Letter: Politics and TRPA
To the community,
Who will slay the TRPA? Will it be Nevada or California that kills the beast? The soap opera has public officials in both states playing musical chairs. Some who wanted the TRPA dead now wish it to live because the big bad bear California is threatening to create a California agency for its part of Lake Tahoe if Nevada pulls out of the TRPA.
South Lake Tahoe’s City Council is an example. Mayor Tom Davis who has opposed the TRPA now wants it to live. Mayor Davis has said that a California agency would not be in the best interest of local government. But that’s the tough nut to crack. What’s in the best interest? How do we define those words when South Tahoe is a battleground where factions fight for their interests to prevail? Those who want the loop road are sure that they know what is best. Those who promoted the convention center knew what was best. So on and on goes the local soap opera. Where it stops, who knows? Who will get what, when will they get it, and how will they get it?
Bill Crawford
In the scheme of things political, each man and woman has the vote so that they can vote for what they see as their best interest.
Political parties are factions that compete to govern. And each party knows what is best. But it’s a messy business. People and parties are divided on big issues. Taxes, war, peace, etc. People in government who claim to have a vision are too cocksure that they are right. I am thinking of Iraq. Too often they are dangerous visionaries. And too often they are elected to the City Council where they leave a record of failure.
Bill Crawford, South Lake Tahoe
Bill, I have no love for how and what the SLT City Council has done, but to use our nation’s entrance into the Iraq war as an analogy for the debacles that have plagued our city council is a wee bit of a
s t r e t c h.
Besides the League to Enslave Lake Tahoe, no group has caused more economic harm to the Lake Tahoe Basin than TRPA.
Amen Bill! However, the voters got what they paid for and quite honestly, I’m thinking they don’t want anything that reeks of the other side…whatever that other side is. They want no change. Just leave it alone and let it wither away they say.
Chris, I have never seen such salient thought from anyone in the basin. You sir need to run for town council!
Mr. Sass:
Point of clarification: the voters got what they “voted” for, not what they “paid” for. It is the supporters of those candidates running for office who try to get what they “pay” for in the form of their candidate contributions. I believe your remarks unfortunately impart a slight expression of sour grapes by a defeated candidate and a non-selected appointee applicant to serve the remainder of Claire Fortier’s term on the City Council.
I would speculate that your City Council runs were premature in that too many of the old guard residents voted in some old guard type Council members by out-voting younger people and newer transplants to this community who have not yet fully participated in the election process. It is my hope that many of the newcomers that applied to fill the remainder of Fortier’s term will maintain their desire and momentum and run for the City Council in 2014 for the seats of Davis, Laine and Swanson. New vision and fresh ideas are needed by people who want to create a new chance to prosper in this community and have something more for their families versus the continuation of the old guard (Bill Crawford included) who only want to protect what they already have. We need to rid the City Council of the cronyism influence.
I will say that to date I’m impressed with the majority of Brooke Laine’s positions on City business and her willingness to identify cronyism when she sees that, along with her ability to precisely articulate her positions with brevity, unlike some other City Council members. At this time I would hope she again runs for office.
its interesting how so many think the problem with Tahoe is what there is to do here? Does it ever occur to them it’s how we treat people once they actually do come here? I think “Chris Says” needs to get out more often…both in and out of the Basin….
Chris, I think you hit the nail on the head in a very positive and eloquent manner.
“The town actually shrunk, tourists are down, investment is down and that trend is continued under the current board and trpa.”
In your mind, are there any other reasons why the town shrunk and tourism is down?
Chris:
While you’ve certainly made some bold comments I’d like to point out that SLT as a General Law City and not a Charter City has no elected Mayor so with regard to your remark that “it’s time to oust the Mayor” that will automatically take place in December when Mr. Davis will resume his regular Councilmember designation, Hal Cole who is the current Mayor Pro Tem will become the Mayor, and the City Council will determine what Councilmember they’ll want to be Cole’s Mayor Pro Tem who will likely be the successor Mayor when Cole completes his term in that essentially symbolic position.
