Sedona's Challenges and Issues

Tourism is a double-edged sword. Sedona's economy relies on it more than any other industry. Without it, a city the size of Sedona wouldn't have many of the things we take for granted: artistic, musical, and other cultural events, many places of worship, four grocery stores, excellent restaurants, two movie theaters, two post offices, a diverse array of businesses, several car repair shops, and plenty of gas stations. Try living where the nearest repair shop is in another town or the closest gas station is miles away, and you'll come to appreciate these last two in particular. 

Eliminate tourism and Sedona would resemble any number of other American towns where the dominant industry relocated or simply closed shop: streets full of boarded-up stores, neighborhoods full of neglected homes, and empty churches and schools.  

I'm as guilty of this as anyone else, but people moving to Sedona tend to want to shut the door behind them. We often forget how many of us moved to Sedona full-time after first coming here on vacation and falling in love with the place.  

Weighed against this are the endless hassles that tourism brings to our doorstep, including drivers who are unfamiliar with traffic circles or act like they've never seen a stop sign, and hoards of oblivious pedestrians. I can't keep track of the number of near collisions I've seen because someone was taking a picture of the red rocks (or the teal arches) as if their life depended on it. If you live near a trailhead, you've encountered tourists who think that "no parking" means "free parking." Thanks in part to the state legislature, tourists now fill our neighborhoods, displacing our friends, neighbors, and co-workers who can no longer afford skyrocketing rents.  

Love it or hate it, tourism is here to stay. Nevertheless, the City needs to focus on managing tourism for the benefit of Sedona's residents. I applaud the City's current and past leadership for the steps that have been taken. The median barriers installed in uptown help control pedestrian flow. The shuttle program has reduced the number of vehicles at trailheads. Simply placing boulders along Carruth Drive eliminated lines of parked vehicles that were a daily occurrence. Still, more needs to be done.  

As a city councilor, I would work to mitigate the negative impacts of tourism on residents, all the while remaining mindful of tourism's vital role to our community. Improving the quality of life of Sedona residents will always be my first priority.

I regularly hear people ask, "Why do we spend any money attracting tourists?" I often find myself asking the same question. Contrary to what marketing materials want people to think, we don't advertise because "we want to share the beauty of Sedona with everyone." We advertise because tourists put money into the local economy and generate substantial tax revenue. However, the tagline "Come to Sedona, leave your money and get out" doesn't sound very inviting.  

Supporting the economy and bolstering tax revenue are legitimate goals for local governments. Still, the City needs to be smart about how it spends your money. That's why we hear talk of attracting the "right kind" of tourists. I don't like that because it sounds like we're trying to exclude the "wrong kind" of people.    

The better way to look at it is that we need to encourage the right kind of tourism. I have nothing against daytrippers but if the City is going to spend money on tourism campaigns, it shouldn't encourage people to drive in for the day, hike a few trails, and then leave. To get the best investment returns, we need to specifically encourage visits that include overnight stays, meals at local restaurants, hiking, and shopping.   

However, a major part of any campaign needs to include HOW to visit Sedona, familiarizing visitors not just with the sights to see and activities to do, but also with things like traffic circles, mass transit, the trailhead shuttles, where to find parking and being a responsible guest in our home. It wouldn't hurt to remind them that we have leash laws and wild animals that are happy to make a meal out of a stray pet. Most tourists don't want to be a hassle. They are because they don't know where they are or are trying to go. We can help with that.  

Done correctly, tourism advertising can bring needed revenue to our community, while at the same time lessening the negative impacts of tourism on our parks, trails, roads, neighborhoods, and states of mind, but let's not overdo it and attract more tourists than we can handle.

The initial decision to be made is what will become of the derelict amphitheater. Making this decision boils down to whether residents want it to be restored, and whether it's economically viable to do so. I've heard from a small number of residents who attended concerts there years ago and would like it to reopen. I've also heard from business owners who think that they'd benefit from a new attraction in town.  

Yet I've heard from many more residents who are concerned about the additional tourists, traffic, and noise that a reopened amphitheater would bring. If there are three things that Sedona does not need, they're more tourists, traffic, and noise.

While I'm not opposed to the idea of a small level of assistance from the City in restoring and reopening the site, I refuse to support forcing Sedona's taxpayers to underwrite its operation. It's irresponsible to saddle future generations of Sedonans with that burden. If the amphitheater were to reopen, it would need to be self-sustaining. I remain unconvinced that it could achieve that. It failed once and I'm concerned that it would do so again without substantial taxpayer subsidies.

More often than not, I find myself agreeing with those who think that the amphitheater should be razed to make more room for other uses. Still, Sedona residents should have the final say on the matter.

That brings me to what I personally would like to see made part of the site. Whether the amphitheater stays or goes, I'd envision a mixed-use development including multi-family housing (across all income levels but with an emphasis on workforce housing), low-intensity office and retail, public use space such as a community center and a senior center, an indoor pool, walking paths, and maybe a botanical garden either as a standalone feature or interspersed throughout the site. 

The public use spaces would be owned by the City, but the housing, office, and retail areas should be sold to private parties with agreements in place dictating what will be developed. This would allow the City to control the overall development, recoup some of its investment, and avoid becoming a landlord.

