Opinion: Time for Tahoe to decide what it wants
By Nancy Kerry
The polls have closed and voting is complete. Now the tallying begins.
These past few months of debate regarding the value of parking meters as a revenue source for the city has resulted in a higher level of engagement and discussion among community members about revenues, expenses and the future of the south shore. An open and free democracy quite often results in these types of lively debate with opinions and positions on all sides of the issues.
Nancy Kerry
I’ve had the privilege of listening to various opinions on both sides of the issue and have heard many good opinions. The City Council’s decision to put this question before the voters was the right decision. The community has spoken through their vote, and their collective opinion is held in high regard and the community’s involvement is appreciated.
I commend Peggy Bourland and her group of friends that took it upon themselves to challenge a decision they did not agree with and circulated a petition. Her efforts and those of her group are exactly what democracy in the United States is all about.
Even when we disagree or when democracy is messy, it’s a wonderful and respectful method of having a powerful voice in your government. At the time of this writing, we do not yet know the outcome of the vote as the polls have just closed. However, the votes have been cast, the decision is therefore made and it is now in the County’s hands for tallying.
Thank you to all of the voters in this election.
Now that the issue regarding the meters is settled, it is critical the community turn our attention to the future of the South Shore. The question remains, “What future do we want and how do we envision paying for it?” The community of the South Shore receives more federal and state dollars from taxpayers in other parts of the state and country than most other communities because of the state and federal government’s efforts to protect our beautiful Lake Tahoe. As a community, we have relied on these and other outside funding sources for many years for capital improvements and public services.
However, those funds are less plentiful today and more competitive to obtain. If we envision investment in improved recreation amenities, significantly improved streets and roads and attracting private investors to remodel commercial properties, we need a strategic approach to economic development, business attraction and job creation. As a community, we can improve our economic forecast, which currently remains uncertain, by attracting and obtaining more private investment, supporting the local business community (both small and large businesses) and using growth in revenues to invest in our future.
But what future does the community want to invest in? It is sometimes easier to know what we are against, than what we are for. Now would be a great time to leverage the community’s interest in local decision making process to shape the future of the South Shore.
In the past four years, the city has reduced expenses significantly, eliminated 30 percent of the workforce, reduced employee wages and benefits and simultaneously invested millions of local tax dollars back into the community through the Harrison Avenue project, street improvements and other capital projects. The city cannot reduce a sufficient amount of expenses to generate enough revenue for the amount of the investment needed in the community.
Although we have more to do to continue to reduce expenses and long-term liabilities, the question remains the same – “What does the community want and how do we as a community envision paying for it?” We will be discussing these questions and more at the next City Council meeting on June 17 and I encourage everyone to join in the discussion and debate and shape the decisions impacting our tomorrow.
Nancy Kerry is city manager of South Lake Tahoe.
This may sound like I’m in favor of paid parking… But I’m really not. I do think we should look at places like Portland and Vail ( sorry anti-vail people)and really be promoting public transportation. We should improve local transportation … Promote it… Then charge every car and boat that enters the basin…. Then let them rely on a top notch system .. Not the crappy service we have now. Nobody should really need a car to get around this place.
I think the people spoke – they want less government.
Government’s function should be truly limited to maintaining our infrastructure and providing some level of safety, health and law enforcement services. That’s really it.
Obviously the paid parking issue was a third rail to the electorate, and they spoke loud & clear.
It’s high time to cut back further, and goodness knows that there’s plenty of places to cut.
I think the people of this community have made it clear what they want for their town in the present and in the future. Apparently things are fairly much liked how they are, so why bother changing anything? Leave things as they are and don’t spend money.
Spouse – 4-mer-usmc
I have been very encouraged by the improvements that South Lake Tahoe has done in the last few years, and was hoping the momentum continued.
The voting down of Measure P is discouraging to me, as it makes me think that either:
A. The voting citizens of South Lake Tahoe like things the way they are, and don’t want change.
or
B. The citizens want improvements and upgrades, but either don’t want the tourists to pay for it? or don’t want to pay for it in any way themselves?
