Letter: Divisiveness doesn’t help our community
To the community,
An open letter to Mr. Bruce Grego:
Your Nov. 2, 2016, letter published by Lake Tahoe News was filled with misinformation and a clear attempt to mislead the community about the Lake Tahoe South Shore Chamber (Tahoe Chamber) and the current local political cycle. As chair of the board of directors, I am writing to call out your continued divisive tactics and clarify the facts.
First and foremost, there is no “Nevada-based” chamber in our community. You know this because we have repeatedly informed you and your cohorts that fully 70 percent of our more than 650 chamber members are California-based businesses. Our organization has offices in both California and Nevada and many of our events and programs, including the very successful Sample the Sierra, are held in California. Your continued use of the term “Nevada-based” chamber only seeks to divide our community rather than build our economy and support our local businesses.
Second, you know that the Tahoe Chamber has adopted a Tahoe Future 2020 Vision. This foundational document represents our members’ vision for the South Shore. It sets forth our organization’s commitment to economic vitality, quality of life, sustainability, infrastructure, and intellectual capital. Yet you consistently assail our motives for supporting these important community values and attack candidates who align with this vision.
Third, the Tahoe Chamber has a transparent endorsement process open to any interested candidates. Separately, Tahoe Chamber has a political action committee called the Tahoe Chamber Independent Expenditure Committee (IEC). This is a separate, lawfully registered organization created to support business friendly candidates who align with the Tahoe Future 2020 Vision. Despite these facts, you work overtime to characterize our process and motives as subversive. The reality is that Tahoe Chamber is proud to identify and endorse candidates with platforms that align with the Tahoe Future 2020 Vision. The Tahoe Chamber IEC is proud to support these candidates through independent expenditures.
Mr. Grego, you present yourself as a community leader, but true leaders do not seek to divide a community. Your constant chorus of “Nevada vs. California” creates unnecessary animosity. It does not contribute to supporting our local businesses, the South Shore’s quality of life, the betterment of our community, or the improvement of our political governance. I encourage you to take a more positive approach to community leadership. In an attempt to assist you in this transformation, I invite you to meet with our executive committee or our full board of directors so we can collectively engage in a more fact-based approach to supporting our local businesses and creating a robust South Shore economy.
Jason Drew, chair Tahoe Chamber board of directors
Mr. Drew, Your comments are misleading and lack transpiracy. #1 The Chambers main office is in Nevada and has been for many years,#2 The Chamber board is more than 50% Nevada businesses and Ca. Business that derive income from Nv. #3 Mr.Drew you work for a firm that has benefited financially for many projects, and still does. Your firm located next to the main Chamber offices, is counting on the money to keep flowing in from the Loop Road and many more projects. Don’t hid behind your chamber position to not reveal your finical gain, just tell the truth and give full disclosure.
Dear Mr. Drew: Your article fails to address any of the issues set forth in my article. According the the Secretary of State websites in Nevada and California, your Chamber is Nevada based; your entity was legally created in Nevada and California recognizes it as foreign entity.
But, instead of trying to place a “spin” on my article, why don’t you tell us something factual? Who are the financial contributors in support of this legal action to defeat Measure T? Tell us the amount that each contributor has made to date in support of this litigation. Tell us why the moneys spent in this litigation against Measure T, where Jason Collin is the Plaintiff and a candidate for City Council, has not been disclosed with the Fair Political Practice Commission. Tell us why you, your organization and Mr. Collin seek to disenfranchise the voter by seeking to defeat Measure T. I am sure the public would be interest in your answers.
Bruce Grego
Mr Drew, After reading your article it seems that Bruce Grego a couple of fair questions for you.
I am with you Bruce. Thanks Lou for the disclosures Mr. Drew inadvertently left out.
Mr. Grego, Ms. Smith, and whoever is hiding behind a don’t give up alias – the Tahoe Chamber IEC is solely a candidate IEC and not a measure IEC, therefore, no money was spent by the chamber to defeat Measure T. No money was contributed to any Chamber entity to defeat Measure T. No chamber money was provided to Mr. Collin to litigate Measure T. Mr. Collin litigated Measure T under his own volition as a private citizen. Fair answers to unresearched questions.
‘Fair answers to UNRESEARCHED questions?’, the implication here is what?
The inference is borderline rude.