In the News

Council OKs Cultural Park 2.0 to draft amphitheater plan – Sedona Red Rock News

Unanimously authorizes SCP 2.0 to discuss plans with venue operators

Sedona City Council voted unanimously 6-0 — with Councilwoman Kathy Kinsella absent — to pursue a non-binding letter of intent Tuesday, April 28, with ad hoc group Sedona Cultural Park 2.0 to develop a business plan exploring the potential reopening of the 5,550-seat Georgia Frontiere Performing Arts Pavilion as a concert venue.

“There’s so many things that this cultural park can bring to the community that are not obvious. It’s jobs, it’s money, it’s tax revenue, but it’s also the sense of community,” said SCP 2.0 President John Bradshaw — a former Sedona vice mayor — following the vote. “We’ve got probably the greatest venue anywhere in the United States, and it’s just sitting there, getting rotted away. There were so many speakers tonight all over the world saying the same thing — it’s going to be a world-renowned venue.”

The action is non-committal, merely authorizing SCP 2.0 to begin conversations with potential venue operators to signal that the city has some level of interest, and does not commit any municipal funding or serve as a final approval of a project.

The council chambers were filled to capacity, with about 80 attendees spilling over into the foyer. The meeting also featured findings from a city survey, run by HighGround Inc., on what voters want to see in the development of the Western Gateway.

“I want to take my hat off to all of the organizers of this community effort that we’ve seen over these last several weeks, it has been the most successful community outreach organizing that I’ve seen,” Councilman Pete Furman said.

Council’s priorities are that no city funds would be used if the performance venue eventually reopens, similar to its December direction to the Sedona International Film Festival that is considering moving its theaters to the Western Gateway.

The amphitheater “deserves to be evaluated in today’s context, not on what you thought was true a few years ago today, based on true facts and on data,” SCP 2.0 Secretary Chris Ford said during public comment. “All we are asking for is … a letter of intent or commitment from this city that brings in experienced professionals to conduct a proper feasibility study. We have partners who want to do this, but they also want to know that their time is valued and that the city is serious.”

Some 35 people spoke during the call to the public; Mayor Holli Ploog reduced public comment from three to two minutes during the meeting without prior notice. An overwhelming majority of the public speakers spoke in favor of reopening the site as a music venue and/or expressed support for SCP 2.0.

Community Survey

“We hope that polling gives 50% plus one way or the other,” HighGround Senior Vice President Paul Bentz said. “Unfortunately, when we look at this data, it’s pretty even split within the community. I’m sure that’s something that you’ve probably felt in talking with folks.”

The poll had an “incredibly high response,” Bentz said, with 1,620 registered voters or current residents within city limits responding and a margin of error of +/- 2.4%.

Question one asked residents if they supported the city’s current plan for the Western Gateway. The results showed 48.5% in opposition and 43.7% in support — with 36% saying they definitely oppose the city’s current proposal, 12.5% saying they probably oppose it, 21.9% saying they probably support it and 21.8% saying they definitely support it.

The sharpest divide on question one was along partisan lines — Democrats comprise 37.7% of respondents, Republicans 28.0%. Of those, 54.8% of registered Democrats were in support, 38.6% opposed. Conversely 51.3% of Republicans are opposed and 30.5% in support. By age: 54.8% of residents 40 to 49 are in support, and 50% of residents age 30 to 39, 51.2% of people over 65 were against and those 29 and younger were split 44.2% both ways.

Question two asked residents to rank on a scale of a low of 1 to high of 5 about nine different uses for the Western Gateway. The uses ranked by mean score are: Community gathering space 3.82, Community recreation center 3.58, event lawn 3.5, an amphitheater 3.05, housing 2.51, apartments and townhomes 2.5, restaurants 2.39, retail 2.11 and commercial space 2.0.

The final question asked voters if they support a proposal — SCP 2.0’s, though not stated explicitly — to reopen the amphitheater which drew: 35.3% definitely oppose, 7.2% probably oppose, 14.5% probably support, 32.4% definitely support, with “other” at 8.4% and 2.3% responding “don’t know.” The sharpest divide was along age, with 69.7% of people under 29 in support, with support decreasing by age: 64% for ages 30 to 39, 59.4% for ages 40 to 49, 54.5% for ages 50 to 64 to 42% for people older than 65.

