THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF LAKE TAHOE NEWS, WHICH WAS OPERATIONAL FROM 2009-2018. IT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH. THE WEBSITE IS NO LONGER UPDATED WITH NEW ARTICLES.

Opinion: TRPA has outlived its usefulness, time to disband


image_pdfimage_print

By Kathryn Reed

What is wrong with Lake Tahoe? Plenty.

What is right with Lake Tahoe? A few things.

What can be done so the answers are reversed?

Every time I leave town I contemplate the above questions because the negatives of Tahoe become crystal clear when other locations seem to have their stuff together. I also contemplate those questions and their answers with friends, colleagues and others in the area.

TRPA, a federal agency, has allowed cities, counties and state transportation agencies to let gunk flow directly into Lake Tahoe. Photo/LTN file

I have relatively minor examples in my life that show the difficulties I have had with rules in the Lake Tahoe Basin.

We don’t have our TRPA best management practices certificate because our driveway is out of compliance. It has a 1 to 2 percent grade. It’s concrete. The most expensive part of replacing the driveway is getting rid of the concrete. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency and the Tahoe Resource Conservation District want us to put in a swale on the “lake” side of the driveway. The water flows the other way, in front of our neighbor, into a ditch and into a field by an elementary school where sediments are naturally filtered out.

We live on a high water table. Each spring the sump pump sends water from under the house, through a pipe to the back yard – where many times the yard is then flooded. The water goes underground, back under the house and the process is repeated. I have spoken to TRPA, Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board, South Lake Tahoe and South Tahoe PUD officials about having a communitywide catch basin for all this water so it could be used for irrigation. I have even said tax us. Yep, I used that three-letter word.

They all said it’s not possible, that there is no shortage of water here so there is no incentive and that people would not tax themselves.

Well, taxing for the sake of taxing we won’t support. But taxing because there is a true, tangible benefit is different.

You see people, we are going to have to pay for the improvements in town. We are the government. I hear people say taxes are high in Tahoe. Prove it. Show me.

Yes, it’s expensive in terms of housing, food and gas. But taxes? Not so much.

(Yes, the state of California is outrageous – but that’s a different issue.)

Another personal issue was with business licensing. When I wanted to start a home-based business, I needed to go to the airport (aka city hall) for the regular business license. Then I had to go to South Lake Tahoe’s Tata Lane office for the home business license. Then I got to pay more money for the privilege to work at home – where I am not adding more vehicle miles traveled to get to an office.

Imagine if I had wanted to do something grander?

Government and regulatory agencies are the problem.

Companies and individuals wanting to do large-scale (even medium-scale) projects are hindered by regulations and then sued by environmental groups that don’t like the projects. The hoops people have to go through are astounding and counterproductive.

Improving infrastructure

Not all development or redevelopment is bad. But neither should it all be approved because there is environmental gain.

Do we really need a five-star resort at Homewood along a road that is so crowded? Do we really need a state highway in front of the only bi-state park in the country?

We can’t blame our woes on second homeowners. Like South Lake Tahoe, in Vail and Park City about 70 percent of the houses are not occupied by primary residents. Those towns are functioning and look great.

But those cities taxed themselves. (They aren’t perfect, no area is, and it’s not that we have to be them – but we do need to stop saying what we don’t want to be and figure what we do want because what we have is crap.)

We have to pay to have free transit if that’s what we want. We have to pay for roads if that is what we want.

Yes, part of the problem cities and counties have is the amount of money doled out each year on pensions and health care for retirees. But don’t begrudge the retiree for getting what their union bargained for. Look at the electeds who agreed to those public dollars to be spent on a few employees instead of the greater public. (It’s only a handful of employees who abused the system by racking up OT and doing other things to inflate their pension. But we the public need to demand those practices are not allowed – to stop the loopholes that essentially amount to the theft of public money.)

We can start by voting. Nov. 6 is the next chance to make a difference. City and county reps sit on TRPA and other vital boards. If you don’t vote, you are part of the problem.

Lakeview Commons in South Lake Tahoe was paid for by California Tahoe Conservancy dollars. That’s state money. Part comes from Tahoe license plate sales. Wouldn’t it be more logical to drive around with a Tahoe plate (California or Nevada), than a bumper sticker?

Improvements to the North Shore in Placer County come from taxing hotel guests in Lake Tahoe. Maybe next year when South Lake Tahoe asks voters to increase the hotel tax some of the dollars could be allocated for events or the arts or to improve athletic facilities and not just go to balance the general fund.

Monumental change needed

There are other ways to bring change beyond voting.

It is time to disband the TRPA.

A week from today is the annual Lake Tahoe Environmental Summit. Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., is hosting it at Edgewood Tahoe. Two other U.S. senators, a congressman and possibly the governors of California and Nevada, along with a cadre of local muckety-mucks, who often act like star-struck adolescents around these Washington-types, will join him.

