Home » City Council, Community » The Lion Roars Again or Whatever Sedona

The Lion Roars Again or Whatever Sedona

SedonaEye.com Columnist Eddie S. Maddock

Sedona AZ (June 20, 2012) – by Eddie S. Maddock, SedonaEye.com columnist.

As Sedona embarks on a two to four year voyage with a newly seated City Council (depending on term lengths), campaign “wish lists” have already surfaced in at least one arena.

During their recent election campaigns, individually, Mayor Rob Adams and long time Sedona real estate developer and former city council candidate John D. Miller both expressed a desire for the City of Sedona to purchase the northernmost available acreage in Uptown Sedona for public usage.

Because a portion of the property under consideration is creek side, it has now been linked with the possibility of establishing a city park and resurrecting the long researched idea for a path along Oak Creek.

At a City Council Meeting on May 22, 2012 (for direct web cast select Item 12 on the following site – http://sedonaaz.swagit.com/play/05222012-706) John D. Miller offered on behalf of his clients, Garden Incorporated, to purchase the 9+ acres on Soldier Pass Road owned by the City of Sedona for the purpose of creating a high end sculpture and meditation area.

Although this “gift” to Sedona will be a public park, an entrance fee will be charged to offset cost of maintenance.

The Garden Incorporated proposal would include a 10 year deed restriction for the conditional use as a public park after which time the heirs of the principals of Garden Incorporated would have the option to revert the property to its original zoned usage for housing or, quite possibly, be rezoned for other purposes after the 10 year duration.

The sale of City owned property – valued for $500,000 or more – necessitates voter approval and would further allow the option for open bidding.

Based on that, the dialog at this City Council meeting was pretty much focused on how the ballot issue would read. Would it, for example, include the 10 year deed restriction, etc?

Garden Incorporated is willing to pay for half the cost of putting it on the ballot or around $10,000 on an estimated total of $20,000.

Of course, the option of selling the 9+ acres for less than $500,000 would nullify the need for voter approval and dismiss the technicality allowing others to bid on the land which, at the present time (indicated at the meeting), had not actually been considered for sale.

Although with the exception of the few businesses just past Judi’s Restaurant, the property along Soldier Pass is zoned residential and the scenic quality ranks among Sedona’s finest. Future potential for rezoning to commercial or high density development beyond the 10 year deed restriction was not discussed at this time.

Miller consistently made mention that the city could take the proceeds from the sale of this land and purchase another park since the sale would (in simple speak) just mean a check for the city. Miller stressed that “time is of the essence” and encouraged a push to have this ballot measure included in the upcoming November election.

This agenda item, surprisingly, made the cut at a meeting anticipated to last for at least five hours and, it being the first city council meeting with its newly sworn members seated, apparently is considered high priority in the realm of protecting the health, safety, and welfare of our community. The conclusion of the presentation resulted in agreeing for further discussion at a (then undisclosed) time and place.

Acknowledging that residents have expressed interest in a creek walk, through input on the Sedona Community Plan and other public meetings, and after years of studying the project, it has never moved forward and with good reasons.

Many, many issues relating to intrusion on private property and, in addition to accommodating a local “wish list,” uncontrolled foot traffic from Sedona’s thousands of tourists would obviously factor in contributing to litter and pollution of Oak Creek, a protected waterway.

As recently as within the last four year city council term, then Vice Mayor Cliff Hamilton wisely emphasized the fact that a creek walk would be located within a designated flood plain. His convincing and thorough research relating to unknown costs of future maintenance and liability as being dangerously unpredictable, over and above initial expense to create such a project, were soundly realistic. Based on that, the issue was put to – what some were hoping – was a last tribute to a really unfeasible idea.

Not so, because here it is again, back on the drawing board.

The appropriation of 1.6 million dollars has been included in the 10-year improvement plan for a land purchase along Oak Creek – even though presumed “safe” areas are subject to potential flooding. Flood waters have the ability to change the course of a waterway – which is exactly what occurred when the island by the New Age Center was created.

At the city council meeting on June 13th, Item 9C Paragraph A-2, “Recreation Component at Wastewater Treatment Plant,” Councilman Dan McIlroy, in addition to questioning money set aside for that and what it meant, also wanted an explanation of the money earmarked for” Creek Access Park/Walk.”

Clarification from Sedona Assistant City Manager Karen Daines verified the 1.6 million dollars was specific and 100% for land acquisition only.

For those interested enough to learn the answer about the “Recreation Component at WT Plant” it’s suggested you refer to the pertinent dialog (by fast-forwarding approximately 15 minutes into Item 9C – June 13th meeting) on the web link provided herein, and then draw your own conclusions.

During that same June 13th meeting, Item 9F/Future Meetings was opened with a comment from Councilman Mike Ward. He questioned the purpose of a “pre-study” council meeting slated for June 26th and specifically wanted to know if it would appear on TV/web cast – which was his recommendation. His concern specifically related to “transparency to public” of what occurred in City council meetings.

