Nason resigns as ED from League to Save Lake Tahoe
By Kathryn Reed
Rochelle Nason was adamant Wednesday morning when she spoke with Lake Tahoe News – saying she is not resigning as executive director of the League to Save Lake Tahoe. However, a press release arrived at 2:34pm saying otherwise.
Nason did not answer the phone when called this afternoon.
The press release says, “League to Save Lake Tahoe Executive Director Rochelle Nason has resigned today, effective October 2011, after nearly 20 years of working to protect and restore Lake Tahoe. League Program Director Carl Young will serve as interim executive director, with Nason serving as a senior advisor, until a new executive director has been selected.”
Rochelle Nason
Nason has had the top position since 1993, having been the League’s attorney for one year before becoming executive director.
The League has been chastised more than usual in the past year for continually suing entities in the Lake Tahoe Basin. Many call the environmental group obstructionists who only file lawsuits, provide no real leadership and offer no solutions to the problems in the basin.
While the League is based in South Lake Tahoe, Nason spends the bulk of her time in Berkeley. She said in the press release that traveling between the Bay Area and Tahoe is not something she wants to continue.
The last lawsuit the League lost was the decision last month regarding the Sierra Colina project in Stateline.
Dissension in the ranks surfaced this summer when Nason said the League’s annual fundraiser on the West Shore at a house that involved an illegal extension of a pier was essentially no big deal. The League’s board president, Robert Damaschino, said otherwise. At the time, in a statement, Damaschino said, “The League to Save Lake Tahoe views the environmental violations that took place at the site of our fundraiser as a very serious matter. We support the efforts of TRPA and the landowner to correct them and assure they are not repeated.”
Most board members never issue statements, instead deferring to staff to speak for the League.
In the Sept. 14 release, Damaschino praised Nason’s leadership – “The entire Lake Tahoe Basin will continue to benefit for years to come from what she has accomplished over the past two decades.”
Just curious. What exactly has she accomplished? I know she has put up a lot of roadblocks, but I don’t think those are normally referred to as progress.
Good question, dogwoman. I, too, would like to know what positive things have been accomplished by the League.
Dogwoman and Grannylou:
That makes three of us who want to know what positive things the League/Nason have accomplished. All I am aware of are lawsuits.
“Never look a gift horse in the mouth.”
In other words: Its not as important to ask what the LSLT did to help the Lake, as it is to know they will no longer NOT be doing it.
This is a good day for the Lake and the stagnant economies that surround it.
Perhaps we can look forward to Tahoe residents taking care of Lake Tahoe.
Now Rochelle can go stir up some mud in Berkeley.
I am so suprised at how negative people can be in our community…What did you all do to change it. Hopefully this gal tried her best. Obviously she is loyal and was worth something if she put in 20 years. She probably contributed more than any of you or myself to this beautiful place. Take the boulder out of your own eyes before plucking out hers. Happy Retirement or whatever your endeavors are. The ones you neeed to watch is the city…Go this Thursday and watch them slice and dice our loyal workers / community some more.
Rochelle Nason is still senior adviser. Carl Young will be interim director. The obstructionist views will still be in play unless the Board of Directors makes a conscious and significant shift in the organization’s culture.
For all of those wondering what the League’s accomplishments have been, they have them all listed on their website.
See it for yourselves.
http://www.keeptahoeblue.org/our-work/accomplishments/
Looks to me like this woman and her cronies were the height of hypocrisy.
The board made the right decision..
The Sierra Colina Project actually improved the environment. The developers were pretty generous in giving over the half of the land back for recreation purposes.
She cried wolf too many times and now she can stay in the Bay area where obstructionist activities are in the mainstream.. good riddance..
I am sure she will find a great job working for ACORN.
Green Falcon
I, for one, am very glad to have a reliable, consistent news source like Lake Tahoe News.net to let us know what is happening in our community.
The timing is interesting. Last month the League’s annual Oscar de la Renta fashion show raised a substantial amount of money for the organization. Maybe part of that was allocated as severance pay for Berkeley’s Rochelle Nason?
The C.E.O. of a major conglomerate at one time said that he would never have an Attorney on his Board of Directors – when asked why, he said it was because they only tell you what not to do. . . almost never offering what can be done.
In Rochelle’s case, that worked for quite a while, given the nature of confrontation (as environmentalists . . .
The current legal system cannot handle sustainable directions, as it is antiquated enough not to know how to be proactive – just how to answer with litigation as negotiable ‘bargaining chips . . that’s Rochelle’s downfall.
Joanne Marchetta (TRPA) is also an attorney, which may also hold her back from the necessary proactive leadership capacity for Tahoe’s future. . . we’ll see.
