Pete Furman

Sedona City Council was right to shut down Flock spy cameras – Sedona Red Rock News

We would like to commend the five members of Sedona City Council Councilmen Brian Fultz, Derek Pfaff and Pete Furman and Councilwomen Melissa Dunn and Kathy Kinsella — for directing city staff to shut down the automated license plate readers purchased from Flock Safety and installed around Sedona beginning in June.

Sedona residents are almost uniformly opposed in a politically bipartisan way to the installation of these cameras and council was wise to not continue with what seems to be a clearly despised public program, but to listen to the will of the public and shut them down indefinitely, perhaps permanently.

It seems that in the end, Mayor Scott Jablow was the only council member to argue in their favor and against the public will.

Contrary to erroneous assertions made by city staff during the meeting, we at the NEWS were not notified in advance of their installation, nor, it seems was the public. Sedona residents began seeing the Flock poles and cameras erected in early June, posted pictures to social media and asked us to investigate, which we did on June 6.

It was only after our inquiry on June 6 that the Communications Department finally responded — on June 11 — and then posted a statement to Facebook on June 12.

After some further inquiries, our lengthy story appeared on June 20.

In the Facebook post, the city notified residents that the city would not be revealing the locations of the proposed 12 cameras, 11 of which were eventually erected, leading residents and our staff to a two-month long hunt to locate them, which seems absurd, considering they were paid for by taxpayer money, installed with taxpayer funds and on public rights-of-way.

Overwhelmingly against the cameras were public comments online posted after the initial story, our concurrent editorial, further posts identifying new cameras and a story that Judicial Watch, a nationwide conservative nonpartisan nonprofit that files Freedom of Information Act and public records lawsuits to investigate claims of misconduct by governments and officials.

The feedback in favor was only from a small handful of Sedona residents, with the rest being active or retired law enforcement, residents from other cities outside the Verde Valley and other states.

It’s rare to have such public output be against the government program across the political spectrum, from liberals who feared that the cameras would supply information to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, to conservatives who feared of the encroachments on their civil liberties and freedom of movement without government surveillance. But liberals, moderates and conservatives were all united in their fear of threats to our privacy, questioning why the camera data would be retained for 30 days, how it would be used, who would have access, how it might be sold or traded by Flock, a for-profit private company with no government or public oversight.

The anger expressed by council members was palpable. Why they had not had an informed debate ahead of time? Why were residents and elected officials blindsided? Why are the cameras needed?

While purchasing the program was certainly legal and lawful under the purview of the Sedona police chief and Sedona city manager, council rightfully wondered why such a mass surveillance program far grander in scale and more intrusive in scope than police body cameras or vehicle equipment had not been discussed at length previously. While city staff and some council members asserted that the program is lawful and not currently prohibited by Arizona state statute, that evades the key question.

What’s “lawful” is not always what’s “right.” Lawful programs and policies simply may not be in keeping with American values, Western ideals, Arizonans’ morals or Sedona community values, which is why elected officials are entrusted with upholding them.

Fortunately, Dunn, Fultz, Furman, Kinsella and Pfaff did the right thing by shutting down this threat to our privacy and civil liberties.

Christopher Fox Graham is the managing editor of the Sedona Rock Rock News, The Camp Verde Journal and the Cottonwood Journal Extra. Hired by Larson Newspapers as a copy editor in 2004, he became assistant manager editor in October 2009 and managing editor in August 2013. Graham has won awards for editorials, investigative news reporting, headline writing, page design and community service from the Arizona Newspapers Association. Graham has also been a guest contributor in Editor & Publisher magazine and featured in the LA Times, New York Post and San Francisco Chronicle. He lectures on journalism, media law and the First Amendment and is a nationally recognized performance aka slam poet. In January 2025, the International Astronomical Union formally named asteroid 29722 Chrisgraham (1999 AQ23) in his honor at the behest of Lowell Observatory, citing him as “an American journalist and longtime managing editor of Sedona Red Rock News. He is a nationally-recognized slam poet who has written and performed multiple poems about Pluto and other space themes.”

– Advertisement –

CitizenPortal.ai – Sedona City Council approves $350,000 Small Grants Program funding recommendations

This article was created by AI using a video recording of the meeting. It summarizes the key points discussed, but for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Link to Full Meeting

The Sedona City Council convened on July 8, 2025, to discuss the approval of the Small Grants Program for the upcoming fiscal year, allocating $350,000 to various community initiatives. This marks the thirteenth year of the program, which designates 40% of its funding to the arts, another 40% to social services, and the remaining 20% at the discretion of the Small Grants Review Committee.

