Home » From The Readers, Letters to the Editor » Vote Yes on 410 to Preserve Sedona Dark Skies

Vote Yes on 410 to Preserve Sedona Dark Skies

Sedona AZ (October 28, 2011) – The following is a letter to the SedonaEye.com editor:

Dear Sedona Eye editor,

Sedona boasts many natural wonders under expansive dark skies, just one of its many gifts,  all bringing visitors and sometimes new residents.  Some tourists specifically visit to enjoy our starlit  skies because they cannot do so at  home where the level of light pollution obliterates the sky.

For  our  tourism-based  economy,  our dark skies provide an exponential revenue stream.  The City pays nothing for a rare product that generates sales tax  revenue.  To remove any revenue stream,  especially  in this  economy,  defies  logic  and  contradicts the notion that the City  is business-friendly  or  even business-savvy.

For  every retail tourist dollar spent,  the City of Sedona is paid three cents, while it collects three percent for every nightly hotel room rental.  Installing CRL and eliminating dark skies in Sedona would be like Niagara removing its famous water  falls.

A local star gazing  business estimates it has hosted around  30,000  tourists  (many  of them repeats)  over  the past six years  of its operation. Our panoramic  view of the sky could easily support more star gazing related  businesses. Star gazing is an exciting  family  activity where we can excite and  fuel our children’s  imaginations  and  potential  interest  in astronomy.

The four Councilors  who voted in favor of the route transfer  considered  many factors, including safety/accident data  provided  by an engineering consulting  firm,  and  by the 89A Safety  Panel that  included  ADOT staff, generous  funding  by ADOT,  applicable  State  law (AZ Revised Statutes re:  Route Transfer/Abandonment Title  28-304; 7201-7215), the ability  of the City to manage  the  road, diverse public testimony, as well as the  income  provided  by dark  skies.

Council  completed  the  due  diligence  process  before  arriving at their  decision, which is what we elected them to do.

Vote Yes for Proposition  410 to support  Council’s decision.


Edward Wisniewski
Sedona, AZ

Vote in the City of Sedona Special election November 8, 2011 by mailing your ballots today!


  1. Leonard says:

    As we learn city council members are suggesting the possibility of new taxes ($5000 per capita or singularly on property owners) that could be levied against residents to help pay for additional drainage improvements, aka special improvement district, or brought to residents city wide, how can people buy into (no pun intended) the baloney that the city can afford to own SR89A? Get a grip, folks. VOTE NO ON 410!!

  2. N. Baer says:

    Really, Leonard? Where exactly did you learn that “city council members are suggesting the possibility of new taxes?” Making such a statement as to incite unfounded and unasked for fear needs to be supported by facts, or else it’s just manipulation.

  3. Bettye says:

    Indeed Leonard, where did You hear this from? Because it wasn’t anyone connected to the City that said it. If I’ve missed something, I would certainly like You to show evidence of Your statement.

    Without evidence I, and Others are going to presume that You are either being Used by the “Vote No” People, or are creating a Fear Tactic Yourself. – Please respond.

  4. Leonard says:

    Response to N. Baer:

    Sedona Red Rock News, Friday 10/21/11, headline article “City No Easy Fix for Flooding”. Paragraph five, including the first two line opening two line paragraph.

    “Tlaquepaque and the Little Elf neighborhood, for instance, were flooded Aug. 1 from heavy rains. Council members also spoke about the possibility of new taxes that could be levied against residents to help pay for additional drainage improvements. That tax could be applied as part of a drainage taxing district or broutht to residents citywide.”

    What better reason to vote NO on Prop. 410. Anymore questions?

  5. City of Sedona November 8 Guidelines says:

    City of Sedona Vote-By-Mail Special Election. The City of Sedona will be holding a Vote-By-Mail Special Election on November 8, 2011.

    There are two ballot propositions. Proposition 410 is a referendum to decide whether or not the voters want the City of Sedona to take portions of State Route 89A and State Route 179 from the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT).

    Proposition 411 is an initiative to decide if future offers from the State of Arizona to transfer any State Route within the Sedona City Limits should be referred to the voters. Publicity pamphlets discussing these propositions have been mailed to the households of all registered voters in the City Limits.

    The Yavapai County Election Department will be conducting the election for the City of Sedona in both the Yavapai and Coconino County sections of the City.

