SLT city attorney says no to paid parking foes
By Kathryn Reed
The group of South Lake Tahoe residents who want paid parking to go before the voters was handed a setback when the city attorney said he could not write a ballot title and summary.
“At this time the Tahoe4Tahoe committee is exploring their options for a legal challenge to the city’s rejection of our petition request and continue to believe that the voters of South Lake Tahoe deserve the opportunity to decide if they want paid parking on their city streets and public parks,” Peggy Bourland, spokeswoman for the group, told Lake Tahoe News.
Paid parking has been a contentious issue since the city started talking about putting up kiosks a few years ago. The bulk of the meters was installed this past summer. While the city shows a financial profit, the naysayers are not going away.
Earlier this month Tahoe4Tahoe filed a notice of intent to circulate a petition that would ultimately result in the voters deciding June 3 whether the city’s paid parking program stays or goes.
One of the hurdles to get it on the ballot is for the city attorney to write the summary and title.
City Attorney Tom Watson wrote Bourland saying, “The text as drafted impairs essential government functions, including, but not limited to: the power of taxation, the police power to control public streets and highways, fiscal management abilities, franchising authority and the legislative power to provide for the health and safety of the community. Additionally, because the initiative is multipart, it potentially violates the single subject rule.”
Bourland requested a meeting with the city attorney. He said no, saying he could not be an advocate for their group and instead recommended hiring private legal counsel.
Time is ticking for the group to meet the deadlines for the June ballot, however there will also be an election in November. But by November the parking program the group doesn’t like will in all likelihood have had another summer to be in place.
The City Council after the first of the year is expected to revisit the parking program to potentially make changes and/or solidify what is in place.
So the voters don’t get a say in how the city is run?
Sounds like this new city attorney wants to shut up anyone who doesn’t agree with the city manager and council.
Ms. Bourland must be part of the group which the city manager referred to in her statement a week or so ago.
“There will always be a few voices in a “Corner of Commiseration,” exercising their right to complain and fight against positive cooperation, that remains their choice just as it is our choice to give it little notice.”
In this case Ms. Bourland and her group aren’t even being given their right to complain through collecting signatures and putting the issue to a vote.
I hope the City Council takes note and resolves this issue at their January meeting when they asked to have the paid parking on the meeting agenda. They should step up and listen to the voters, reverse this ordinance which put these kiosks at the beaches and move on without the voters having to hire legal council as suggested by the city attorney.
Besides parking meters (which I love) EDC should consider a $5 charge to those entering and leaving the Tahoe Basin. Why? Because of the $5/$6 charge to cross the newer Bay Bridge. If they can do it there then why not here?
Advocate, those are the only attorneys this city wants. Remember how they gave Jackie Mittlestadt (sp?) the shaft when she gave them answers they didn’t like? Fired her and kept Enright. It’s how the city operates.
Screw the citizens.
Dissolve the City instead, along with its higher taxes, higher fees and surcharges, redundant and lower quality services, and arrogance.
The voters had a say when they elected those that made this decision.
In one year the voters have a chance to swing the council with three open seats.
I feel this decision was arrived at after many years of discussion and should be given a chance. I’m also well aware that some, maybe even many, oppose this. I say some because the populations of the effected areas seem to be producing minimal dissent. Nine folks speaking out against at the last council meeting does not a strong opposition make. Does it?
If you agree or disagree with me, do something about in a way that won’t cost we the taxpayers any more than the basic cost of the next election (sans a ballot issue).
VOTE, CITY OF SOUTH LAKE TAHOE!
Break the mold and GET INVOLVED. If you’ve lived here 70 years or one year, this is YOUR home! Register and vote. 23,000 city residents. Let’s see if we can generate 5,000 votes cast. Don’t we normally run 3,000?
road blocks and flaming hoops
Hal and the Team are always going to win
that’s how it is being the Stepchild
I left out one small tidbit from my diatribe:
Once you vote, accept responsibility. At least some.
And that means accept the fact that making knee-jerk reactions to things you may not like, may cost you in the long run even more than you may know!
