Sierra Club disappointed with 89A lighting compromise

Letter to the City of Sedona: City Manager, City Development Director, Mayor, and City Council

Sedona, AZ - April 17, 2008 - The Sierra Club Sedona-Verde Valley group wishes to express disappointment in the 89A Lighting Committee’s forced compromise as noted in the "Red Rock News " April 11 edition and again, April 15 with the further story of discord on the committee due to some members’ idea that we absolutely needed 76 street lights (and applied for such a grant) without asking Sedona residents first.

Now we feel that the Lighting Committee must present their recommendations soon to the public and city council at a public meeting separate from the city council meeting where it votes on this matter.

This presentation must include drawings of the entire proposal and its pros and cons. Simply posting the document on the website is not adequate. The public needs time to digest the suggestions and an opportunity to pose questions to the committee, the City Manager and Development Director in a public forum.

There are many unanswered questions remaining concerning this issue, including the forced compromise. Somehow the city always manages to put the “cart before the horse” in discussing almost any issue publicly. The city council and the mayor are accountable by elections. However, the City Manager and City Development Director, and others are not.

They are in positions of power, but they are our employees; they advise us and the mayor and council members. Together, we make the decisions.. Therefore residents feel that it appears that many city plans/decisions are being made without proper exposure to public sentiment and scrutiny.

The other point to note here is that both mayoral candidates say they will abide by the committee’s decision. However, if such a decision is pre-ordained by prior grant application (as was done here) and then manufactured to appear as a compromise, we are no further ahead for democracy in Sedona. In the public interest, we suggest that this lighting proposal compromise be included as a referendum during the Mayoral runoff election on May 20th.

Our positions:
1. There is absolutely no evidence to support extra night-time lighting in this section of 89A – other than the light and crosswalk at Andante. Safe convenient on-demand (lighted) crossing places are the real problem day and night! The second major problem is left turns across and into 40+mph traffic. Sierra feels that lighting (especially if not LED or solar) is wrong for global warming/environmental reasons. May we suggest the Tucson example of overhead lights on the road, which are on-demand lighted crosswalks only? Another on-demand crosswalk is needed between Andante and Dry Creek (I know I walk this area regularly).

2. Sierra approves of the enforced reduced speed limit and attractive lighted fencing solution for sections of sidewalk along 89A. We feel these additions will light pedestrians’ way and also force crossers to use the crosswalks. Better still these lights could be run by solar panels – a renewable energy example set by the City of Sedona.

3. The extra 10 lights should be the last solution considered. It should be considered only after a 2 year safety study period with the Andante Light, all the attractive night-lighted sidewalk fencing and an additional lighted-on-demand crosswalk or two are installed. Only then can we make sensible and financially prudent decisions.

The Sierra Club is America 's oldest, largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization. Inspired by nature, the Sierra Club’s 750,000 members—including more than 14,000 in Arizona and 500 here in the Sedona area — work together to protect our communities and the planet.