Paid parking opponents win in South Lake Tahoe
By Kathryn Reed
Say goodbye to South Lake Tahoe’s parking meters at Lakeview Commons and Lakeside Beach.
The voters on June 3 said take them out. This will happen after Labor Day.
With 100 percent of the precincts reporting, the yes votes were 1,271 at 68.41 percent and the no votes were 587 at 31.59 percent.
“I think the people have spoken very well; that they just don’t like it,” John Cefalu said of paid parking.
Cefalu was one of the main opponents to the meters and early leader to force the city’s hand to change its policy.
“For the city to make the argument that this is a fundamental part of the budget and they need the revenue, I just can’t buy it,” Cefalu told Lake Tahoe News.
The city’s latest paid parking program has not been welcome since the get-go. Meetings were often contentious, with name-calling and anger the norm instead of civility and compromise.
While a group called Tahoe 4 Tahoe secured enough signatures to take the question of paid parking to the voters, legally they could not do so because of how the Vehicle Code is written when it comes to parking meters. Had it gone to court the city would have likely won based on past rulings. In the end, though, the City Council decided it was better for the voters to decide and the city put the measure on the ballot.
“I just hope that the vitriol is over. We are getting a lot done in this town with marginal revenue,” Mayor Hal Cole told Lake Tahoe News. “We need to all start pulling in the same direction moving forward. A lot more investment is needed.”
The decision does not affect the parking garage at Heavenly Village or the meters on Bellamy Court.
“It means we have to find a way to plug a hole that the lost revenue will create. We will be discussing that at the next council meeting,” City Manager Nancy Kerry told Lake Tahoe News.
The voters spoke, the city over reached on the parking issue. As for replacing that revenue, the city can do what private enterprise does all the time – cut payroll, live within your means.
Here’s an idea for plugging the new $250,000 hole in the budget — eliminate the $350,000 yearly subsidy for the airport. Since something has to give, why keep subsidizing parking for private jets? Perhaps the Lakeview Commons meters can be moved to the airport hangars.
I am impressed that 1858 locals got off the couch and voted.
thanks to everyone for getting out and voting.
I congratulate all those who supported P and the elimination of paid parking on their decided 68.4% victory of those who voted. Of the total 1,858 people who took the time to participate in the decision-making process of this community, your voting constituency of 1,271 people was undoubtedly the most organized and dedicated to your cause.
I don’t know how often one can say that roughly 10.3% (1,858) of the entire population of approximately 18,000 people have the power to determine the future of a community. But now those 1,271 people who were victorious, or 7.1% of this City’s population, have decided what’s best for the entire community regarding parking.
tahoedad is correct
Get rid of the airport
According to the Tahoe Tribune, a consultant hired by the FAA and City of South Lake Tahoe, commercial service will never return to the airport, without millions in yearly subsidies. Start saving that $350,000 per year now, close the airport.
I didn’t see this story here on LTN.net
yep, m-c, another structural problem with democracy. small factions utilize the winning formula of a generally uneducated electorate coupled with inevitable low voter turnout to manipulate the system.
LTN had the airport story first: https://www.laketahoenews.net/2014/05/lake-tahoe-airport-on-course-to-remain-open-without-return-of-commercial-service/
To ensure you see all of LTN’s stories, put in your email address at the bottom right of the home page where it says Daily Digest. Then you will get an email each morning listing what has been posted in the last 24 hours. You get the headline and first paragraph. Clicking on the headline gets you the whole story.
This is a free service.
LTN staff
Such contempt for the democratic process that is the foundation of this great nation. How sad. I didn’t support P, but to say people are “uneducated” because they happen to disagree with you is rather lame. It’s the true hallmark of a lazy, poorly-run campaign to blame the “stupidity” of the voters after a loss. It’s not like outside Super PACs were blanketing the air with misleading ads. If anything, the “powers-that-be” were pushing hard for a No vote. They just got outworked by the Yes campaign. I strongly disagree with the outcome, but I have to congratulate the Yes campaign for taking on the City/Chamber and completely kicking their butts.
The City can’t close the airport because they would have to repay $20+ million in grants to the FAA. It’s a pretty brutal Catch-22 for the City. That’s why the County sold it to them for a buck.
Although I’ve been a proponent of paid parking I would like to congratulate the T4T folks on their victory. I applaud your drive and commitment to see your cause through till achieved.
Should serve as good example for anyone trying to achieve something through the proper channels.
Paul — the FAA grants could be forgiven through congressional legislation. Think of it as an in-kind Environmental Improvement Project. A $20 million dollar write-off is small change compared to the $1.5 billion Tahoe has received from the feds, CA and NV for the EIP so far.