However, younger age groups also were less likely to have filled out the survey, and older voters were more likely to participate in the survey and were the “driving force” of the results Bentz said. The majority, or 68.6%, of survey respondents were 65 and older, 20.6% were ages 50 to 64, 5.2% were ages 40 to 49, 3% were ages 30 to 39 and 2.6% were 29 and younger. That trend of participation was also reflected with the speakers during the public comment section of the meeting.

Question three along partisan lines showed: 54.7% of Republicans in favor, and 33.1% in opposition. Democrats broke 48.5% in opposition with 41.6% in support. Other registered third parties such as Libertarian, Green and No Bels parties split with 46.5% in support and 41.8% in opposition while independents were 49.2% opposed, 41.7% in support.

Council Response

“I do not support putting city money into this endeavor,” Councilman Derek Pfaff said. “If there was overwhelming public support, then maybe I would. … I think that [the SCP 2.0] plan needs to be completely self-sustaining. I could see us doing the same thing we talked about for SIFF, maybe some extension of utilities … But I have no interest in seeing the city spend tax dollars on either renovating this or subsidizing it.”

Furman added a fiscal warning to attendees who earlier in the meeting raised concerns about the $981,319 price tag for a contract with EDGE Construction LLC for interior restoration work of the historic buildings at Ranger Station Park.

“Anything we do here is going to be subject to the same bonding and insurance and reporting requirements as the Ranger Station project we voted on earlier today,” Furman said. “If you thought that was expensive, wait till you get the number for what’s going to happen out of the Cultural Park.”

The letter of intent is needed by SCP 2.0 because “to engage with the operators of various entertainment venues requires them to know that the community in which it will be housed is serious about it,” Ploog said. “The letter of intent gives them that assurance that we are serious about pursuing this, not that we have made a decision about it.”

A work session is scheduled for Wednesday, May 13, on how many housing units could be recommended at the Western Gateway. Community Development will host a Housing Think Tank on Monday, May 18, and Tuesday, May 19, which requires signup on the department’s website. A discussion of the letter of intent is slated for the Tuesday, May 26, City Council meeting.

Sedona receives clean audit – Sedona Red Rock News

City has $29K in assets per resident

The city of Sedona received a clean audit during the March 10 Sedona City Council meeting, at which council heard a presentation about the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2024–25.

The presentation was delivered by Deputy City Manager Barbara Whitehorn; Jean Marie Dietrich, signing director at Clifton Larson Allen LLP; and Renée Stanley, the city’s accounting manager.

“I look at it as large reserves, annual surpluses, a clean audit, low finan­cial risk, all these things you found in audit,” Councilman Pete Furman said. “It’s amazing fiscal performance that I think reflects the culture of folks that work here in City Hall, stemming from the city manager on down through the Finance Department and going into every department this people take these fiscal performance of our city seriously, and it’s a very it’s a pleasure to sit here on City Council and accept reports like this.”

In performing the audit, Dietrich said her firm conducts a risk-based approach, obtaining management’s financials, details and supporting schedules, then examining and verifying management’s assertions on those sched­ules and financials before providing an opinion.

“I do not opine on the health of an organization,” she said.

The city’s total net posi­tion is $284,167,327, calculated as the difference between everything Sedona owns, such as infrastructure and cash, minus everything it owes such as debt. At the end of Fiscal Year 2025 the city’s total net position increased $18.7 million and in Fiscal Year 2024 it increased $27.3 million according to the audit.

“The assets and deferred outflows of resources of the city exceeded its liabili­ties and deferred inflows of resources at the close of the fiscal years 2025 and 2024 by $284.2 million and $261.0 million — net position — respectively,” the audit reads. “Of these amounts, $86.5 million and $59.5 million — unrestricted net position — respectively, may be used to meet the government’s ongoing obligations to citizens and creditors.”

The city approved its $103,291,695 budget on June 24, 2025.