I hope that this may bring some needed changes in the LTSLT/aka League to Sue Lake Tahoe…it is a shame that the League has come to this pinnacle of “sue happiness”, all in the name of the environment, of which, we all desire to protect here in the Lake Tahoe basin.
This is a great first step in trying to get the citizens respect back. Now if they can just be a positive force to help us all move forward, if not, then I think they are an outdated agency that was unable to keep up with the times.
Can they help fund research?
Offer scholarships?
Take on organization and funding for at least small projects?
Be a sounding board and resource to help us do things the best way we currently know how?
or is this all under TRPA’s objectives?
I think it still is going to be a struggle to see where they fit in the picture. Maybe they can be the educators, teaching tourists to take care of the lake, and/or assisting TRPA with projects when they are short of funds.
I don’t think that anyone is surprised by this. Her fate was sealed when she mishandled the press. Unforgiveable for a spokesperson.
So much positivity, as usual.~
Some of the above apparently have not been paying attenion. The League with Rochelle’s leadership has been responsible for bring some $1.5 billion in federal funds to Tahoe for EIP projects; opposed the proliferation of piers and bouys, monitored development projects that are more about $ than the lake, etc., etc.
Her leaving will be a great loss, but she
has built an orginization that is strong
and will not go away.
See you at beach clean-up day and forest
stewardship day… or are you just a bunch of whiners?
Jerome Evans
We were all waiting for YOU to say something positive, Robot!
Jerome, it’s not how much is brought in that matters, its what is done with the money that matters. What has the League done with millions of donations? They have sued everyday people trying to make a living, sued developers trying to improve their properties, sued government agencies and non-profits and sued just about anyone or any agency that would bring them publicity, that they could use in turn to get more monety, that they could use to sue more people.
The League needs to FUND technology and projects to improve current conditions in order to improve the lake.
Calling people out on being factually incorrect is neutral. In a world where truth should matter, it is positive.
Honestly, this is such a giant step forward for the environment and Lake Tahoe. This woman put up so many road blocks that Nevada was forced to pass legislation to bypass her obstructionist tactics. The TRPA, under the sage guidance of Joanne Marchetta, is now in the position to do what it was mandated to do 30 years ago: preserve the pristine beauty of Lake Tahoe and make the basin a vital, livable entity for all to enjoy for millennia to come.
This will be a great day for Tahoe both the lake and the economy. She may have brought 1.5 billion but how much of the did the locals see and how much was wasted by attorneys and scholars who never came to the lake. What kind of carbon footprint did she leave commuting between the Bay and Tahoe for 20 years. Just like the Sierra Club and other court room environmentalist, the need to come up with solutions and not lawsuits.
Let’s hope the next in line can make some changes or the number sticker comes off the truck.
Jerome, for the League to take full responsibility for SNPLMA and the private share is misleading at least. Yes the League did help, but there are about a dozen other groups that helped equally.
And that is the problem Rochelle has. Over the last five years she quit being a member of the bigger community of groups that gets things done in Tahoe. So she had to resort to lawsuits where great attorneys win the negotiation.
John is correct it was many people that helped get funding. Rochelle has zero access to republicans at the state and federal levels both of which were needed to secure funding.
It’s people like Jerome who give the League to Kill Lake Tahoe a bad name. Keep it up!
1.5 billion and lake clarity still declines while resources are being funneled to thresholds that won’t improve it. Money will not solve this problem only a fundamental shift in how we do business. This may be a good first step.
Did Rochelle really lie to Kae? Not Rochelle who specializes in truth, justice, and the American way. Just another lying NGO politician with an axe to grind. I guess she got tired of swimming in the pure waters of Lake Tahoe. The cesspool called Berkeley is so much more fun to swim in and she can swim with her wacko friends.
I’d like to think of this as a positive development, but I don’t forsee any real change in the attitude of the elitists at the League to Starve/Stymie/Sue Lake Tahoe. Time will tell, but I’ll bet they contnue to be the obstinate obstructionists that have always been.
Finally!
The fundamental nature of an environmental advocacy group is to question and push policy makers to the best decisions possible for the environment. It is not the League’s role to fund research or direct improvemens. Does the Chamber fund these things? However, the League has performed their role in a very confrontational manner over the last 20 years, often cherry picking data to push an agenda that has stalled investment needed to address the critical environmental issues we have. I look forward to new leadership continuing to ask the hard questions, but also recognizing that our true environmental problems will only be solved through private investment in urban upgrades. If we cannot attract that investment, both our environment and our economy will continue to suffer.