Plus, the City could sell the airport for conservation or other uses, At the low end of market values for runway coverage in the SEZ ($10/square foot), the airport would fetch a cool $25 million, leaving $5 million left after paying $20 mil to the FAA. (if the loan can’t be written off). Selling at the high end value of SEZ market value ($40/sq. ft) would yield over $100 million. That would pay for a lot of parking spaces.
Slowroller, while I agree in thanking those who took the time to vote I think we should also make a comment about those who did not vote. If you do not exercise your right to vote and take part in the process you have NO right to complain about any of it! So many people say ‘my one vote does not make a difference’. If more of you non-voters would take the time to vote it could make a huge difference.
Please, get out there and register and take the time to cast a ballot. It is a right and a privilege that should not be taken lightly.
Interesting arithmetic – almost all who signed the petition apparently voted, but NO ONE ELSE. . .as the Mayor of Park City was worried at a point about winning initiatives that had 55% +/-, we appear to make do with way less than 30% – there goes the democratic process…
4-mer
Could the same be said about the school bond that was forced on all the second homeowners who couldn’t vote on the issue?
THANK YOU TAHOE4TAHOE!! Great job!
4-mer: it’s better for 1271 voters to say what is their vision then 4 council members that did not listen and then shoved it down our throats. Time to move on and we will see how this is going to impact the Nov election.
Am sure Truckee, Nevada City, Auburn, Monterey & many others are laughing at “backward ” South Lake Tahoe that is stuck in outdated way.
4-Mer, that 10% didn’t decide anything, they were the sample of citizens that represented the population. Presidential election polls use sample sizes of 1000 to predict national elections and the good ones pin it down to within a couple tenths. With that sample size there is no scenario where the will of the people is to keep paid parking.
Economists don’t waste time voting, they just encourage their friends to waste their time voting. That’s more efficient and gets the same job done.
But, the City has kept the parking ticketing program. Remember the two parking enforcement officers hired at the start? only .25 of one of them is leaving.
Long before paid parking was an inkling in any council members eyes, we’ve had a parking enforcement officer here in SLT ticketing in no parking zones.
Just like how a small % elected the City Council that imposed Paid Parking, a small but over 2 to 1 ratio, voted to end the program!!
Congrats Tahoe4Tahoe for working hard within the democratic process in order to affect change!
The people spoke. When you like what’s said, or when you don’t, hopefully it can be respected!
And hopefully The City will respect such a clear decision and not try anymore silly revenue grabs?! Or another direct vote on the matter may be called for.
Bigger, that’s true, now you have 3. that’s the point.
Parker. Might want to check that math. P got 1271 votes. Votes for City Council – 2012 Top 2 Candidates: Hale Cole 2481 Votes. JoAnn Conner 2396 votes. 2010 Top 3 Candidates: Claire Fortier 1848 Votes. Tom Davis 1607 votes and Angela Swanson 1374. Tom Davis was the lone No paid parking vote. Which equates to 8099 (4 Council Members total vote) to 1607 for Tom Davis or 85%.
Rock,
That’s because you could vote for multiple candidates! So the vote totals are multiplied! Hal Cole got 2400 plus votes, but maybe 800 were for him as 1st choice, another 800 as 2nd choice, and another 800 as 3rd choice. Get it?
Being that it was a Presidential election turnout was probably a little higher, but still a small % of the eligible electorate in our town made the call!
Parker, if I remember correctly when voting for multiple open seats on the council, each person voting was allowed to pick the number of candidates that would fill the empty seats, not first, second, or third choices. My point being is that each candidate couldn’t get multiple votes from a single voter.
Also remember that general elections ALWAYS garner more participating voters.
Hope that all the “vote yes” folks sign up for toilet cleaning duty. That will be the next big complaint by all those haters of paid parking. Better stock up on rubber gloves and tp now…
I hope none of you run for office.. Too much whining and bad math …or maybe you should ?
Biggerpicture,
Sorry I didn’t go into every detail! Correct, it’s not a choice vote. But if there’s 3 open seats, you can vote for 3 different candidates. So Hal Cole may have been the ‘first choice’ of only a portion of the votes he received. In other words, if the voter could only vote for just 1 candidate, his total # of votes may have been more like 800.
Thus, since one votes for multiple candidates, the vote totals are multiplied! Thus, it’s not comparing apples to apples with the vote totals. But Yes, as I said, in General Elections, especially Presidential Elections, turn out is higher than in yesterday’s Primary Election. Yet in all elections, issues & candidates are decided by a minority of eligible voters!
go figure: the property owners at lakeside beach clean their own toilets as they are on private property which allows the public access. The ticket writing program never paid $1 towards the upkeep of that beach.
