Letter: Chamber endorsement process flawed
To the community,
On July 24 at noon, I was contacted by the Tahoe Chamber to participate in their endorsement process. At 3:50pm, I contacted them to ask a question and meet with them and I was told because they were under rules of the FPPC I could not contact them individually. At 4:04, I declined to participate in their selection process.
In the Tahoe Chamber’s press release of the criteria of selection they said that the selection for whatever political endorsement they would make was based on personal interviews and answers from their questioner. Since I participated in neither I found it interesting that information was not released. I also found it interesting that the District V criteria page was missing from the press release.
Kenny Curtzwiler
Several other political candidates also chose not to participate: City Council – Bruce Grego, Austin Sass and Tom Davis; STPUD board – Jim Jones and Duane Wallace; El Dorado County District V – Kenny Curtzwiler.
I can say I found the Tahoe Chamber process flawed, their actual members (650) were uninformed as to the decisions and completely left out of the loop in the decision-making, for the chamber to represent the feelings of the entire chamber is incorrect. There were eight members who selected the candidates of their choice of which three are Nevada based, one who is a rabbi (separation of church and state comes to mind), one who works for LTCC, one who works in the same building as Austin Sass (who did not participate) and one who works for the real estate company that handles all of the city of South Lake Tahoe redevelopment land sales.
I found the whole process rather comical and flawed from the beginning and do not feel the chamber should be involved in the endorsement process when the majority of the chamber members did not participate. I was not asked and I am a chamber member and their endorsements do not reflect what my choices would have been. This is a very small town with a big future ahead of it and we should be very wary of endorsements from a very small percentage of Tahoe Chamber members. I and the other candidates who did not participate are asking the community to contact all the candidates and make their own decision as to whom they would like to see in office. We all know each other in this town and for the chamber to get involved is wrong, immoral and causing a further divide here that may or not may be able to be corrected with an election.
Remember to vote on Nov. 4.
Kenny Curtzwiler, El Dorado County supervisor candidate
AMEN!
My inclination is to vote for whomever the chamber did NOT endorse
“one who is a rabbi (separation of church and state comes to mind)”
Unless he is politicizing from the pulpit or endorsing a candidate as a Temple endorsement this is not an issue. What he does on his time is his business.
mrs.t, I agree with you. I pay close attention to who is endorsing candidates.
I received one of the lowest “scores” from the Nevada Based Chamber. I also refused to seek their special interest endorsement. I do not believe any candidate should accept endorsements from an organization that receives large sum of moneys from the City.
It appears that processes that purport to “speak on behalf of” their membership, without actually engaging that membership, may end up being perceived as a “control mechanism” rather than the Forum it suggests that it is.
Yet another example of decisions being made before the actual event. . .the same ‘modus operandi’ that annoys the public: about some agencies: make a presentation knowing full-well what’s to be done beforehand. . .
Trust & transparency are not to be encouraged this way.
Mr. Grego:
Would you please provide specific information on the “large sum of moneys from the City” that has been directed to what you refer to as the “Nevada Based Chamber”. I think knowing when and how much is something the public would like to know more about.
Thank you.
This reminds me of the “Farm Bureau” endorsement process which doesn’t seem to reflect anything the members want. It does appear to reflect what special interests want which is strange unless you consider the developer’s lobby is always trying to grease wheels they think will pay off later. It is best for people to check candidates websites for endorsements as this will reveal a lot. Novasel’s site is a good example of this and there you will see the self proclaimed “Good O’l Boys” and others endorsements and several are people who haven’t lived in the area in years and some who are still trying to be important players even after that time has long passed into history.
As mentioned to several of the ‘powers-that-be’ already, it will be ideation, not money, that will get us where we’ll need to go. . . as money already made tends to follow itself, not anything new enough to make an appreciable difference. . .
That’s the spirit of ‘new blood’, plus integrity. . .
FPPC means what?
Come on politicians….ditch the acronyms so all know what the hell you are talking about.
Garry; trust and transparency whats that? I think in the last 10 months Tahoe4Tahoe got a lot of people thinking long and hard about what is being shoved down our throats by all the acronyms. Like Bill said the well is dry!! Now it’s time to vote.