Let’s vote for “no taxes” next, I’m sure it would pass ;)
Unfortunately, those of us who live in the county don’t get to vote on city matters. Otherwise, things might be quite different.
We DO, however get to pay your city sales taxes, car registration fees, and if we want to go to the beach we usually can’t walk, we have to PARK. And pay your meters.
However we might luck out and not have to pay the new telephone tax. Don’t know about that one yet.
Good. That makes up for all of the science you don’t want to fund.
The City Attorney does not have the legal option of “rejecting” a voter initiative by the people. His objections can only be raised in a court challenge, after the initiative passes. Instead he has refused to perform his lawful duty, a direct and serious violation of the California Election Code which states:
“California Election Code 9203. (a) Any person who is interested in any proposed measure shall file a copy of the proposed measure with the elections official with a request that a ballot title and summary be prepared. This request shall be accompanied by the address of the person proposing the measure. The elections official shall immediately transmit a copy of the proposed measure to the city attorney. Within 15 days after the proposed measure is filed, the city attorney shall provide and return to the city elections official a ballot title for and summary of the proposed measure. The ballot title may differ from any other title of the proposed measure and shall express in 500 words or less the purpose of the proposed measure. In providing the ballot title, the city attorney shall give a true and impartial statement of the purpose of the proposed measure in such language that the ballot title shall neither be an argument, nor be likely to create prejudice, for or against the proposed measure.
Personally I disagree with the parking meters, but if it pisses off the libertarians i guess it can’t be all bad.
My dog LOVES grapes…someone’s must be just a bit sour!
So, some people posting here are FOR paid parking ONLY because some other people here are against it.
Typical. Vindictive. The leftist modus operandi. There doesn’t NEED to be a reason, as long as it hurts others. What more do you need to know about them?
I’m for parking meters because we need the revenue, there is limited parking already due to it being 2013 and not 1970 anymore. It’s called capitalism. You want to park near the lake and not walk – then pay up. What’s the big deal. You want to live in the past – move to Russia!
Somebody needs a lesson in economics. The State putting parking meters on tax-payer funded roads is not capitalism. Not by a long shot. But that’s one reason this country is in so much trouble. The schools teach social justice instead of truth. 2+2 can equal 5 as long as it makes you feel better.
The city needs to be more long term goal oriented.
We seem to have bottomed out and are on the way back up. The city budget finally seems to be under control and the increase in revenue should be planned for and spent wisely.
I think three long term plans for this revenue should be allocated for street maintenance, pension/medical long term debt and getting rid of the parking meters after their revenue has been replaced.
You can sugar coat it all you want but it does take away from the quality of life and piss off tourists.
Seems like the issue here is the city attorney not putting up the ballot issue and summary. Ahhhh, the gray areas of the law. I have not read the rules regarding this, but it seems only right he does his job whether or not he likes it or agrees. It does seem that our city and council are not representing the people as they should. Btw, Sunriser2, nicely put! Especially the last line to which can be added that it pisses of the residents too! I sure hope the city and attorney and council will follow the rules and laws and not bring any more lawsuits upon us by circumventing. :)
The issue here isn’t whether one is for or against the meters. It’s whether we live in a democracy or not?! The people want to be heard, and our City is silencing the voice! Shameful and Disgraceful!!
And to anyone who says people need to get more involved in the goings on of our town-why? The powers that be just do what they want anyway!
In the UK when they installed speed trap cameras the youth panted them all kinds of colors rendering them unusable. Just an idea.
Scott, you seem to be very level headed, hopefully you will run for one of the open seats next November, you would be fresh air to the council.
Bigger Picture this is exactly what the ballot proposals are for. Truely showing the demorcratic system in its best form. What you are saying is that once you vote you have to live with it. Fortunatly we dont because there is also recalls for really bad elected officals, though I am not calling for it in this instance.
As the city attorney reports to the city council; not the city manager, I think we can assume his lack of cooperation with Tahoe4Tahoe is at council’s direction. Makes sense since the council members were the ones who voted to put the meters in.
