Letter: LTCC thankful for Measure F support
To the community,
Thank you for your support of and confidence in the students, board, faculty, staff, and leadership of Lake Tahoe Community College. We’d like to personally thank the South Lake Tahoe community for lending your support to Measure F, and for turning out this Election Day.
This community’s four-decade-long involvement and interest in the college is what keeps LTCC going. You’ve supported your local community college, and we hope in the months and years to come, you’ll see firsthand the difference Measure F is making and will join us in celebrating its passage.
It’s been a long journey toward Election Day for Lake Tahoe Community College and the many volunteers who supported Measure F, endorsed it, donated toward the campaign, walked neighborhoods to get out the vote, made phone calls on behalf of it, and voted in favor of it. To all those who worked so hard for so long to get this bond measure passed, thank you sincerely. Your efforts have made Measure F a reality. This bond measure will contribute not only to the success and growth of our college and students, but also of our community. Great things await all of us thanks to your efforts. The staff, students, faculty and administration at LTCC owe you a huge debt of gratitude.
Special thanks also must go to the dozens of hard-working members of the Measure F campaign committee who donated many hours of their time for months to attend meetings, collect endorsements, put up signs, write letters to the editor, arrange phone banking nights, and all the other efforts that helped to turn out the vote and get Measure F passed. Your total dedication to LTCC’s future was inspiring, touching, and made all the difference. Thank you.
With sincere gratitude,
Roberta Mason, board president
Kindred Murillo, superintendent/president Lake Tahoe Community College
You are welcome! The great efforts made not only by staff, but the student body was most impressive. Us voters expect to see great progress. :)
Thank you for another amazingly over inflated wish list burden on our tax bills………
As one who voted against it, I urge you to please use our tax dollars wisely. Another increase in taxes is hard to take considering the increases we are seeing from health care to food, gas, and utilities.
WE voters. Looks like the education system is doing a fine job. Good thing we’re throwing more money at it.
Awesome! The plans to use these funds are well founded. I am glad I voted YES on this measure. Go Coyotes!
Dogula, just because you think education isn’t worth investing a dime in does not mean others feel the same way. Look at what the bond measure did for the highschool! Open your eyes! It’s worked well!
Also I’d bet that you will see an increase in property value that in time will make up for your $100 loss per year.
As for everyone else who’s upset about it being too much money, I ask you to trust in the community college leadership. They know what they are doing (as it’s their job to do so). Kindred does a fantastic job running the college. Have a little faith that she’s going to put LTCC on the map and not waste money.
Tinfoilhat – Opposition to this measure doesn’t necessarily mean that someone doesn’t think educational investment is worth it. Anyone paying property taxes is already “investing” in education. They may not think this particular measure is worth the added cost.
You also assume that his increase is $100 per year. That may or not be true, as a $100 increase indicates an assessed value at under $400K. There are many homes here worth quite a bit more than that, whose owners will pay more than $100/yr..
You also trust the community college leadership to know what they are doing because that is their job. Quite a leap of faith. Without getting into naming those in national politics, there are many who do not seem to know what they are doing even though it is their job to do so.
Lastly, you claim that property value increases will offset the additional tax. Maybe. Maybe not. The home values here seem to have stagnated and even declined again recently. Who knows when we will see increases again. If we do, I find it unlikely that they will directly be due to improvements at LTCC.
As a student I say, “thank you”. I know it is an added financial burden for some, but I hope you know it IS going to a good cause. We need a school we are proud of and want to attend. It’s important to keep up the maintenance so it doesn’t become dilapidated like so much of this town has…and at least this is going to fund something that supports education, which in turn will make for a better community. Bettering the programs and the college is a good thing! Why not take a class? You might enjoy it and learn something new while your at it.
Yobob. County assessor told me yesterday that assessments are trending towards a 2% increase on property tax for next year due to rising home prices.
I wonder how many of the 4654 votes in this election are property tax payers?
This measure needed a 55% pass rate. This measure passed by 75 votes. Great example of “every vote counts”.
Mark,
I imagine that most of the yes votes are from non home owning transient voters.
