Letter: Fortier’s rant proves whose side she’s on
To the community,
It seems that we have the Queen of Hearts serving as mayor. In Alice in Wonderland when the Queen was unhappy with whomever or whatever in an angry burst, she shouted, off with their heads.
In a recent rant our mayor, Claire Fortier, raved in a tantrum on how unreasonable so many of us are. Translated, she’s sore because there’s a strong opposition to the loop road. She’s gone loony over the loop road. She wants it. Thus, those in opposition are unreasonable and divisive. Bad boys and girls.
Bill Crawford
Well, at least the mayor has taken off her disguise. She’s playing her cards to support the TTD and the Park Cattle Company. And the pressure’s on her to deliver. But it appears that she’s going to be knocked off her would-be throne.
Bill Crawford, South Lake Tahoe
PS: Hale Cole needs to be reminded that the deal between Randy Lane and the city on the hole was signed in July 2006 and that his signature is on it.
Well said, Bill Crawford!
Thank you Mr. Crawford! Couldn’t have said it better myself.
Old Long Skiis(STHS,class of 1972).
p.s. I should of paid more attention in your english class.
In this opinion piece alone (not to mention what was said in many of the comments posted in response to Claire’s opinion piece) we see Mr. Crawford using the words: rant, rave,and tantrum, and he even calls her loony. Now I, and I can only speak for myself, never HEARD any of those inflections in her piece, seeing as that it was written and not spoken. Many of you, Mr. Crawford included, seem to be projecting into her comments the tone in which THEY feel she was using.
I personally found many of the points she made to be spot on, and I would especially expect you, Mr. Crawford, to relate to her comments as they pertained to trying to govern in an extremely polarized environment.
If memory serves, Mr. Crawford, YOU were the brunt of some of the most vocal criticisms I have EVER heard leveled at an SLT council member in my 30 years of living in South Lake Tahoe!
Bravo! Mr.Crawford, Bravo!
Did you sign the document Mr.
Cole? And your memory is just failing or maybe selective. “Hole in the Ground” what’s that?
Thanks Bill.
It’s clear that Hal is for Nevada not South Lake Tahoe. By moving the loop road to go behind 7-11 it still moves potential costumers away from the city of South Lake Tahoe to Nevada. Get off the fence all of you and just say “No Loop Road” !
It would be timely to refresh voters’ memories with who Park PAC contributed to last time around.
Thank you Mr Crawford! Well said!
How does removing more California Businesses and making an express lane to Nevada at California’s expense help the California’s economy? It doesn’t!
Please, give us a City Council that is not beholding to another state?!
Our tax dollars should go to our town.
Why is everyone so concerned with tourists going to Nevada? If they want to go there, they will get there one way or another. Let’s help them move, get them off our streets and end the traffic nightmares. From comments against the loop road it sounds like we should do all we can to make car travel in South Tahoe as difficult as we can, and in that way people will give up trying to get to Nevada and pull into one of the businesses in California. Ha Ha
We need new blood in our council that will represent the residents of our city. It’s what they want not what the council member wants or their special interests that matters.
Biggerpicture and Steven — Perfectly stated.
Regarding Hal Cole and the City Council’s approval of the Convention Center Project, perhaps Mr. Crawford needs reminding that the day that discussion was on the City Council’s agenda for final approval Mr. Crawford showed up at that meeting and addressed the City Council during the morning pubic communications period and requested that boulders be strategically placed on roadsides in the Tahoe Keys to prevent vehicle and boat trailer parking. When the afternoon time-certain Convention Center Project agenda item came up for discussion and approval Mr. Crawford was nowhere to be seen and he never even voiced his opposition to that City Council’s approval of the project.
Revisionist history can go both ways.
Divisive. This could have been stated in a much more constructive manner.
Shame.
Mr. Crawford boycotted the afternoon session. Mr. Crawford did not vote for the the “grand hole.” Me thinks he clearly showed he was against it.
Mr. Zitts:
Since Bill Crawford wasn’t a sitting City Councilmember at that time he couldn’t vote on that matter. I’m sure Mr. Crawford will be pleased that you explained his absence from that afternoon session when the actual approval vote took place which provided him the opportunity to publicly speak in opposition of the project to that City Council. He has done an excellent job of verbalizing his opposition to that Council’s decision after the fact though.
Everyone has an issue with all the current people on city council be it bribery charges, who signed off on the “hole”, being cited by the Grand Jury for unethical behavior, to being disfunctional, to being beholden to Stateline interests. The same people have an issue with the candidates. They are beholden to Stateline, they are adveserial,they are unethical, they don’t understand budgets, and on and on.
So how about some discourse on what the positives are of the candidates running be them challengers or incumbents. Either we find two to vote for or everyone leaves their ballots empty and we get 2 new council people voted in by a handful of people.
Its past the ***** session time my freinds. Make your case for who should get elected becuase the ballots are coming soon.
Don’t forget that the city council will appoint a person to replace Claire. Depending on which two candidates win the election in November, the council’s choice could close the deal on several controversial issues. No? That is why, as one resident (not vitriolically) suggested, Claire should have resigned prior to the election and the electorate should have had the right to elect all three candidates.
But the way it’s going to be is that citizens elect two council members, the council chooses one member-maybe the all important one when it comes time to vote on the issues that decide the city’s future.
The 3rd place finisher should move into Clair’s vacated position.
Mr. Crawford improves everyones learning curve.