LTCC inching closer to putting bond on ballot
By Kathryn Reed
Lake Tahoe taxpayers have not directly paid for any of the buildings at Lake Tahoe Community College. But that could soon change.
The college is contemplating going to the voters in November with a general obligation bond between $35 million and $55 million. This would be spent on facilities.
The board this month agreed to hire Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates to conduct a survey of 400 registered voters in the district to gauge their opinion of the proposed bond. The research firm will be paid $19,500. The board had budgeted $20,000 for this expense.
Lights at South Tahoe Middle School are a possibility. Photo/LTN
Different questions will be put to voters to find out what dollar amount, if any, they support. The survey will last about 19 minutes.
South Lake Tahoe will pay for a portion of the survey because it will have specific questions asked at the end. They will be multiple-choice questions, but the exact questions are not known.
Results of the survey will be presented to the board at the April 8 meeting.
The answers will help the board decide if it wants to go forward with the bond measure.
College President Kindred Murillo told Lake Tahoe News this would be the community’s opportunity to decide if it wants to help fund the college. The college would hope to leverage the taxpayer money like Lake Tahoe Unified School District did so there would be even more money available for improvements.
While the college has not definitively decided how it would spend the money, it has a list of ideas.
One idea is to put lights on the South Tahoe Middle School field so there are more opportunities to play football and soccer at night. With the college starting soccer programs in the fall, it will mean more demand for fields.
The college field is half on city property, half on college land. It is maintained by the city and governed by the recreation joint powers authority. The college, though, has priority over using it for classes and intercollegiate play.
Part of the bond money could go toward adding bleachers and dugouts at the college field.
“There’s a possibility of putting a bubble over it in the winter,” Murillo told Lake Tahoe News. “One major problem with artificial turf is snow.” She said snow is more damaging than something like a SnowGlobe music festival.
The expense of a bubble is being researched.
Three capital outlay projects have been submitted to the state. The first priority is a remodel for efficiency that would include an overhaul of the science labs, student services and technology. This will include a university center. This is needed as the college looks at offering four-year baccalaureate degrees.
The next project is for a regional public safety training facility. This could include having a city fire station on campus.
The third idea was for a sports medicine facility, but with South Tahoe High having just built one the college now sees this as being redundant. Instead, another project could be adaptive physical education or a sustainability center to go with environmental studies.
Safety improvements would be made throughout the campus, along with technology upgrades.
The college is also looking at improving the trails people use so they are clearly marked and in good condition.
Dorms are another project.
“They are essential to make a destination college real,” Murillo said.
Today students have to live at home or rent an apartment or house.
With improvements the city is making to Harrison Avenue and what the college could do in the future, Murillo foresees the area from Al Tahoe Boulevard to Lakeview Commons being a hub for college students.
Murillo also envisions creating an early childhood education center by taking the existing Child Development Center and perhaps moving the Tahoe Parents Nursery School to the campus.
Build-out of the projects is likely to take 10 years and the bond payments would last 20.
“We want to make the community feel like it’s theirs,” Murillo said of the college.
“Lake Tahoe taxpayers have not paid for any of the buildings at Lake Tahoe Community College. But that could soon change”
That’s an absurd statement. Did they appear by magic?? If the state of California paid for them, it’s California taxpayers, some of it most likely from Tahoe. If the Feds paid for them, that likely also is partially Tahoe money, from some form of tax or ‘fees’.
None of it got here without SOMEBODY’S tax dollars being spent.
TANSTAAFL.
The administration and board don’t know what they want the money spent on but ball fields and preschool education are right up there. Good luck LTCC in getting the suckers, I mean voters, to pass this ill thought out tax increase.
Maybe they should raise student fees instead of taxes. The people that use it should be the ones paying.
They hired an outside consultant for $50 per response to see if voters will pay even higher taxes, and they don’t know yet what they will spend it on? The taxpayers are being soaked already. For these people, money indeed does grow on trees.
