The League of Women Voters and Sedona Chamber of Commerce hosted a forum on Wednesday, Oct. 12, for Sedona mayoral candidates Samaire Armstrong and Vice Mayor Scott Jablow at the Sedona Performing Arts Center. The forum was moderated by Mary A. Chicoine of the LWV.

Both candidates had made an effort since their debate the previous week to refine and clarify their position statements in response to public input, Armstrong in particular.

Leadership Style

Asked how she would work with the council as mayor while having only one vote out of seven, Armstrong replied, “I will have the community’s support. It will be a wake-up call to how council is being led, and in January, when we have the priority retreat … we can work towards goals that are metric- and data-related …. My getting voted in alone will be a big statement.”

“We don’t do things in a silo. We listen to the residents, and it seems to be working just fine,” Jablow said, responding to the same question. He cited the city’s proposed parking garage as an example, noting that at the afternoon’s meeting, City Council put the project on hold as a result of local concern over its utility. “I’m out listening and talking and meeting with people seven days a week.”

Sedona’s Future

The two candidates articulated different visions of a future Sedona when asked what their priorities would be as mayor and how they would like to transform Sedona’s economy.

Armstrong, who has opposed Sedona’s dependence on tourism, offered a rethinking of what the city might become. She identified good fiber-optic internet as Sedona’s primary economic need, in order to accommodate those working from home.

“They’re coming for sanctuaries,” Armstrong said of skilled workers relocating from urban centers, “and that’s happening with people who have the ability to work remotely.” She identified academics, artists, social media influencers, movie post-production and “creative technological elements that could be utilized in Sedona without … creating more buildings” as the types of individuals and enterprises the city should try to attract. Newcomers would need to share Sedona’s “ethos,” a point Armstrong emphasized repeatedly, and which she explained as a desire for quality of life without urbanization.

To further entrepreneurship, Armstrong advocated lowering the city sales tax to 2.5% and expanding housing by permitting tiny homes. “The need for ADUs is imperative because we’re in a crisis,” she said. “If we have the ability to put these [ADUs] into an existing infrastructure, you don’t change the entire landscape with quoteunquote affordable workforce housing.”

“Whatever works, I am willing to do so we can bring our workers back to our city,” Jablow said. He agreed that permitting long-term ADUs and improving internet access would be beneficial, but also observed that without capping short-term rentals, entrepreneurs and business startups would not be able to afford to relocate to Sedona. Nor, he added, would they want to do so without access to good schools and doctors for their families.

“Why not have live and work housing [on Shelby]? Jablow said. “They can have a business on the first floor and they can live on the second floor.”

He alluded to his fight to take back local control and prevent the state from continuing to loosen local code restrictions that have so far prevented tall buildings in Sedona.

Nevertheless, Jablow said, “Tourism is our main income,” and did not propose a future for Sedona in which it was not primarily reliant on tourism revenues.

Transport

Both candidates continued to duel over the best solution to traffic congestion and public transportation in Sedona.

Jablow doubled down on his support for the Sedona in Motion program and called for “a multimodal city” in which the transport load would be divided among cars, buses, walking, biking and a proposed micro-transit program for residents. He stressed the need for more shared-use paths to make biking and walking safer.

While continuing to advocate the construction of connecting roads to bypass State Route 89A as part of his recently-emphasized emergency evacuation plan, Jablow also mentioned that one of his goals is to eliminate cars from streets. He claimed that the proposed parking garage was not intended to increase the number of parking spaces available in Uptown but rather to get cars off the streets by concentrating them in one spot.

“It doesn’t work like that,” Armstrong said, dismissing the idea that Sedona was “walkable in the first place.” She opposed the construction of hardscapes, sidewalks or shared paths as “antithetical” to the “dignity” of a rural community. “It’s urban! It’s city! It’s going to collectively destroy our environment by sealing off the ability for rain to be captured,” she said. Instead, Armstrong suggested separating walking paths from roadways with boulders, or constructing them using crushed granite or a porous substance sprayed onto the soil to stabilize it.

As for the bus system, Armstrong termed it a “colossal waste of time and money” intended to pressure residents into accepting greater control by the federal government. She argued against the city trying to convince residents to give up their personal vehicles, and repeated her previous suggestion that tourist parking be moved out of town, with tourists to be ferried into Sedona by a private company.

Climate Change

Jablow reiterated his support for Sedona’s Climate Action Plan. “I believe in it. I believe what we do in Sedona will have a little impact. I want to have whatever impact we can.” He also stressed that the CAP is undergoing continuous revision driven by public demand: “It all started from comments from the residents.”

Armstrong referred to the CAP as “absolute and utter garbage,” and took the opportunity to denounce the “greenwashing agenda,” pushed through in Sedona’s case by “six unique ideologues,” as a scheme by government “to control every aspect of your life.”

Dramatics

About 15 minutes into the event, Armstrong interrupted the proceedings to suggest Jablow had been given the upcoming question in advance, to boos from the audience. “Want to come take a look?” Jablow challenged her, offering her his papers.

Later, Armstrong made an admitted dig at Tesla owners and another at Jablow’s personal appearance, remarking that she “won’t turn red in the face” when dealing with other communities. Responding to the audience’s reaction, she said, “I can have humor, you can too. It’s time to be a bit more lighthearted.”