THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF LAKE TAHOE NEWS, WHICH WAS OPERATIONAL FROM 2009-2018. IT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH. THE WEBSITE IS NO LONGER UPDATED WITH NEW ARTICLES.

Editorial: Vote no on South Tahoe’s Measure C


image_pdfimage_print

By Lake Tahoe News Editorial Board

“Don’t tell me what you value, show me your budget, and I’ll tell you what you value.”  — Joe Biden

That sentiment needs to be applied to the city of South Lake Tahoe and all other public agencies.

When looking at the city’s budget for this fiscal year, which began Sunday, there are zero dollars for roads. If the former vice president of the United States is correct, that shows the five elected members of the City Council who last month approved this budget and the staff who presented it don’t value roads.

Shame on all of you.

For months, even years, people associated with the city of South Lake Tahoe have touted how important roads are. They say what we drive our cars and ride our bikes on are in disrepair. They say something needs to be done. We agree.

But what are they doing?

Not a single road was paved in 2000, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2011 and 2016.

Still, from 1995 to today the city has spent $11,792,473.10 on pavement rehabilitation. That is an average of $512,7616.22 per year in each of the last 23 years. So, clearly, the city has money for roads when it wants to. At least some councils saw it as a priority.

This money was solely for paving.

Measure C on the November ballot is projected to bring in $2.5 million annually. The proposal would have money going toward complete streets – meaning more than an overlay. It would include curbs, gutters and striping for bike lanes where appropriate.

We believe safe roads is one of the basic fundamentals government is supposed to provide. Clearly, based on this council’s budget priorities, the five disagree.

This current group has neglected its duty to be fiscally prudent, cut costs, increase revenue and provide the basics for their constituents. They, instead, want people to pay a higher sales tax to fix the roads.

Measure C on the November ballot asks the residents of South Lake Tahoe to raise the sales tax from 7.75 percent to 8.25 percent.

While advocates say 75 percent of the local sales tax is paid by people who don’t live in the city limits, they have not provided any proof to substantiate that fact. Even if tourists, and not just our neighbors in El Dorado and Douglas counties, were paying the bulk of the tax, that should not be a reason to say yes.

At some point the people we elect and nearly 200 workers employed by the city need to make roads a priority. It is their job to work within the budget to provide all of us with safe roads. It is not the taxpayers job to come to the rescue every time they want something.

Higher taxes for the extras in life are one thing – like an increased hotel tax for recreation amenities or property taxes for improved K-12 facilities – are logical. Another tax for the basics, like roads, is ludicrous.

Come on city officials, do your job – make roads a priority by funding them out of the General Fund.

And voters, do your job – vote no on Measure C on Nov. 7.

image_pdfimage_print

About author

This article was written by admin

Comments

Comments (4)
  1. Irish Wahini says - Posted: October 2, 2017

    I don’t know where the City gets its funding for “Complete Streets”, but most folks don’t care about getting all the trimmings on a FEW streets instead of paving the streets that need fixing! “Complete Streets” not only includes putting in new roadway, but adds PAVED PATHWAYS, CURBS, GUTTERS, POP-OUTS AT CORNERS, LANDSCAPING, NEW LIGHTING and more. I don’t think we need all these NEW bells & whistles on streets like Al Tahoe Blvd (which seems just fine to me), or on Sierra Blvd (which needs repaving, drainage correction and erosion control (not taken care of during the “Erosion Control Project”. The enormous amount of money spent to rework streets into “Complete Streets” could probably fund the paving of MANY MORE ROADS that need fixing!

    The budget should include funding for South Lake Tahoe roads, and the Council could approach the taxpayers with a ballot measure to fund “COMPLETE STREETS”. Safe roads are a necessity – “Complete Streets” are not!

  2. Carl Ribaudo says - Posted: October 2, 2017

    I live in the city and would like complete streets and am prepared to pay for them.

  3. bruce grego says - Posted: October 2, 2017

    Dear Kae:
    The last line of the Lake Tahoe News’ editorial against Measure “C” states: “And voters, do your job – vote no on Measure “C” on Nov. 7.” Be aware that the only matter being voted on in this November election is Measure “C”. It’s a special election that is more costly to conduct than a general election (where the costs can be distributed among several governmental entities). Why is the Measure “C” election being held in a special election and why is the City willing to expend these additional costs? The City is hoping to maximize the effect of special interest groups that support Measure “C” and diminish the votes of the general electorate. Don’t let this election strategy be successful, please vote on November 7, 2017.

  4. 4-mer-usmc says - Posted: October 3, 2017

    I agree with Mr. Ribaudo’s remarks on this matter, and I believe that improvements stimulate further improvements.

    I must question why a special election and those associated costs were suitable to Mr. Grego when they were for Tahoe for Tahoe’s purposes and what they wanted, but are not suitable in this instance when many local citizens want and support the rebuilding of our local streets. There are some residents who are very tired of waiting for this to happen, and they are really tired of living with the indecisive results and inactions of former City Councils. A one-half percent sales tax increase that would be used solely for road rehabilitation would be borne not only by the residents of SLT but by every person who comes to SLT and spends money in our City on anything that is taxable. If someone spends $10 on something taxable this will add 5-cents to their total purchase price; if they spend $50 it will add .25-cents; and if they spend $100 it would add .50-cents. I think that’s a small price to pay for a desired and beneficial return. The fact is nothing is free in this world. For example, the privilege of blogging one’s opinion to anything contained in this publication costs $10 per month, or $100 for 12-months. However, that was in December 2016 so it remains to be seen what those costs will be in December 2017. See, nothing is free, but it’s what you pay to help support your local community and to support its businesses.

    Driving [or cycling] on our local roads is reminiscent of the condition of Okinawa’s 3rd world quality roads that I experienced in 1962-1963. Our roads are a hazard to one’s vehicle, to their bicycle, and most importantly to the safety of children. Show that you care about the safety and quality of the community where you live and where you’re raising your kids, and vote Yes on C.