Undecided on 410

Sedona, AZ (September 27, 2011)

Dear Editor,

I can’t decide between the lesser of two evils. If I vote for ADOT to maintain control of 89A, then it will likely put up a string of streetlights that will make West Sedona look like some airstrip. Some pilots might get confused and try to land on 89A. The only plus about this choice is that my taxes won’t skyrocket in the long run. My state income tax will continue to finance all ADOT construction regardless of our vote.

What if the city takes control and has to maintain 89A? Supposedly ADOT would give the city a one-time lump sum of money for road maintenance. At one point $15 million was mentioned. Then the city would probably choose no streetlights; but there is no restriction on how that money could be spent…unless the council earmarked it solely for road maintenance. But the council has a history of fiscal irresponsibility when it comes to limiting its spending. They tend to shift money from one department to another in a financial sleight of hand. This stealing from Peter to pay Paul was evident with the increase of the waste water rates. Because the city can’t tax us directly, they do so indirectly by raising those rates and then moving revenue from the waste water fund into the general budget. I can’t imagine (sadly I can) what a feeding frenzy the consultants, developers, road and building contractors will have with this $15 million…unless the council earmarks and protects that money solely for road maintenance (repaving, signal repair, etc.). I’d be surprised if this happens.

More likely the council will burn through that $15 million in no time flat. The people behind Our City, Our Road, Our Choice will want to use these funds to beautify West Sedona – all in the name of safety. They’ll stick in a lot of unnecessary medians in the middle of the road and jam up traffic. They’ll direct funds to the West Sedona Development program, subsidizing the consultants, developers and contractors. Soon that $15 million will be gone, and we’ll be stuck with the road maintenance. When this happens, our taxes will rise, if not skyrocket, directly or indirectly. More waste water rate increases or some other smoke-and-mirrors financing to pay for it all. (And don’t forget we still have to pay back the $83 million school district bond that all went for extravagant construction and none for books or teachers’ salaries.)

So truly I’m in a dilemma. I don’t want to vote for ADOT, because I don’t want the streetlights. I’d probably vote for the city takeover, if there was legislation prohibiting the use of those fund for anything but pure road maintenance. But I don’t trust the council to administer those funds wisely. All along I’ve felt that ADOT could still keep control of 89A and not put in streetlights. But that option was eliminated by some unknown, shady, back-room wheeling and dealing between our state politicians and the road construction industry. Anyway, I’m not sure how I’m going to vote.

Henry Twombly

Sedona, AZ 86336

This is an advertisement

Paul Chevalier on September 27, 2011 10:10 am

I understand your dilemma I offer some information that might be helpful. The Agreement that our City Council and ADOT made before the referendum made it moot was that ADOT WOULD GIVE THE CITY $10.6 MILLION to take over control of the road. In addition ADOT would repave the road and put in a streetlight at the corner of Andante and 89A – both items that ADOT has committed to do REGARDLESS of whether or not Sedona has control of the road.
At the time our City Council voted to take control of the road the language of the agreement contained a requirement the the money received from ADOT would be put in a separate city account and ONLY be used for road maintenance and improvements. Of course that agreement is now moot but since our council membership remains the same, it is reasonable to assume that if the majority of the voters opt for Sedona to take control of the road that the next agreement between ADOT and Sedona will contain this language.
A fair question is will future City Councils change the agreement that the money received from ADOT only be used for the road? I am not sure that they legally can. I am sure that it would be politically difficult for a future council to get a majority of its members to reverse that commitment.I I do see is a lot of citizen generated creative ideas being enacted to make this roadway safer and more attractive at moderate costs.
You questioned whether our Council will waste the money received from ADOT by putting in center medians? Center medians are an issue of contention in our city. I think the likelihood of having center medians added, at least in the next couple of decades, is remote, simply because there will not be enough money to build them plus the roundabouts and or very wide turnaround lanes that would be required when the medians are added. More likely the money from ADOT will be used on maintenance and on less expensive safety improvements such as lighted crosswalks.
As to the overhead lights, if the road is put under city control the present council will not add overhead lights. Perhaps a future council will want to add overhead lights, but most likely much lower ones. To do that it will cost many millions of dollars that are not now available because much of the $10.6 million must be kept for road maintenance. At some point in our future, perhaps two decades from now, this stretch of road will have to be taken down to the gravel and rebuilt. That is going to be very expensive. Telluride is planning to do just that three years from now for a stretch of highway it owns that goes through its town but is a lot shorter than ours.
I hope this information is helpful. As you have indicated, our decision boils down to each voter evaluating the gains of having control of this important stretch of city road versus the costs of maintaining it.
Paul Chevalier

2 Comments

N. Baer on September 27, 2011 8:46 am

Correction for Mr. Wombly:

ADOT was not giving Sedona a lump sum amount of money. In addition, as I remember it, Council had voted to restrict the funds it was to receive from that agency in an interest bearing account for use only on the road. Furthermore, Tim Ernster, our experienced City Manager with 35 years under his belt, had projected costs of operating and maintaining and agreed it was doable.

In addition, Sedona has been maintaining 89A for years and splitting the cost with ADOT.

The reason we are paying higher sewer fees is because all of our prior City Councilors kicked the can down the road and now we have to pay higher rates to catach for all of the years we hadn’t done so.
Paul Chevalier on September 27, 2011 10:10 am

I understand your dilemma I offer some information that might be helpful. The Agreement that our City Council and ADOT made before the referendum made it moot was that ADOT WOULD GIVE THE CITY $10.6 MILLION to take over control of the road. In addition ADOT would repave the road and put in a streetlight at the corner of Andante and 89A – both items that ADOT has committed to do REGARDLESS of whether or not Sedona has control of the road.
At the time our City Council voted to take control of the road the language of the agreement contained a requirement the the money received from ADOT would be put in a separate city account and ONLY be used for road maintenance and improvements. Of course that agreement is now moot but since our council membership remains the same, it is reasonable to assume that if the majority of the voters opt for Sedona to take control of the road that the next agreement between ADOT and Sedona will contain this language.
A fair question is will future City Councils change the agreement that the money received from ADOT only be used for the road? I am not sure that they legally can. I am sure that it would be politically difficult for a future council to get a majority of its members to reverse that commitment.I I do see is a lot of citizen generated creative ideas being enacted to make this roadway safer and more attractive at moderate costs.
You questioned whether our Council will waste the money received from ADOT by putting in center medians? Center medians are an issue of contention in our city. I think the likelihood of having center medians added, at least in the next couple of decades, is remote, simply because there will not be enough money to build them plus the roundabouts and or very wide turnaround lanes that would be required when the medians are added. More likely the money from ADOT will be used on maintenance and on less expensive safety improvements such as lighted crosswalks.
As to the overhead lights, if the road is put under city control the present council will not add overhead lights. Perhaps a future council will want to add overhead lights, but most likely much lower ones. To do that it will cost many millions of dollars that are not now available because much of the $10.6 million must be kept for road maintenance. At some point in our future, perhaps two decades from now, this stretch of road will have to be taken down to the gravel and rebuilt. That is going to be very expensive. Telluride is planning to do just that three years from now for a stretch of highway it owns that goes through its town but is a lot shorter than ours.
I hope this information is helpful. As you have indicated, our decision boils down to each voter evaluating the gains of having control of this important stretch of city road versus the costs of maintaining it.
Paul Chevalier

Letter to the Editor

Undecided on 410

2 Comments