Mayor Rob Adams and council members Jessica Williamson and Mark Dinunzio expressed preferences for holding this proposed meeting in the Vultee Conference Room, whereby only an audio recording would be made available relating to what transpired during this trial test for having a pre-council meeting for the alleged purpose of spending less time at lengthy regular city council meetings.

(For clarification City Attorney Mike Goimaric termed the pre-meeting as a “Special City Council Meeting” with a sort of “workshop” type tag since it was clearly a test of some sort, even if in name only, to shorten meetings.)

To benefit your clarification of this somewhat muddled situation and, in addition to Item 12 on the May 22 meeting, check out Items 9C and 9F on the following web site.

http://sedonaaz.swagit.com/play/06132012-669

And then maybe ask yourself the following questions:

1. Will the city use the current decline in real estate property values as a questionable reason to discount the 9+ prime scenic acres on Soldier Pass Road by selling it for less than $500,000 in order to avoid a public vote?

2. Would that compensate for purchasing equally lower valued property in a known flood plain?

3. Has a “Recreation Component at the Wastewater Treatment Plant” actually been officially approved?

4. If the sale of the property of the city owned property becomes a ballot measure, then why not include a vote on approval of a creek walk and related expenses?

5. Will two shorter meetings, say 2-1/2 hrs each, still not add up to a 5 hr. meeting if the purpose of meeting #1 is simply to refine the agenda of meeting #2?

6. Would you find listening to an audio transcript nearly as amusing as watching the videos?

Seriously . . . have fun, check this out, and pray. Then let the lion roar.

For the best Sedona Arizona News and Views? Subscribe to www.SedonaEye.com today.

 

 

 

17 Comments

  1. Alyce G says:

    Who would control the choice of sculpture(s)?

    This brings to mind that bizarre item that appeared on 89A near the Catholic Church & the fiasco that resulted between the idea/site & Yavapai County (or was it City of Cottonwood?) And an “entrance fee” to off set upkeep?

    Why charge a fee to look at sculptures & to mediate? Are you sure it would a very low fee? I have lived here for almost 22 years & I have lost count of the ideas regarding development and a creekside trail/walk. None have become reality.

  2. Marv R. says:

    reading this in disbelief. who would be getting a gift besides miller and his Garden Inc outfit which I find nothing about on google? will the city be “gifted” with millers commission check for the sale of all this property. wow. a trip and and half or more.

  3. …when we return from whence we came…

  4. Warren says:

    Whenever I read anything about the Moronic Convergence (AKA Sedona City Council) I am reminded of Ringo Starr’s Law of Politics: Anything government touches turns to sh*t.

  5. Sedona Voter says:

    Wow. When did the City talk about selling any land and why? Or, was that some individual maybe who we elected to council. How slick is Miller? And some of our councilors, I might add. Repeating the script and imprinting the idea in the publics’ collective unconscious! LOL. Garden Incorporated haven’t even bought the sculptures yet!!! Scare and blackmail the voters with the choice of some kind of apartment project on the corner of Casa Contenta or put in a sculpture garden. Then, start that cliffwalk project that has been repeatedly (at least that is how I remember it) rejected due to the risk posed due to flash flooding!

  6. J B says:

    Whenever I hear a certain real estate guy mentioned, I cringe. See also the selling of the Cultural Park, the tenants at the New Frontiers building, and who bombed the creek to make it flow more towards his own home.
    Eeuuuwww! Something smells!

  7. Thank you, Eddie for your great coverage and insight. So now we’re having pre-city council meetings which will not be televised in real time, still dealing with creek walk, and negotiating to sell city parkland property for less just to keep it from bidding and a public vote. back to the same old bad ways with only 3 honest councilors. It is shameful. Keep up the good work keeping us informed!

  8. At the time I wrote this article I wasn’t aware it would be on the Agendas for the following City Council Meetings on June 26, 2012:

    SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING (pre-discussion), 3:00 PM Tuesday 6/26/12

    Item 4: From The Regular Business Section of the 4:30 PM Agenda

    a. AB 1411 concerning a Letter of Intent to purchase 9.15 acres of City owned land at 555 Soldiers Pass Road, further identified as Assessor’s Parcel No. 408-25-339A. This property is part of the Posse Grounds Park.

    REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA, 4:30 PM Tuesday 6/26/12

    Item 9: Regular Business

    a. AB-1411. Discussion/possible direction/possible action on Letter of Intent to purchase the City owned property as described at the Special (pre-discussion) Meeting held at 3:00 PM prior to this Regular City Council Meeting.

    NOTE: This meeting will be available for live viewing, Tuesday, 6/26/12 @ 4:30 PM, SuddenLInk Cable, Channel 4.

  9. N. Baer says:

    Yes, thank you Eddie for keeping up with city shenanigans; the potential exploitation of Sedona real estate values (realtors take heed!!! Less money for you unless you stop this now!!!) and the sabotage of the Sedona Community Plan before the ink hits the paper.

    I’d add to Marlene’s observation that while the two pre-meetings will not be televised, neither will any public comment be allowed.

