With the 2022 general or primary election behind us, we can now look towards the future.
The race for Sedona’s mayor is heading to a runoff between the top two vote-getters: Vice Mayor Scott Jablow and newcomer Samaire Armstrong, both of whom ousted four-term incumbent Mayor Sandy Moriarty.
It seems clear from the election results that after 2020, voters who had been unhappy with the incumbent mayor didn’t have enough votes to replace her.
Challenger Kurt Gehlbach was both a protest vote and a candidate in 2020, but in 2022, Sedona residents definitely wanted a change, but Gehlbach wasn’t it.
Instead voters chose between two new challengers to replace Moriarty, whose campaign was not as animated or motivated as Armstrong and Jablow, as reflected in election day totals. Now these two candidates will compete to earn Gehlbach and Moriarty’s voters as well as general election voters who didn’t vote in the primary.
We thank Moriarty for her eight years of service to the city of Sedona, on top of her four months of service on Sedona’s provisional council after incorporation in 1988, and we wish her well in her future endeavors.
The election results also indicated that while the candidates handled themselves with respect and decorums — for the most part — the actions of some nefarious and nasty proxies negatively affect their candidates. We urged voters to hold candidates responsible for the actions of their proxies and voters did so. This should serve as a warning in the runoff for future elections that candidates have a duty to keep their proxies in check. After all, once elected, no proxy will be on the dais during a debate, so candidates must learn how to speak up and defend their decisions on their own.
We encourage voters to be passionate and vigorous in their support for candidates but stop any underhanded, cruel or cowardly actions that may reflect on their candidates come election day. If a candidate is the right choice, let their ideas and words stand alone without bad posters, removing signs or other dirty tricks.
In terms of council, voters have made their choices and selected three candidates who will not face a runoff. We thank Councilman Tom Lamkin for his service, though we wish he would have run for reelection so voters would finally have been able to elect a candidate who was twice appointed, first to fill Councilwoman Angela LeFevre’s term, then Councilwoman Janice Howes Hudson’s.
Unless Lamkin runs again, he will be a unique historical footnote who served more than five years on council though was never elected.
We also thank Councilman Jon “J.T.” Thompson for his service, though he was not reelected, and expect he will remain a strong voice to address climate issues.
We look forward to Brian Fultz, Pete Furman and Melissa Dunn on City Council and hope that they listen to voters, the will of the public and act accordingly with forethought, respect and the courage to stand up to the squeaky wheels, special interests and NIMBYs who are often the loudest voices in council chambers, but have myopic views of our city.
We hope these candidates do what’s right for residents as a whole, even and especially for those who did not vote for them but instead voted for their opponents. Once you swear the oath of office, you serve the city as a whole, not merely those who funded your campaign or selected your name on a ballot.
One of the biggest problems of City Council is that current and recent council members get pigeonholed into listening to those who voice their views during public comment at council meetings, regularly email them, have their personal phone numbers or gain exclusive access via their private political clubs.
This cadre or cabal of voices represents only a few hundred residents, but this city has 9,680 residents — hundreds of whom are children — and many residents are simply too busy to attend council meetings, or are working, or can’t afford childcare or are just too tired after a day of work to call council member about issues, often feeling council members will ignore them.
Council members are supposed to represent us but often do not, so it behooves these new officials to speak to residents at restaurants, retail shops, at community events, schools and public functions; wherever residents may be that are not in the antiseptic and limiting space of a Tuesday council meeting or a council member’s personal Gmail inbox.
I can count on one hand the number of nonpolitical events I’ve seen council members attend, but that was one of the reasons why voters liked Moriarty: She regularly attended these events and was always accessible. Use her service as a touchstone. Be a public figure at public events. Ask residents their concerns, ask for their opinions, ask them what affects them and how the city or city council members can help. Attend meetings and gatherings hosted by people from the other party — council seats are supposed to be nonpartisan, try and pretend like that’s true.
It’s good for voters, it’s good for your public service, you might learn something that helps everyone, and to be cynical and coldly political, it’s good for a potential reelection campaign.
Christopher Fox Graham
Managing Editor