    Yavapai County Voter Registration will send a ballot, by mail, to every registered voter in the City of Sedona beginning the week of October 17, 2011, twenty-two (22) days prior to the Special Election Day.

    Voters may return voted ballots to Yavapai County via the U.S. Mail.

    Voters may also hand deliver ballots to the Sedona City Clerk, 102 Roadrunner Drive, during regular business hours, Monday through Friday, or to the Yavapai County Annex, Recorder’s Office at 10 South 6th Street in Cottonwood throughout the balloting period, or during the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on the day of the election, November 8, 2011. Voters may also place their ballots in the Yavapai County Early Ballot Drop Box in the Sedona City Hall parking lot or the Yavapai County Annex parking lot.

    Yavapai County Voter Registration or the Sedona City Clerk must receive ballots by 7:00 p.m. on the day of the Election, November 8, 2011. Postmarks are not accepted.

    If a voter misplaces his or her ballot, does not receive a ballot, or spoils the ballot in any way, a voter may go to the Sedona City Clerk’s Office or the Yavapai County Annex, Recorder’s Office in Cottonwood to vote a ballot to be verified.

    If a voter knows that he or she will be out of the City during the election period, the voter may call, write, or e-mail the Yavapai County Voter Registration Office to request that his or her mail ballot be sent to a different address.

    The phone number is 928-639-8100 , ext. 3248, address is Yavapai County Voter Registration, 1015 Fair Street, Room 228, Prescott, Arizona 86305, or e-mail web.voter.registration@co.yavapai.az.us.

    A voter in this election must be a qualified elector of the City of Sedona. A qualified elector of the City is defined as a person, eighteen years or older, whose name appears on the Coconino or Yavapai County voter registration rolls for the City of Sedona twenty-nine (29) days prior to the date of the election.

    For more information, call the City Clerk’s office at 928-282-3113 .

  6. Leonard says:

    PS to N. Baer & Bettye: (whose comment didn’t appear prior to my last submission)

    Maybe it’s time for those of us who pre-paid $2000 for sewer connection and still don’t have it to unite and have our money refunded. It states right on the contract that the money is refundable.

    Hmmmm . . . wonder how much money that would amount to and whether or not that’s been included when idiotic reports continue to come from certain council members (Barbara Litrell, for example, in her recent City Talk article) about how financially sound Sedona is.

    Why then at the October 19th meeting, yes a public meeting, did the suggestion for special taxing districts come up and even to be a consideration as a blanket assessment to all Sedona residents.

    If that happens for sure I’ll need my $2000 back as a down payment for what apparently is in store. And Sedona can afford to own a State Highway? Ha.

    More reasons to VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 410!!!!!

  7. Sheri Graham says:

    This is in response to both Bettye and Nancy Baer,

    You ask where the amount of $5,000.00 per person comes from, as though it is a made up figure or lie.

    My suggestion to both of you (and anyone who actually is interested in facts vs just believing what these two have said) is go the the city web site and watch the last segment of the 10/19/11 council work session video on drainage.

    Go to where Barbara Litrell starts speaking and just turn the volume up – and I do hope you are sitting down.

    She, Barbara, uses the big $5,000.00 figure…correct me if I’ve missed something – yet I seem to remember she is connected to the City.

    Leonard is 100% correct and has not “manipulated” or “misstated” anything. Check it out yourself and then maybe, just maybe, there should be an apology to Leonard?

    You can try to dumb down Barbara’s comments but you can’t erase them.

    That is the exact location of hearing and watching “a person connected to the city” use that exact same figure $5,000.00.

  8. Leonard says:

    Thank you, Sheri Graham, for producing facts although such an endeavor might serve only to confuse those who refuse to face reality.

    As for an apology to me, as the saying goes I would suspect hell to freeze over before that happened. However, I appreciate the suggestion.


  9. Don Gay says:

    To those who are concerned about cost of ownership of 89A, I would encourage you to watch the video by Cliff Hamilton explaining this issue in detail at http://www.sedona.biz.

  10. Leonard says:

    Hey, Don, I have news for you. That video is as stale as last week’s chopped liver. Sorry. The real world is what’s happening at city council meetings, not spin chit-chat from three council members who blatantly represent their own personal agendas instead of the will of the people, which is why they were allegedly elected. So pathetic.


