Opinion: Any change to Measure S should only be for bike trails
To the community,
There is an important meeting about bike paths coming up June 30 at 9am at the South Lake Tahoe library. If you support bike paths, you should attend and make yourself heard.
Remember Measure S? Money from it was designated to go to bike paths, ball fields, the ice rink and Tahoe Paradise Park. Well, the money for everything except bike paths has been spent or is allocated, but the bike paths haven’t been built and there is a pile of money there that the ball field people see and they want to get their hands on it.
Now we have the proposed Measure R, written by ball field proponents. Its purpose is to divert money from bike paths to ball fields. The voters voted for bike paths and ball fields in measure S. The ball fields already got their money. We still don’t have our bike paths. We need bike paths. Our economy needs bike paths. We don’t want the bike trail money diverted to ball fields. We need to complete our bike path network.
If the JPA (who manages the money) wanted to do what the voters want instead of what the special interests want, they would have written measure R to allow the unspent bike funds to be spent on bike paths other than the ones specified in the original Measure S. It’s simple. The problem is that they don’t want to do that because they want to divert the money instead to their pet ball field projects.
Measure R should be re-written to re-allocate bike path money for other bike projects that weren’t covered by the original Measure S. Keep bike path money for bike paths like we voted for or thought we voted for in the first place. Please attend the meeting and voice your opinion.
Hank Raymond, Meyers
Thank you, Hank Raymond! My thoughts exactly. All you bicycle enthusiasts, please, please mark June 30, on your calendar and come to the meeting at the library at 9 a.m We do need improved bike trails throughout our community. This money should go for it’s original intent, bike trails. Period.
Kaye, please double check the time and location, as I had 9:15 at the airport down for the meeting time and place. Thank you!
Very misguided! The measure S funds were intended for ball fields. We did not get what was promised. There were no promises for new bike trails, only maintenance on trails that were to be built with outside funding.
Economic impact: ball fields will allow infrastructure for us to become the tournament destination. There are billions of dollars spent each year for adult and youth events. In order for us to find those dollars we need fields! Please show me how bike trails will help our economy? Bike events use our roads not trails.
I wouldn’t mind them spending all the money on bike trails if you saw people using them. Do you know how many times I drive down the highway with the bike trails empty and bikes on the road. At least they use the ball fields.
Shirley,
We need to spend some money for signs on H50 to divert our visitors over to the bike paths.
We also need a bike path board walk from Elks Club, along the Upper Truckee , by the airport, to the Outdoorsman meadow and to H50, under the H50 bridge, and proceed down to the Lake to Cove East Park, and then a board walk along the lake shore to Lakeview ave. THAT IS WHAT WE NEED TO MAKE OUR COMMUNITY A BETTER PLACE TO LIVE AND DRAW MORE VISITORS TO LAKE TAHOE AND IMPROVE OUR LOCAL ECONOMY. I will be at the meeting next Thursday where ever it is.
Shirley, thanks for your comments. I have experienced the same outrageous selfishness many, many times. It is indeed frustrating but hardly the only frustration with sharing our roads with our visitors. The cycling community, although dedicated to their interests, is a small, vocal group of special interests. Just yesterday, I was turning onto Country Club Drive in Meyers where the bike trail crosses the street. Stop signs for the cyclists, both fully-costumed cyclists flew through the stop signs without so much as a glance at traffic, while I slammed on my brakes to avoid hitting them. They never even saw me. The lack of courtesy had better be addressed by the cycling community before someone dies. It will, of course, be blamed on the driver of the car.
Although, I support the maintenance of the bike trails, they simply are not the answer to our economy. Recreation is, indeed, very important to our economy. However, the attention to recreation should be far more broad-based and should create recreation for a much wider portion of our visitors’ demographic. IMO.
The problem, as always, is that very few people actually take the time to research and understand any legislation, the current Measure S legislation , or much less the proposed changes. At the same time, they are fully prepared to complain.
Shirley and dumbfounded,
Check the bicycle/pedestian/ect.. paths around the college and the Highland Woods neighborhood in South Lake Tahoe at minimum. There might be a possibility more people use these paths for everyday activities than motor vehicles (Highland Woods) at times. A very great community resource for efficiency, safety (getting people further away from motor vehicles), and just plain quality of life issues.
TAKE THE MONEY BUILD SOME HANDBALL COURTS.
True on the cyclists. The roadies will not use the bike paths. They don’t like the obstacle course of families with little kids and runners and dog walkers. They prefer to antagonize car drivers by demanding their “rights” to the road, and yet frequently ignoring the laws that apply to them as well.
It’s pretty much a no-win situation until they “cycling community” starts policing itself.
Use the money to build bike trails. If more ball fields are such a beneficial endeavor, they should bring up their own separate measure, and work on getting it passed.
@ careaboutthecommunity…get their own separate measure…read measure S…got it…passed it…now lets see the ball fields we should have….let the bike riders get their own measure and work on getting it passed!
I agree with you Tahoe Mom. We should follow the law that was passed.
Did anyone notice the use of fields this weekend with CUFA (Come Up For Air)Tournament? I think the total income the community received this weekend will show how we need good fields. Not only for this major draw, but have you ever had to schedule a kid’s soccer or football practice? A game or match? There just aren’t enough fields.
CUFA brought in 120 teams, over 2000 players and their families from areas near and far. The restaurants, motels, stores, gas stations all received the benefit of this. Had the school district received the city’s input of $250,000, their field would have been able to bring in 20 more teams…300 kids and their families. But, thats another story for another day :).
maybe water polo could provide some chilling thrills.plenty room out there.
Oh that’s right got have the balls checked for creatures,no boots,they charge you my how big you are.better check the bows,waders,swim fins,yep you got take a shower ,you got quagga virus.
Tahoe Mom, I have not read the entirety of Measure S, and have for the most part developed my position based on what others have commented on here.
My understanding is the measure was to include: an ice rink, a baseball field, and bike trail/path maintenance. Where is the discrepancy? Why is anyone arguing this? Does the argument lay in how many ball fields would be created? What does the measure say? Is it vague?
I do like 30yrlocal’s point about how many families came to town for the CUFA tournament, and acknowledge that it has been tough in many communities around the country to have enough ball fields for the amount of players that would like to play.
Can we compromise? Maybe some of the reserved funds could be put towards the ball fields, and maybe we could get a volunteer force to pitch in the rest.
Could anyone post Measure S here, or give a link to it?
Measure S taxes homeowners (like myself) to raise money for the construction of facilities for the use of local families.
Business interests want to hijack that money and put it into facilities that can be promoted for use by tourists.
If the ballfields will be used by out-of-town leagues, like CUFA, and the beneficiaries are local businesses, then those businesses should pay for the ballfields. Don’t tax local homeowners to support commercial facilities (such as the airport).
That is why I am against modifying Measure S.
@careaboutthecommunity…that’s fine, but then don’t say there should be a bike trail and nothing else…the ball fields would benefit the locals and give the opportunity for events that bring in out of town support.
Care, here is a link: http://cityofslt.us/ordinances/measure-s.html
Local businesses also pay the Measure S tax. In any event would be great if we could work all this out instead of money sitting in an account.
The resolution was posted on Upton’s column and the story written by an LTN writer before that.
The pot of money is sitting there for bike trails to be maintained in the future. Look at our current trails. Everyone complains thing get built without money allocated to maintain them. Finally, we have a way to maintain what WILL be built and we want to take it away?
Anyone think when the Cefalus get hold of the ice rink that that new company will then want to be making money off ballfields if they were built? Follow the money!
And there is really the need to build softball fields — if fields are to be built.