S. Tahoe’s aging snow removal fleet a concern
By Kathryn Reed
Dismal snow years are good and bad for South Lake Tahoe’s Public Works Department.
The good means the aging fleet doesn’t have to be used much.
The bad is that the state reimburses the city in part for its snow removal expenses, which means fewer dollars will be in the coffer for next winter. That’s bad if even a normal snowfall accumulates.
Ron Corbett, fleet manager for the city, told the City Council last week, “We have a lot of equipment that is in dire straits. This is the oldest fleet I’ve ever seen.” He’s been around fleets for 35 years.
A $20 a year parcel tax passed in 1989 is what the city relies on for buying equipment. (None of it goes toward operations.) In that time 15 snow graders-plows, one snowblower-loader combo and two snowblowers have been purchased. The three newest pieces were bought in 2007 and will be paid off next year.
There is no money in the kitty for new equipment until the current debt is paid.
The city received $227,753 from the parcel tax last year. A snowblower costs $750,000. Maintenance of the fleet is costing $800,000 a year.
“This $20 is not even close to (what is needed) to replace our equipment,” Corbett said.
Voters were asked in 2005 to up the $20 fee, but they said no.
The City Council in September 2013 voted to go back to the ballot box in 2014 to double the fee. That never came to fruition.
“I don’t think it had a good chance of passing,” Councilman Tom Davis told Lake Tahoe News. “Is it needed? Absolutely. Maybe it needs to be packaged with road repair and repaving.”
He said the council’s change of mind came about because other entities – Lake Valley Fire, the library and community college – were coming forward with tax initiatives and that the thinking was voters would not be happy to keep having their wallets tapped.
Davis also said it’s hard for the public to see the need for equipment replacement when the snowfall has been lackluster for the last few winters.
But what worries Corbett is he’s not sure if the vehicles are taxed in a heavy winter, if they will be able to hold up to the demand.
The $18 million fleet would cost $30 million to replace today. Corbett urged the council to put aside money for fleet replacement. No such action was taken at the April 21 meeting.
Rather than replacing our snow removal fleet I’d like to see that money spent repairing and repaving our streets. The’yre getting worse all the time.
Potholes, cracks, crumbling edges of the roadway and falling apart rapidly.
Lets repair our infra structure and repair some of the old snowplows that need it the most and are rarely used. OLS
Genoa has a candy dance to pay for their infrastructure and bills- perhaps our city leaders could think outside of the box and come up with solutions instead of taxing us to death………..
A $50.00 fee is what should be charged for every parcel in the City, a very small price to pay for opened streets during the winter.and Business leaders should pay $100.00 for every business.
One day it will come to a head and you will remember what I have said.
$50.00 IS A SMALL PRICE TO PAY.
Big difference between Genoa and South Lake Tahoe. Not sure fundraisers are realistic.
$50 is a small price to pay?
On top of every other little ‘small price to pay’ that you the people have stuck the homeowners of this little town with??
Every 6 months or so, just when people have forgotten the last little ding, you come up with one more ‘just a cup of coffee every day’ fee you want to stick people with. November it was the Community College. June it was the library. The fire fee. All you people think the homeowners are your own personal piggy banks with an endless supply of contributions.
Dogula,
Still wondering if you moved out of California over to Nevada, and if you did how that’s working out for you.
Repeat, see below
800K for maintenance? On a low snow, so low use year? That seems high, what’s the breakdown?
When the city was incorporated in 1965 One of the three goals was improved roads. That goal was a success and the roads were maintained for many years. Then the city changed it’s focus to Redevelopment and Tourism and forgot about roads and snow removal. This is just the latest way to extort more funds from our community. I am not against increasing the fee for snow removal equipment just not until the city takes our roads and our basic community needs more seriously. They can do so by allocating a budget to repair our roads and some city funds to assist with snow removal equipment replacement. If we just approve another tax without a change in attitude you just watch the next new tax will be for road repairs and replacement. That one will be expensive
What the City should have done years ago was to form Assessment districts throughout the City for road improvements, this should be done today. Yes your taxes will go up but it would be paid over a 30 year period and would increase the value of all property throughout the City, it’s a win win. And you would have new paved roads with curb and gutters, Less polution to the Lake we all so Love and want to save.
Wake up people of South Lake Tahoe
The real financial issue that isn’t on the table is the gross inefficiency of the general budget to meet any of these ongoing demands, i.e. road work and snow removal.
All of these things were handled in past years, so what changed?
The cost of doing business with the city is what changed. The pie was swallowed by other interests, and now departments have to beg, borrow and steal from rate payers to keep the gluttonous budget afloat.
Simple math really, but few seem to want to talk about why it’s changed.