  11. Sheri Graham says:

    In Reply to Don Gray;

    Don, I would encourage you to accept that Vice Mayor Cliff Hamilton is speaking and acting on his own.

    Fact: he does not have a council vote to substantiate his words. His rosy financial picture has actually NOT been approved by current council.

    Fact: what he suggests is only his cherry pie concept…with no whipped cream = pie in the sky….or is this just the pits of one man’s wanting to deceive all of us in believing that he can somehow predict what all current and future council members will decide regarding how to use the funding coming up when the 2015 sewer bonds start to retire?

    What he forgets is the dire situation our treatment plant is in and the current moratorium on new hook ups…and the huge costs to correct.

    Overbearing, unconfirmed, officious, misstatements and actions do not win…believe it or not – we see through those tactics.

    Since there has been no City approval of how to fund 89A – what is Cliff huffing and puffing about? Seems to be his personal opinion, as he has defined it.

    I have watched his video and am just amused at the innocence shown – well intended – yet without Council substantiation.

    One man’s pie with no whipped cream does not create an approved plan.

  12. Sara & Robert says:

    Having just returned from six weeks of travelling in our motor home, we are wondering why we came back to Sedona.

    Catching up on the printed nonsense related to Sedona owning SR89A is something we didn’t expect.

    The most shocking of all, however, is seeing three members of the Sedona City Council flaunt their faces in a full page newspaper ad as advocates for the ownership of this State Route.

    The arrogance of power and elevated self-imposed importance portrayed by these three elected representatives is beyond belief. Their disclaimer at the bottom of the page relating to the excessive blah, blah, blah as being their “personal opinions” does little to diminish their true message as displayed by their apparent wealth since we believe an ad of this magnitude costs a cool two grand . . . yep, that’s $2,000!

    Isn’t it the unwritten word that conveys the strongest message . . . that being, as we interpret it, these wealthy people are well prepared to sustain the increased taxes which will surely be part of the package deal should the majority accept ownership of SR89A.

    If these people are so convinced our lives will be more blessed by owning this major highway, why can’t they “sell their wares” by declaring “Sure, it will cost us a lot of money but it will be worth it.”

    Honesty is obviously not the best policy of these three elected members of the Sedona City Council. What a shame but not necessarily a surprise.

  13. Casey says:

    I am sick of the yellow T-shirts and the over the top ” shove our view point down all Sedona Citizens throats” .
    We are able to decide for our selves , we read , we research we attend council meetings, all your antics will do nothing but push voters in the other direction, IT’S GETTING OLD , GET OFF THE STREET AND GET OFF THE SIDEWALKS you are disrupting the traffic flow and your YELLOW T SHIRTS are irritating. P.S THAT GOES FOR THE MORON PROTESTERS ADDITIONALLY!! GET A JOB AND GET A LIFE! YOUR PROTESTING IS NOTHING BUT A BUNCH OF UNINFORMED CLOSED MINDED PEOPLE TRYING TO STIR UP TROUBLE AND DISRUPT THE PEACE OF OUR STREETS. YOU MAKE SEDONA LOOK BAD, REALLY BAD!

  14. Eddie Maddock says:

    Casey, in my opinion you just knocked the election ball right out of Sedona City Limits with your home-run statement: “I am sick of the yellow T-shirts and the over the top ‘shove our view point down all Sedona Citizens throats’.”

    I’ve never read so much mumbo-jumbo and convoluted statements whereby in the next sentence the same writer(s) take a completely different stance.

    Example #1: A post under a different article claims ADOT still has $15+ mil. on the table; then shortly thereafter the writer of that statement denies having said (written) it? Holy smokes.

    Example #2: Then we listen to “Sedona can afford to own this State Highway” followed by the suggestion for forming tax funded “improvement districts” to remedy ongoing flooding conditions which have to date been ignored because it’s become more important to focus on owning a State Highway which “they” claim Sedona will be able to afford! Whew.

    My second vote for a homer goes to the writer who suggested a Harmonic Convergence at Bell Rock whereby all of these obviously well meaning but never-the-less self-centered, narrow minded birds of a feather have the opportunity to flock together and blast off to a better(?) place.

    Amen & Hallelujah

    Eddie Maddock

  15. Concerned says:

    Casey, You sound a lot like Mike.

Leave a Reply

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