Looking at the latest tax bill, the rate is approaching 1.1%. I wonder the level at which those who own and live here will say No Mas. 1.25%? 1.5%? fFor those who rent, the added tax burden is passed on as rent increases by the off mountain home owners. The people who really take a hit are fixed income retirees. Small businesses and restaurants will feel some pain as well as people are forced to cut back discretionary spending due to this and every other increase that we see coming our way.
Marc, the 2% a year increase is the max it can go up in any 1 year due to prop 13.
So glad to see Measure F pass! It’s great to know that the majority of the community sees the value Lake Tahoe Community College brings to SLT. As a homeowner and tax payer, this is an important investment that I’m happy to make.
Reloman, that’s my point. Assessed values are going up and the assessor is maxing out the property tax increase for next years bill. I think things have been muddled with talk of tax rate on assessed value vs % amount allowed to increase annually on assessment.
yobobbyb it will increase it to 1.125% or 2.5 cents out of every 100 of assessed value.
it will be interesting to see what really happens with the Money.
most of you folks will have forgotten what they said vs. what they really do with the Money.
the best part is that we will be paying for whatever is built or bought, long after it is worn out or thrown away.
Slow, the good thing is they will have increased parking so maybe you can get the contract to do annual restriping,
Isn’t it funny how non-property owners can vote to tax those who do own. What a rigged system to confiscate money.
Hey Student,
Be prepared for when they raise your rent to cover it. Why can’t the people of this state (taxifornia) ever try to fix things by being smart, instead of trying to fix things by throwing money at it. A vicious cycle where they just want more and more of our hard earned dollars, but it is never enough.
One of the really big problems is, they always allocate funds to build the projects. Then they hire the cheap bid, and they do a shoddy job. (The roof at the college was done WAY wrong in the first place. And they’ve been fighting with it, spending money on it, ever since) But they don’t bother allocating funds for maintenance!! Never. You can’t just build something and then forget about it. Private sector accounts for maintenance in its figuring. Public sector? Rarely. And never adequately.
It’s how they operate: always overestimate revenues, always underestimate expenses. If the private sector worked that way, nobody would stay in business more than six months.
Dogula, Mountain Mamma and others. I say hire a local roofing contractor to patch the roof. Hire a local plumbing and heating business to install a new furnace for the cold rooms. Keep it a two year community college and forget about building a dormitory as we have lots of empty homes in our town that could be rented out bringing in a little TOT for the city.
This measure affects me in triplicate as I have three properties here and will probably never attend LTCC, unless it’s to take classes on how to file for bankruptcy due to an ever spiraling tax bill!!! The money that,s left over from measure F can go towards re paving our streets.
Old Long Skiis
OLS, from what I understand, a local roofer has been trying to fix the damage but patches aren’t doing it. It was so bad from the start, it’s a major deal.
That’s what happens when you’re doing a major job with other people’s money. You never are as careful with it as you would be with your own.
WHINERS AND FINGER POINTERS, YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE
I agree 100% with hiring locals, but just because you hire a local, doesn’t mean you get a good contractor. Chances are the locals they hire are “cheap” too. You get what you pay for.
Quite few locals signed petitions to get Measures M, N and O on the ballot. Does anyone know how the vote on that went?
Countywide:
Measure M. Would prohibit construction of any housing developments of five parcels or more unless CalTrans certifies that two preconditions exist: first, that the stretch of Highway 50 west of Placerville has traffic levels that do not reach Level of Service F, and, second, that traffic will remain at an LOS above F in the foreseeable future. Would prohibit rezoning of land currently designated as farming or open space for other purposes. Limits up zoning low-density residential areas, creates exemptions for non-residential and ag-related development.
Yes: 42.06% No: 57.94% Percent Reporting: 100%
Measure N. Framed as a competing alternative to Measures M and O. Would extend Measure Y slow-growth restrictions but opponents allege it would change the General Plan to allow more development in some areas.
Yes: 25.00% No: 75.00% Percent Reporting: 100%
Measure O. Would rezone a large portion of the county from “Community Region” to a “Rural” designation, changing the required traffic Level of Service of D instead of E.
Yes: 33.20% No: 66.80% Percent Reporting: 100%
Thank you tahoeadvocate. Disappointing though after the no people put on such a slick and expensive campaign to deter voters.