinion says:

    Angela LeFevre, DORR President says: (above)
    “……. It is sad that a Club which is a vibrant contributor to the community…..”

    OK Ms LeFevre, as the President of DORR (“a vibrant contributor to the community”), lets see if you can answer my simple question as stated in my reply above and repeated for you below.

    “Could someone (anyone) please list 22 good things (one per year) that the city council, planning commission and city staff (including city managers) have accomplished in that time which can be considered a benefit to the citizens of Sedona? Just 22. One per year of our incorporated history. Surely there must be some justification for incorporating besides the incomplete sewer system, which cost over 6 times the estimated cost (so far).”

    Lets see how astute you and your group are and if you have been paying any attention to our city actions over the past 22 years….or are you just a bunch of groupies who need to have a reason to gather for a ‘coffee klatch?

    It seems to me that if, as you said above in your message…” We have many members, including myself, who feel strongly about 89A”….”and the needs of the populace in West Sedona.”… your group might have voiced an ‘opinion’ during the city hall purchase, the situation of the intersection of 89A and Rodeo, the cultural park (a failure to recognize its limited attraction), the allowance of the many hundreds of ‘time shares’ built in Sedona, the failure of the city to complete the sewer system for of ALL Sedona, not just the “favored” new developments which shows a complete distain for the residential community…the activists responsible for the ADOT change of redevelopment of Hwy 179 from their recommended 4 lanes to the 2 lane bottleneck, the list goes on and on. Not a peep from the group that considers itself “…. a vibrant contributor to the community…..”. Why? How do you”…want to see your city develop”? (Your words, not mine). What expertise does your political group have regarding the governance and development of a city? I sure hope it is better than our current administration (and for that matter the current occupant of the white house!)

    There was once a time, when we had an opportunity to develop Sedona into a very desirable retirement community, a charming town to visit and explore. There is nothing charming about a line of 6 jeeps carrying sometimes as many as 8 people each down our main roads. We used to have a handful of shops which traded in authentic Indian articles to an appreciative tourist. Now we have a plethora of shops churning ‘junk’ to an unsuspecting public. Is that the image of our town you want?

    Promoting the “Harmonic Convergence …come one, come all”, by the chamber of commerce was the final nail in the coffin. The future of a ‘classy’ Sedona was doomed. Now we have ‘fortune tellers’ and ‘faith healers’ at the gates of the city. Opportunists abound here. This didn’t happen overnight. It took many people with good intentions to look the other way for this to happen, and a city government asleep at the wheel while, perhaps unintentionally, driving the bus of greed and corruption.

    This kind of dialogue should appear in the local newspaper. Maybe an informed community would have kept the city administration in line. Limiting the “letters to the editor” to those the editor approves is their prerogative but it also allows a ‘bias’ by the paper to inject itself into the issues concerning the city. After all, we all know that were it not for the ‘incorporation’ and the ‘central sewer system’ being installed in “uptown” most, if not all of the uptown shops and businesses would have been shut down by ADEQ because they were putting their sewerage into Oak Creek…their on-site systems didn’t work properly. Being built mostly on rock and no percolation soil present to filter the effluent the raw stuff found its way into the creek. Shutting down uptown would probably put the paper out of business…the loss of advertising revenue would have been financially hard to overcome. (Read between the lines…no pun intended).

    So I say to you Ms. LeFevre, if you and your ‘group’ want to truly participate in the proper development future of Sedona, I suggest you look to the past history to see how we came to this and not sit by and watch what history will tell as the killing of the golden goose (and I am not referring to the profits to be made here). Look around. As unique as our location is it can be turned into a ‘junkyard’ if care is not taken. My opinion.

    Phew! I’m done! (for now)

  21. m allen says:

    Jerry,
    Sedona incorporated 22 years ago. Please get over it. Yes the sewer was poorly handled, once again get over it. You don’t like the Red Rock News, don’t buy it.
    Ms. Le Fevre did not directly cause any of the issues you have decided to clump together in another one of your rants. Her point was well made and stuck to one issue. You should take a lesson.

  22. Iolanda says:

    good job getting all the facts to the public

  23. Baker says:

    1300 SIGNERS OF THE ANTI DARK SKIES, ANTI EVERYTHING BUT THE SAME OLD CHAMBER MEMBERS WHO WILL RAT OUT THE RESIDENTS WHILE POCKETING THE $$$$ WE PAY IN TAXES

    WHAT A DISGUSTING GROUP OF MALCONTENTS LED BY AN EVEN MORE DISHONEST CHAMBER OF COMMERCE THAT WANTS LIGHTS & DON’T MAKE US LAUGH OVER YOUR “SAFETY REASONS” BECAUSE THE SAFETY STUDY PROVED THAT IT DOESN’T DO SQUAT FOR SAFETY & THAT WAS ADOTS OWN STUDY,,,,,IT’S NEVER BEEN ABOUT SAFETY YOU FOOLS!!!!! WE VOTED YOU OUT ONCE &WE WON’T HAVE YOU BACK AGAIN

    STOP BEING LED BY THE NOSE BY ANTI SEDONA CADRE & KEEP YOUR $$$$ OUT OF THEIR GREEDY HANDS & HIT THEM WHERE IT HURTS IN THE CASH REGISTERS & NO MORE $$$$$ FOR THE CHAMBER & ORGANIZATIONS THAT SUPPORT THE LIGHTS AND ADOT

    !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!NO MAS NO MAS NO MAS!!!!!!!!!!!!POST YOUR NAMES IF YOU BELIEVE SO MUCH IN WHAT YOU SIGNED!!!!!!!!!!

  24. P. Revere says:

    All of this is a result of:

    1. The totally biased newspaper who refuses to print both sides of any question,
    2. The small nucleus of people who are afraid of losing power and are willing to work against the City’s best interest,
    3. The purposeful spread of misinformation and fear,
    4, The Chamber (whose members are mainly located in uptown or along the SR 179 corridor), Main Street, etc. all groups who receive City subsidies without submitting any hard evidence of measurable goals and any results achieved,
    5. Businesses that fail to recognize that; competition is a necessary component to being successful and that collaboration among businesses makes every business stronger.

  25. Marv says:

    Baker and P. Revere, are you saying that within Sedona City Limits there are 1300 members of the Chamber of Commerce who are validated registered voters, qualified to make up this list of signatures for the Referendum? I don’t think so!

    Get a grip. The signatures at some point in time (probably after they’ve been officially validated by both Yavapai and Coconino Counties) will become public information, so maybe for a small fee you will be able to purchase the names and then dine on crow. As, perhaps, will the new “Fabulous Four” who might be forced to witness just how many of their election supporters are no longer!

    Of course, instead of facing reality, all of you brilliant folks will remain in denial, continue to pursue your scare tactics of ADOT either dumping SR89A on Sedona and/or filing a law suit against the city. Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest, stand by. Your work is cut out for you while, in the meantime, four little people with inflated egos continue to sever and mutilate any hope of unification for once beautiful Sedona.

    Shameful! Hope you sleep well at night for betraying all but a handful of your supporters.

Leave a Reply

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