Fair Political Practices Commission
Kennny and Bruce you have my vote.
Voters need to do their own investigation of each candidate and not vote for or against someone based on a candidate being endorsed or not endorsed by a specific group. That is uninformed and lazy voting.
I’ve spent four years watching and listening to Bruce Grego at City Council Meetings when he was a City Council member and then after that when he’d address the Council as a citizen. And I’ve watched Ken Curtzwiler for years and years address the City Council on so many occasions and on so many topics that they are too numerous to count. What I’ve heard from each of them came directly out of their respective mouths which is the reason I would not vote for either person. Curtzwiler is the epitome of a “Good Ol Boy”, and I’ll refrain from making any further comments about Grego.
4 mer, i think bruce is refering to the grant money given to the chamber to develope a business mentoring program
Always interesting how those that were not endorsed complain. 4 mer has it right in my book, everyone do your own research.
4-mer-usmc is right about “Good Ol Boy” Curtzwiler. He loves to hear himself talk, what a wind bag. Nice of him to use this “Letter to the Editor” forum to toot his own horn. Notice how he mentions his name in the beginning of the article, to make sure everyone knows that he is running for ELDC Supervisor. Then he reminds everyone to vote (vote for me!) at the end. Pathetic. I wonder how many letters to the editor he will write in order to get his name out there for free?
reloman:
If Mr. Grego was referring to the pass through monies from the Community Development Block Grant that the City applied for and received from the State of California, that was not money from the City’s General Fund. That item appeared on the June 3, 2014 City Council agenda and was an award in response to a Request for Proposals (RFP) for Technical Services for the Business Coaching to Local Small Businesses. Anyone (including Mr. Grego) could have submitted a response to that RFP with their own program material, curriculum, and the associated costs.
The actual prose of that Consent Agenda Item 6 is as follows:
“Professional Services Agreement between the Lake Tahoe South Shore Chamber of Commerce (aka Tahoe Chamber.org) and the City of South Lake Tahoe for Business Coaching in the Amount up to $288,500 of State Community Development Block Grant Funds in Response to RFP # 2014-04-01 to Deliver Technical (“Coaching”) Services to the Local Business Community”
Mr. Grego’s insinuation that the City ‘gave’ large sums of money to the Tahoechamber.org is a half-truth. They awarded an RFP to a bid submitter. If his reference was to some other “large sums of money from the City” I’m still waiting to hear about that from Mr. Grego.
Dear 4merusmc,
I disagree. The City did receive a grant and they gave this grant to the Nevada Based Chamber in the sum of $288,500. True anyone could have applied for the grant, but the fact is that the Nevada based Chamber by the decision of this City Council…received this money. The original source of the funding is irrelevant. It boils down to the fact that the Nevada based Chamber accepted money from the City and is now involved in the endorsement of candidates, including candidates that voted in favor of this distribution.
Grego, the flaw in your argument is that the Tahoe Chamber is NOT Nevada based. It serves both sides of the stateline and the business coaching program is only available to CITY residents. Quit spewing your ignorance.
To LTN: why do you allow mistruths in your comments when you’ve stated before that you don’t?
My question is why didn’t the city give the grant money to the South Tahoe Chamber? Spread the wealth in the city they represent. The more true information on candidates the better. Register to vote and VOTE!!!
Buck- The city did not award the grant funds to the South Tahoe Chamber because the South Tahoe Chamber did not apply for the funds.
I would like to start by saying that this is my personal opinion, and although I am a staff member, I am in no way speaking on behalf of the Tahoe Chamber.
Chambers of Commerce are very much encouraged to be involved in the political arena: to vet candidates and ballot measures, to endorse candidates and ballot measures, and present these findings to the general membership, who elects a board annually to represent it. The Tahoe Vision 2020 document, which has guided the Government Affairs Committee and the Candidates Endorsement Committee won a Core Competency award from the Western Association of Chamber Executives, which has a membership of over 400 Chambers. Only 6 of these awards are given out each year. In the past two years, Tahoe Chamber has received 3 of these prestigious awards. The Tahoe Chamber membership should be extremely proud of how its Chamber is working for our community. These awards are a direct reflection of the leadership B Gorman provides.
