Letter: Sass should be appointed to S. Tahoe council
To the community,
In light of Claire Fortier’s expected, yet somewhat sudden, departure from the South Lake Tahoe City Council last week, the big question that looms in the minds of many of us city Of South Lake Tahoe voters is who and how will Claire Fortier be replaced.
In my opinion, and in the opinion of many of my fellow South Lake Tahoe voters, whom will hopefully voice their opinion on this matter in some way, shape, or form, feel that the only one specific course of action that would be an acceptable resolution to this situation would be to appoint Austin Sass to the council seat vacated by Ms. Fortier.
By virtue of the results of last month’s election it’s quite obvious that the voters have no desire to see Bruce Grego return to a council seat. I am also quite sure that most city of South Lake Tahoe voters would be highly dismayed were the council to opt for a costly special election. The voters have spoken and the council, in my opinion, should not waste any more time or money on this issue, and should appoint whom I, and many others, see as the most qualified candidate, who burns with a fire to serve his community to the best of his ability. And I just want to remind you that those abilities are highly developed, and he is highly qualified and prepared to take on the work load that accompanies the job of a city council member of the city of South Lake Tahoe.
Respectfully,
Toogee Sielsch, South Lake Tahoe
SASS SHOULD BE APPOINTED ASAP, HE IS THE ONE THAT HAS RUN AND ALMOST WON.
Sass like Grego lost the election. Why in the world would the Council appoint someone who lost. “Coming in third” is akin to everyone gets a participation trophy. Had there been three seats open to vote on, which is essentially what you are arguing, the votes would have been very different. There were two seats and Sass and Grego weren’t even close.
I urge any City of SLT voters that feel the same as I do, and even those that may disagree with me, to please let your voice be heard on this issue by either showing up and speaking when the City Council will be holding a special meeting on Wednesday, January 2, 2013 at 9am to discuss this issue, or as I have done write a letter to be read at that meeting by emailing Susan Alessi at salessi@cityofslt.us.
He lost the election even though he spent more money per vote than anyone. That money came from Nv. loop road interest and the voters don’t need any more of that. Let him apply like EVERYONE else.
it’s obvious: let’s get austin sass on board…
Does it make more sense to appoint someone who got zero votes?
What is the LAW on this matter? That’s what we need to follow on this issue. Whether you like Sass or not, When a position on the Council needs to be filled, what is the accepted procedure for filling it? That’s what we need to do.
Somehow I’d be surprised if the council went back to prior election results and picked a loser. Especially a loser so well financed by Nevada.
Sass should be appointed. It was selfish of Fortier to not resign early knowing she and her girlfriend were leaving the area. The politics in this town is ferocious. This town will never move forward till you get rid of all these good ‘ol boys and girls who have destroyed it!
Dog, I believe the council either has the choice to appoint someone to the vacated seat OR hold a special election to fill the seat. Had Claire vacated the seat prior to the election this discussion would be a moot point as Austin would have won the seat by receiving the third most votes. But since the city is flush with cash (NOT!) by all means let’s hold a special election (NOT!!!)!
I agree that Austin should be appointed. The loop road configuration is under review and after 30 years it won’t happen on a whim. The businesses and other affected properties should be held in high regard.
I know of many people that were against Mr.Sass because of past involvement with Heavenly and Airmark and some are completely against these corporations. I believe he may be a voice that speaks their language? They are one thing for sure and that is a huge sourse for jobs and a reason for tourists to come here.We must assume Austin wants to be appointed and a “special” election is costly as well.
I think that a new election is in order for the vacant seat. It would be the best way to proceed following the departure of Ms. Fortier. I’m not compfortable appointing someone who came in a distant third. Let the voters speak!
Expensive?, perhaps. Maybe it could be done online or some other way that would be more cost efficent than the old paper ballots especially since we are only filling one spot.
Maybe a mailer in with the gas or electric bill? Vote and insert ballot with bill and send it off. Probably violates election laws but worth looking into.
Old Long Skiis, who hasn’t missed an election since I was 18, (and that, was a looong time ago!).
Sass should fill Fortier’s spot for the remainder of her term.
worst written “paragraph” ever:
In my opinion, and in the opinion of many of my fellow South Lake Tahoe voters, whom will hopefully voice their opinion on this matter in some way, shape, or form, feel that the only one specific course of action that would be an acceptable resolution to this situation would be to appoint Austin Sass to the council seat vacated by Ms. Fortier.