“I tried to explore a new math analysis of the ACFR this year, and I stumbled across looking at net posi­tion per population, and I see that we have $29,000 in assets per resident,” Furman said. “Which I believe is just an extraordinarily high number for a small city like Sedona, and so everybody in this town should just be absolutely happy and proud of the financial position of our city.”

Additionally, “at the close of fiscal year 2025, unas­signed fund balance for the General Fund was $21.8 million, or 68.6% of actual expenditures,” the audit reads. “City policy requires a minimum unassigned balance of 30%.”

In the next three to five years, Dietrich said the city should pay attention to cyber security and grant manage­ment as two financial risks.

“The one thing is, with the city of Sedona, [you] are not highly reliant on federal grants,” Dietrich said. “In fact, we’re completing the second single audit that you’ve had. From a finan­cial reporting risk. It’s your controls over your infor­mation systems that are at highest risk. And warned that employee turnover in grants management could potentially put the city at risk because newer employees could be less familiar with reporting and documenta­tion requirements.”

One such risk is that Yavapai County announced on Feb. 2 that it had fallen for a business email compromise scam and nearly lost $868,982.14, but it recovered nearly 98% of the funds.

Whitehorn said the city has not currently purchased software for grants manage­ment but she sees it as a need.

Vice Mayor Brian Fultz asked how artificial intel­ligence could “be a tool to address some of these risks going forward?”

“AI is assisting with grants management in that it is putting workflows in place that is increasing segregation of duties, AI is assisting with reading and interpreting documents,” Dietrich said. “We always have to read what AI reads, because we trust but verify.”

Furman asked whether the audit identified any financial vulnerability related to the city’s reliance on sales tax revenues. Dietrich said that falls outside the scope of an audit, which focuses on whether financial sched­ules contain any material misstatements.

“We have to really consider that our revenues that drive most of our collec­tions are sales and bed tax, which can be more volatile in challenging economic times,” Whitehorn said. “Because of that, we maintain policy reserves that are higher than the standard kind of minimum of two months or 16% for the general fund. And our policy is 30% and we are well above that 30%.”

“Overall, sales and bed tax revenues comprise approximately 76% of the more than $51 million in General Fund revenues,” the audit reads. ­

6 work on Sedona City Council pay – Sedona Red Rock News

Six residents will help decide whether future Sedona City Council members get a pay raise.

Council members unanimously approved the appointment of six people to the newly formed City Council Compensation Review Work Group, tasked with researching and recom­mending to council, by the end of the year, whether the current monthly sala­ries of $550 for city council members and $800 for the mayor should be increased, by how much or not at all.

The work group is tasked with reviewing and recommending compen­sation including salary, benefits and expense allowances for mayor and council members, ensuring the compen­sation aligns with the size of the city, the workload and similar cities.

During its meeting Tuesday, Feb. 24, council selected Brock Delinski, Kali Galewski, C.J. Tronnier Gershon, Diane Phelps, Laura Rumann and Sean Smith. Human Resources Manager Russ Martin is also assigned to the group. City Councilman Pete Furman, who is leaving office in November, will serve as the chairman and will be a voting member.

Sarah Wiehl, chairwoman of the Planning & Zoning Commission, had applied to the committee as well, but was not recommended because Galewski also serves on P&Z. Henry Silbiger, who is running for mayor of Sedona, also applied, but staff recom­mended no 2026 candidates for council should be selected.

The initiative was proposed by Furman during the December priority retreat “to broaden the opportu­nity to be a council member to more people than what seems to be the pattern of retired Sedona resi­dents,” he said.

Council approved the group’s charter during its Jan. 27 meeting and called for volunteers from Feb. 2 through 16.

Furman has cited the process used by the city of Flagstaff, which in November 2022 approved a phased 250% increase of its mayoral salary from $38,500 to $70,180 and increasing a council member’s salary from $25,000 to $63,800, as well as increasing a travel and meals stipends.

“I have not made up my mind,” Furman said about what he would like council compensation raised to.

“I want to actually learn about what they did in Flagstaff and think about what we could do here,” he said. “But I do know that there’s a significant opportunity cost that’s lost for working people being on the council, and I want to try to address that.”

