Pete Furman

For the good of Sedona, Mayor Scott Jablow must resign – Sedona Red Rock News

On Sept. 10, the Sedona City Council voted 5-2 to censure Sedona Mayor Scott Jablow and those five members called on the mayor to immediately resign.

In listening to council members’ comments, it appears Councilman Derek Pfaff would have voted for the measure had it only been about a censure, but the vote to include the demand for resignation was a step too far, as Pfaff said the decision to elect or remove an elected office from office is the decision of voters, not the council.

That nuance aside, a majority vote to censure the mayor means council not only believe Jablow’s behavior warrants reprimand but that it should be public with council members voting on the record.

Jablow has lost the council, the city they were elected to manage and the voters who elected them to represent the elec­torate, wholly undermining his ability to govern effectively as one of the seven.

Among the five were Councilwoman Kathy Kinsella and Vice Mayor Holli Ploog, who have worked alongside Jablow when he was just a councilman before he was elected mayor, two of the colleagues who have known him the longest as an elected official. If they turned against him, they must feel that getting Jablow to behave respectfully, responsibly, ethically and lawfully is beyond repair.

It must be repeated that the council didn’t just censure Jablow, they called for his resignation, which elevates the severity of the issue by his colleagues. Impeachment is not a political tool available to municipal governments in Arizona, but if it were, council would have had the lrds majority to strip Jablow from office. Considering most of council aligns with Jablow’s political ideology and most votes are either unanimous or with Jablow in the majority, the admonish­ment was not political.

The censure was not a one-off after a contentious vote by a divided council over a political issue, but actually the third time council had admonished him for his behavior. Per Sedona City Code, the first two reprimands were done behind closed doors in executive session and per the law, council cannot discuss them, so this is a legislative “three strikes and you’re out,” which, as a former law enforcement official, Jablow should be acquainted with.

Council laid out seven reasons for the censure, the afore­mentioned breaking the confidentiality of attorney-client privilege as well as interference with city staff and depart­ments, creating and fostering a hostile work environment, circumvention of City Council process, acting beyond the authority of the office of mayor, acting unilaterally and finally violating the principles of ethical conduct for elected officials.

Instead of focusing on issues facing the city like affordable housing, budget city operations as the economy sours and tax revenues dry up, several zoning projects heading to council, the Sedona Cultural Park/Western Gateway or grants to arts organizations, Sedona residents’ attention is now focused on an internal conflict as Jablow has diverted it away from real city issues. His legacy will not be housing at the Cultural Park or city programs he supports, but rather “the disgraced mayor who didn’t quit when he should have.”

This pressure on Jablow, council and the city, calls for him to resign and his professional and personal reputation will only worsen over time as community members will publicly call for him to resign at council meetings, at public and private events and certainly on social media until he leaves.

The comments on our unbiased and middle-of-the-road news stories on social media are already filled with such demands from residents.

This opening volley of attacks on Jablow will first just be those who opposed his election or oppose his stances on past issues, but it will grow as those indifferent to him will join the chorus followed finally by former supporters and donors who will call on him to quit.

It’s not like Jablow enjoys a vast mandate as it is. He defeated Samaire Armstrong with 56.61% of the vote in 2022 and John Martinez with 54.18% of the vote, but that isn’t the full story. Voter turnout fell from 80.7% in 2022 — a midterm year — to a dismal 44.32% in 2024 — a presidential election year — and Jablow got 1,532 fewer votes in 2024 than in 2022.

That’s a lot of people indifferent to his administration who will be questioning his actions now. We warned readers in 2022 that Jablow would be an adequate mayor, at best a place-holder between more dynamic leaders, but did not expect his tenure to turn into disaster.

If Jablow remains, “why hasn’t he resigned” will be the stomping elephant in the room at every council meeting. Ultimately, Jablow remaining in office is selfish and egotis­tical, both critiques lobbed at Jablow even before last week. Council members said his resignation would “restore trust” in municipal governance and would be the right thing for Sedona. He confirmed to the NEWS on Friday, Sept. 12, he would not run for reelection in 2026, so there is no point in remaining.

If the mayor truly loves the city more than himself, he must resign.

If loves himself more than the city, then he must resign.

Remaining harms the city, period. Jablow must do the right thing and resign.