The city has not supported tourism for years. Costs go up. I agree too much was spent on labor and benefits but the city manager has done a good job of reigning that in and her work to limit the long term liability is excellent work. Is there inefficiency in the budget? Yes there is inefficiency in a family budget, a private business budget and public sector budget. The problem is inefficiency is in the eye of the beholder. One persons waste of taxpayer dollars is another’s vital program. There is a point where costs go up and $20 seems like it ought to change. My opinion.
It seems to me the real problem is that the $20 was not adjusted each year for inflation, if it was the payment should be about $38 right now. Which would have been a couple of million dollar towards replacement or rebuilding the old equipment.
Slapshot is right the city has been out of promoting tourism since the beginning of 2007 when the Tourism Improvment district was formed by the lodging community.
I still say we need to repair and repave our roads. If voters went with a 55 million property tax increase, that we all pay, to patch a leaky roof and a couple of cold rooms at the local college, then we can afford to repair our roads. Oh yeah, The administrators did vote themselves a raise real quick before anything was done to improve the facility!
The college is at half capacty enrollment. Move those kids to the rooms that aren’t cold and patch the leaky roof.
Our roads are falling apart, but that’s put on the back burner. Too bad, as our roads are used daily but many don’t care that they are falling apart and in bad condition unless we do a complete make over.
So now they want to buy all new snow removal equipment that sits idle for a lot of the year?
More important priorities! Two cold classrooms at a sparsely attended community college. Oh yes thats a big concer. LOL
Oh hey, I’ve got it! Lets hire a consultant!!!!They always have the answers!! Honest!!! lLeast that’s what I’ve been told. OLS
It’s true the city has slowed down on promoting tourism. Now they have a mountain of old debt to pay off. An example might be one of many like our city funded parking garage as well as The Heavenly Gondola being tax exempt.
The roads were abandoned many years ago, It’s time to focus more on paying down some debt and our community’s needs such as roads and snow removal. Taxes will need to be raised however that is only part of the solution in my humble opinion.
With the effects of climate change, we may have less and less use for snow removal equipment. I wonder if it will ever be the way it once was with three or more feet of snow in the road.
Has any consideration ever been given to outsourcing this service?
What would the annual subcontract cost be versus the total cost of buying and maintaining the equipment plus having all the employees on the city payroll( which includes the responsibility for pensions, etc.) instead of transferring those employees and that responsibility to a subcontractor?
We will end up with lots of new snowplows and trucks that are not needed as the taxpayers foot the bills, at their expense,for the purchase of new snow removal equipment???
Very few people vote in this town, so this will probably get passed, and more people just move away, as they become fed up with local politics.
Have a nice Sunday . OLS
Start by charging Snowglobe an event fee instead of subsidizing it! All other events are charged, why not the globe??
Encourage business rather than discourage!
Allow buildable lots to be developed by handing out available allocations to generate more from tax base.
Increase camp ground fees.
Audit motels for TOT.
Find the Vacation Rentals that are operating illegally and collect TOT or shut them down.
Promote more events during shoulder seasons rather than peak periods.
Yes as stated, all these ‘little’ fees add up. And when the generous salary & benefits packages of City Staff are pointed out, often the retort is, that’s what’s needed to get & retain skilled people.
Well then, a skilled staff should be able to find ways to fund what’s necessary through existing revenue. Especially as it’s being touted what good financial shape the City is now in. Or is that not really the case?
I am in the county, but same thing here as far as snow removal equipment goes. Seems like there is millions of dollars of equipment sitting around unused for 7 months of the year..Could this equipment be leased out to the freeway builders in Carson city !! Perhaps generating $ ?? Just a thought. Steve
Not only is the city in a terrible financial position, management is unqualified for the task. Great lip service, but no clue as to how to fix it. Look at how current management operates:
1. Say what they think you want to hear while doing what they please.
2. Make irrelevant topics relevant in order to alleviate any questions in regards to relevant concerns.
3. Most important what are the qualifications of current management? MBA? Success in Private Sector? Success in other Public Sector positions, ie fixing problems in other municipalities?
None of the above!!
OLS the reason why the roads are falling apart and is on the back burner is no one wants to pay for them. We couldn’t even handle parking meters in this town and your talking about $55 million in taxes. Not this town we expect to impose wear an tear on city assets, ask for city services and have others pay for them. That’s the way we roll.
Assets wear out and need replacing, but as usual so many people in this town don’t want to pay for anything. When the drought breaks (and it will) and SLT’s antiquated snow removal equipment can’t keep up it will be very interesting to hear what’s being said then. I’m certain the same whiners will be out in force criticizing as usual.
$50 a year is a very small amount to pay to ensure that this community has the requisite equipment to clear the roads so its residents can drive to work, to the grocery store, get their kids to school, so police, fire and ambulance services can get through to those people who need them, and for everything else that people need to do up to and including making their beer-runs.