Christy Turk, the city liaison for the program, and Stephanie Geesbrecht, chair of the committee, presented the recommendations after reviewing 34 grant applications submitted by local organizations. The committee, composed of seven volunteers, expressed gratitude for the council’s trust in their recommendations.

One notable discussion centered on the eligibility of the Sister City Program for funding. Councilor Kathy Kinsella raised concerns about previous council directives limiting the use of city resources for the program. Legal counsel clarified that the grant funding is separate from the internal resource restrictions, allowing the Sister City Program to receive support as a nonprofit organization.

Councilor Pete Furman echoed Kinsella’s concerns, questioning whether the grant could be considered a city resource. The council agreed to amend the language in the grant documentation to clarify that the funding does not imply a city obligation, addressing Furman’s apprehensions about setting a precedent.

Another significant topic was the funding request from the Rotary Club of Sedona for an extended day program. The council discussed the implications of providing city funds for a position that had already been filled. The committee emphasized the importance of this program for workforce stability in Sedona, as it allows parents to work knowing their children are in a safe environment. The council acknowledged the need for clarity regarding the funding’s purpose and its potential impact on future federal funding opportunities.

Public comments included concerns about the city’s funding practices and the implications of contracts for grant recipients. Residents expressed a desire for transparency and caution regarding future restrictions that could accompany grant funding.

The council’s discussions reflect a commitment to supporting local initiatives while navigating the complexities of funding eligibility and resource allocation. As the Small Grants Program moves forward, the council aims to ensure that language and policies are clear, fostering a supportive environment for community organizations.

Sedona City Council OKs $103M budget, new staff – Sedona Red Rock News

The Sedona City Council unanimously passed its $103,291,695 budget on Tuesday, June 24, for Fiscal Year 2025-26, which went into effect on Tuesday, July 1. The vote was 6-0 with Councilman Brian Fultz absent.

The approved budget represents a 2.8% decrease from the previous year’s $106 million. The reduction is driven by a $6.8 million decrease in capital expenses, which dropped from $48 million to $42 million because of the competition of such projects as the Forest Road Extension.

Meanwhile, operating expenses increased year-over-year from $57.891 million to $61.2 million.

Operational changes include the addition of 12.8 full-time equivalent employees across the city, a majority of which will be Sedona Police Department staff.

SPD will have five new patrol officers with a one-time cost of $692,535 and ongoing annual costs of $535,467; three new motor officers with a one-time cost of $373,337 with an annual cost of $444,279; and a community outreach officer — who will focus on homeless residents and visitors — with a one-time cost of $161,474 and an ongoing annual cost of $102,064. Additionally SPD will receive a full-time Emergency Management coordinator and a part-time evidence technician.

The City Clerk’s Office will add a short-term rental code enforcement officer. The Municipal Court will extend a part-time security officer to full time and the Public Works Department will upgrade part-time hours to create two full-time positions.

The final budget was $706,292 less than the adopted tentative budget, approved on May 27, which was driven in large part because a salary staff study cost $400,000 less than anticipated.

Facilities maintenance costs will rise $133,000 for utilities, equipment and city parking lot repairs. Public transit costs will grow $32,000 for micro-transit, shuttle costs and a parking study. Street maintenance will increase $21,000 due to higher material and labor costs.

Revenues

The “March, sales and bed tax were disappointing this year,” Director of Financial Services Barbara Whitehorn said. “They were still higher than budget, but they were lower than [the] prior year … which was surprising for the same time period. So we kind of anticipated that April would show the same kind of trend given what we’re seeing nationally. Surprisingly, it did not. We had the best April for sales and bed tax that we’ve ever had.”

The estimated bed tax revenue for FY 25 was $9.2 million, with the actual revenue coming in at $9.7 million, and the estimated FY 26 bed tax revenue remains at $9.2 million, according to the budget packet. However, the final report for FY 25 including the revenue from June won’t be available for another 45 days, according to city Communication Director Lauren Browne.

