City of Sedona mayoral race down to the wire

Candidates lay out environmental positions

By Tommy Acosta, SVVT Editor

Sedona, AZ - April 17, 2008 - It’s down to the wire between Sedona Mayor Pud Colquitt and Sedona Councilman Rob Adams as they race neck-and neck towards the May 20 mayoral-runoff election.

Councilman Adams received 50 more votes than Mayor Colquitt in the March election and the 600 votes received by defeated-mayoral candidate Mathew Turner are the prize both candidates need to put them over the top.

Mr. Turner has endorsed Mayor Colquitt.

Pivotal, is will Mr. Turner’s supporters independently vote for the candidate who best represents their environmental concerns or will they support Mr. Turner’s endorsement of Mayor Colquitt without question.

Three issues, 76 lights along 89A, a National Scenic Area designation for Sedona and an alternate route through Red Rock Crossing dominate as concerns for Sedona’s environmentally-conscious citizens.

76 lights for 89A

Mayor Colquitt originally voted for ADOT’s proposal to install 76-traffic lights along 89A in response to a number of people being killed trying to cross the thoroughfare at night in 2005-2006.

A committee was later formed at the request of Councilman Adams to revisit the issue and provide alternatives to the lighting because of concerns by environmentalists the lights would ruin Sedona’s dark skies.

The mayor believes a compromise is possible.

“Human life is sacred to me and dark skies are scared as well,” she said. “Someplace there is a solution. Do I want a Las Vegas strip along 89A? No. My gut instinct will be to do what is best for everyone concerned; what is best for public safety and welfare. Reasonable compromises take reasonable people coming to the table.”

Councilman Adams said he was ready to back the recommendations of the of the 89A Safety Committee 100 percent.

“I originally suggested putting together this committee after voting for the ADOT proposal and later realizing the proposal, as it stood, was not in the best interest of the community,” he said. “Absolutely, I will back the recommendations of the committee. We should also be looking at what we want for 89A ten years from now -- not just its safety but under grounding utilities, improving traffic conditions and aesthetics as well.”

The city council has not rescinded its original vote to approve the 76-light poles for 89A.
The committee is still working on recommendations that would be acceptable to all parties involved.

NSA designation for Sedona

The city, prior to the present mayor’s administration, went on record in support of a National Scenic Area designation that would protect Sedona in perpetuity against land trades by developers.

Sedona’s forest land is presently protected against such trades by Amendment 12 of the National Forest Service, a federal agency under the Secretary of Agriculture. Amendment 12 is part of the Forest Management Plan and cannot be made permanent. It is presently in place for the next 10 years.

Proponents of a NSA designation for Sedona say it will protect forest land against land trades permanently and not affect local control or add another layer of government because the Forest Service is already part of the federal government. Private property rights would not be affected either.

Opponents say local control would be relinquished to the federal government even though the National Forest Service is part of the federal government.

Mayor Colquitt believes Amendment 12 sufficiently protects forest land and claims an NSA designation would weaken local control.

“If they could put together an NSA designation as comprehensive as Amendment 12, I would have no problem with it,” Mayor Colquitt said. “The difference is we would be dealing with Washington D.C. rather than Albuquerque, where the district office for the Forest Service is located. I am opposed to another layer of federal government. I am concerned anyone outside our city having control over any part of Sedona.”

The mayor said she is not opposed bringing the question to the public.

Councilman Adams said he fully supports a NSA designation for Sedona.

“I think it is clear the community fully supports a NSA designation for Sedona,” Councilman Adams said. “A NSA designation would simply make Amendment 12 permanent. I think, from a business standpoint, NSA makes Sedona a unique place in the world and adds to the allure and special ness of Sedona.”

Councilman Adams has asked the city to consider public forums on the NSA designation issue, with the possibility of bringing the question to public referendum.

Alternate route over Red Rock Crossing

This debate has been going on for some time with proponents citing the need for a bridge at Red Rock Crossing to connect West Sedona and the Village of Oak Creek in case all three of Sedona’s exit routes are shut down because of an emergency.

Opponents say a bridge at Red Rock Crossing is not necessary and would destroy the natural beauty of the area.

A $70,000 study on the need for an alternate route conducted by a private company was recently presented to the city council with no action taken by the council.

The study suggested there is a need for an alternate route in Sedona.  Mayor Colquitt believes an alternate route is needed for safety reasons, not necessarily at Red Rock Crossing.

“I would hate to do anything to demolish the natural beauty of Red Rock Crossing,” Mayor Colquitt said. “A feasibly study showed that a need for an alternate route is definitely there. We only have three ways out of Sedona: 89A North; 89A South; and Hwy 179. I have been through two emergencies as mayor where we had only one way out of town. If we had an alternate route to VOC it would have made it easier to get to West Sedona. An alternate route is something we have to look at. It will make a difference. It’s not an easy solution. We can’t just sit back and not do anything.”

Councilman Adams is dead set against and alternate route through Red Rock Crossing and thought the feasibility study by EDAW was not worth it.

“I am totally against an alternate route at Red Rock Crossing,” he said. “As far as I am concerned, the feasibility study was a total waste of money. All the information was already there in terms of alternate routes. I’m not saying an alternate route is not necessary. Show me one that does not have a negative-environmental impact and perhaps I would consider it. Presently, an alternate route is not feasible. ADOT does not have the funding to do it and neither do we. This is something we might be able to look at five to seven years down the road.”

[Home Page] [News Home Page] [Back to Community Page]