The work group’s meetings will be open to the public. The specifics for how the work group will operate has not yet been determined —the details will be left up to the work group to decide, though Furman said he is aiming for 90-minute meetings across three to four sessions.

“The future of the city was still, can be still, should be a community of all people that live here, retired here, work here,” Furman said. “That’s what I want to see continue — that Sedona remains a community of people that live here.”

The Work Group should conclude its work no later than September, the council agenda reads.

If approved, any salary increases would not take effect until after the Tuesday, Nov. 3, General Election, and would require final approval by City Council.

Sedona City Council to talk with community & SOCSD – Sedona Red Rock News

Sedona City Council decided during its Tuesday, Feb. 10, meeting that, begin­ning in April, it will replace every fourth Wednesday work session with commu­nity conversation meetings outside of city hall.

The first such meeting is scheduled for April 29 from 4:30 to 6:30 p.m. at Community Library Sedona, 3250 White Bear Road, to discuss the needs of fami­lies and seniors, including activities.

“It’s a big darn deal that the City Council is going to give up [work sessions] to meet with the commu­nity outside of the council chamber, sitting at tables together, not at a dais, and legitimately talk with and hear from the community on important topics,” said Vice Mayor Brian Fultz, who requested the change during council’s December priority retreat.

He said his goal for this format is to increase community input ahead of major council decisions.

“I’m really excited about this, because what I’ve seen out of the last couple of years on council is that many … in the community feel like it didn’t know enough about [council decisions] until it was the 11th hour,” Fultz said. “One of the main purposes of the community conversations is to be able to have information sharing about some of these poten­tially significant projects way before they get in front of council for making a decision. So that we get a better sense of the pulse of the community, so that we’re having civil conversa­tion and trying to arrive at a good solution before people have drawn up sides and are getting angry, from both sides of an issue.”

Potential future topics include educating resi­dents on wildfire resilience and emergency planning, Western Gateway land use decisions and commenting to the Arizona Corporation Commission about Arizona Public Service’s proposed rate hikes.

“Based on the cadence approved by council at the retreat, the next sessions would be either Aug. 26 or Sept. 9; and either Nov. 12 or Nov. 25,” the council packet reads.

Fultz described the format as both listening and brain­storming, depending on the topic. For the April meeting, he anticipates it to lean away from extensive back-and-forth debate.

“We want to hear from the community. ‘Hey, what can we do that’s going to make this a better place for families to live? What can we do that’s going to make this a better place for seniors?’” Fultz said. “We don’t have all the answers. Staff is not going to have all the answers. So it’s really a brainstorming session.”

The two- to three-hour time frame Fultz said should allow for both seniors and families to be able to adequately share their needs and desires despite being at two very different points of their lives.

However, one common­ality raised by Councilwoman Kathy Kinsella as a potential discussion topic between those two age groups might be a recreation center.

“For years, at least, to me, members of the community have expressed a desire for a rec center that would meet needs —aquatic needs — something that would be available in all weather, something that would be an enclosed facility,” she said. “Know how that might fit in with some of the plans and priorities that we’re looking at, so I thought that that would be a good community conversation topic.”

Interim Mayor Holli Ploog voiced her support for a topic addressing the needs of families and seniors and added that the meeting “could lead to [whether] we need a rec center or not.”

No further discussion about such a recreation facility has been made by the city.

SOCSD

The theme of supporting families carried into another council discussion involving Sedona-Oak Creek School District. Council scheduled a Wednesday, March 25, meeting at 3:30 p.m. will hear an update from the Community Development Department on its Balanced Housing Plan and — at Fultz’s request — a joint meeting with the SOCSD Governing Board.

“I think it’s just really important that we identify where are the opportuni­ties where the city can be supportive of the needs of families that are going to encourage more families to be here, so we can get more butts in seats in the schools,” Fultz said.

SOCSD “can tell us, ‘No, thank you,’” Fultz said when asked why the city should meet with the district if it’s outside of the city’s purview. “But a great working example are the couple of meetings that we had with the Sedona Fire District [Governing] Board when they were interested in acquiring land for a new fire station.”