Here is another user fee for you guys. The city could install pay for use toilets. Maybe put some subway turnstiles on the bike trails so they could pay their fare share.
No matter how much money the city receives they will spend it on employee benefits.
Parker, one candidate can only get as many votes as voters choosing that candidate. You may vote for let’s say three candidates, but each person voting for a candidate wouldn’t triple unless a voter was able to vote for a single candidate three times. In other words if Hal Cole got 2400 votes that means 2400 different voters chose him as one of the three different candidates they voted for. And if memory serves on general elections we usually have in the neighborhood of 3000+ voters.
First off, we’ve gone off track! A minority of eligible people decide in all elections! Agreed?
Whatever one thinks of Measure P, over 2 to 1 of those that care, wanted the Paid Parking program to end. In fact I predicted a solid victory for Measure P multiple times on this website. Didn’t know it would be that solid, but I knew that generating over 1,400 sig., which translated into over 1,200
votes, would lead to its solid passage. Again, I said it multiple times here, so I know what I’m talking about!
Now, I’ll explain this one last time: Yes, he got 2400 votes. So at least, 2400 used one of their 3 votes to vote for him. If people could vote for only one candidate his vote total would’ve been a lot less! Agreed?
Take all the votes that voted on Measure P, for or against, and that’s how many cared one way or another to vote on it. But you can’t take all the votes for all the City Council candidates in their last election and compare that to the Measure P total. If you have to take the City Council total and divide by 3 for an accurate comparison. Agreed?
Now that total will still be greater than the Measure P total! But it was a Presidential Election and it was still a minority of eligible voters deciding!
Measure P passed resoundingly! The people were heard!
I am now done explaining it and commenting on it!!
3 seats comin’ up for grabs on the city council this fall. Any suggestions as to who should run? Everyone complains about the “same ol’, same ol'” but yet the carousel whirls around and that’s what we end up with!
If you know of a city resident that you feel is qualified, please post their name here on LTN.
I have not much to gripe about our current council, sure I didn’t agree with EVERYTHING they voted on but we, as a city, have made some progress that I’m proud of!
The 3 Sooges, Moe, Larry and Curly? The Marx brothers, Groucho, Harpo and Chico? The 3 Muskateers? All contenders… but all dead and not residents.
So please submit some names here so we can affect some change in the city of South Lake Tahoe! I’m serious, we need to get on this pronto!!! OLS
Too bad Kenny Curtzweiler can’t run. . . he’d shake things up a little. In a good way.
Old Long Skiis — A man who almost always displays eternal optimism. Congratulations on your Measure P victory.
I don’t think that there will ever be any real change in South Lake Tahoe and believe that the people in this community have made it clear what it is they want for their town both in the present and in the future.
Spouse – 4-mer-usmc
I’m amazed that it passed! People from all over the world come to see this lake, I don’t see how paying $8.00 would have been so devastating…..
Spouse-4- mer-usmc, Yes, I am the eternal optimist but I do have my grumpy days where I’m pretty pissed off at just about everything around here,(male menopause?). So the offer is still open for you and your hubby to come over for a cold one and have a talk. Maybe I’ll even have some fresh veggies come later this summer and you can take home a bag!
Any ideas for candidates for city council? Maybe you or your spouse? Kenny would be good but he lives in the county so that makes him ineligable, same goes for John Adamski, Angela Olson and so many others who would be excellent on the council. Unfortunately all of them not city residents.
I’m thinkin’, for us city folk, like Joby Cefalu, Tyler Cannon, Kathryn Reed, Garry Bowen, Bill Kingman, Les Wright,and many others, and that’s just for starters!
There’s lots more, but it’s a thankless job at REALLY low pay, considering all the time time you put in and all the crap you deal with.
Lets fill those empty seats with people that vote for what the LOCAL RESIDENTS REALLY want!!! Not what the TRPA, CTC, TTD and other associated agencies, committies, groups and blah, blah, blah, dictatae and out of basin developers pay off said groups and push thru this bull—- that the people who live don’t want or need! The Outspoken, OLS
parker your numbers are still a little off as when Hal was elected there were only 2 open seats
Hillary, pay attention. Nobody cares if a tourist has to pay an extra $20. The paid parking made it where a blue collar worker was economically prohibited from going to many of their favorite beaches such as the CTC land off of Venice. The vote was locals taking the reason for living here back from the Council.
