ADOT: Feds have not stopped Hwy 89A lights project

SEDONA, Dec. 8, 2008 � Rod Wigman, public information officer for the Arizona Department of Transportation, said his office �sort of chuckled� after reading that the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) had stopped ADOT�s street light project.

�FHWA hasn�t stopped anything,� Mr. Wigman said in a Dec. 8 telephone interview.

The article was written by Sedona resident Cliff Ochser, who owns an astronomy-based tour company and who heads the Sedona Chapter of the International Dark Skies Association.

�His statement that the federal government has �stepped onto the stage in Sedona and has stopped ADOT's plan to install 76 streetlights on Hwy. 89A� is not accurate,� Mr. Wigman said.

Mr. Ochser, individually and through his IDSA organization, opposes the street lights and has partnered with Keep Sedona Beautiful, the Sedona Chapter of the Sierra Club, and others to fight city and state officials who support the lights project.

The oppositions� tactics have included a recall campaign against City Councilwoman Nancy Scagnelli, who made a motion on Aug. 13 that set the project in motion; threats of recall petitions against three council members who voted with Ms. Scagnelli; protest demonstrations at the state capitol and at City Hall; support for a failed referendum to over turn the council�s recommendation for the street lights; complaints to the Arizona Attorney General�s Office regarding alleged open meeting law violations; and this latest move � to stall the project through a National Environmental Policy Act study.

The letter from Division Administrator Robert Hollis that was published with Mr. Ochser�s article was addressed to former KSB President Barbara Litrell; and contained no language indicating the lights project was stopped or slowed in any manner.

Mr. Wigman said the opposition�s call for action on a NEPA study is redundant because the study is required any time federal funds are used for a state road project.

�We already know we�re doing a NEPA process,� he said. �Usually that starts when the scoping documents start.�

ADOT recently met with city officials about the scoping process, which includes things like the size of the light poles, the type of bulbs and wattage, Mr. Wigman said.

On Nov. 12, Mayor Rob Adams instructed his environmental committee to focus on the lights as its top priority.

The mayor�s committees make recommendations to the mayor, although Mr. Adams said he expects the environmental committee will make a presentation to the entire City Council before ADOT�s return in February or March, with recommendations on the types of light, recommended wattage, color of the light, aesthetics, light fixtures, light standards, light heights, costs; �everything involved in lighting the 89A corridor�, according to the Nov. 12 meeting minutes.

�Mr. Adams� committee is looking at it and so are we,� Mr. Wigman said. The scoping and NEPA documents are prepared somewhat concurrently, and draw from data and information that has been compiled since the project began, he said.

About the only thing new arising from KSB�s inquiry of the NEPA study is that ADOT may include a public meeting in the NEPA process, Mr. Wigman said.

�Usually, street lighting projects don�t require public meetings,� Mr. Wigman said. But the state may do it anyway, considering the FHWA�s mention of it in the letter; and because the lighting project is a hot issue in Sedona, he said.

When asked what influence tactics from either side of the issue have on ADOT officials, Mr. Wigman said, �I don�t think it has a lot of influence. ADOT knows there are two sides. It doesn�t change much; we just try to do the right thing.�

Readers' comments

#1 ADOT "chuckled" about doing due diligence and upholding proper environmental protection law? Wickman sounds like a typical bureaucratic pr mouthpiece who stands and laughs at the public and our right to voice our shared community values. If this is the way ADOT works with the public, they are in for a serious awakening.

The author lumps this issue with the recall efforts which is unfair. KSB, Sierra Club and IDA have nothing to do with those efforts and the author has a responsibility to make that clear. Fanning the flames with untrue statements diminishes the authors credibility. Those who have represented the legitimate community interests on this issue are dedicated to providing the best safety solutions for our community and protecting Sedona's fragile environmentally based tourism economy. These leaders have nothing to do with the recall efforts and are prohibited by non-profit law from doing so.

Mr. Wickman, and the author, fail to address the directive by FHWA's Hollis "the Department of Transportation will consider all viable alternatives that address the current safety concerns on SR 89A." That's the part ADOT needs to be worried about. This will not be a rubber stamp NEPA. This arrogant agency needs to come to that public meeting and justify with Sedona specific statistics on how the lighting scheme will improve safety. They can't do it. They consistently refused to do it all through the 89A safety panel process. They can't justify their position based on statistics and real safety research. I'd have more respect for them if they were just honest and said "we can't afford to give back $1.8 million of federal money in this economy."

Finally, Wickman states regarding the tactics used to voice public input and community involvement �I don�t think it has a lot of influence. ADOT knows there are two sides. It doesn�t change much; we just try to do the right thing.� Is doing the right thing "chuckling" at public opinion and community values? Sounds to me like extreme bureaucratic arrogance. Maybe Mr. Wickman will be at the Public Meeting and he can "chuckle" directly in the faces of the people his agency intends to ignore and the people whose night sky his agency intends to destroy. I'm giving 10 to 1 odds he is nowhere to be seen.

#2 I am the author of two of the four complaints filed with the AG of Arizona. I did not file the complaints as a 'tactic' as Ms. Hardee states. I filed the complaints specifically for the purpose of examining if violations of the Arizona Open Meeting Statutes took place.

I do not have an opinion on the issues of 89A light at this time. I do, however, have an abiding belief that elected officials should conduct meetings in public and not privately.

As to the motives of the other filers of the complaints with the AG I think it is presumptuous to assign motives to their actions and then print same for public dissemination.

In closing, what possible good did this article do except to continue fomenting division and polarization within the community?

#2 I too found the article and Rod Wigman's comments offensive. It is the same as ADOT telling the people of Sedona that they do not know what is good for them: "Oh, no you can't (stop the lights)" is the message I get here. How sad. As someone who has canvassed the area intensively for the past year, and has also kept abreast with this issue, I am of the firm opinion that a vast majority of the residents here do NOT want continuous lighting on 89A in West Sedona. Furthermore, the vaste majority do NOT believe doing this will improve the safety on 89A whatsoever.

The problem is a day-time issue, the reaction of ADOT and some members of the council is partly financial (yes, we have the money and we are not going to give it back) and partly protection against any possible lawsuits. As many of us know, the deaths that did occur, which started this whole process, were not due to lack of lighting. Far more accidents happen during the day-time, due to serious safety issues on this main highway - yes, the one infamous for its \"suicide\" lane running down the middle. What a shame that all that work done by the investigative committee was ignored, and all we get now is a chuckle from ADOT because they finally get their way, despite all the proof and work done to say they are wrong.