Referendum petition had nothing to do with Democracy
by Cheryl Fleet
Sedona, AZ (May 15, 2011) – I was astounded at Tuesday evening’s council meeting when Councilor Dinunzio stated that, “As I understand, the initiative for the referendum was not to let the people vote; it was predominantly, if not entirely, to stop the turn back.” He followed his comments by voting (the only “nay” vote) against Councilors going up to Flagstaff to speak to the ADOT Board on behalf of the citizens of Sedona to urge ADOT to keep their offer on the table until after a citizen election on the issue. (Be sure to view and comment on the reader comments)
Otherwise the election would have no meaning since ADOT will have backed out of the deal and begun to install 108 35′ tall street lights on 89A. Since Councilor Dinunzio signed the referendum petition and his wife was a circulator of petitions, it seems very deceptive that people were told the petition was to “Let the People Vote” and he now says that’s not really the case. I was told by a petition circulator (who incidentally, lived in VOC) that this would be “democracy” in action and “All we ask for is the chance to vote.” Sounds more like “deception” in action. I wonder how many other petition signers thought the idea was really to have a vote. We’ll know the organizers’ intentions for sure if Sheri Graham and Terrie Frankel, who also attended the May 10 council meeting and who have led the referendum action, do or don’t join councilors at the ADOT Board meeting on May 20 in Flagstaff to speak as one voice for Sedona citizens urging ADOT to extend their deadline for the contract until after the election.
This is an advertisement
12 Comments
I signed the Referendum for only one reason and that was to let the will of the majority of the voters decide this important community issue. The purpose of a referendum is to let the majority of voters vote yes or no on an issue, not just no. If ADOT decides to begin digging up the roadway for streetlighting before the referendum is held then the people who favor having streetlights will find serious resistance from those who don’t. This referendum, on the other hand, would decide the issue by direct democracy and the residents of Sedona will accept that decison, even if some of them beieve it was the wrong decision. However, if the voters are denied this right to vote I expect that civil disobedience will follow. The only way to put this matter to rest is to have this referendum voted on before any roadwork begins for streetlighting. Those residents who support streetlighting should not underestimate the reaction of those who don’t, if they are denied a chance to vote on this subject.
The fair and smart thing for the leaders of the referendum to do is to join the six members of the City Council, three of whom voted for the takeback and three of whom voted against it, in asking the ADOT Board to extend its contract with the city until after the referendum vote. If the referendum leaders go on May 20th in Flagstaff to make that appeal, alongside our city council, it would show the community you were truthful that the purpose of the referendum was to let the majority of voters decide this issue.
Letting the people decide important community issues is the only thing that works well. When you don’t do that, the issue does not do away for a long long time. That is the lesson that we keep relearning in Sedona. How many times does this lesson have to be relearned?
Paul Chevalier
Just one minor comment. Including the Mayor’s vote, the vote for the take back was 4 to 3 by the City Council. Paul mentions a 3 to 3 vote.
Are their Arizona laws concerning using deception to get signatures for referendums?
Nice idea, Mr. Chevalier, however with the ongoing verbal attacks, both in generalization and individually, from those who are angry about the referendum, why would any of the Let the People Vote choose to ‘break bread’ with the enemies at the ADOT meeting? I’ve yet to see any name calling or ill conceived accusations from those who opted to sign the petitions. In fact, Sir, I’m even surprised that your comment appeared on this web site as most inferring the referendum is a good idea have been rejected. The line was drawn in the sand by the four votes that approved the route transfer. Why don’t those four people now stand up and apologize, offer an olive branch to those, including yourself, who want to vote on the issue. That might be either before or after they suggest to those opposing the ballot issues to clean up their acts and return to being civil. Their behavior is appalling and only serves to fan the flames.
Actually allI I hope for, at this point, is to have the majority of the voters decide this important community issue. I am encouraged that three of the Council members who voted for the transfer are joined by three Council members who voted against the transfer in asking ADOT for an extension to let the people decide.