Old Long Skiis:
As has been stated numerous times in the past, my spouse and I own property and thus pay taxes on it within the City limits of SLT but we live in the EDC portion of SLT so we can’t run for City Council. Also, while we don’t agree with every City Council Member all the time, overall we have no complaints about how this City Council is governing the community and how they’re trying to make improvements, and we believe that the present City staff is extremely good and are doing a very good job of executing the City Council’s directives while simultaneously receiving no public support for their efforts and being subjected to constant criticism and being called names.
I think the people who should run for the three Council seats that will be open this November are the individuals who have most boisterously criticized the City and all other local agencies and/or have made the most accusations of lies, deceit, misuse of funds, mismanagement, and of ignoring what they say local people want. My recommendations would include, but are not limited to the following:
Morale Hazard; Parker; John Cefalu; Joby Cefalu; Peggy Bourland-Madison; Chief Slowroller; Buck; sunriser2; Steve; Andy Engelhardt; and of course yourself Old Long Skiis. I’m certain there are lots more but they haven’t come to mind as yet.
I’d like to see every one of those above named people put their money where their mouth is and run for those open City Council seats so they too can make that whopping $500 per month for their 40-plus hours of work per week and be the recipient of constant criticism and name calling. Taking into account the litany of criticisms heaped on this City Council and on much of the City’s staff, my impression is that you all know what’s best for this town and think you can do a better job than anyone who is presently on the City Council, so step up to the plate and let’s see what you’ve got.
Spouse – 4-mer-usmc
Spouse-4-mer-usmc, Good list of candidates for city council! I’ve talked to some folks on who should run, with lot’s of names being bandied about.
Myself? While I have been asked by a few folks and was duly flattered that someone would think I’m up to the task. So I gave it a lot of thought…for about 5 seconds(!), and came to the conclusion, I wouldn’t want that thankless job! People angry at you no matter how you vote or what you say. Maybe that’s why the people on the council are there, because they love this town and want to make it better(as do I). I’m of that feeling for love of SLT but just don’t know if I’m up to the commitment. As they say, “Never say never”, so only time will tell if I put my name out there.
The current council sure ain’t doin’it to get rich. Heck, I was making that kinda money washing dishes at Harvey’s “Top of the Wheel” back in 1968!
So any one else with some possible candidates? Some on my short list are county residents so they can’t run for council but I wish that wasn’t the rules of the game. Good day and good luck, OLS
Parker. Regarding the 2012 Election. It wasn’t a 1st, 2nd or 3rd place election, it was a Vote for three candidates and you could not vote for the same candidate three times. The Voter Turnout was 67% in 2012 versus 22% in 2014.
You were the one that posted, “Just like how a small % elected the City Council that imposed Paid Parking.” NOT ME.
OLS. There are some great things happening in South Lake Tahoe. Overall, I think the City Counsel Members have done a good job for our town.
The Chateau is going to open this summer and I know people are already looking for work down there. Now it is up to the private sector to pick up the ball. I predict some of the slum owners behind (an near) The Chateau will start their own maintenance and re-development projects too. Same goes for the Harrison Avenue Al Tahoe folks too.
I would rather have a “do something” City Counsel then a “finger pointing” City Counsel any day.
Parker:
I want you, Moral Hazard, and Buck to run for City Council and make this town into what you think it should be. Show everyone your dedication to SLT and how it should be done to make this community into a booming economic success with new, better paying jobs for the people who live here, fixing everything that needs fixing, and paying for all future maintenance.
I’m challenging you. If you love this town get out there, run for office, and make it better in your own image.
Spouse-4-mer-usmc
rock4tahoe, Yes, Good things are happening on South Shore! Sure, there is bad stuff mixed in, unwanted developement, sewage spill, high unemployment with starting wages, when you can find a job, at below poverty level…well the list is long on the negative, but I try to “accentuate the positive”. (sorry, corny old song sung by Bing Crosby and many others).
After all these years we are finally getting some sidewalks that are lighted in a tasteful way! When I told an old friend of this, who has long since moved to Idaho, there was a long pause and he said ” You’ve got to be F&a*%$#@% kidding me?” No Tom, it’s true. I reply ,”Now go look at the city website and see the improvement to El Dorado Beach!”. Same response from a former local.”WTF?”
Sure just a few accomplishments but there is a lot more on the way PLUS alot I didn’t mention.I’m anxious to see how the Harrison ave. project turns out as well as the “Chateau” ,as phase one nears compleation. Lake Tahoe Wildlife Care aquiring 27 acres for a new facility is the best thing to happen to this town and our wildlife since…well?…since forever!!!
As always, the eternal optimist, OLS