I wish these council members and city attorney had the gumption to have a press conference or town hall meeting once in a while and answer the tough questions rather than hide behind the protocol of council meetings.
What are the rules for recalls of really bad elected officials? The city attorney statement could be the straw that broke the camels back. Disgraceful!! No pitiful!!
Folks need to understand the relationship between staff and elected officials in towns like SLT. Elected officials, most of whom have no experience in managing anything bigger than a real estate office or a fast food joint, depend on City Staff to advise them on what they can get away with,and how to do it when things are marginal. City staff, for their part, have to balance what’s right, what’s legal, and what the screwball council wants. It’s a tough job, but it’s what career staff folks get good at.
Does anyone seriously believe that the citizen voter plays much of a roll in this process? Only at election time, when council folks do what politicians do best (and City staff recognizes) – obfuscate.
Reloman, I disagree. Knee-jerk reactions definitely do not represent the democratic system at its best! So far there really has been just a handful of loud voices opposing this new law. Just two months ago some on this forum were advocating the recalling of a council member because some felt she was being a bully by giving her opinion on an issue up for vote, and then a month and a half later forgot they even advocated for it. Recalls were built into the law for extreme situations, like breaking a law in the case of an elected official, not just because after someone is elected you disagree with them or a law they pass.
And Parker, you just lost any inkling of credibility by opining that involvement in the process is a waste of time. So you don’t want to get involved, yet you seem to have no problem voicing your “uninvolved” opinion?
I lose credibility by stating the facts? There is no question the majority of the town opposes the parking meters! That’s why the City Atty. fights bringing it to a vote!
If the City Atty. opposes democracy, why shouldn’t he be recalled? And if the citizens can’t have their voices heard, why get involved?
To those that they say the City Council was elected by the voters, very important point here-as I’ve pointed out before, with our City’s election system, it doesn’t require a majority to get elected! Only a plurality! The top vote getters, who only need a core of support, be it from their buddies they grew up with in town, their union backers, etc., get elected. No runoffs allowed to insure that the our Council represents a true majority of support!
No Biggerpicture, those that don’t want the majority of citizens heard, those that fight democracy in (where do we live again?) America lose all
credibilty!
Biggerpicture, you’re the one that has no credibility, to say that a vote of the people is a knee jerk reaction is an insult to the intelligence of the others in the community. If I recall correctly you are or were a government employee, correct?
This is more support for the argument that on revenue and outsourcing issues government employees should not have the right to vote. From school employees to all civil servants over and over they have proven that they vote for their own self interest not the true interests of the the community.
Before you all start up with the argument that everyone has a right to vote, I say everyone has a right to chose whether or not they take a government job. That is where your rights stop, once on the job you don’t get to control the payout you get. That is not how it works in the real world and should not in government either.
What you are payed is for the employer to decide, in this case the people you work for is the citizens. The role as a “civil servant” makes it a conflict of interest in the vote. If you don’t like the job or the pay offered you can quit.
That is how it works in the real world and it is time to impose reality on our government.
This is at the core of the reason that the term /civil servant’ was removed from our lexicon for so many years, now it is back and it is time to fix what they broke.
Parker, only nine people speaking out in opposition at the last council meeting sure doesn’t seem to represent a “majority” of voters here in South Lake Tahoe, does it?
Cj, wrong again.
Considering the two polls that the Tribune has published this year, I’d say Parker’s statement that the majority of the town opposes parking meters is correct. In May the poll was 87% opposed on a for or against question. Just two weeks ago the question was “Do you think the city’s parking program has been successful?” The results were 76% NO with the difference being split between Yes and Not sure. For a ballot initiative that would remove the paid parking program to succeed at the polls, a simple majority of 50% plus one vote would be needed. Polls may not be infallible, but these two separate polls are certainly indicators that what Parker and others are saying about the majority in our town opposing paid parking seems accurate.
Using the number of people that speak at a council meeting as a barometer for the community’s voice likely doesn’t capture the vast majority that are working during those meetings.
By putting this issue to a vote, we will be able to acurately determine what the majority really wants.