TRPA was enacted by Congress to protect Lake Tahoe. Congress can make TRPA go away. What if we showed up at the 10am event in Stateline and took back our lake? What if we the people told these members of Congress that enough is enough?

TRPA has nine thresholds. Lake clarity is just one of them. That is why they get to say if your deck can be expanded, waffle on how big of a tree you get to cut down in your yard, if windows on a house should be allowed to be seen by boaters on the lake, and to decide after a fire obliterates 254 houses that pine needles as an erosion control measure isn’t so wise.

TRPA has done good. But even its executive director keeps admitting to how things must change, that past policies weren’t based on science, and that it is a new day.

Well, the new day should be that they go away.

Local jurisdictions can figure out how to zone areas. Local jurisdictions can figure out what type of lighting is good, what paint colors work, what signs should look like and if a tree should be removed.

Local water agencies and fire departments have proved that they can form regional alliances. Because we do need a regional, aka lakewide, approach to some matters.

Lahontan and the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection, along with owners of lakeside property, U.S. Coast Guard, and departments of waterways for the states will figure out the lake clarity part.

TRPA stresses that is a planning agency and not a doing agency. It looks like it planned the demise, ruin and destruction of Lake Tahoe based on the dilapidated infrastructure, lack of attention to water clarity along beaches (where we and the tourists are swimming), creating commodities out of commercial floor area and tourist accommodation units, and the empty buildings (because it’s so dang impossible to convert old hotels into housing or to renovate structures because of the air mitigation fees).

TRPA has failed us. We must stop this. We can’t rely on the updated Regional Plan that is supposed to be approved in December. Those close to the process say a lawsuit is likely if it does pass, and that it won’t include any meat in terms of real change. All of that remains to be seen and is speculation at this point.

Still, TRPA is hurting the Lake Tahoe Basin, not helping it. It served a purpose once, but now it is so much about creating job security for the people inside those walls.

This is the agency that last month paid approximately $12,000 for two people to come talk to the Governing Board and locals about what Tahoe needs to do fix itself. At the end of the three-hour public session I told two TRPA employees that the night was a complete waste of my time. Someone else told them the two speakers were preaching to the choir.

TRPA is a public agency – so that means those were our dollars that paid those people to essentially have a paid vacation in Lake Tahoe. Wow, I could talk for $6,000. I could give you my opinion for much less – oh, wait, I just did – and it was free.

 

 

 

image_pdfimage_print

About author

This article was written by admin

Comments

Comments (26)
  1. Steve Kubby says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    The TRPA does not have the authority it currently claims. Take a look at Article VI of the TRPA charter and you’ll see that its powers are supposed to be “general and regional in application,” leaving the writing and enforcement of specific and local ordinances to local jurisdictions like the City of South Lake Tahoe:

    “Whenever possible without diminishing the effectiveness of the regional plan, the ordinances, rules, regulations and policies shall be confined to matters which are general and regional in application, leaving to the jurisdiction of the respective States, counties and cities the enactment of specific and local ordinances, and rules, regulations and policies which conform to the regional plan.” (Emphasis added)

    What part of “whenever possible,” or “confined to matters which are general and regional,” or “leaving to the jurisdiction of… cities,” does the TRPA, or my critics, not understand? The elected officials of South Lake Tahoe have the legal authority to override the TRPA enforcement codes, to ignore its BMP requirements, and to tear up TRPA red tags, so long as the City Council is prepared to uphold the Constitution and protect its residents from such overregulation and illegal abuse.

  2. dave says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    You have just begun to scratch the surface. As an entrepreneur who moved here several years back, I find the regulatory environment stifling. The fact that a lawsuit is inevitable from the “league” only compounds the problem. This area is destined for only big, deep pocketed players, or very small business’ around the peripheral. Nothing in the middle, which would offer sustained support to the local populace. I am leaving, without investing my money, only to return to visit.

  3. X LOCAL says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    Wow, Great article. After all these years someone has finally awakened to expose the truth. This problem can start to heal itself when you get rid of Tom Davis, Hal Cole and Clair Fortier along with Nancy Kerry. Get a new City Council and get a Real City Manager. Then we have a chance to improve.
    Great article Kathyrn Reed.
    Thank you

  4. Frank T says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    Great article…  I agree …  To many thresholds and lack of prioritization have left our town in shambles and clarity on the back burner.

  5. Bob says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    Help the TRPA disband. Find an attorney to file a class action lawsuit against them for planning the demise of Lake Tahoe and its residents.

