Truckee-North Lake Tahoe trying to address socio-economic inequities of residents
By Kathryn Reed
TRUCKEE – Gated communities with manicured golf courses and spas – home to people who may have multiple addresses. A couple miles away much lower end housing inhabited with people living check-to-check.
While this dichotomy of the haves and barely hanging ons seems to becoming the norm throughout the Lake Tahoe Basin, the stark contrasts were pointed out in a presentation last week at the Truckee Donner Chamber of Commerce meeting.
“Living in Tahoe is the tale of two cities,” Alison Schwedner, director of the Community Collaborative of Tahoe-Truckee told the group gathered at Truckee Tahoe Airport. “It’s important to balance the two. We need to create an environment where families can live and thrive.”
Her group of 45 agencies is trying to address the needs of community members in the North Lake Tahoe-Truckee areas.
“Data shows a lot of families are struggling,” Schwedner said as she went over stats from the just released Community Report Card.
Kings Beach opened an affordable housing complex in 2014. Photo/LTN
She talked of how people line up at the Family Resource Center because it’s warm and they may not have heat at home or be able to afford it. Project MANA provides food to half the people who live in Kings Beach. The waiting list for the more than 400 affordable housing units in the region is more than two years. Tahoe Truckee Unified School District provides 1,000 free breakfasts each day; 37 percent of the students receive a free or reduced lunch.
Getting help is a problem for many because of the state line and three counties – Nevada, Placer and El Dorado. Donner Creek Mobile Home Park is in Placer and Nevada counties. That means neighbors could be seeking help from different agencies. And sometimes that help is not right in town, and without a personal vehicle the aid may be out of reach.
Two contributing factors to what is keeping people down are low wages and the high cost of living. With most jobs being tourist oriented, they are minimum wage or about $11 an hour at most.
In 2011, the ACCRA Cost of Living Index put Truckee at ninth most expensive place to live in the United States.
Schwedner said it costs more to live in Truckee than the California and national averages. This means housing, food and everything combined costs more in Truckee.
“A lot of people technically live in poverty, but they don’t qualify for federal aid,” Schwedner said.
This in turn means people are turning to nonprofits for assistance.
Housing can be an issue. Schwedner showed a picture of affordable housing in Kings Beach that could be described as squalor. Then she showed the facility that opened last year – new, clean and a place people are proud to call home.
Tahoe Forest Hospital did a recent Community Needs Assessment that found while most people are healthy, with heart disease-obesity-tobacco use all being on the low side; there is an abnormally high use of alcohol in the area.
“We tend to be binge drinkers. We drink more than the state and country,” Schwedner said.
A question on the survey asked if people had a drink in the last 30 days. The hospital found that 81.1 percent of the people said yes. This compares to the state average of 55.5 percent and national average of 54.5 percent.
Mental illness is also something nonprofits are seeing as an issue and something the collaborative wants to address.
“There is all the difference in the world between treating people equally, and trying to make them equal.”
-F.A.Hayek
People should choose to live where they can afford to based on their income. This is the way it has always been until leftists had the terrible country destroying idea under LBJ to build government housing projects and provide welfare and SSI which are all destroying the idea of self employment and a livable income, a career and honest work. Building more low income housing projects in high cost of living areas is not the answer to people having low incomes from many causes that require living in affordable areas and states.
In america low income is a roof over your head, food to eat, cable tv, a car, and a cell phone. We shouldnt target successful people and guarentee money to lazy people. That said we have a huge income disparity between people making a mil a year and folks making billions. Its a tough subject and i never recieved a paycheck from a poor person but i am scared of the top 80 people in tye world controling 50% of the money. That becomes a shadow govt that only serves its own interests with zero recourse.
So the same government that created the socio-economic chasm wants to address it?
The government has crowded out private spending, the government has driven up the cost of doing business, the government has placed restrictions, regulations, and taxation on everything but the air we breath which drives up the cost of living, and now they want to “address” the inequities that they created?
Give me a break! Until the government lowers the regulatory burdens, decreases the taxes paid by business & individuals, and limits the size, scope & reach of government, the socio-economic divide will only deepen.
So move. I cannot afford to live in Hawaii on Maui or in Beverly Hill or Vale. But should I insist on doing so, is it the responsibility of others to pay my way or provide assistance?
People need to take control of their lives and learn to make decisions based upon their own financial; capabilities. Can’t afford Tahoe? Then move.
Justanass, go take your meds
Nature..either state your idea and present your side or shut it. Your constant belittling of others with no real substance is tiresome…dare i say alinskyish.
You would make a wonderful politician.
I agree ,People need to take control of there money, Just disconnected Charter because there is a hike again, Got NetFlex 7,99 MONTH and If I want to read the news go on your internet, Saved 100 bucks ,There are ways to live ,If you ever have been on the streets you get street smart,a a lot of toasted cheese sandwiches ,and a lot of poor food, And they have Christmas cheers to be thankful for if you can not work and disabled ,There is a limit yo everything,No need to move ,it cost money deposits and rent ,just get wise.Thats my thoughts and I am sticking to it,
BO. Funny you dont tell justanass to stick to the topic, as his response is the same regardless of the topic. If you dont like what I post than dont read it…I dont believe you have any authority here, perhaps you just want to controll the message…good luck with that….
Ok
Everyone has a different level of acceptability. If one person is satisfied with living under certain conditions that are less “acceptable” to another, it’s none of our (or the government’s) business to intervene.
Dan….really?
Dan that is a REALLY slippery slope you just pitched your tent on.