Trib polls aren’t scientific. You can vote multiple times. Find a credible source to quote. And has anyone thought the city attorney saved the taxpayers from footing a bill to fight the legal battle if this were challenged after the fact because of how poorly worded the Tahoe4Tahoe language was. Yes, take it to the voters. But have it worded correctly.
Advocate, you site a poll that allows voters to vote multiple times and generally garners a couple hundred votes? Not really overwhelming evidence, is it?
Bigger, so are you implying that you think the majority of taxpayers support paid parking? At some point people get to call out your ridiculous notion that people in Tahoe like loosing affordable access to beaches.
So now its someone elses fault that dogface cant vote for or against paid parking because of not living in the city limits.well cry me a river…if you are so upset by that reality then move. What will everyone complain about if this outrage against the local people dosent have the outcome they expect? And just think how awful it is that someone should have to pay sales tax that ends up keeping the ball fields open or the public pool open and maintained. What a crime that our socialist system would try to provide services to the town by collecting sales tax, how horrible! NOT
City Attorney is not voted on, therefore can’t be recalled. This position can be fired. Since there is most certainly going to be a legal challenge to his poor decision, he should be fired. Legal challenge will cost the city much more than the alliance looking to put forward a ballot measure.
Polls are conducted with a small cross section of demographics then analyzed and censored. No the Tribune is not a true interpretation, and potentially the measure will fail. I personally believe it will pass and assume the City Management does as well, or there would be no stone walling. Bottom line let the voters decide based upon the rule of law. We need a strong local economy and no road blocks, or traffic tickets, standing in the way. Whoever posted we should charge a toll to get into the basin because SF does should move to SF.
Wow, gofigure, you went back a long way just to distort what I said, while ignoring most of the other comments here.
I feel so important.
Considering most of the comments are simply rhetoric. I am simply trying to make a practical point. As you are much more intelligent than I. Please elaborate on your comment….I don’t get it?
“What more do you need to know about them?”
They accept evolution?
Dog…you sure are sensitive. I forget that ‘righties’ have forfeited their sense of humor. Can I get you a tissue?
Dog, it is interesting how the left wing thinks being snarky is humor.
You on the other hand have demonstrated both whit and wisdom, your opponents demonstrate neither, constantly.
I bet lots of people notice and respect both your whit and wisdom.
To CJ, wisdom means something much different.
You are one delusional dude CJ.
Biggerpicture,
If the City Atty. would let the people speak, if he’d allow democracy to take place, we’d know where the majority stands! Wouldn’t we?
So you should let the City Atty. know you want this measure on the ballot so you can prove me incorrect!
I thought we lived in AMERICA. Maybe SLT is not part of it any more. Up or down, win or lose what’s the problem with the city?
Like the paid parking foes who received a “rejection” of their initiative earlier this week, our medical marijuana voter initiative was also rejected. That makes two separate citizen groups that the South Lake Tahoe City Attorney has violated their First Amendment rights and twice that he has flaunted the law to exercise authority he doesn’t have. Such obstruction can only serve to create the appearance of a city government at war with the community, determined to block opposition through unlawful means. So far, not one word from any City Council members to defend this outrageous and unprecedented attack on the right of the People to seek redress through the initiative process.
Perhaps they trying to separate Church and State as one of the original 3 names on the letter given to the city contained John Grace (as in Father Grace). If anyone would have gone to the informational meeting the city put on about the plastic bag ban you would realize the City Attorney and the City Manager are trying to get out as much information as possible but are frustrated that no one shows up. They made several comments about that and they are correct. They also pointed out that they cannot offer personal opinion on anything that is directed by the City Council. They can only implement policy not personality of the council. The CM is really trying to get the info out to the public but no one shows up and it is frustrating. Our CM has really tried to get the mess in the city worked out but can only do what the council directs. My suggestion is to show up and say one way or another on items presented by the council. If the CM cannot put a face to the protest it won’t be looked at. Get involved.
hey CJ…not to be getting snarky on you, but do you KNOW the definition of ‘whit’? For someone who claims to place value on intelligence and logic(hyuck hyuck), attacking non-righties for your perceived flaws in their arguments, you sure do get creative with your spelling. It wouldn’t be so ridiculous if your comments and the FOX/Rush ideas you parrot demonstrated cohesion and were based in reality(as in-the phenomenological world of verifiable facts and events), but alas, they do not. Do not be dismayed, I will help you to enlighten yourself. WHIT: the smallest part or particle imaginable : bit.