A special election should be held in all fairness. Two years for an appointment is too long. With Sass’past alliances it is obvious he is not representing the little guy.
If you look at the vote tallies, clearly too many people were opposed to Austin Sass to have him appointed. Especially considering, as pointed out, it would be for a full 2 years. Unfortunately, the fair, democratic thing to do is to have a special election! (And bill Claire for the cost!)
One salient fact that is conspicuously missing from this discussion is that just over 50% of the City South Lake Tahoe voters even bothered to cast ballots IN A CRUCIAL PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. To me this indicates that the rest of the lazy, disaffected, self-absorbed SLT ‘citizens’ are not to be trusted with making important decisions like who will quickly usher our floundering community into the 21st Century. They have clearly abdicated their constitutionally guaranteed right to democratically choose their leaders. So much for a special election even if it were to cost nothing.
The candidates who did run (and actually bothered to actively campaign) took the time and effort to study and debate the issues. I don’t think having the City Council pick some “fresh meat” is the answer here. Mr. Sass garnered the support 20.2 % of the 52.9% who bothered to vote. Give him his shot. IF, as some detractors claim, he is “bought and sold” by Nevada interests, he can be recalled. Nevada gains NOTHING (excluding perhaps the airport) by making CA. is whipping post..what a foolish notion. I don’t for one minute believe that Austin is a sellout, but if in the course of future events I should be proven wrong, I’ll be the first to speak out…count on it!
Tom, You might be too late, if decisions have been made.
Like it or not, the only fair way to fill this vacancy is to have an election. It could be that someone better qualified, better experienced, or more representative of the wishes of the citizens may come forward. To not allow that opportunity to occur is shortsighted and disingenuous.
“…shortsighted and disingenuous.” Pretty much sums up my opinion of the City Council in general.
Tom, the turnout was more than statistically significant. Really thats all that matters. Voting is not really a great use of time. Yes its our duty, and I vote even in off cycle, but our vote probably does not really matter. We just need a good statistically valid cross section of the community to vote. We probably have that.
I agree, just get Sass on the council, we are only a month+ after the election, thats close enough.
I thought Claire only had about a year left to her term?
An election means that the individual voted in does not take a seat on the council for another 6 plus months. Do we really want the possibility of no decisions because of a 2-2 vote for that long?
Does it make sense to appoint someone who did not take the time or effort to run? Do we want the council to appoint someone based on where they stand on one issue or how well they are liked by specific council members?
Ask your self these questions please before you let your personal biases affect your comments. We don’t need a lot of finger pointing. We have a lot of important decisions to be made and if the vote goes this way or that because of an appointee who was a political selection we will all be unhappy and the current council members will have to live with that when they run again in two years.
‘It “could” be that someone better qualified, better experienced, “or” more representative of the wishes of the citizens “may” come forward.’
Steve, that’s waaaay too many limiting modifiers to even be considered a logical argument.
“To not allow that opportunity to occur is shortsighted and disingenuous.” Steve, Steve, Steve, the opportunity was there for months..anyone (sadly- only within city limits) could throw their hat in the ring as I did in 2006. There is nothing what-so-ever disingenuous about telling non-voters, “Hey, you had your chance and you pissed it away..now live with your actions.”
John , “our vote probably does not really matter” Really? Doesn’t that kinda define the problem? You may find 53% statistically valid but it makes me kinda sick. On the flip side, most of those 47% who didn’t vote probably couldn’t find a polling place if it fell on them so you might be on to something……..
Let me put it differently: its not that “our” vote doesnt count, its that individual vote doesnt count. That doesnt mean there arent a bunch of good reasons to vote, just that influencing the election is not one of them. Thats not defining the problem, it just shows how cool math can be.
Well math was never my strong suit John, so perhaps you can give it to me in a math for dummies format. First though, let me take a whack at it…..I’m always willing to learn from a mistake.
Let’s see… the individual vote does not count (I believe that’s true in the middle-east)…but we are in America. So if there are say 200 million voters in America and each one theoretically votes, does that not create a multiplier effect? (200 M X 1 vote = 200M votes.) Or?