“Sedona” might be considered to be borrowed into Latin and hence indeclinable, as was the case for a number of borrowings when Latin was still an active, living language. However, Latin usage tends to treat names which appear to conform to Latin structure as if they were nouns of the relevant declension. Hence “Ad Sedonam…” would be the preferable form, treating “Sedona” as a first declension noun and the preposition ad governing the accusative case.
“…et ultra” is completely proper. However, Latin usage tended to form constructions of this sort using the alternative “-que” suffix to join two words, particularly when one was an adverb like “ultra” relating closely to the previous noun phrase. Hence, Ad Sedonam ultraque would probably be the preferred Latin construction, though “…et ultra” would be grammatically and syntactically sound usage — much as “My aunt’s pen” is the preferred English translation of “la plume de ma tante” (or “la plume de la soeur de ma pere” :eek: ).
Actually Sedona should be in the accusative, so I’ll arbitraily impose a feminine first declension (since “Sedona” ends with an -a) and that would give you Ad Sedonam et ultra, which would look more grammatical in Latin.
Actually, “Sedona” is a woman’s name so feminine is appropriate. When it came time to name the town, they wanted to name it after Sedona Schnebly. I think using her first name was much better than using her last name.
Yes, I like the ad…et… construction better, too. And even though it isn’t strictly precise Latin, I think I’ll use Ad Sedona et Ultra as the phrase, being slightly more understandable to the lay person.