Home » From The Readers, Letters to the Editor » Jerry Reynolds Responds to DORR President

Jerry Reynolds Responds to DORR President

(SedonaEye.com editor: Below is Mr. Reynolds Letter to the Editor response to DORR President Angela LeFevre’s March 22 2011 comments. Mr. Reynolds comments follow Ms. LeFevre’s.)
 
From Jerry Reynolds, Sedona:   https://sedonaeye.com/first-legal-battle-for-stop-sedona-take-back-of-89a
 
Angela LeFevre, DORR President says:
March 22, 2011 at 8:02 pm

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(ed) 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 individual 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! Many of our members supported Mayor Adams, who voted against the route transfer. Cliff Hamilton, a member of the “Famous 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.

My response……..Jerry Reynolds, Sedona AZ: Angela LeFevre, DORR President said:

“……. 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 the 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 local administration (and for that matter the currant occupant of the white house)!
 
There was once a time, when we had an opportunity to develop Sedona into a very desirable retirement community and 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. They had no solution other than a central sewer system. 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.
 
Phew! I’m done! (for now)
 
Jerry Reynolds, Sedona

Mark your calendars to vote in the City of Sedona Special election November 8, 2011

 

Leave a Reply

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