So says the Mirriam-Webster dictionary. I will even use it in a sentence for you. ‘You, and your Bachmannite dog vampire whom you worship so shamelessly, do not appear to demonstrate one whit of wisdom in the opinions contained in your comments.’ I’m guessing you are going to ascribe your intellectual inconsistencies on the failure of Teachers, Unions, Socialized Education, Fluoride in the drinking water, brown skinned people, being abducted and probed by space aliens, the president’s non-existent birth certificate, anti-gun nuts an erection lasting more than four hours having cut off the flow of oxygenated blood to your brain, Keith Olbermann, Carl Sagan, Albert Einstein or or maybe Jerry Brown.
OOOO-OOOH-SNAP!!!!! !
Sorry Kay.
di·a·tribe
ˈdīəˌtrīb/noun: diatribe; plural noun: diatribes
1. a forceful and bitter verbal attack against someone or something.
Hmmm, Ahhh shucks, I spelt something wong… gggggg Hommer i nose that is the real import stuff.
Glad you are on top of it.
You have so much to say about such an important issue…
… didn’t bother reading it, I’m sure it’s worthless.
Dr. Wayne Dyer says that the highest form of ignorance is when we reject something that we don’t know anything about. For example, being proud of smugly proclaiming you hadn’t read my comment before responding to it. That sort of arrogance makes my point. It’s not just the spelling glitches…we all make typos. What I am primarily referring to is that you use words that you don’t know the correct meaning of, and try to project an attitude of being superior towards the ideas you are insulting. You seem to think you’re being smart when you do it. It is what bullies do. It is part of a greater pattern…and your thought process is neither deep, careful nor accurate. The truth is, you DO miss the import(ant) stuff.
CJ we’re still waiting for you to make your case as to why the U Haul metric is valid.
You wouldn’t just fabricate evidence. That is beneath you.
Cosa, I am not surprised you need a simple economic concept like ‘Supply and demand’ explained to you.
I wouldn’t waist my time explaining anything to a government leach such as yourself.
Beware cosa, people are turning on liberal media, loud mouthed spreaders of hate like yourself are losing support, the masses are waking up.
“…waist.” “…leach.” “…loud mouthed spreaders of hate.” Seriously, this is top-notch intellectual discourse! Perhaps you can’t explain ‘Supply and demand” because you couldn’t locate it on the Faux News website. Bwahahahahahahahaha.
CJ, that uhaul metric is not your original idea.
You are plagiarist.
That is so pathetic.
I read up on it. After I found out about your plagiarism (obvious, same example cities used), I read that it is the demand in the DESTINATION cities that drives the prices. It is on their website. So if your metric is valid, the conclusion would be exactly the opposite of what you say it is.
Cosa,
You are a nut case dude, and a darn stupid one at that. The U-Haul rate study is based on the principle of Supply and Demand.
It is a simple concept, I certainly did not invent it, never said I did. You obviously don’t know what you are talking about.
It is a simple economic concept, you read up on it? WOW, that is hard to understand. Whats to read up on? It is a simple simple concept. To most people, even a child, it is an intuitive concept.
Plagiarized? that doesn’t apply to this at all. What are you talking about? What was plagiarized? Are you sure you know what that word means?
It appears that the Tahoe4Tahoe anti-paid parking group has limited options. They could easily tap some of their deep-pocketed members and hire the best of legal counsel to challenge City Attorney Watson’s stated position in court but that would be time consuming. I’m sure they could rally numerous PO’d citizens(and present some ticketed tourists affidavits) to speak out at the upcoming City Council meeting in January in hopes of gaining support from some Council members for some major changes to the program or at least recognition of their rights to redress grievances. I don’t think it looks good for a ballot measure on the June’14 election date but if they continue to gather signatures and keep the pressure on the Council the November’14 election should be doable. Of course, as reported in this article, that’s another whole summer season of paid parking.