The city leases the Sedona Community Pool at Posse Grounds Park and the Dr. Nancy Alexander Administration Building at 221 Brewer Road from SOCSD, which is an inde­pendent government. In the 2025 Small Grants program, council provided the Sedona-Oak Creek School District Educational Foundation with $33,225 and the Rotary Club of Sedona with $20,000 to support the afterschool program at West Sedona School.

Shared Facilities

During its work session Feb. 10 discussing the Fiscal Year 2026-27 budget, council decided it wanted to discuss leased and/or shared facilities with SOCSD in March. Council touched on pool mainte­nance while discussing Posse Grounds Park capital improvements.

Kinsella requested a breakdown of the mainte­nance and operating costs of the pool ahead of the joint meeting.

“We can discuss this when we are meeting with [SOCSD] but I think they would be happy to sell the pool to the city,” Councilman Derek Pfaff said. “When they get a bill from us for their 50% [of pool maintenance] it’s hard, right? That’s money they’re spending on the pool that they’re not spending to do maintenance on some­thing else … I want us to be mindful of the fact that they are in a much tighter budget than we are.”

Housing

While housing is “obvi­ously one of the most pressing needs,” Fultz said he’s been thinking about other ways the city could help — particularly improving childcare options for working parents. He noted that West Sedona School has some programs, but there are gaps during weekends, holiday breaks and summer.

“Parks and Rec runs a bunch of programs, but it’s not every week of the summer, and it’s not every program for the same age and stage,” he said.

Council unanimously approved Basil and Mimi Maher’s 60 Goodrow Lane workforce housing project during its Feb. 10 meeting, rezoning the property to allow 51 multifamily units with half deed-restricted for households earning up to 120% of area median income. The Mahers prohibited short-term rentals for 10 years and stated their intent to priori­tize housing for Sedona workers.

During comments to council, Basil Maher also stated that the Educational Foundation’s endowment is now “up to $15 million,” an increase of $5 million from when the group announced it had formed the fund in January 2025 from multiple donors. Maher is the foundation’s vice president and Mimi Maher is its secretary.

“That [money will] supply about $800,000 a year” in income to SOCSD, Basil Maher said.

Housing is poised to be a major point of council discussion and community contention this year with the Western Gateway.

“Although SOCSD has taken no official position on the Western Gateway proposals, I will say that, speaking as superintendent of [SOCSD], I am gener­ally supportive of efforts to increase housing that is accessible to working families and teachers,” SOCSD Superintendent Tom Swaninger, Ph.D., wrote. “In the two and a half years that I have been with the district, I have lost track of the number of times good, hard-working families, and the chil­dren we serve, have been forced to move due to the scarcity of accessible housing. Additionally, the recruitment and retention of high-quality educators is extremely challenging.”

City of Sedona talks parking & garage – Sedona Red Rock News

Sedona City Council heard an update Jan. 27 on the $26.4 million Uptown Parking Garage, which will add about 270 new public parking spaces. The project is about 70% complete, and anticipated to open in June.

Much of the discus­sion centered around the use of license plate reader technologies in the parking system and an effort by council to not have a replay of the summer’s controversy surrounding last year’s Flock Safety license plate readers, which were briefly installed, then removed.

“If we are going to use plate readers on any sort of street parking we need to be very clear on how the steps can be set up so it’s not just picking up anybody who happens to drive by,” Councilman Derek Pfaff said. “I don’t want this in any way, shape or form, to resemble the Flock situation.”

Transit Administrator Amber Wagner said her Transit Department staff is planning to use automatic license plate readers for parking enforcement at “the Uptown Parking Garage and other city managed parking facilities where appropriate,” the draft Parking Data Governance Policy and Standard Operating Procedures for the Sedona Parking Management Program wrote. Additionally “hand­held or vehicle-mounted LPRs may be used by parking enforcement staff … for on-street parking and city managed lots,” the document reads.

Parking enforcement will be done by the Sedona Police Department, most likely by non-sworn Community Service officers.