I want this to be a place where people willingly spend their free time and where local workers reside as part of the community instead of being shuffled off to surrounding communities. It can and should be a point of pride for Sedona and its residents.

For those unfamiliar with the term, the Dells is the name given to approximately 200 acres of undeveloped land owned by the City of Sedona across from the wastewater treatment plant on State Route 89A, around six miles west of the city. The area is used for spray irrigation to dispose of effluent water from the treatment facility.

There will come a time when the Dells are developed. Sprawl is an unfortunate but inevitable by-product of growth. The Phoenix area has experienced unmitigated sprawl over the years. Let’s not rush to imitate that. I, for one, value Sedona’s open space. My personal opinion is that the Dells should be left alone for the time being.

The costs to install injection wells and suitable utility infrastructure at the Dells would be considerable. I keep asking myself the same question, “What could be done with the Dells that would improve the quality of life for Sedona residents enough to justify the taxpayer cost and the resulting environmental damage?”

A new amphitheater and festival grounds? If Sedonans want another event venue, it’s more sensible to restore the defunct amphitheater. However, I remain skeptical that residents desire yet another source of tourism, traffic, noise and taxpayer expense. 

New campgrounds? Sedona is surrounded by them. Do we want to increase the burden on police and other emergency services by adding more areas of responsibility? Agriculture could use the treated wastewater generated nearby, but who’s going to work there and where would they live?

Speaking of workers, what about workforce housing? Sedona desperately needs housing for workers, not just for those who work in tourism, but also for teachers, police officers, firefighters, and the like. There’s a push by some to put workforce housing in "surrounding communities." This sends the message to workers that while we want them to continue laboring in Sedona, we don't want them living among us. 

Too many workers have been forced out by the proliferation of short-term rentals and other factors that made it too costly to remain. City government and Sedona residents should work together to find ways to welcome workers back to Sedona, not shuffle them off to surrounding communities or a former effluent disposal site located near a wastewater treatment plant. They deserve better. Sedona can do better.

Sadly, there are no viable solutions that will solve all of Sedona's traffic woes. Many of the suggestions are cost-prohibitive or involve lands that are not subject to the City's control. The City needs to work with these outside jurisdictions to develop plans that can be implemented. Unfortunately, this will be a slow and painful process.  

In the meantime, the City needs to address the factors that are within its control. Continued expansion of mass transit needs to be explored, prioritizing the needs of residents and workers over those of tourists. Still, we need to keep in mind that the more tourists use mass transit, the less their cars will clog our roads.  

We have traffic studies that identify where improvements should be made. As of late, the City seems more intent on implementing the recommendations of its experts. We need to keep that momentum going. The benefits realized from small changes here and there will soon add up.  The end result will be an improvement in our traffic situation.  Notice I said "improvement" and not "solution." Absent a total collapse in tourism, Sedona's traffic problems are here to stay.  As a city councilor, I would work hard to find and implement solutions, but I won't make promises that can't be kept. 

The state did a disservice to residents, particularly in places like Sedona, when it curtailed our ability to regulate short-term rentals. I wrote a piece about this back in 2018 and the situation has only gotten worse.  Here's a link: https://www.dailyjournal.com/articles/346275-a-potential-solution-to-short-term-rentals.  It also appeared as an op-ed in the Red Rock News.

While I don't fault part-time residents for leasing out homes while they'd otherwise sit vacate, and I understand when people let out an extra room to help make ends meet, too many Sedona homes have been bought up by out-of-state investors who have no intention of using them for anything other than short-term rentals. This has exacerbated an already dire workforce housing situation.  

Sedona and its residents need to continue to put pressure on the Arizona legislature and the governor's office to return control to the cities. Only then, will we have the necessary tools to address the STR issue in a meaningful way.

I've heard a few residents say, "I commuted when I lived in [wherever], they can, too." I commuted to and from work for more years than I care to remember.  Still, I find several problems with this suggestion.  

First off, the entire Verde Valley is experiencing a dearth of affordable workforce housing. This phenomenon isn't unique to Sedona. Commuters need places to live and there simply aren't enough available.

Many of the jobs that Sedona businesses need to fill are low wage. Someone making $18 an hour is already likely to be struggling to make ends meet. Add fuel and vehicle maintenance costs to the mix and their situation can easily become untenable.  

"Well, then. Make businesses pay more." If it were only that simple. Done correctly, a minimum wage increase helps workers. Done incorrectly, it results in layoffs, business failures and price increases that do the most harm to those it was intended to help. It's a delicate balancing act and governments tend to have poor senses of balance.

Sedona is competing with other cities and towns for workers. It doesn't take long for workers commuting from Cottonwood or Camp Verde to figure out that they can often get substantially the same job, for substantially the same pay, but without the long drive. Sedona's schools have lost more than a few teachers to that realization.

Lastly, for Sedona to really thrive, I think we need police officers, firefighters, teachers, and other workers to live where they work. It's no secret that local residents tend to take more pride in their communities and reinvest more of their time and effort in bettering those communities. Also, strong schools help build strong communities. More families mean more students. More students mean more state funding that can be used to help our schools and students live up to their full potentials. 

The "P" is silent and it rhymes with "off."

I wish.