Waking to the Nightmare
Sedona, AZ (November 11, 2011) – The effects from the defeat of Proposition 410 are already being felt. At the November 9 city council meeting requests were made by several councilors for City Manager Tim Ernster to request Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) for a stop light at the Sedona Medical Center intersection, lowered light pole height, and crosswalks and other safety measures. The answer came back loud and clear: ADOT owns the highway and they will do as they planned. Nothing will be added or modified. Traffic warrants do not suggest a light at the medical Center intersection. Pole heights have been decided already. No additional safety measures will be implemented. If ADOT considers any other safety design measures that are not included in the scope of work on 89a, the city will be responsible for any additional costs. ADOT has its marching orders: install the stop light at Andante Drive and 89a, resurface the highway, and install 108 35′ tall continuous roadway lights. Period.
With the votes in and unofficially counted, the community voted roughly 70% to reject ADOT’s offer for the city to accept ownership and control of State Route 89a in West Sedona and also to reject their $15 million offer for future highway maintenance. ADOT has patiently waited in the wings for the community to decide the fate of the highway. While they waited, plans were drawn and contracts written for the installation of 108 35′ tall continuous roadway lights (CRL). It is expected that the contract for the stoplight at 89a and Andante Drive, overlay paving, and CRL will be awarded at the next State transportation meeting on November 18, in Florence, Arizona. Work is slated to begin on the project around the first of the year.
The decision on whether or not to install CRL has long been a contentious issue for Sedona. The issue has been kicked back and forth like a soccer ball, depending on who was seated on city council, with the community observing from the stands, cheering when a goal was made or missed. Elections were won and lost by the position candidates took on the issue. Two years ago 4 members of the present council were overwhelmingly elected on a no-lights platform. The community did not want the lights. ADOT threw a monkey wrench into the gears when it added the highway ownership issue into the mix.
Here’s what Sedona will get:
No daytime safety measures
No cross walks
No pedestrian lighting
No light at the medical center intersection
No undergrounded utilities
No citizen input on highway improvements
No control on highway decisions such as signage along the roadway
No inviting shopping atmosphere
No working partnership with ADOT
No pedestrian walkability considerations
No traffic calming measures
108 35′ tall lights
Continued sharing of highway maintenance costs
Electricity bills for the lights
Loss of dark skies
A roadway designed to move automobiles as efficiently as possible
Ownership of the highway after the lights are installed with no maintenance funding
With the town consistently voting to reject the lights over the years, how is it that the voters embraced ADOT’s proposal to install the lights? There is evidence that several factors might have been beneath the swing in voter attitudes:
1. Fear, one of humankind’s biggest motivator, was injected from the very beginning. Voters were told it would cause a property tax. Maybe a food tax, maybe higher sales tax, maybe other city projects would be set aside. No facts were presented, only hypothetical circumstances and fear of the unknown. Even when a plan for financing the highway was presented, the fear tactics continued.
2. Editorial content was presented as fact on the front page. No rebuttal was allowed.
3. The mayor went public with his opinion saying ownership was not in our best interests. A clear election ethics violation.
4. Sedona experienced some flooding, which the no on 410 people blamed on city officials.
5. Accusations that an artist rendering showing how the lights will look if installed was trumpeted as a lie in full page ads. Artwork was stolen and modified to support the no on 410 position.
The election is over. Soon the vote will be certified as official. Voters are about to wake up to the reality of what just happened. Sedona, you’ve been scammed. The bulldozers waiting in the wings will be fired up and the work will begin. Highway 89a will be torn up for 1 to 2 years.
As Mayor Rob Adams so eloquently said November 9: “We’re all on the same page, until we find something else to fight about.” Stay tuned, there’s another train wreck just around the next bend.
This is an advertisement
9 Comments
This is a real tragedy for our city. That people would want to eradicate that which brings tourists to enjoy our clean air and dark skies indicates complete disregard for our natural environment as well as those who come here and need to cross 89A safely. Their votes essentially eliminate more tourism, Prior to this vote, half of the city’s sales tax revenue came from the businesses located along the West 89A corridor. Sedonans who did not educate themselves adequately ultimately may cause the city to implement a property tax (which we do not have and never had) in order to meet the city’s operating costs. How ridiculous is that?
This is a real tragedy for our city. That people would want to eradicate that which brings tourists to enjoy our clean air and dark skies indicates complete disregard for our natural environment, as well as those who come here and need to cross 89A safely. Their votes negative votes on Proposition 410 essentially eliminates more tourism, Prior to this vote, half of the city’s sales tax revenue came from the businesses located along the West 89A corridor. Sedonans who did not educate themselves adequately ultimately may cause the city to implement a property tax (which we do not have and never had) in order to meet the city’s operating costs. How ridiculous is that?
The article above states very clearly the results we can expect by turning down ownership of our Main Street. Please, citizens of Sedona don’t complain when the road right-of-ways are torn up in the months to come, and not a single safety crosswalk or pedestrian bench is installed, and our small town charm turns to urban USA look and feel along with 14% diminshment of our night skies.