“This is a different situ­ation than having [ALPRs] out on streets where people are just driving through, [because] these are parking lots,” and drivers pay to enter them, Councilman Pete Furman said. “So, I’m OK right now with the direction that” staff has.

“This system is not a law-enforcement tool, does not connect to any police or national ALPR networks, and may not be used for investigative, surveillance or immigration-enforce­ment purposes,” the draft version of the parking data policy reads.

Residential Parking

Council also received updates on the Uptown Residential Parking Program, with Wagner outlining plans for a free, license-plate-based permit system for residents on Smith, Wilson, Van Deren and Price streets, where on-street enforcement is planned. Implementation of the residential program is tied to the opening of garage.

Cameras may be used at the Uptown Parking Garage to document vehicles entering and exiting; council had an early discussion on the data governance, with the data currently slated to be saved for 30 days.

“In regards to citations and appeals, it takes about 20 days to have access to the cita­tion data that is issued for appeals with that program,” Wagner said.

Deputy City Manager Andy Dickey said that staff is working to get “the data retention period down as much as we can,” but did not say a lower limit.

Councilwoman Melissa Dunn wanted assurances that facial recognition won’t be done with the garage cameras.

Wagner said she thinks a majority of the RFPs would only capture a vehicles back license plates “so facial recognition would not even be a consideration.”

While the draft states “the vendor is prohib­ited from releasing data directly to any third party,” Interim Mayor Holli Ploog noted that similar language did not “seem to work with [Flock].”

“At least one of the members on the resident side is somebody who is heavily involved in the [Flock issue] and he is now a member of this work group,” Ploog said — Parking Work Group member and civil rights lawyer Mikkel Jordahl — which Vice Mayor Brian Fultz later confirmed. “So I think we can be assured that concerns about the cameras are going to be addressed and brought up, and that this is not an attempt to repeat the Flock camera fiasco.”

Made up of city officials, staff, residents and business leaders, the Parking Work Group advises on Uptown parking and related programs.

Jordahl “did look at it, and did provide his support, and he did share it with other members of the group that he worked with previously, and we have not received any notification other than from the Parking Work Group member that he does support it,” Wagner said, adding that he shared concerns about third parties accessing license plate data.

The data collected from the cameras in parking lots would also be stored on a cloud server, which could be a point of vulnerability, Wagner said.

“The consistent finding is that the Uptown challenges relate to peak demand, circulation, employee parking and neighborhood spill­over, not simply a lack of spaces,” Wagner said, outlining five focus areas for Uptown parking: Parking management and guidance; residential permit parking readiness; balancing parking supply and demand; employee parking; and a parking fee structure.

Wagner plans to pilot some programs in Uptown as early as March, ahead of the garage’s opening, she said.

Since 2023, “several changes have reduced public parking supply,” the council packet reads. “Lot 1 — Jordan Road — was permanently removed from the public inven­tory following its sale to the Sedona Fire District [resulting in the loss of] 70 spaces; Lot 8 was removed from the leased public parking program due to a pending property sale [resulting in the loss of] 23 spaces; and on-street paid parking was reduced by four spaces. Collectively, these changes have reduced public parking supply by approxi­mately 97 spaces.”

The city calculates the effective available parking supply at approximately 749 spaces when accounting for turnover rates and other real-world factors, down from the total physical inventory of 881 spaces. Effectively, Uptown has a parking deficit of about 110 spaces during its peak demand.

“When operational, the 2026 parking system is projected to include approximately 1,150 public spaces, resulting in an effec­tive supply of approximately 980 spaces, compared to an estimated peak-period demand of approximately 860 spaces, thereby substantially offsetting the current deficit and stabilizing parking conditions during peak periods,” the packet reads.

A $95,800 contract amendment with Quality Testing, LLC, was unanimously approved by council as a consent item, for inspection and quality assurance for the garage. Council previously approved a $182,973.50 contract with Quality Testing on Feb. 25.

“We’ll continue to refine this, because none of this is baked yet. It’s not even in the oven,” Ploog said. “It’s in the pan … and that’s why I’m encouraging anybody who is concerned to contact the members of the group, to come to the meetings and observe the group, contact you and to provide their input, because we are accepting all input.”