Also, your suggestion for SLT to talk with Nevada to make sure “our voices are heard” is already taking place as evidenced by the second annual Joint Workshop Meeting between the SLT City Council and Douglas County Supervisors that just took place on April 29th. And the City doesn’t have zoning they have Area Plans that dictate what can and cannot be done, all of which are subject to the TRPA’s regulations. The City does have a Planning Commission however.
With regard to the TRPA, BMPs, coverage, improvements, and so forth, the City and Douglas County/state of Nevada are pretty much in agreement on that. I would recommend that you research the proposed new California legislation SB-630 which is California’s plan of pulling out of the TRPA and implementing their own new California Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (CTRPA). All appointees to the CTRPA would be made by the California Governor with no effective local representation on this agency, and of course with Nevada out of the picture whatever evenhandedness they attempted to apply to the present TRPA would be gone. If you think the existing TRPA is bad you’ll find that a CTRPA with very left leaning environmentalists that are all California Governor Appointees will make anything and everything impossible. Believe me, a CTRPA will make the existing TRPA look like they were a very cooperative agency.
Is it possible that some properties were purchased at way below market value because developing these parcels would require costly improvements? I’ve heard many a “growth” proponent paint a rosy picture of sure economic boom because if we build it they will come.
I know a condo building time-share salesman when I hear one.
The following is language contained in California Senate Bill 630 which can be viewed in its entirety at the following website:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB630
This is something that individuals residing on the California side of the Tahoe basin should have great concern about. Check out Section 67070, Item (a)(4) that reduces coverage from 70% to up to 50%.
67041.
The governing body of the agency shall contain the following nine members:
(a) One member appointed by the Governor who shall be an member of the Board of Supervisors of the County of El Dorado or the Board of Supervisors of the County of Placer, and one member appointed by the Governor who shall be an elected member of the city council of the City of South Lake Tahoe. Both of these appointees are subject to Senate confirmation.
(b) Three members appointed by the Governor who have a demonstrated interest and appreciation for the natural beauty and economic productivity of the Lake Tahoe region who shall represent the public at large and the geographic diversity of California. All of these appointees are subject to Senate confirmation.
(c) Two members appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules.
(d) Two members appointed by the Speaker of the California Assembly.
67070.
(a) The regional plan adopted by the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency on December 12, 2012, shall be considered the interim regional plan of the agency, except as provided in paragraphs (1) to (6), inclusive. Amendments to the interim plan or the adoption of a comprehensive long-term general plan and amendment to that plan shall comply with the rules and regulations prescribed in Section 67101. The agency shall implement the interim regional plan as follows:
(1) No project may be developed in the region without obtaining the review and approval of the agency. Any delegated authority for the issuance of permits under areas plans is terminated as of January 1, 2014.
(2) On or before October 1, 2015, the agency shall determine whether the boundaries of town center districts and regional center districts are empirically shown to create a less auto-dependent development pattern, and, if not, the agency shall adjust the boundaries so that they promote that pattern.
(3) Resort recreational districts shall be eliminated.
(4) Provisions in the interim regional plan that allow up to 70 percent land coverage shall be reduced to allow up to 50 percent land coverage.
(5) Provisions in the interim regional plan that allow for the calculation of land coverage on an areawide basis shall be eliminated, and coverage shall be calculated on a per parcel basis.
(6) Certification of compliance with all best management practices shall be a condition for the sale of commercial property parcels.
67101.
(a) The Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Code of Ordinances, which was adopted by the Tahoe Regional Planning Association Governing Board on December 12, 2012, and its Rules of Procedure, which were in effect on that date, shall be considered the interim agency ordinances and rules, with the exception of any requirements for the interim regional plan set forth in subdivision (a) of Section 67070. Unless the context otherwise requires, the requirements of this title concerning agency ordinances, rules, and regulations shall also apply to its interim ordinances, rules, and regulations.