This No vote to owning our Main Street portrays a deep distrust of our City government. I wonder how many people actually went to the in depth presentations by the City Manager when he gave a financial analysis after months of research along with successful examples of how local ownership has benefited other cities. Clearly it was stated at the meetings, there would be no round-abouts installed and nor were continuous medians were planned. That in fact, citizens of Sedona would have input in the redesign of 89A.
We turned down millions of dollars that would have funded our road for the next 15 years and allowed us to install site appropriate safety features and have use of the 33′ on either side of 89A to benefit our citizens and businesses.
Perhaps with such distrust of City government, we should consider disbanding the City and reverting to County management of Sedona. We could sell the sewer system and school buildings to private enterprise to run; lease out our City offices to businesses. We would save a lot of overhead that way. It would be a lot easier with County management to raise the zoning densities and types so we could increase development in West Sedona.
The only part of Sedona that requires planning, a Sedona look and feel and pedestrian safety is Uptown and the Gallery District. That has already been taken care of. So what do we need a new 10 year plan for? Do we even need to be a City?
This is the time for neighbors who were on opposite sides of this important issue to bury the hatchet. I was at our City Council meeting on Wednesday November 9, the day after the balllots on 401 and 411 were counted, and I felt that all our council members have accepted the will of the majority with grace and are anxious to work with ADOT, as the economy improves, to add 89A daytiime safety improvements.
All members of our community should adapt accordingly. To come together as a community the leaders or supporters of the winning side should not crow about the decision made by the voters and the leaders and supporters of the losing side should not complain about the majority decison of our community.
It is in the best interest of everyone in Sedona to make 89A safer day and night. The message received from our Council members on November 9th was that they all motivated to do just that. Let’s support their approach and adopt their demeaner.
Paul Chevalier
I suppose the reason I find the final vote so disappointing, is that a very large percentage of the residents chose to ignore the Facts that were presented, to believe in the fear and contrived misinformation. This was very obvious at last Wednesday’s City Council meeting, when during the discussion on ADOT lights, Councilor McIlroy suggested that We could ask for shorter poles, lower wattage bulbs and crosswalks. He hadn’t been listening, and the answer was No, ADOT is finished with us. Then during the same meeting, at break, I suppose that Bobbie Surber thought the camera and sound was off when She spoke to Councilor Rayner, and asked Him if we could ask ADOT for shorter light poles and lower wattage bulbs. The answer is No, we voted, that’s it.
Now even here under the ‘comments’, Paul Chevalier is saying that ‘our council members are anxious to work with ADOT to add daytime safety improvements’. Perhaps McIlroy, Ninunzio and Adams feel that way, but to the four of them I say, You should have been listening, the answer is No, we voted, that’s it.
So here it is, we get 108 additional lights on 35 foot high poles, no daytime safety, and an additional bill at the end of the month for the added electricity. I can’t calculate at this time what the added cost of maintenance and electricity will be, but at the end of the year you can bet it will take a large chunk out of our budget. Yes, money that could have been used for other things like promoting tourism, arts, infrastructure, etc..
When you look at the big picture, what we’ve given up, and what we’re going to get, you have to say, What a Shame. And, I personally, don’t want to hear your complaints later.
Hi Bettye – I did not speak to Councilor Rayner, only McElroy and that was to share all 64 lights were dark sky compliant and that the light fixture the city of Sedona selected for Hwy 89A was IDA’s second choice out of the 64 dark sky compliant lights offered by ADOT.
International Dark Sky Association literally wrote the book on the protection of dark skies and we cannot trump their expertise on this topic. I also stated we cannot strive to become an International Dark Sky City while stating IDA research is not valid.
Bettye – to state this as plainly as possible, I am not arguing the point of lights vs. no lights, everyone is entitled to their opinion on this topic and it is my goal to respect each persons viewpoint. What is a fact is the lights selected by the city of Sedona and approved by IDA are dark sky compliant lighting and will protect our starry skies.
Respectfully,
Bobbie Surber
Excuse Me Bobbie, but I saw and heard You, when You went up to the Council bench at intermission, and spoke to Councilman Rayner. The camera and sound were still on. Did You forget?
‘what a shame’- absolutely. And shame on those who a) lied to the people for fear to “win” – personal issues over the benefits to our city and b) didn’t take personal responsibility of voting seriously, learn the facts, and learn from past mistakes. The path is set – Sedona will NEVER be the same, and there is no turning back.
Residents have not heard the last word on “raising property taxes” (which we do not pay to the City, but to the county) and/or “sales taxes.” If Sedona citizens will respond to the City’s Department of Parks and Recreation’s survey, you’ll see those recommendations given as ways for the city to raise funds to initiate any of the recreational “services” we suggest..
The survey first asks questions regarding what kinds of improvements or expansion of services you want, including a question of whether the resident wants more outdoor entertainment, or an indoor community center. Then it asks the responder how the City should pay for the improvements suggested. Some of ways it “suggests” are initiating property tax and an increase of sales tax to pay for anything anyone notes as desirable. If my memory serves me correctly, the issue of the community center was roundly defeated something like nine years ago.
Also included is a question concerning a park by the creek and a creek walk.that had already been determined to be unsafe for development by the council headed by “Pud.” Furthermore, this was another strategy proposed in lieu of Sedona paying back the $586,600 to AZ Department of Parks after failing to secure the grant the city received for the Cultural Park.