  6. Perry R. Obray says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    Hard for me to believe the TRPA controls dysfunctional entities like El Dorado county library, LTCC, vocational rehabilitation, in the city of SLT. Once the keys subdivision is mostly gone to restore the filter to the largest river entering Lake Tahoe, free nonpoluting public transit, buildings that don’t pollute, ect……once all this is accomplished, there will be no need for an all encompassing jurisdiction. Should be much cheaper to have a single outfit doing the research/ect…than 5-10 separate entities that have the same goals.

  7. fromform says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    the keys is essentially the reason for the continued existence of the TRPA. you are right, perry, that once the keys is mostly gone, there will not be much need for its oppressive reign.

  8. Blindspot says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    And when one county or another decides to stop mitigating air quality impacts because they can’t afford it, who stops them? What about when one jurisdiction decides they want to shoot bears or allow a McDonalds to install a 100-foot sign that can be seen from anywhere in the Basin. The argument for a regional entity was settled a long time ago and unearthing that debate makes us look like the dysfunctional morons, not forward thinking community leaders.

    “Local jurisdictions can figure out what type of lighting is good, what paint colors work, what signs should look like and if a tree should be removed…” History clearly shows this to not be the case. A city council or county board seat is too easy for a person of dim wit to win. Local control is great, but without regional oversight, the slope is slippery.

  9. dumbfounded says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    Excellent opinion piece. Yet another example of bureaucracy doing what it does best, overextend it’s authority to increase it’s own size and scope. It’s ultimate goal: protect the bureaucracy at all costs.

  10. Careaboutthecommunity says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    Explain any one of the imposed rules on homeowners to an outsider, and they are shocked that any entity has that kind of power, and they think many of the rules are excessive nonsense.

  11. lou pierini says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    If you agree with the article vote for people that feel the way the author does, or run for office yourself.

  12. Local Yokle says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    I do agree that the TRPA should strictly be a policy/research agency and not a policing one. Local agencies should be the enforcing bodies. Additionally, there should be a process to contest rules that make no sense (i.e. French drains required in areas that already flood) with a locally elected body to judge on the worthiness of such.

    The TRPA has long over-reached its own purpose. As I understand it, the TRPA was to make the rules around our lake the same with the goal of protecting the lake. We can all cite examples were money or politics have over ridden these goals and where the average tax payer is left with no options. If the TRPA is to exist it needs to be based on science and not who has the most money to buy their way through regulations. The rules should be the same for everyone.

    As for our city hall at the airport. I prefer we use our airport for something rather than build an office complex at tax payers expense. That building has unused parking and office space. If the City wants a better space maybe they can resolve the big hole at Stateline and save some money. I would sooner vote to disband our City Government than throw more money at their ongoing shenanigans!

  13. earl zitts says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    Kae, you arch conservative, what a wonderful common sense article you wrote.
    Maybe you will have started something that can grow and really change the way things are done in SLT and the basin. The TRPAZI will fight to the death to perpetuate itself so prepare to go to the mattresses.
    As an aside to the Keys haters, please get your science before you crucify a very important tax base for SLT. There are two very large settling areas on either side of the Keys for sediment precipation. 67 feet of clarity is excellent for the lake and the goal of 100 feet just an excuse for the TRPAZI to run and ruin you life and squeeze the life out of our community

  14. Dick Fox says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    Arch conservatives would agree with disbanding the TRPA, eliminating All regulations, not just the crazy ones, and improving our local environment with improved infrastructure with things like free transit, road repair and improvements like Lakeview Commons….. They just would NEVER accept paying for it. Never. After all, they Have theirs and are Taxed Enough Already! Big difference when trying to envision a new plan for our community.

  15. DAVID DEWITT says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    TRPA has always had to much power and not enough common sense

  16. Dogula says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    Dick Fox, you’re very big on stating what “arch conservatives” would or would not do if they had their way. It’s a funny little fantasy you live in. But so far, in the past 50 years, it’s only people like YOU who have had their way, and we KNOW how well that’s going.

  17. Mike Mulligan says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    Have lost many Real Estate deals as a direct result of TRPA. They are smothering this community. Nice article Kay.

  18. Biggerpicture says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    Many love to bash the TRPA, and more often than not deservedly so. But we might be well served to take a step back and approach the question from this angle:

    What would the lake and our area be like had there not been a TRPA formed? It scares me to think what this pristine (for a populated area we have to admit this statement holds true) environment might look like today had the development that came with the 1960 Olympics and into the building of the Keys kept at that pace completely unchecked. I’m by no means sticking up for the TRPA, but it is a valid question we should ask ourselves before possibly throwing out the baby with the bath water.

  19. Dogula says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    So, just because you think TRRPA may have done some good in the past, you believe that is reason enough not to disband them? Does ANY government beaurocracy EVER go away? Regardless of whether or not it is still needed? Are we not broke? Do we not have an overabundance of environmental agencies caring for the Sierra in the present day? Is TRPA still necessary, if it ever was? That is the question to ask.