“So next steps, for the budget in FY 26 … we will continue to monitor economic conditions, particularly sales and bed tax,” Whitehorn said. “We look at consumer confidence indices, market performance and where the Fed[eral Reserve] is headed. It looked like the Fed was going to reduce rates … and they’ve decided they’re not going to do that right now. I would, however, be surprised if they didn’t reduce rates by 25 basis points by the end of the calendar year. But I’m not a professional economist, so I’m basing my opinion on that of actual economists and what their expectations are.”

City budget analyst Sterling West said he anticipates a budget surplus of $7.3 million and staff were directed by council to provide an update on the results of FY 25 in January prior to the final vote.

One person spoke in opposition to the budget during the call the public.

Navajo Lofts

With a 5-1 vote, council approved the Final Plat for Navajo Lofts, a 60-unit subdivision located near the intersection of Southwest Drive and State Route 89A, with Councilwoman Kathy Kinsella voting against.

“Kinsella expressed a desire that the units remain for rent rather than available for ownership,” the meeting packet reads in reference to the Jan. 28 meeting where Kinsella also was the lone dissenting vote. “While the city cannot prohibit a subdivision on the property, the developer/current property owner has entered into a Development Agreement with the city that prohibits the use of the units as short-term rentals.”

Animal Ordinance

Council moved the possible approval of an ordinance banning the display or performance of “exotic” animals unless an exhibitor has permission of a property owner and has a permit as a wildlife exhibitor from Arizona Department of Game and Fish or U.S. Department of Agriculture to the Tuesday, Aug. 12, meeting.

Lew Hoyt

Philanthropist and Sedona Red Rock High School assistant track and field coach Lew Hoyt was honored by council for his contributions to the community, with about half of the near-capacity council chambers on hand for the presentation.

“[Hoyt] walks our hallways and our lunch room. I have two daughters that go to school [here],” Sedona-Oak Creek School District Superintendent Tom Swaninger Ph.D., said. “[Hoyt] sits with them, asks them, looks them in the eye and shares the wisdom that he has. He’s not only made my life better, but hundreds of children over the years and you may never know the true impact that you’ve had.”

Dry Creek Shared-Use Path

The council approved a $1.9 million construction contract with Doege Development LLC for Phase III of the Dry Creek Road Shared-Use Path. Construction will begin in July and continue through March, covering the segment from Gringo Road to White Bear Road, including a path alignment change between White Bear Road and Kachina Drive. However, even after this phase, the path still does not reach State Route 89A. Public comment was split, with one resident speaking in support and one opposed.

Phase One of the Dry Creek Road SUP was completed in 2021 and runs from Two Fence Trail to Forest Road 152. Phase Two, finished early this year, extended the path from Two Fence Trail to north of Gringo Road.

Council unanimously approved the Doege contract, however, members expressed concerns about the piecemeal approach to construction and the project approval, emphasizing the need for a more comprehensive plan when city staff drafts projects. Some council members, particularly Councilman Pete Furman, voiced reservations about the project’s approach.

“I’m frustrated because I think this council and our public could have benefited from a more holistic discussion of the entire plan before we segmented it out and in parts that we did,” Furman said.

Furman added that outreach to residents could have been better, that the complete streets element from the community plan was not fully implemented, that the city should have first started addressing traffic and bicycle issues near the intersection of Dry Creek Road and State Route 89A and that he thinks a future council will have to spend more money to redo portions of the project.

“I’m disappointed about the process that we used … we’re going to produce a project that’s going to be good and it could have been great,” Furman said.

“I would like to see in the future, complete paths done instead of starting-stopping and have them incomplete for a while,” Sedona Mayor Scott Jablow said. “I think it gives the wrong message to our community that for whatever reason [the city] can’t finish a project.”

At several points, council members stated that they want to see how all phases of a construction project fit together.

“I need to visualize the whole [project], even if we build it in sections,” Vice Mayor Holli Ploog said. “I find it difficult to actually know whether what we’re doing is the right thing or not. ‘I just have to nod my head and say, I trust our public works department.’ It’s not that I don’t trust public works, I’d like to see it myself and to be able to explain it when people ask us questions, which right now I cannot do.”

Deputy City Manager Andy Dickey said the city would consider the request but noted that creating renderings is time-intensive and typically reserved for larger projects, making it difficult to produce them for every smaller one.

“I hear you Andy, but $3 million here, $3 million there,” Ploog said. “It’s a big project eventually. I mean, this is not going to be an insubstantial amount of money.”

“We’ll look into it and see what we can do,” Dickey said.