(b) Within 90 days of the effective date of the interim regional plan, the agency shall amend its interim agency ordinances and rules so that they conform to the requirements of subdivision (a) of Section 67070. Any amendments to the interim agency ordinances and rules shall be exempt from the requirements of Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2.
Chris:
I would appreciate your remarks on California Senate Bill 630 and the language contained therein. While you and I may have differing opinions on some matters related to local government I think we may agree that what the state of California wants to do regarding a CTRPA would put the last nails in the coffin of SLT.
I think new timeshares is cruel viscous thinking that might trigger a relapse in property values.
How much cocaine is required to build a fantasy plan for developement on So. Shore that will never happen?
Chris, LTN some months ago said it was going to stop allowing such visceral name calling on this site so not sure why your posts keep getting through. Your know-it-all and condescending attitude along with cussing is bad enough, but telling someone to end their life is so far over the line its unbelievable.
No one’s opinion, including my own, is all that important.
Chris’ last comment has been removed.
LTN staff
Thank you, and good work Red Dog and LTN staff.
And yet nothing is said when the (Teabagger) phrase is thrown out here repeatedly?
Yes I am Tea Party supporter.
What does that mean.
The Tea Party movement is an American political movement that advocates strict adherence to the United States Constitution, reducing U.S. government spending and taxes, and reduction of the U.S. national debt and federal budget deficit. The movement has been called partly conservative, partly libertarian,and partly populist.The movement has sponsored protests and supported political candidates since 2009
when Tea Party supporters are referred to as Teabaggers) I am being offended.
I did not see what Chris typed that warranted deletion. But it must have been horrible if calling me some who performs a degrading sex act is OK.
Is this just to be a heavily-opinionated forum that ends up the same way South Lake Tahoe is now: no vision, no way to conjure-up what vision means to a future (?) – (have given up on THE future). . .
When two individuals (Bill Harrah & Harvey Gross) in the 40’s & 50’s could make significant contributions to actually creating an economy in a seasonal place like Lake Tahoe, and those who “replace” them can only rehash 40+ years later the very fact that in 1965 the actual slogan was “America’s All-Year Playground” as some sort of revelation means that no-one is doing their homework. . .
The world has changed, and we have not changed with it, if we continually rehash what is not even understood by those who did not live it. . . Tahoe is in a great position to excel, given the proper orientation & motivation, which is (?). . .
As to Mr. Crawford’s statements, it is increasingly obvious to those who have lived it, that most of the TRPA flack merely gives those without vision a way to vent their frustrations – now the thought of no TRPA means that responsibility may actually have to be taken for their own community. . .a frightening thought for some, as they’ve made TRPA too much of a “default” here, and TRPA has overreached that default in merely accepting the power handed them, absent any particular vision of their own – just more of a regular cash flow than some in the Basin. . . now being diminished.
For example, The League to “Save Lake Tahoe”, doesn’t want to be saved from the current TRPA as then the object of that work would be more difficult to zero-in on as a ‘target’, diffusing their focus on finding all the mistakes TRPA makes. . . and continue to make. . .
As the sustainability of lots of places around the globe continues to slip precipitously, Lake Tahoe’s role in doing better (not “less bad”) could be an inspiration for themselves & more to visit, but instead becomes just another grant program to be administered. . .as grants disappear, what will we be left with ?
As the eminent Harvard biologist, E.O. Wilson, remarked, when asked recently to define Nature, defined it thus:
“What’s left when Man gets done with it”. . .
That’s not the legacy I had in mind when growing up here. . . otherwise, I could be just about anywhere if that’s to be the case. . . especially when “just about anywhere” does more for its’ constituents, and not just those with power. . .
Mr Bowen;
well said, you seemed to get right to the root of the problem, but the answer seems to elude.
What next.