Measure R to be on Nov. 8 ballot
The board that oversees recreation Measure S on Wednesday voted on all the necessary motions to go back to the voters.
Measure R would revise the 11-year-old Measure S to allow for more bike trails to be given funding for maintenance and more money for ball fields.
The boundaries for the people paying the $18 a year fee are those who live within the Lake Tahoe Unified School District.
— Lake Tahoe News staff report
Boo. Vote no. If they couldn’t get it right the first time, what makes anybody think they’ve got it right THIS time? The politicians see a little pot of money just lying there for the taking. Not all us homeowners are rich vacationers. Think about your neighbors when you vote.
VOTE NO. Leave it alone.
This is just a shell game to overturn what the voters approved.
No, leave it alone, once and for all, quit wasting money trying to change it.
This measure is just another example of thief bureaucrats trying to subvert funds from what they tricked voters into voting for earlier. Let’s hope voters don’t fall for this scam again. It is no wonder citizens have such distaste for government and its schemes.
No, no, no! There is NO ADDITIONAL MONEY being spent by this measure! All of you above are mistaken. It is only allowing it to be spent to fix the OLD trails. Yes, it was written wrong the first time. Our old bicycle trails are badly in need of repair and this allows them to finally be repaired. Please don’t stop the old trails from being repaired. The money is sitting there for that purpose.
This does not require any more taxes than were approved by the original Measure S. It’s just how the money will/can be used.
Dogwoman, this has nothing to do with taking any more money from you or anyone else. Please don’t be misleading in what you say…..
It costs money to put on the ballot. Same with the $18,000 for Measure B(oondoggle). It’s taking money from maintenance of future new bike trail money and could hurt getting new trails built because O+M money won’t be available per grantee requirements. There is only a guarantee for ballfields to get immediately. Bike trails get money only if the money is there in 3-4 years. No analysis has been done what it takes to fix a mile of trail. Are cyclists really getting anything with this or caving because it sounds good. I was taught if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
This is f-ing dumb! They are wasting money to put something on the ballot to please a few individuals and it’s going to be voted down. I can’t wait to vote out every last person that pushed for this measure. The people had already voted on what they wanted that money to go towards. Stop wasting the taxpayers’ money on stupid stuff like this!!!!!!
no,no,no……..get rid current council on ballot,total recall”yes,yes,yes”!$
When Measure S was put on the ballot, part of the goal was to fund the maintenance of bike trails that were scheduled to be built. Unfortunately, few of the planned bike trails were built and therefore the maintenance dollars for those bike trails will not be spent. However, they MAY be built in the future. Since maintenance dollars are in short supply at this time, the idea is to use those existing maintenance dollars for older bike trails not currently covered by Measure S. However, until the exact language of the Measure (R) is known, one couldn’t possibly know what other uses for the dollars are proposed. From what I can discern, there will be no new taxes nor new funds. There will only be improved use of funds that are languishing in non-productive accounts.
If we want smaller government, we need to be involved, do our homework, ask questions and vote.
Perhaps Ms. Reed or John Upton could publish a summary of the proposed Measure R with a link to the entire document. This would be helpful to stop the rampant accusations. Misunderstanding comes from a lack of knowledge.
Right on Mr. Clark.
And maybe a breakdown of where the money has been spent and how much money is available or unspent. Let’s see if Mr. Upton is up to the task. This doesn’t have to be an audit type of accounting, just something relatively simple that we citizens can understand.