By Norm Wallen
Flagstaff Resident

These days a sense of humor is pretty much essential. Without it, you are likely to be angry much of the time or to question your sanity. No, I’m not referring to the election, though that’s another good example. I’m talking about the current spin on the preservation – at last – of the Dry Lake crater and its rare wetland just west of Flagstaff. I feel sure there will be those, including some of my friends, who disapprove of this story, believing we should be happy with the outcome and let bygones be bygones. Well and good if the developers and the Arizona Daily Sun were not promoting a dangerous spin on the process. The danger is that, once again, commercial interests that have fought community activists tooth and nail get away with portraying themselves as a major part of the solution instead of perpetrators of the problem. It’s called co-opting, folks. It’s also called greenwashing.

In an editorial (Dec. 21, 2000) in the Daily Sun, we read: “In hindsight, it’s too bad the parties could not have all sat down at the same table initially to work out their differences in a civil fashion. But the lesson for the future appears to be that if developers and preservationists can come to agreement on an issue as divisive as Dry Lake, anything is possible. We hope it’s a lesson that all parties put to future use.” Isn’t that sweet? Who can disagree? Except that the reality is very different. In a Dry Lake story published Dec. 20, the Sun quoted developer Jim Mehen as stating “We were tickled to be part of an example where developers and conservationists can sit down around a table and find a solution that satisfies everybody.” Are you laughing yet?

Some of us know parts of the real story. We know that there were never any overtures from Mehen to sit down with anyone. He played the usual game, just trying get his re-zoning approved by the County Board of Supervisors. The community would never have even had a voice if a couple of people, most visibly Mary Sojourner, hadn’t been paying attention and begun organizing. Mehen’s reaction – after he met with a few of his opponents (actually around a table) and tried, unsuccessfully, to convince them of the error of their ways – was to dismiss or try to discredit such impertinence. The most amazing part of the story is that Friends of Dry Lake, the local grassroots group that opposed Mehen’s plan, managed to continue an effective opposition over two years, requiring many, many hours of unpaid work.

Some of us remember Mehen’s letter to the editor in which he described the opposition as “Flagstaff’s small but very vocal group of anti-growth, anti-business and anti-development proponents.” He went on to admonish the business community to “take a firm stand against these unreasonable and misinformed groups that threaten Flagstaff’s ability to grow in a planned fashion consistent with the best interests of a majority of our citizens.” Pretty funny right? A rebuttal by ten well-known citizens followed.

Some of us remember his unwillingness to sit down and discuss such things as conservation easements or changes to his design. His response was, “We’ll talk when you have the money.” Some of us remember him breaking the promise he made when withdrawing his original proposal. He had promised not to return to the County Board of Supervisors with a new plan until the regional planning was completed. And we remember his repetition of his environmental consultant’s assurance that there were no endangered species on the property after his consultant had publicly apologized for his “mistake.” We also remember his total disinterest in the land swap until he finally lost at the Board of Supervisors on Sept. 2, 1999. Even then he described the process as “political extortion.” So much for sitting down together.

Only after Sept. 2 did Mehen get serious about the land deal that finally came to pass. Initially, he and the other developer, Robert Semple, negotiated with Friends of Dry Lake. Civil discussions around a table? Hardly. Instead it was one demand after another. Finally, the Friends accepted things they had fought against: houses visible from the crater, a road virtually on the ridge; encroachment into the crater from the north – and a damned golf course! All of this was to be outside the crater itself but it would be highly visible from town and accompanied by the usual tree cutting, blasting and bulldozing. Why did the Friends agree? For fear of losing the deal and thus the crater. Getting funnier by the minute, but we weren’t laughing.

After much wrangling, an agreement was signed moments before the Board of Supervisors meeting on March 20, 2000. At the meeting, the Board made it clear that its approval of the new development was contingent on the agreement to swap the crater to Semple followed by sale of the crater to the Grand Canyon Trust (for subsequent transfer to the Forest Service). Next came private financial discussions among Semple, Mehen and his associates (Flagstaff Ranch Golf Club) and the Trust. These should have been simple since the basics had been agreed to before the Board meeting. They were not. They dragged on for another nine months. The delay hindered the Trust’s ability to raise the $3.5 million needed to buy the crater and also hindered the Golf Club’s construction. Inevitably, word gets around – the word being that Semple was impossible to deal with. His temper tantrums were well known, having been demonstrated at a Board of Supervisors Meeting and in denunciations of the Board.

By now, everyone, including Mehen, the Homebuilders Association and others who had fought for Mehen’s original proposal, wanted the deal done. In August, the Trust learned that the Golf Club and Semple had finalized their land exchange, in violation of the March agreement and the Board directive. The Trust and their allies were outraged and considered filing a lawsuit. They did not because of the time consuming and expensive legal maneuvers that always accompany the breaking of a contract. They also feared losing the $2.5 million needed from the federal Land and Water Fund to complete the deal. The LWF funds were seemingly dependent on a united “home front.” Through all this, the Trust, their consultants and attorneys persevered. Crediting them is the only thing the Sun editorial got right. So much for good-faith negotiations and honoring of agreements. Ho Ho Ho.

Still, with the Golf Club out of the picture, Semple continued to haggle. He owned the crater, had agreed to sell it to the Trust, but kept dragging his feet. Time and again, verbal agreements once put on paper were rejected as he angled and tantrummed with only one possible goal – more money for himself. His intransigence nearly killed the deal many times, even after the federal moneys were awarded. What more did he hope to gain? Did he really think he’d be able to build in the crater? We’ll never know. Most likely it was only a poker game in which his childish behavior only strengthened his bluffs. And did he win? You bet he did and so did Mehen, getting everything they could have reasonably expected. Mehen got his golf course subdivision, enhanced in value because of the adjacent crater. Semple got top dollar for the crater itself. And the community? Well, after being jerked around for a very long time, we finally saved the crater with its steep slopes, rare wetland and stands of oak and aspen along with wildlife and some remaining silence. But take a good look just outside. Some win-win.

So, that’s the story, or at least a major part of it. A fine example of civil, reasonable win-win negotiations among really nice, caring people. As the Sun said, a real model for future development. Are you still laughing? 

 Norm Wallen is a community activist who served on the Flagstaff City Council from 1996 to 2000.