Sedona City Council to Mayor Scott Jablow: Resign to restore trust – Sedona Red Rock News

By Joseph K. Giddens and Christopher Fox Graham

The Sedona City Council has formally and publicly censured Sedona Mayor Scott Jablow for his behavior and called for his resignation on Wednesday, Sept. 10.

The vote was 5-2 with Councilman Derek Pfaff and Jablow the dissenting votes.

Jablow said to council and to the public that he would not resign and that it is up to the voters to remove him from office either by recall or during the 2026 election.

Council read seven major complaints requiring censure: Interference with city staff and departments, creating and fostering a hostile work environment, breaking the confidentiality of attorney-client privilege, circumvention of city council process, acting beyond the authority of the office of Mayor, acting unilaterally and finally violating the principles of ethical conduct for elected officials, as read by Councilwoman Kathy Kinsella.

“Obviously I owe our community an apology overstepping in different ways that the council has brought to my attention, [and] reminded me, I do apologize to the community. I apologize to our staff, I apologize to mostly [to] the City Manager [Anette Spickard] I apologize to our council, but I will leave it to the voters. I will not be resigning. I feel that it’s the voters who put me in place. If a recall takes place, I will follow that and see where we go. But I have been working for this city for 11 years, almost 12 years, and I feel I have accomplished a lot of very good things, so I will not be resigning my position.”

On Sept. 3, the city had posted an executive session meeting agenda to discuss and consult “with the City Attorney for legal advice and to discuss or consider the disciplining of a public officer.” By statute, Sedona’s only public officers are the mayor and council members, and the only disciplinary action available is Rule 2.L of the Council Rules of Procedure.

Council met at noon, Wednesday, Sept. 10, and after Kinsella moved Vice Mayor Holli Ploog to chair the executive session, going into at 12:01 p.m. and emerging at 1:40 p.m. with a visibly flustered Jablow and subsequently voting at 1:50 p.m. to publicly censure Jablow.

“I don’t think it’s up to council to decide whether the mayor finishes his term, it’s up to the voters. Voters who are displeased with his performance, they can recall him, or they could choose not to reelect him if he were to run next year,” Pfaff said. “I will not be supporting the motion.”

Rule 2.L reads “City Councilors who fail to follow these Rules of Procedure are subject to both private reprimand and formal censure. It is at the discretion of the Mayor to initiate action if a Councilor’s behavior is called into question by another Councilor. When this occurs, the Mayor will discuss the behavior with the concerned Councilor whose actions are being questioned and may issue a private reprimand. If the Mayor is the individual whose actions are being questioned, the same procedure will be followed after a Councilor expresses a concern to the Vice Mayor.””

Two previous private reprimands were delivered by council in previous executive sessions.

“If, after a second private reprimand concerning the same behavior, the conduct continues, the matter shall be referred to the City Council to consider whether a public censure is appropriate,” Rule 2L reads. “Any public censure for violation of these Rules of Procedure can only take place upon a two-thirds vote of the entire City Council.”

Five votes were required for the public reprimand.

“This was not an easy motion for me to write,” Kinsella said. “I have a heavy heart with it, but I do believe that in order to restore the faith of the community, that this is action that the council must take and public censure, and as part of that censure, requesting that the mayor resign his office so that we can have a start to restore the public faith in the fact that this council will not sweep things under the rug. This council will not turn blind eye. This council will act in good faith to support public good and transparency.”

“I support the motions as stated, no changes required,” Councilman Brian Fultz said. “I grieve deeply that we are at this stage right now. The findings, the documentation we reviewed, is compelling, [Jablow], I ask sincerely, pleased for the good of the community, please do, in fact, resign from office.”

“His council colleagues have documented multiple violations, including City Code 2.10.40.D, Rules of Procedure 2B, 2C and 2G he has even received two official private reprimands, and yet his behavior has not changed,” Councilman Pete Furman said. “He has not learned. That’s why we’re here today in this public session, following our rules to formally issue the censure and to call for his resignation. This is the extent of our authority as a council the public agrees with our actions and wants further steps taken. That power rests with you. The power of recall is in your hands. … I hope we will not have to go through this again, but if necessary, we will.”

Rule 2B states “All Councilors should be treated with equal respect”; 2C says that council members “shall conduct themselves so as to serve as a model of leadership and civility to the community, inspire public confidence in Sedona government and demonstrate honesty and integrity in every action and statement”; and 2G details council conduct with city staff.