Dog, you missed the point of the reading. Yes, some of the tax payers who paid for the building do live in Tahoe. No one is saying otherwise, it is assumed that the reader is aware of this. But not all of the taxpayers live in Tahoe. Without the people outside of Lake Tahoe, the building would not have been built. Education is good, even for the people who remain uneducated.
This is a simple reading comprehension exercise, much like one that might be taught at the college. You should check it out.
Hey, Fish~ the first sentence was edited since I made my post. I copied and pasted it in my post as it was. Read it.
Gettin’ tired of your lectures to everyone as if you think you are the smartest kid in the class. You’re not. You’re just behaving like a jerk.
the Marvelous Makeover continues.
they should just steal some more measure S money
for the Football Field.
in 2002 quon-set hut dorm’s were suggested as an upgrade.
Enrollment is down down down. Who are they building new facilities for?
How much does it cost to get a bond measure put on the ballot? I am sure it is not free. Perhaps rather than spending tax payers dollars twice, they should forgo the study, come up with a viable plan for what the college really needs rather than what the tax payers might be willing to spring for. Then put a dollar amount to it and spend the $20 grand on putting the measure on the ballot.
Dawg, I can’t comprehend reading for you, and there is no time stamp on edits, so I cant be responsible for them. And that change doesn’t change anything.
‘Without the people outside of Lake Tahoe, the building would not have been built.’ is still valid.
“None of it got here without SOMEBODY’S tax dollars being spent.” is not a revelation. We all know that. It is assumed that the reader knows that. Its part of the whole reading comprehension thing. I can’t help you there. You should take advantage of LTCCs cheap course offerings. Try an intro to philosophy class, it is fun. Seriously, adult education is very important.
And as to your last statement… I comment carefully and am rarely ever wrong. Being right doesn’t make me the jerk. You should thank me.
Cosa Pescado : The state income taxes are collected from all the working citizens, then the state distributes the money for (among other things) education. That community college in our town represents Lake Tahoe’s fair portion of education. This is not rocket science. That college was built using our tax dollars; It is what the state has provided us as a return on our tax dollars. I think you’re the one that is missing the point here. I will not respond to any further comments by you. I’m not going to engage you in some senseless argument.
Steve : I’d like to expand on your point. They are spending money, that has been appropriated for education, and spending the money on a study. I say this is misappropriation of funds. If they want a bond measure, they should get the signatures necessary, and then go forward with the bond measure. Am I missing something here ? There doesn’t seem to be any reason for conducting a pre-vote study.
tahoe Pizza Eater,
You obviously have no clue about how our local community college, or any of California’s CCs, are financed. To say that LTCC was built with taxes collected from Lake Tahoe residents is a typically ludicrous statement that is out of touch with reality.
We should be proud of LTCC and its growth as a major asset of our region. If So. Lake Tahoe is ever going to become a more economically diversified town with opportunities for generating more than low paying service industry jobs and be attractive to middle class families, the college will be an integral part of that transformation. Investment of tax dollars in LTCC has been a great success for our community so far and this bond issue should get a fair hearing.
They changed their requirements for class priorities by excluding certain members of the community (because they weren’t pursuing a degree), gave themselves raises and now want to take more money from taxpayers for some yet-to-be determined project. I got (another) degree from LTCC in 1980 and started classes in the old motel. But the quote from Ms. Murillo: “We want to make the community feel like it’s theirs”, is hard to understand. Only a bureaucrat could fail to realize that it is already ours. Taking more money from the taxpayers won’t make it any more or less “ours”, IMHO.
Pizza eater, how you arrive at your conclusion about my understanding is none of my concern, but it is wrong.
me: ‘Yes, some of the tax payers who paid for the building do live in Tahoe. No one is saying otherwise, it is assumed that the reader is aware of this. But not all of the taxpayers live in Tahoe. Without the people outside of Lake Tahoe, the building would not have been built.’
you:
‘ The state income taxes are collected from all the working citizens, then the state distributes the money for (among other things) education. ‘
Whatevs.