The reason the roads are falling apart has nothing to do with parking meters. Parking meters were to pay for maintenance at Lakeview Commons???? Infrastructure is paid through proper fund management and planning over many years. I’m not giving the city a penny more money than I have to until they prove they can manage it properly. We have been paying for roads for years, the money was allocated to other places.
Easy Answers the point I was making ( probably not as good as I should) was not that the funds from parking meters was to be used for road repair. But the inability of this community to even consider a $55 million tax increase as had been suggested. But you make another point worth noting that the community could not handle the concept of paid parking to generate funds to maintain Lakeview commons.
So the plows got a year off. I know of and have worked for many companies that have equipment that is 50 years old and operates perfectly. Proper maintenance and diligent service. Yes equipment wears out and private sector replaces one at a time over a period of time so as not to tax the bottom line and still provide excellent service. As for roads, same story small projects each year avoid major work. Once again management! Government has done a great job of spinning “the sky is falling mentality”. You all fall for it. No different than IRS this year, “they won’t fund us so we won’t answer the phone”. Question, Mr. Marino you get attitude. Question Nancy Kery you get back doored and attitude. Leadership requires responsibility! Take responsibility or take a hike. It’s not about $50 bucks, I pay my share and would pay again if the money was properly spent. No trust, no more money!!
Easy Answers, Good comments! I’m in complete agreement.
I’ll add “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.
Happy Monday, OLS
I would gladly pay a $50 snow tax if the same was simultaneously deducted from regular taxes, too much of which are wasted and squandered on useless programs, unnecessary grants, bureaucracy, duplicity and inefficiency. Essential services such as snow removal and street repairs should be the first funded, not last and held out as a discretionary option for voters.
Tax the only discretionary growth industry in the region, lift ticket sales. At $115 a ticket already, skiers would hardly be deterred by a small lift ticket tax, generating millions of dollars for infrastructure and snow removal.
Easy Answer Says: “I know of and have worked for many companies that have equipment that is 50 years old and operates perfectly. Proper maintenance and diligent service.”
At the April 21st City Council meeting Public Works Director Jarvis announced that the National Institute for Automotive Service Excellence which is a professional certification group that certifies professionals and shops in the automotive repair and service industry in the United States gave the City Fleet Services Division a Blue Seal of Excellence Certification for the fourth consecutive year. He went on to say that receipt of that honor required for at least half of the City’s mechanics to be Master Mechanics, that there were only 62 non-government shops in the entire state of California that had achieved that certification and only 18 government shops in California had achieved that Certification. Your insinuation that those men don’t properly maintain the City’s equipment and work hard doing so is wrong.
The majority of the City’s snow removal equipment is old and it’s not like you can go to pick’n’pull for replacement parts. Once you need to start cannibalizing your inventory to keep the rest of the fleet going it’s a downward spiral.
I don’t think that Mr. Marino’s and Ms. Kerry’s attitudes are so much to blow people off as they are likely just tired of dealing with uninformed constituents with inflexible opinions.
Yes, Steve, It seems every level of gov’t now wants taxpayers to buy the idea that taxes don’t pay for things like snow removal or road maintenance or the Library or fire protection. The idea that taxes are for everything but not basic services is out of control. Providing these services is the entire point of gov’t and citizens need to keep reminding their elected officials of that.
4-mer, seriously? The city just bought property to move the snow removal yard. Once again, first things first, if the infrastructure and equipment need to be replaced then what is the prioritity? Who is the uniformed party here? Once again manage your assets over time, upgrade one piece at a time. Those in charge need to take responsibility! I’m neither uninformed or inflexible, just sensible. Try it!
Easy Answer:
Do you know why the City bought property to move the big, ugly, public works equipment that sits in plain view on Rufus Allen, just down the street from the Library, and in the middle of the 56-Acre Project area? It’s because it’s sitting in the center of a very valuable piece of land that has the potential for substantial revenue generating use. Being in that location is a waste of that City land asset and is comparable to placing a toilet in your front yard.
Since you fancy yourself as so informed and so good at prioritizing, perhaps you should go to the City’s new Speak Up SLT website at http://speakupslt.org/ and inform them of all your brilliant ideas.
Let’s clear up misstatements about the parking meters so people can get back to the topic at hand. The parking management program was about keeping jobs and was stated as such in the staff report dated Dec. 11, 2012 signed by the Chief of Police and City Manager.
It said in the summary, “ln the event this ordinance is not passed, financial implications include the need to find savings through cuts in the current budget. This could not be accomplished without loss of City jobs….”
Now let’s get back to snow removal.
The final adopted and ultimately repealed parking management program was intended to manage the public parking on Lakeview, Harrison Avenue, and other City streets and to raise revenues to do the necessary maintenance and repairs to Lakeview Commons. Now people can park all day in front of homes along Lakeview when they go to the beach, and they can park all day on Harrison Avenue thus denying the patrons of Harrison businesses a place to park, and nothing can be done about it.