  20. Satori says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    Great timing for such a thoughtful piece – given the arrival of the latest Tahoe Summit next week. . . Last year was laughable, watching both Governors and Jared Blumenfeld, the EPA ‘wunderkind’, “kick the can down the road” 65 years, in recognition of TRPA’s “cash cow” (SNPLMA) disappearing into the sunset.

    Disbanding TRPA (with their prevailing Emperor’s New Clothes attitude sounds good, except for the alternative: leaving the Lake’s communities to their own devices.

    We have a great example already, with the City of South Lake Tahoe – let someone else other than us, anyone, do we can continue to cover up (our main function) the mistakes we make via using our promotional funds (TOT) for everything but promotion.

    TRPA might as well go by the wayside, as they are already on the path of shifting further responsibility to Tahoe’s communities, who’ve shown no inclination to know, or even caring to know, what kind of future might allow optimized health & well-being for themselves, their neighbors, or their “community” – if they even choose to have one. . .

    The best case for disbanding TRPA, and Kae’s point, is in the continual “recycling” (some would say ‘regurgitation’) of the thresholds – most have never worked; the ones that got close weren’t close enough to accomplish more than 6″ of the very clarity so cherished as a goal.

    Redesigning & redoing “town centers” (I.e., neighborhoods) is a “pig-in-poke” for most areas, which just adds fodder to the fire of rejection.

    Absent compelling (I.e., substantial) reasons to change what they’re doing, most people will their demise.

    Be careful what you wish for, though, as in an economy as frail as this one is, the only reliable incomes are theirs – even as their duties are already shrinking.

  21. John says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    I understand most of it, but I dont get the part about having a state highway in front of Van Sickle. I cant think of another state park that does not have a state highway in front of it. I also cant think of another international resort destination that cant have a street party because there is a state highway running through the center of the entertainment district.

  22. Honkylonk says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    Nice piece, Kae…and nice to see how you view you world now as a homeowner and small business owner. The countless burdens imposed on all of us by any number of faceless, self-serving bureaucrats has reached the level of intolerable. Take back the lake? I’ve got a pitchfork, sign me up!

  23. fromform says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    either we build some form of the loop road or we stay where we are, which is falling further and further behind. a few benefit from the status quo, and they are vocal. the whole town will come alive if highway 50 is made to bypass the casino corridor.

  24. 22 year SLT Resident says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    Spellcheck the article and you will see the recommendation to change TRPA to TRAP!:-)

  25. Paulson says - Posted: August 6, 2012

    It’s interesting that we can persecute the homeowners for BMPs that don’t even drain to the lake, harass off roaders (most of whom are responsible outdoorsman), move rivers in the hope we can reduce sediment and regulate the heck out of everything else, yet we do nothing about boats and marinas.  Boating is encouraged, more piers installed for promoting direct use in the one thing we are striving to protect.  How can we expect clarity to improve if we continue the very same use that perpetuates it’s destruction.?   I believe the lake healed after the Comstock because the source causing the destruction was stopped (clear cutting and stream disturbance)   It then could begin the process of healing through time.   The keys can’t be moved, boating is here to stay and recreation sure to be a keystone of enthusiasts and our economy.   At some point it appears we must accept that lake clarity will not be what it was in 1968, the nearshore affected by the very people housing “keep Tahoe blue” stickers on their cars and all of us who love to live, socialize and recreate here.  The best thing the TRPA did was limit development in sensitive environmental areas and protect stream zones.  It was drastically needed in the 60’s when development was rampin.  With the current onset of exploding productive diatoms, rising temperatures and excessive nutrients,  it seems difficult to believe that clarity can be reversed even with the massive dilution of the lake and granted the basin can get enough funding to implement all projects in directly connected urban watersheds supposedly causing excessive  fine sediment to be introduced into the lake.  The TRPA fills a niche, a niche that if it weren’t present would have caused excessive destruction to this ecosystem.  Are they needed anymore?, well i guess that depends where your standing…  We’ll see I guess..  I’m remaining neutral….

  26. nature bats last says - Posted: August 14, 2012

    Stop whining! The TRPA was started by that socialist Ronald Reagan. WHY? Because the clarity of Lake Tahoe went from over 100 feet to 60 feet in less then a decade; WHILE WE HAD SO-CALED “LOCAL CONTROLS!” Ah yes, the “good’ol days” when Lake Tahoe was on track to look like Clear Lake with 1 foot of visibility by 1990! We have been “developing” Lake Tahoe to “save” it since the 1860’s; it’s never worked. I personally don’t loose any sleep knowing some people are actually trying to Keep Lake Tahoe BLUE rather then turning it Greenish Brown. I have been to Hawaii, Mexico, the Caribbean etc and they are all being TRASHED by tourists and development. “Call someplace paradise and kiss it goodbye.” D. Henley. I hope we are an exception.