    Hopefully, wiser people will prevail and not exploit Sedona’s valuable land just to satisfy some egotistical fantasy.

  10. ah…perception!…

  11. Ted says:

    I smell a recall if this stays on the council agenda. Pay attention Mayor and councilors. Losing ones perspective so early in the game is like leaving the Sedona cake out in the monsoon… No need to be playing with the inauthentic big boys asking you to toss priceless real estate up for grabs when the voters are waiting with baited breath to fire you.

  12. Eddie,

    links for agenda items, 6/26 & 6/27 (I am afraid to look at 6/27): at http://www.sedonaaz.gov

    Home » Meetings » City Council » June 26, 2012
    Adobe PDF Document 6-26-12 Agenda – Special Meeting #1
    Adobe PDF Document 6-26-12 Agenda – Special Meeting #2
    Adobe PDF Document 6-26-12 Complete Council Packet – Special Meeting #2
    Adobe PDF Document 6-26-12 Agenda – Regular Meeting
    Adobe PDF Document 6-26-12 Complete Council Packet – Regular Meeting

    Home » Meetings » City Council » June 27, 2012
    Adobe PDF Document 6-27-12 Agenda – Special Meeting with Sustainability Commission
    Adobe PDF Document 6-27-12 Complete Council Packet – Special Meeting with Sustainability Commission

  13. Eddie S. Maddock says:

    Click on Item 9A to view the portion of the June 26th City Council meeting concerning the discussion/possible direction/possible action on disposing of the 9.15 acres of City owned land on Soldiers Pass Road.

    http://sedonaaz.swagit.com/play/06262012-635

    Briefly, City Manager Tim Ernster made the following six suggestions and/or recommendations:

    1. Recommended that the City Council should delay disposing of any City property until after the Park’s Master Plan is completed and consider doing any decision on disposition of any property until the Community Plan update is completed which would be in the spring of 2013.

    2. Before any decision is made to dispose of the parcel it should be reviewed by the Parks & Recreation and Budget Oversight Commissions. The reason for that recommendation is that the property is adjacent to Posse Grounds Park and Parks & Recreation Commission should have the opportunity to consider if they would like to incorporate this parcel into the park for some possible recreational use. The Budget Oversight Commission should review the financial need and fiscal implications of disposing of the City property at this time.

    3. If the City does decide to dispose of this property there shouldn’t be any restrictions placed on the property that would artificially reduce the value of the property.

    4. If the City should decide to move forward with this the City should be responsible for the full election costs associated with the election to give the voters an opportunity to vote on this.

    5. Adjacent property owners should be notified of any future public meetings where this is discussed so if Council does decide to go through some sort of review process and asks Parks & Recreation and Budget Oversight Commissions to review the process, adjacent neighborhoods should be notified so they could attend and participate in the discussions.

    6. Would the present applicant be interested in a low rate, long term (5-10 years) lease to operate the property as a sculpture park? The City would still retain ownership and possibly in 5 or 10 years or so, when the real estate market has recovered and the property is possibly worth considerably more than it is today, then consideration could be made to dispose of the property through auction.

    ACTION TAKEN:

    1. City Council did not expedite action to accommodate the current application known as “Letter of Intent” to purchase the 9.15 acres on Soldiers Pass Road.

    2. By a vote of 5-1 (Mike Ward being the dissenting vote and Barbara Litrell was absent from this meeting) it was approved to refer the matter of the 9.15 acres owned by the City, located at 555 Soldiers Pass Road, to the Parks & Recreation Commission after the completion (sometime in August) of the Parks Master Plan for recommendations regarding possible sale for park uses of said land.

    Therefore, it’s likely that the disposition of the property will be on the ballot for voter approval at the March 2013 election.

  14. Marv says:

    what? they’re going to sell city property already belonging to posse ground “park” to a private party to be a park? so they can buy cheap swamp land by the creek? what did that guy above say? let me check. yea, “moronic convergence” just confirmed.

  15. jerry says:

    Ward and Maddock offer points worth discussing. What about these three for now…

    Ward – selling this property was never a consideration until the Miller offer at the council meeting. What – Come again???? Ask what the public heard and what its saying now? Maddock – council refers to pre-meeting/pre-discussion while city attorney labels it SPECIAL council meeting. Come again – how SPECIAL IS IT Mr. Mayor and Council ????

    Trying to follow “the meetings” and meeting referencing – No transparency. Confusion YES. Sedona City Council WAS better than this! Election coming up soon! jerry

  16. Marty says:

    From what I read here this proposed disposition of very valuable city owned land has been discussed at council meetings for the past couple of months.

    I’ve gone through the local paper (Red Rock News) including the most recent ones this week and see nothing about this very important and potentially pending disaster in Sedona. Why is that?

  17. Sandra says:

    What will happen to the economy in Sedona when all the uptown shoppers spend their days down by the creek after it’s made accessible? The positive side, however, might be that there won’t be any more jaywalkers!

Leave a Reply

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