4, that is an opinion! The yard has been located there for years and was there to logistically serve the community. So is the city going to develop that property. Build new facilities maybe expand the rec center as has been proposed?? With what money? Try not to be so self righteous. If you roof is leaking you repair your roof, you don’t buy a new house, especially when you can’t afford one! To clarify the last two posts there were statements made to both, lake view commons and budget shortfalls. Then reports the city is doing great financially. Lots of spin, very little fact.
Let me get this straight. $800,000 this year to maintain the snow removal fleet. The plow was down my street maybe 6 times this year. That’s not even one set of chains to replace. Like OLS said we were sold a bill of goods by the college only to give themselves a retroactive pay raise. The city has 1 new ladder truck and two new fire trucks. Maybe we should have purchased a snow plow, ladder truck and one fire truck. 4-mer the good thing about the yard in the center of town the plows don’t have to go to the Y for fuel, change drivers or for simple repairs. A lot of travel time and wear and tear from state line to the Y.
mc:yup
As others have very well stated using different verbage: It’s not that people are too cheap to pay for new snow equipment. It’s that we already pay plenty in taxes to take care of such things!
It’s this constant effort to squeeze more $ out of the citizenry thru new taxes & fees that has many fed up.
As I’ve stated and asked before, “How much is enough?” From our City the answer apparently is, “More!”
Easy Answer and all others who believe they have all the answers:
PLEASE—
Go to the City’s new website at http://speakupslt.org/
Tell THEM how to solve all the problems and you can take credit for saving the City. It’s better than critical blogging and accomplishing nothing.
The excessive government interfering in freemarkets is the problem.
The solution is less government.
Excessive gov. has been pointed to as the primary cause Of our decline for decades.
The government is not the solution to the problem, it is the problem.
R. Reagan
It will continue to decline until the government is purged of the progressives and they are held to account for the damage they have done.
History all over again.
4, that website is what you call “feel good politics”. Why would I waste my time? Somewhat like the time you spend here, a waste of time.
Blue bag program for recycling, feel good waste of time! STR sorts through all garbage the same. Done going back and forth. Left my opinion, just funny how you always have an opinion on any and all topics.
Easy Answer:
I never called the website “feel good politics”–that was you. I view the ability to communicate an opportunity, but I full well recognize that you would consider that a waste of time.
What I have posted is my opinion. And to use your very own words (sans your propensity for grammar, punctuation, and word-usage errors): Funny how you always have an opinion on any and all topics.
For the record, I’m not going to stop posting my opinions on this forum so I suggest that you just don’t read what I write in the future. It’s no wonder you think that Jim Marino and Nancy Kerry blew you off—they probably did because they didn’t want to waste their time on you—just like I’m not wasting any more of my time on you.
Chew on that.
I’m chewing and laughing! You always feel the importance to get the last word. You are wrong, not only on this subject but a majority of what you spew. It’s great that this blog is here for you to blow your horn. Blow 4, blow…….I will continue to read because your garbage is entertaining, no sense just garbage. Sounds like you have all the answers, so please just two things. Go outside and take a big deep breath before you blow your horn again. Second, spend your time on the city’s new site and solve all of our problems. You know it all, they could really use your, your, I’m not sure what they could use that you have to offer. I take it back just go take a breathe of fresh air.
Easy Answer, your moniker is an oxymoron not only as it pertains to this issue of discussion but to life in general. And any way you cut it 4-mer-usmc, regardless of what you think of his opinion, is actually informed by virtue of monitoring either in person or online all city council activity. And as to the last word thing, you post a final comment adding nothing to this discussion other than getting the last word in.
Just my observation of the bigger picture.
Great observation Bigger and you are correct, no real intent other than to irritate 4. Although your assumption that I am not informed or don’t also stay up to date with council meetings and current events is incorrect. Unfortunately, what takes place in council chambers is not always the most relevant or current business that our city is undertaking. I will in the future limit my comments to relevant subject matter.
It dawned on me reading this article that the solution to this problem is already at hand.
Global Warming
We do not require newer better snow removal equipment as Climate Change will inevitably decrease the amount of snow here in Tahoe in perpetuity.
Without snow, there is no need for snow removal equipment.
Problem solved.
Once again retrofit and rebuild this snow removal equipment or any other city mechanical equipment as much as possible. They the City have mechanics on payroll like STPUD, put them to work! Stop wasting our hard to come by $ City Of South Lake Tahoe!
These government bodies believe that money grows on tree’s and spend as if it was!
The City’s equipment was the best that could be bought at the time.Hours of use on the hour meter are the measure of wear on equipment not age. Most business’s today can not afford to purchase new equipment. 10,000 hours plus are considered high and I doubt if any of the city’s equipment has that kind of hours.