Measure P wasn’t even for improvements, it was to maintain the improved areas, that was my understanding. A tax that was only collected on those that used the service, instead of everyone, it seemed like a win to me, one could totally avoid ever paying for parking, especially with a locals knowledge of the area.
What is the answer to how we fund the fixing of the broken infrastructure in our city? is the answer: we do not care to fix it? or only if it’s free?
I just don’t see how this is going to get done, and I feel this little city is worth fixing up :)
AB. No. “They” said they want “Free” Parking. (and 23% of the people voting is not a landslide)
Careabout….. This city is worth fixing up but writing parking tickets and alienating tourists wasn’t the way to make that happen. Neither was writing tickets to residents to park in front of their property and beach which they pay to maintain, not the city.
Why not get an accounting of how TOT is being spent and an answer to why TOT is not charged at some timeshares even though the people staying their don’t own their share at the Tahoe property. If they want to trade their week for the basic cost of the room they should still pay the TOT as a non-property owner. They don’t.
We’d have plenty of money for fixing and improving the City if they did.
tahoead, the tot goes to the genral fund, if you want to know how it is spent look at next weeks agenda for the city council, it is all there.
I used to think this City was worth fixing up but have since shifted to not wasting the time, energy and money on it for the present time. I have come to believe that this town is a mix of a lot of people who want things to stay just as they are, a lot of people who take no interest in or care about what happens, a lot of people who aren’t willing to pay for anything better, and a few who do want better and are willing to pay for it but are so outnumbered by those who don’t want change, are apathetic, or are cheap that they’ll never be able to get anything accomplished on a community-wide basis for a long time to come. I doubt this will go on forever because since there are finite properties and homes in the Tahoe basin there will be people wanting a little slice of Tahoe who have money and will eventually buy up most everything in SLT since it’s the most affordable place to buy in the basin. Then those people will demand improvements and will be willing to pay for them since they won’t tolerate the continuation and embarrassment of a rundown looking town.
Spouse of 4-mer
I’m no longer involved in SLT politics since I’ve lived a few miles outside the City for quite a few years. But TOT has forever been a bone of contention within the City, with the folks trying to finance City services (and yes, that includes salaries for City employees – did you ever really want your City attempting to protect you with Fire and Law Enforcement employees who were so desperate for jobs that they were willing to accept salaries and benefits in the bottom 5% of State agencies?)by attempting to use the money to pay for the increased services for the tourists who often tripled or quadrupled the population. While the various lodging lobbyists insisted that TOT should go toward promoting tourism, simultaneously limiting the incentive for the City to draw on TOT and incidentally producing some of most ridiculous promotional ads ever seen. Why not; from the point of view of the lodging folks, wasting money on a non-accountable advertising scam would likely stifle anyone asking for more money?
But I’m interested in the claim that TOT is not being charged to time-share owners/users. Isn’t that the business with which Little Tommy Davis supports himself?
Copper,
The deal with the TOT is that was raised by 2%, granted way back in the 80’s, but raised with the SPECIFIC PURPOSE, of the monies going to marketing. It was voted on by the General Public in fact.
Later there was a vote to have that 2% go thru the General Fund, not to be used as General Fund monies, but as greater security for the Redevelopment Bonds.
One of the many revenue grabs I’m always referring to is how those monies were grabbed at as soon as they went thru the General Fund.
That 2% was not for the General Fund! Period! But that fact was always distorted when other entities grabbed at that money! The arguments of: maintaining various city services is necessary for tourism, or we don’t like how the LTVA is marketing our community, would be used.
Whatever one thinks of those arguments, the fact those were misdirections to get at that 2%! That 2% was added for the sole purpose of marketing So. Lake Tahoe. But it was taken for other purposes! And it’s part of the history of revenue grabs by the City that just never seems to be enough?!