The Sedona City Council has scheduled a discussion of Mayor Scott Jablow’s proposed ordinance banning the use of OHVs on city streets for its meeting May 23.

According to the current agenda, the ordinance will be discussed but not voted on at this meeting.

While the item summary included in the council packet states that the draft ordinance’s definition of a motor vehicle will be updated “to expressly exclude electric bicycles,” the copy of the ordinance attached to the council packet does not reflect this change. The numbering of the ordinance also continues to specify that some of its provisions will be placed in the animal control section, if it is passed as written.

Residents Respond

After becoming aware of Sedona’s proposed OHV ban, a number of residents reached out to the Sedona Red Rock News about their experiences as OHV owners who drive their vehicles within the city.

All but one of the OHV owners with whom the NEWS spoke said that they drive their vehicles primarily on trails outside the city limits for recreational purposes. However, they all routinely drive through the city on city streets in order to reach those trails. Almost half of them do not own trailers; those who do only trailer when taking their OHVs to other locations in Arizona or to a shop for maintenance work.

More than half of resident owners will use their OHVs to run occasional errands or go shopping, and one uses his vehicle primarily for work and errands. Typical frequency of usage ranges from several times per week to several times per month, with some daily usage also reported.

“There is limited to no parking at trailheads now,” Pamela Czarniecki said. “Broken Arrow trailhead is not trailer-friendly. That entire neighborhood is going end up being overtaken with trucks and trailers up and down its streets.

“What? Do they think we will just stop riding? Never. Schnebley Trailhead is a little bigger, but it will fill up quick and same thing.”

“We came here on vacation from Texas a year and a half ago,” Czarniecki added. “We fell in love with the beauty, camping and off-roading. We had no idea it was legal to ride in the streets and not have to trailer constantly. We moved here just for that reason.”

“We do agree that the number of OHV vehicles on Sedona roads is getting crazy and the lack of road etiquette of the drivers can be dangerous,” Kristi Doman said. “However, we do not think residents should be punished for the behavior of tourists.”

“OHVs have no more or less impact than other offroad vehicles,” James Pautot said. “From the outside looking in, it would appear that the city of Sedona has had too much success with the rental companies of sideby-sides and now wants to find a way to eliminate that success … If their vehicles are fully registered and insured to meet the requirements of the Arizona MVD Title 28 requirements, it would appear Sedona is trying to negate a legal vehicle. It would be the same if someone said that ‘all Tesla vehicles catch fire so we don’t want them to drive in our city.’”

“I use my OHV primarily on our property doing general farm chores on our 20 acres,” Paul Huber said. “But, living in VOC, I run to Clark’s grocery and Ace Hardware and other errands here in the Village. In a three-year period I have only been on trails four times, all of those being Broken Arrow.”

Small Percentage

The city of Sedona produced a report on OHV activity in May 2019 that contained data on OHV trail usage proportional to Jeep tour and 4×4 usage. The report indicates that OHVs are responsible for a small fraction of total motorized trail use.

The highest levels of OHV activity were observed on Vultee Road between July and November 2017, which averaged as many as 22 OHVs per day on weekends in August, representing 25% of the total number of Jeep tours, 4x4s and OHVs using the road. In October, that number fell to 14 per day, or 17% of the total.

For the same period, weekends only, Broken Arrow trail showed much lower levels of usage. OHV use peaked in September with an average of 11 accessing the trail each day, or 12% of the total number of off-road vehicles. By November, this fell to an average of 4 per day, or 5% of the total.

More extensive data for Broken Arrow, collected during both weekdays and weekends from 2017 through 2019, showed the following average usage pattern:

• Jeep tours: 50 vehicles per day, or 63% of total vehicles
• 4x4s: 25 vehicles per day, or 32% of total vehicles
• OHVs: 4 vehicles per day, or 5% of total vehicles

Costly Consequences

According to a 2018 Arizona State University study, the OHV industry in Arizona generates annual direct spending of $1.86 billion and operating and ancillary spending of $2.64 billion for a total of $4.5 billion in economic activity. Arizona OHV businesses paid $221.8 million in state and local taxes in 2017. The same study found that 20% of the state’s patronized OHV trails are located in Yavapai County.

Sedona city staff did not disclose the amount of sales taxes that the city receives from OHV businesses.

If Sedona’s OHV businesses are responsible for just 5% of Yavapai County OHV activity and 1% of statewide activity, then those businesses create an estimated $45 million in local economic activity and pay $2.2 million in state and local taxes — approximately $1 million of which goes to the city of Sedona. A ban on OHV usage within the city would deprive the city of part or all of that revenue.

In addition, Sedona’s 2019 OHV report stated that if the city were to adopt more restrictive OHV regulations than those imposed by the state, “the city could lose approximately $3.9 million in state revenues” as a result of an SB1487 complaint under Arizona Revised Statute §41-194.01 by a member of the state legislature. The report admitted at the time that “a new city regulation prohibiting UTV use on city streets would be contrary to state regulations,” which could trigger an SB1487 complaint.

Sedona’s allocation of state shared revenues in fiscal year 2022 was $3,435,878.

Meanwhile, the Sedona City Council has stated that its objective with regard to tourism management is to reduce visitation to no more than 2019 levels.

On the basis of the city’s sales and bed tax collections from 2019 to 2022, achieving this goal would result in an economic contraction of 29%, equal to a loss of at least $300 million in local economic activity and a direct loss to the city of $10.9 million in sales taxes.