As far as CJConnell’s lunatic fringe teabagger clowns rising up to take back America and free parking, here’s the report from the latest rally of “millions of patriots”: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/larry-klayman-rally-overthrow-obama-draws-slightly-fewer-millions-expected
I heard there was much whit and wisdumb and libertyin’ going on there.
Now who would be issuing the marching orders for our city attorney?
As with the Chief of Police, Attorney and all city employees the City Manager is the one who is their boss. The CM directs the will of the elected officials. As was suggested by the CM at the plastic bag ban meeting, contact them and voice your opinion but only if you live within the city limits. Does not matter if you own a business, shop or play in the city facilities you do not have a vote therefore no opinion. City voting residents need to get involved or not get involved but it is their problem. The parking as well as the phone fees are thinly disguised taxes to support the bottom line and past retirement pensions which the CM has warned about it the budget.
Correction to the above post — the city manager and city attorney report to the South Lake Tahoe City Council.
The city clerk and treasurer are elected positions just like the council.
LTN staff
I stand corrected but I got my info from the city web site. I believe I said employees and did not mention elected positions. Thanks
City Clerk – Elected Official
Class specifications are intended to present a descriptive list of the range of duties performed by employees in the class. Specifications are not intended to reflect all duties performed within the job.
SUMMARY DESCRIPTION
Under general administrative direction of the City Manager,
Ken C.,
“The CM directs the will of the elected officials.” Stand me corrected if that doesn’t = mentioning elected positions. Thanks
Correct and corrected
When I wrote that I meant elected city council officials. Thanks.
Ken last spring the city held a meeting at the senior center and there were over 100 people and 95% were against paid parking. Nancey walked into a wasp nest. So plenty of people showed up and the city did’nt listen.
Buck, Thank You and you are correct. I was referring to the comments that the city attorney and CM made at the plastic bag meeting when they stated no one shows up. The city only remembers when no one shows up versus showing up as criteria on what to do which is exactly the opposite of the will of the people in most cases. Note that the parking fee and cell phone fee are police revenue oriented, you only need to look at who is behind this “new” revenue stream and know the money is not going to infrastructure or recreation which are two of our most pressing issues today.
ELECTIONS CODE SECTION 18620. Every person who seeks, solicits, bargains for, or obtains any money, thing of value, or advantage of or from any person, firm, or corporation for the purpose or represented purpose of fraudulently inducing, persuading, or seeking the proponent or proponents of any initiative or referendum measure or recall petition to (a) abandon the measure or petition, (b) fail, neglect, or refuse to file in the office of the elections official or other officer designated by law, within the time required by law, the initiative or referendum measure or recall petition after securing the number of signatures required to qualify the measure or petition, (c) stop the circulation of the initiative or referendum measure or recall petition, or (d) perform any act that will prevent or aid in preventing the initiative or referendum measure or recall petition from qualifying as an initiative or referendum measure, or the recall petition from resulting in a recall election, is punishable by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars ($5,000), or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 of the Penal Code for 16 months or two or three years, or in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.
Mr. Curtzwiler. You are correct that the paid parking ordinance was a task lead by the Police Dept. to develop and implement a comprehensive parking program for the city. They concluded the council wanted paid parking and visitors should pay. (no where in their study did the residents support paid parking). The residents supported more TOT and amusement taxes on things like the Tahoe Queen paid by visitors.
The program today collects more money from parking citations and drives away visitor who pay TOT. No amusement tax was proposed or implemented. It’s a bad concept for a tourist town and should be removed at all the beaches and should be prevented from being implemented in the neighborhoods where the city wants to charge you to park on the street in front of your house.
So it is safe to say that the city manager/city council has ultimate control over the paid parking program and whether the parking initiative makes it to the ballet this June i.e. direct the city attorney to write the summary!
Theft is Theft. Lets call it what it is an not hide behind fanciful words. Kleptocrats will take it all.