Paul
I am not a resident of Sedona, but do have a lot of activities there, and was MOST
AMAZED at being able to see the stars and skies so beautifully when I looked up
from Route 89A the first few nights. If there is anything that will draw a crowd, it will be that rare view of the beautiful night skies from earth, which is so rapidly disappearing above street lights.
It seems to me that I have seen very few people on the sidewalks going down that hill into Sedona, and in 6 years I may have seen 6 people crossing the highway– during the daytime. So I am curious as to what the reason might be to WANT THE STREET LIGHTS THERE????
Would someone explain that to us, please?
Beverly raises an important question as to what “Let the People Vote” have as an agenda that far supercedes the deal that was negotiated for the “route transfer.” Time for them to come clean.
I would like to direct My comment to Jim. The issue of Transfering the Hwy., or Not, was a Council vote, as many issues are. The question of letting the people vote, to My knowledge was never brought up in any of the Council meetings, by anyone, so there for, never denied.
I don’t understand Your comment of “breaking bread with the enemy”? Since the referendum has been brought up for everyone to vote, doesn’t it make sense that We all join together, and ask ADOT to wait until that vote is settled? By not asking ADOT to wait, it would appear that Councilor DiNunzio is correct, and that this was never about a Vote, but only to stop the contract from being completed?
As for the four Council members offering You an ‘Olive Branch’, for what? The four that You refer to have done everything possible to assure a Vote is up coming, and all They are asking is that ADOT wait for that vote. I, personally have heard no ‘verbal attacks’ that You refer to, from anyone except people like Yourself. And, I too may have sign the referendum, if I had been asked. Just like Paul, I believe in Democracy.
So, at this point, I ask that You, and Others like You, put away Your hostilities (that do none of Us any good), ask ADOT to wait, have the Vote, and see what happens.
Great Comments Bettye, and PLEASE someone responsible for the referendum provide a response to Beverly Smith, for the many of us, who are angry and still cannot understand 108 35′ lights when data indicated they’re not a safety solution.
City Council voted to defer setting an election date until June 28, 2011. Does Council want a vote on this? If so, why didn’t they vote to uphold the November 8th election date as submitted on the Consent agenda?
For those who are now advocating for the vote, I wonder how many of them signed the Referendum and Initiative to vote on the 89A Route Transfer?
Answer to Mr Vernier: If you really want an election, please sign the petition. You should now know what Mr DiNunzio said last Tuesday – that the purpose of the referendum “Let the people vote” was to stop the transfer – not actually vote!
Yes, Council wants an election on this issue, but they want the $23,000 spent for the election to actually matter in what goes forward on 89A. They do not have to set the date until July 11, 2011 at the latest for the Nov election.
What’s the point of an election if the election doesn’t matter?
Beverly says it all. Not only residents, but those who come here for the spectacular starry nights, will find that it is all gone someday (if those lights are installed)! And, then those people will stop coming…and many long time residents will choose to move….because it won’t be the same. This is Sedona’s future at stake…think about it…not only for residents, but for tourist traffic, which helps support our city!
Sedona is a special, beautiful place and we should not succomb to shady voting tactics and useless in-fighting to install horrific lighting that will not solve the problem. The real problem is the people who, without thinking, run across 89A…during both daylight and evening hours. Will lights stop these careless individuals from crossing in the daytime…don;t think so!
We see people purposely riding bikes speeding through traffic…directly across 89 A and others crossing a few feet from an actual designated cross walk. Will hundreds of lights help this? No. These people simply do not care…and when one gets injured…then all of a sudden there is an outcry for LIGHTS! How about using one’s brains and not walking into traffic??
Jaywalking should be policed (just as driving is) and those people should pay a fine. Maybe then they would think twice before recklessly crossing 89A and walking directly into traffic. People don’t want to take responsibility for their actions anymore and it’s time they did.