LTUSD superintendent backs out of recreation deal with LTCC, SLT; board never voted on it
By Kathryn Reed
Lake Tahoe Unified School District’s board has never had the opportunity to vote on whether it wants to be part of a consortium with Lake Tahoe Community College and the city of South Lake Tahoe that would manage and maintain ball fields.
Instead, Superintendent Jim Tarwater made the decision to back out of the deal that has been talked about since at least last spring.
“I don’t know that it is really a policy decision,” LTUSD board President Barbara Bannar told Lake Tahoe News. “It doesn’t involve the education of our children. When you look at what benefit the children in the school district get from being part of the JPA it was minimal at that point if any.” Plus, she cited the growing attorney costs for a reason to put an end to the discussions.
The college board and City Council both voted on and for the creation of the JPA – believing the decision to enter the joint powers agreement is a matter for electeds to decide, not the hired leaders of the organizations.
The college and city are going forward with the JPA without LTUSD. They were the original creators of the JPA, with LTUSD being a late addition – and now a recent subtraction. Separate agreements will need to be written to incorporate the K-12 district into the equation, though, because it is still a player without being JPA member.
The reason all three entities were initially creating the JPA was to consolidate the management and operation of ball fields. The recreation master plan calls for a blended approach instead of individual entities; ultimately making it easier on the user.
Less than two months ago LTUSD Superintendent Jim Tarwater was set to take the JPA to the board. He told Lake Tahoe News this week that the reason to forego the JPA is that the district could not afford all the maintenance that was proposed.
“They need more maintenance than what I can do,” Tarwater said.
“The board doesn’t need to vote on it,” he said of the JPA.
An agreement from earlier this year has LTUSD being required to maintain the fields on its property instead of the city doing so. In turn, the city is subsidizing this operation by $100,000 to be a community partner and recognizing adult leagues also use these fields.
Had LTUSD joined the JPA, it would have gotten the $50,000 for maintenance that comes from Measures S/R for the community play field at the college. That full amount has never been used and is carried over each year. It’s anticipated the new fields to be built adjacent to that field will use up the balance of the $50,000. This is allowable based on the original recreation measure calling for multiple fields at that location.
LTCC will now be responsible for the maintenance of the current and future fields in that area.
The current field and proposed fields are in part owned by all three public agencies. The JPA was to have managed all of them. Now easement agreements with LTUSD must be devised.
The JPA was a discussion item at last week’s LTUSD board meeting. The board at the time seemed open to the JPA idea. But it wasn’t an action item.
A day later Tarwater sent an email to City Manager Nancy Kerry and LTCC President Kindred Murillo saying the district would not be part of the JPA. This came after the three had a conference call that morning that Tarwater referenced. The email cites the lack of a guarantee of the baseball field immediately being built as the reason to not enter the JPA.
“There is no guarantee that a new baseball field will be built. For these and other reasons, the LTUSD has decided, after careful thought and consideration, to decline the offer to be a member of the JPA,” Tarwater wrote. While he makes it seem like this was a district decision, it was in fact his decision alone. “One [stet] behalf of LTUSD Board of Education, I hope that the Community Play Consortium is successful.”
There is no guarantee which field will be built when because this is something the City Council must vote on. That will take place in January when it is better known what the coffers look like. The city has about $1.2 million – it may turn out to be more – to build the fields. Cost estimates are being worked on now. The goal is at a minimum one field will break ground next year.
The college is investing $1.6 million to renovate the current field, with Measure R contributing $300,000 to that cause. That, too, will occur in 2016.
LTUSD, even without being a party to the JPA, will continue to do all the scheduling for the community ball fields. It is possible the district and other entities would become JPA board members down the road.
LTUSD Tarwater made a smart move backing out of the LTCC/City SLT deal about the ball fields.
What a despicable mess these fools are.
Bottom line, the community uses the fields and they should not be maintained by the school.
Remember how the Rec measures were sold to county residents, in part, because it would include a ball field at Tahoe Paradise Park? County residents are getting the bone on this one with no apparent representation in the process. Any wonder why the money is staying in the city?
I don’t blame LTUSD for not wanting to be part of this fiasco.
Isee, that was certainly NOT part of the agreement. There were funds set aside for Tahoe Paradise Park to spend as their Board deemed necessary. There was absolutely no provision for “a ball field”. This has indeed become a fiasco, please don’t make it worse by misrepresenting the facts. I was intimately involved in the agreements.
I first learned the expression “Attorneys have to eat too” in 1976 in a negotiating meeting with City of SLT representatives. The sentiment was expressed by the hired gun/attorney representing the City – outrageously, I might add. If there’s one thing the City has historically been good at, regardless of who’s been elected to what, it’s keeping lawyers well fed. Ours and theirs.
When it comes to following legal directions the City always reminds me of a reversal on the old Bum Phillips quote: “they can take their’n and lose to our’n, and they can take our’n and lose to their’n.”
The City has earmarked $1.2M for a ballfield, while city streets continue to crumble into disrepair? When is the last time the CITY repaved a city street (not STPUD as part of a water pipe replacement). Outrageous.
We have not heard the last of this.
This would not be the first time Tarwater shot his mouth off and caused a problem, It looks to me as if LTUSD really does not know where the various authorities end and begin.
As for the City….well enough said, and LTCC is not significantly better.
Complex matters cannot be managed by simple people.
Steve, so you know, the money for the ball fields was from a measure passed like 10-15 years ago. We’ve been paying into it from property taxes. It was originally supposed to be for BIKE TRAILS, 2-3 multi use (baseball, soccer etc…) fields, and the ice rink.
The first thing done was to start building the ice rink. The contractor failed the new one said he couldn’t work with the substandard work done by the first so they tore it down and started over. That took a lot of money out of the budget for everything else.
The second thing done was fix up the house for the guy who watches over the park out in meyers. A few people complained but the sheep kinda let it go. That took more money out of the pot.
The third thing done was build the field by the college. It was supposed to be 2-3 fields with real grass. We got one field made of artificial grass that didn’t live up to its guarantee and will probably have to be replaced sooner than expected. Hey pot check out this money.
Now so you know the ones who really got that measure passed at the time was the bikers who just wanted a safe way to travel, (I’m not talking about doing crazy stuff in the forest that scares hikers) and if some goes to all other facilities great. But in the past decade most of the money went to everything else. So the bikers were pissed. Then the bikers found out that because of the way the lawyers phrased things in the proposition, none of the money set aside for bikers could be used for any maintenance on existing trails.
Hey pot, here’s money, but you can’t spend it.
The the powers at be said we’ll make a compromise, we’ll let you use the money you put in for trail maintenance for existing trail maintenance but you got to share it to fix up the baseball fields by the middle school. Here share this pot of money … again.
Now you have what you describe as your 1.2 million for the ball fields that has been accumulating over the past 10-15 years rather than going into what the people who pushed for it to be passed thought they were voting for. Pot, now you can spend your money.
Oh and as for fixing your roads. We all pay a hidden tax when we buy gasoline. (its included in the price you see at the pump) The geniuses at the state government raised that long ago and instead of spending that money to do any sort of preventable maintenance on the roads, they put it in their general fund so it could be spent better in other places. If you follow that money it went to social welfare, and to prop up schools. So don’t blame anyone locally for that. Not your pot of money after all.
Oh wait, that gas tax for roads did go to schools in a round about way. Now Tarwater doesn’t want to any funds from state resources to maintain the fields.
Sheep, meet pot.