“I’m heartbroken, but I support the motion,” Ploog said.

Automatic License Plate Readers

After a contentious public meeting on Aug. 13 over the city’s process of installing Flock Safety automatic license plate readers, which Jablow pushed for over 15 months, City Manager Anette Spickard sent a 30-page memo to council, dated Aug. 17, about the process and how the cameras came to be installed without public outreach and no majority consensus direction from City Council to the Sedona Police Department.

Five members of council’s gave direction, with Jablow dissenting, to indefinitely turn off the ALPR network and provide a timeline of how the city came to install the cameras.

In the memo Spickard accused Jablow of being manipu­lative in leading to her being “the fall guy for the public outcry” and she included a summary letter, pages of emails between her and Jablow discussing the progress on the instal­lation of ALPRs and a two-page statement from Sedona Police Chief Stephanie Foley.

Council the night prior to voting on the censure unanimously voted to cancel its contract with Flock and to remove its 11 installed Flock cameras installed in the city. Jablow changed his position from the prior work session based on concerns of locally collected data being shared with federal law enforcement despite what local desires may be.

Police Chief Foley Complaint About Jablow, Jablow’s Counter-Complaint About Foley

Foley previously filed a formal 157-page complaint against Jablow on July 27 alleging that since being promoted to chief in August 2022, she has “endured constant and continuous scrutiny, micromanagement and undermining of her position of authority” by Jablow. “This harassment includes ongoing interfering with day-to-day operations within the police department and attempts to intervene with police department policy.”

Jablow mayor responded with a three-page undated complaint of his own.

Jablow accused Foley of fostering a hostile work environment using retaliation, fear, discipline to retain, retention through discipline, a toxic environment and micromanaging SPD police officers.

After the NEWS reported the complaints in a story on Aug. 22 [“Sedona Police Chief Foley, Mayor Jablow file complaints against each other for hostile work environment”], Jablow filed a revised five-page complaint against Foley alleging many of the same issues in his first complaint while adding others.

Rules and procedures are essential elements of a well-functioning government. They are not always easy or enjoyable to follow, and at times they can make progress feel difficult and slow. However, they are a design feature, not a flaw. It is an essential duty of public officials to understand the rules and procedures — and to follow them.

The public is right to expect accountability. It is not only acceptable but appropriate for residents to hold their elected officials to an even higher standard — and I encourage them to do so.

Norms, too, play an important role. Not everything can be written down, and not every circumstance can be anticipated. Norms of behavior and process are sometimes just as important — if not more important — than the rules and procedures themselves.

Unfortunately, in recent years — really since his election — our Mayor has repeatedly demonstrated confusion about his proper role. It seems he brought with him an “old-school, East Coast, big-city, strong-mayor” understanding of government when he moved to Sedona. That is not how our system works here.

He has received feedback from many people and has been instructed repeatedly on our rules and procedures. His Council colleagues have documented multiple violations including Sedona City Code 2.10.040.D, Sedona Council Rules Of Procedure 2B, 2C, and 2G. He has even received two official private reprimands. Yet, his behavior has not changed. He has not learned.

That is why we are here today — in a public session — following our rules, to formally issue a censureand call for Mayor Jablow’s resignation. This is the extent of our authority as a Council. If the public agrees with our actions and wants further steps taken, that power rests with you. The power of recall is in your hands.

Please know that this Council will remain vigilant in enforcing our rules and procedures. I hope we will not have to go through this again — but if necessary, we will.

Mayor, even if your intentions were absolutely pure and well-meaning — and some of them may have been — your approach has been incorrect, inappropriate, and contrary to our rules. And I fear you may have unintentionally harmed the very causes you were trying to advance.

To our employees and our community: This Council remains fully committed to making Sedona a great place to work and live. Thank you for standing with us through these challenging times. It will get better.

Finally; trust between a government and its people is hard to build – and incredibly easy to lose. I hope and pray that our actions here today are noticed and appreciated, not only by our community but also state and federal officials. I encourage leaders, at every level, to act within their rules and authorities to reign-in power-hungry officials and restore public trust.

Made in support of Kathy Kinsella’s motion to Censure Sedona Mayor Scott Jablow and to call for his resignation. Made at the 9/10/25 City Council meeting. The motion passed 5-2 (Jablow and Pfaff opposed).