As an aside, I strongly feel that those who persist in the California versus Nevada division should look at how our community is laid out. The membership of the Tahoe Chamber is comprised of about 65% California members with the remaining membership from Nevada. This is very representative of our community as a whole. The California side of the South Shore would be hard pressed to succeed economically if the Nevada side fails and vice versa. Petty comments over where the Chamber office is actually located does not benefit our community. If anyone has questions regarding who our “highest paying” members are, they can visit http://tahoechamber.org/pages/ChairmansCircle/. This page highlights the largest contributors of our membership. Without their support, it would be challenging to run all the training programs, workshops and forums that directly support small businesses.
Mr. Grego:
The “Nevada Based Chamber” as you refer to them submitted a response to an RFP that was released on February 26, 2014 for a team of consultants to deliver Business Coaching Services to our community. As per the staff report for Consent Item 6 in the June 3, 2014 agenda:
“The City received only one response to the RFP: Lake Tahoe South Shore Chamber of Commerce (LTSSCC) (Attachment 3). The City has contracted with LTSSCC in the past to provide business coaching services to our community.”
With regard to the City having “contracted with LTSSCC in the past to provide business coaching services to our community”, that took place at the Council’s February 7, 2012 meeting, Unfinished Business Item A. The motion made on that agenda item reads as follows:
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER GREGO, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DAVIS AND CARRIED BY ALL PRESENT TO APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. C-11-12, AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH LAKE TAHOE AND THE LAKE TAHOE SOUTH SHORE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE (AKA TAHOECHAMBER.ORG) FOR BUSINESS COACHING IN THE AMOUNT UP TO $153,125 OF THE STATE’S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS (CDBG) TO AMEND SCOPE OF WORK AND CONTINUE TO DELIVER TECHNICAL (“BUSINESS COACHING”) SERVICES, AND ASSISTANCE WITH THE FAÇADE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TO THE LOCAL BUSINESS COMMUNITY. 1004/1047/1264
Not only were you on a City Council where the City had received a CDBG Grant for business coaching, you were the Council member who made the motion first to give that money to the “Nevada Based Chamber” at that February 7, 2012 meeting. Apparently you too are a candidate that voted in favor of a distribution to the “Nevada Based Chamber”, albeit not in June 2014.
I am collectively commenting on Kenny’s response and the comments to B’s letter explaining the CEC process.
Reloman and 4-mer-usmc hit the nail on the head. THINK FOR YOURSELVES! If you are making decisions for or against somebody or some issue because of who endorses it YOU are the broken spoke in the wheel of governance.
The Tahoe Chamber exists to promote a pro-business and pro-economy environment. Endorsing candidates that support that platform makes logical sense (again, if you think for yourselves).
Kenny, you did not seek an endorsement. You told me personally you were not. “Separation of Church and State”? Really? You’re beginning to sound like the politicians you condemn.
As for the CA-NV interests-chambers-blah-blah-blah. Get over it. We are one community. The majority of people that work on the Nevada side of the this community live in CA and pay CA income taxes, shop at CA stores and buy CA gas. The casinos also provide more financial support and community support than just about any other organizations around.
Bottom line: If you don’t like casinos or living on a state line–MOVE!
Buck, Mrs. T, Local, Grego and whomever else continues the negative, apathetic rants…please stop. Do something productive. Tahoe4Tahoe did nothing to move this town forward. Paying for that which we use (i.e., parking at beach parks) is the most fair and constitutional way of conducting business.
If we run this town like a business (as many are trying), we have a fighting chance to see the South Shore thrive before we’re all too old to appreciate it.
We are not entitled to have public services, access and perfectly paved roads just because we are locals. Nor does being a “tourist town” justify turfing the financial responsibilities over to the tourists.
If we want a strong, vibrant South Shore WE have to invest. WE have to pay taxes. WE have to pay for use (annual passes are good though!). WE have to elect public officials that are looking our for the greater good. WE have to move this town forward.
Change the conversation. Let’s try productive, provide fact-based ideas and see how much better we do.
SNAP……
Stop trying to push back against the inevitable corporate takeover of your lives! Accept minimum wage jobs and get used to no social services or public schools or anything else that middle class people built for our communities. Watch foxnooze and listen to rush and get back in line!