How so, Hmmmmm? It makes perfect sense to me. When I was young and broke, I lived in such a way that many people would not have found acceptable, yet I was fine with it. Over the years, working, I improved my lot. My choice. Why should how anybody chooses to live be subject to the choices of another?
I live in the truckee projects yo! I guarantee a huge increase in crime and gang activity in truckee with the arrival of the projects. Can’t afford to live here? Move to oakland. Don’t bring oakland here.
@kathy if you use periods we could read your posts. Not attacking you but I literally cannot understand what you’re saying.
@Dog-Because how I choose to live has both direct and indirect impacts and consequences for those around me….my neighborhood, my community, my nation, the human species, other species that are either sentient beings with rights and standing or I have been given dominion over. No-one is separate. No-one. Of course Dan’s comment makes sense to you…it is in line with libertarian philosophy and Satanism(do what thou will). If I choose to live in a way that negatively impacts my neighbors….for example: say the Coal Ash dump leaches into your well, or my dilbit pipeline over the freshwater aquifer spouts leaks on a semi-regular basis, or I ignore those pesky fire system regulations I buy up all the land and give you the option of working for next to nothing or in toxic conditions or watch your children starve, work for me for a pittance or straggle on down the road…hey it’s your choice: say thank you or pack them up and go somewhere else. There is a reason for a government regulation, oversight and a ‘social contract’-it’s because business historically HAS NOT been accountable. But based on your continual arguments, that is just the way things should be.
Hmmm, you clearly don’t know squat about libertarian principles. And Satanism? Really? Now you sound hysterical.
Libertarianism respects private property rights and the individual. I cannot pollute YOUR property. You have the same right to breathe clean air and drink clean water as I do.
Educate yourself before you spew.
Dog, I am not so certain you fully grasp the libertarian philosophy. It is possible I misremember your position on a number of matters, but some are clearly non-libertarian. For example, a true libertarian not only supports “property rights”, but also an individuals right to use alcohol and drugs (just not to the detriment of others), supports gay marriage, supports a women’s right to choose, etc. I have posted two articles that one provides the scholarly foundation and evolution of libertarian philosophy including both the “right” and “left” libertarian view of natural resources, which is patently different, and a blog that touches on the moral failings of the libertarian philosophy – there are hundreds of others I could provide but choose not to. I have read quite extensively on all political philosophies including libertarianism for the last few decades. I personally find libertarianism as a failed political paradigm, and put it nearly as bankrupt as communism. A real world example is when Ron Paul was queried during the presidential debates about what would you do with an individual sorely injured but without health insurance and the Tea Party audience responded Yeah, let him die, Paul noted this was the choice of a free society, but that non-gov could fill the void (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/12/tea-party-debate-health-care_n_959354.html). In fact the philosophy is so morally bankrupt that Rand Paul has had to walk back criticisms he had against the 1960’s civil rights laws – laws I might add that were enacted by states with the explicit purpose of limited the constitutional rights of people of color.
See: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/libertarianism/ and
http://philosophygetsreal.com/2012/07/06/libertarianism/
All in all, I think most folks have a streak of libertarianism in them on some issues, but few are stringent adherents as the philosophy lacks a true moral compass. I can be pretty sure most mainstream religious leaders (certainly non-orthodox Judaism or 95% of Jews, Catholicism (particularly the Pope), most other mainstream Christian denominations (except the evangelical right), Buddhism, Muslim, Hinduism, nudism (had to throw that in) reject a strict libertarian philosophy.
Rick
Rick, I believe your understanding of libertarianism is flawed. Right/Left libertarianism is not quite accurate. There are anarchocommunists and anarchocapitalists. But left and right doesn’t quite fit, since the idea of right or left still implies statism.
I registered to vote libertarian for the first time in 1976, though I’ve never been a member of the party. And even voting is somewhat anathema to pure libertarianism, but I still do it, simply to vote against new laws and new taxes.
Even though I’ve been a libertarian for most of my life, I have only been delving deeply into the philosophy for the last few years, as it’s become easier with internet access. And consequently, many of my ideas on the details have evolved recently, though my core beliefs haven’t changed.
I do believe that as long as you are not infringing on another person’s rights, you are free to live as you choose. I believe in the NAP. But your claim that libertarians believe in ‘pro-choice’ is wrong. There is no single libertarian stance on that, or several other issues. There’s a strong libertarian argument against abortion. Many of us believe that the unborn child has the same rights as any other human. Many libertarians are Christians. Many are atheists. Many agnostics. The one feature that unites us is the NAP.
Ron Paul is not our spokesman. Nor is the Pope. Most of us prefer to speak for ourselves.
“Libertarianism respects private property rights and the individual.”
Yet you argued in favor of prop 8, a position that furthers the right wing religious agenda by using the state to limit free choice.
You can’t have it both ways. Which is why no one wants you in their camp. You are inconsistent, which makes me question your grasp of a philosophy of anything.
Your use of the word evolution is highly ironic.
Fish, as I said, if you had been paying attention, my thoughts have evolved on certain issues.
I actually believe that the State doesn’t have any business in marriage at all. I believe I pointed out back then that the issues involved for couples of any sex regarding legal issues should be dealt with through contracts, not state sanctioned ‘marriage’.
But you don’t care about that, you just want to try to make me wrong so you can be right. You’re not interested in a philosophical discussion, you’re just looking to belittle people. This shouldn’t be about me, or about you. Your inconsistencies are often glaring, but my sole purpose here, unlike yours, isn’t just to try to make other people look bad.