S. Tahoe staff, council differ on need for commissions
By Kathryn Reed
Even though staff told the South Lake Tahoe City Council there is no money, time or staff to deal with the non-mandatory city commissions, the elects aren’t ready to disband them.
Instead, the council wants to have every member of the Parks and Recreation, Latino Affairs, Sustainability, and Airport commissions make a case for why their particular commission should stay the way it is. Even if everyone weighs-in, there is no guarantee later this fall the council won’t take staff’s recommendation and do things differently.
And if the commissions stay in place, the council will have to figure out how best to allocate the minimal resources left in the city to handle this non-essential work. Staff reductions in the last few years mean 65 fewer positions – or one-third the employees are gone.
Prior to the Oct. 2 meeting the city manager had contacted the chair of the Sustainability and Recreation commissions to apprise them of the agenda item. Neither attended Tuesday’s meeting.
The Latino Affairs Commission only has a couple members and therefore is not able to meet because it does not have a quorum. This has been an issue for that commission for some time.
Councilman Tom Davis, who chairs the Airport Commission, said he is fine with disbanding that group. However, David Kelly, who is on that commission, said the opposite.
City Clerk Suzie Alessi and City Manager Nancy Kerry tag-teamed the presentation to the council that outlined what the commissions do and why change is needed.
Kerry explained that each commission is subject to the Brown Act – the California open meeting law, how staff helps oversee the commissions and that city offices are used for the meetings.
What was proposed was to make many of these commissions committees. This would eliminate the open meeting requirements, allow for less structure and potentially the ability to get more things done.
However, the council likes having control over the commissions, including who is on them. Council members also questioned whether there would be their desired transparency if the groups become committees. And then there was the question of whether committees would have the same voice as a commission.
By state law or city code South Lake Tahoe must have the Building Board of Appeals, Delinquent Refuse Fees Hearing Board, Planning Commission, and Airport Land Use Commission.
The city has technically not had the latter commission. It got away with it under old state requirements by having the Planning Commission plus two airport commissioners convene. They haven’t met since 2007. But current law necessitates the new commission be formed.
That commission will be comprised of two county reps, two city, two aviation experts and one person from the general public. The purpose is to work on land use issues involving the airport. With the city soliciting requests for proposals for someone to come up with a master plan for the airport, the commission would be on the ground floor with that process.
The current Airport Commission is more involved with operations of the airport. The new commission would have none of those responsibilities.
Council recommended blending the Delinquent Refuse Fees Hearing Board’s responsibilities into one of the established commissions. The Planning Commission or Building Appeals are contenders.
Davis wondered why the city deals with collections for South Tahoe Refuse when it doesn’t for other utilities. Because that stipulation is part of the franchise agreement is the answer. That, though, could be changed.
Changes the council agreed to are:
• establish the Airport Land Use Commission
• appoint two physically handicapped people, per the Health and Safety Code, to the Building Board of Appeals.
Altogether too many people with too much time on their hands.
Commissions are a very important component to city government, as they represent the community voice & perspective regarding policy, budget & funding for those important departments. They are able to question planning & spending issues that might be rubber-stamped by staff and/or the City Council. To save money, the number of meetings can be reduced, and minutes can be tape-recorded without a staff member present, and subsequently typed up by staff for public record. Commissioners are un-paid volunteers who spend a lot of time and effort to ensure the public’s interest & agenda is seen & heard. The use of office space for their meetings is concurrent to other uses in place, and their time is free! To eliminate Commissions is to close the door of transparancy!
PS – their meetings are public, and should be posted on a public reader board
and in the local papers.
“Davis wondered why the city deals with collections for South Tahoe Refuse when it doesn’t for other utilities.”
I guess Councilmember Davis either forgot or ignored that the City of South Lake Tahoe mandates that South Tahoe Refuse perform trash collection at every City address whether or not they get paid by said property owner/renter. If the City wasn’t involved in that then South Tahoe Refuse could execute a collection process for delinquent fees rather than needing the City to initiate a lien process on their behalf via El Dorado County and property taxes.
If they are unpaid volunteers, then why is there no money in the budget for the commissions?
What is the breakdown of expenses for these all volunteer groups?
Irish Wahini:
I agree. And I wish this City Council would expend some effort and vision on how to generate new revenues for the community rather than just wringing their hands about no money and continuing to eliminate services. Put on your thinking caps boys and girls, and come up with a plan to help bring more money to the community. Have some vision for goodness sakes!
Thank you, Irish, I couldn’t agree more! Time to think outside the box, bring in new revenue, and stop piling more fees and restrictions on our business owners, which translates to higher costs for our citizens.
The City Council needs to stop micro-managing every tiny detail of the day to day operations of the City and staff’s responsibilities and concentrate on a macro methodology to start bringing some prosperity to this community, which is THEIR job. For example, certain Councilmembers brag it up about their breakfasts or meetings with state legislators but they never talk about plans or meetings with out-of-the-area businesses to recruit them to our area and bring in more jobs and revenue. Nothing is done to promote non-tourist, office type businesses which could easily be operated here such as medical and computer tech support centers or environmental non-profit organizations. Have some foresight and diversify the economic base of this community. This town needs visionaries on the City Council and the out dated Councilmember business model of protecting only the vested interests of their own and their exclusive cronies are not acceptable.
The City Council has defined their job as: Economic Development, Fiscal Sustainability, Improve the Built Environment, Public Trust and Accountability, and Partnership Development. They should focus on this and this alone.
Unfunded commissions should be disbanded or the responsibilties integrated into funded ones. Manage the infrastructure to accomplish the goals, don’t go outside it.
4-mer-usmc—— Your last comment with regards to vested interests brings up an issue about our town. The upcoming elections for City Council positions will only be voted on by people whose voter registration for the US President in at their address here. I would venture that the majority of property owners in South Lake Tahoe do not have this voter registration here but at their primary home elsewhere. We are a city of 2nd homeowners who pay propety taxes without representation as well as no local voice in the elected officials who are supposed to represent them. When the city was formed in 1965, these property owners were not able to vote to establish the city or not. Seems there should be a way that property owners as well as those who rent but live in someone elses property could have a say in the way their taxes are spent.
Tahoeadvocate:
I don’t know any other way that voter registration could be affected other than primary residence. While second homeowners who don’t live in SLT have no say in SLT City government elections neither do local residents living in the unincorporated portion of SLT in El Dorado County, and those individuals are directly impacted every day by the government of SLT and the City Council’s actions and decisions. Unfortunately that’s just the way it goes. Renters living in someone else’s property can vote in City government elections as long as they reside in the City of SLT, so they do get to participate in the local decision-making process.
4-mer-usmc—- I agree with you but it’s too bad that our system doesn’t allow for a person to select one place to vote for President/Vice President while being able to select their State and Local representatives wherever they pay property taxes. As far as the people in the unincorporated area of the county, they do have the right to become incorporated into the city and have a direct vote then. I know my other property in another state is that way and we chose not to become part of the city even though their elections do affect us.
residency is king apparently.
4-mer – You will be pleased, then, to see what I have to say in the upcoming Business Monitor.
44-mer -I’m a people watcher and thats how we can help by letting people know how we feel.