By Joe Mathews

One of California’s hottest development projects can be found in one of its coldest towns.        

In an era of neighbor-bites-neighbor fights against big developments, perhaps it’s fitting that one antidote should emerge from the Donner Pass. Tiny Truckee—a snowy municipality of 16,300—is doubling the size of its downtown.

Joe Mathews

The Railyard Project—it’s a converted railyard—shows that communities can overcome NIMBYism, environmental litigation, and all the usual California obstacles in pursuit of transformational development. The project also shows just how difficult such transformations have become in a state once famous for dramatic change.

Truckee’s ambition is startling. First, it’s starting with affordable housing—often the last type of housing to be added to a project, given the political and financial challenges. Second, it’s exactly the sort of dense, urban development that draws fierce opposition in the state’s biggest cities.

While the project has gotten little notice outside the Sierra, that seems likely to change as construction continues. The project has used innovative financing mechanisms, including dollars from the state’s cap-and-trade program. It is likely to employ factory-made housing as a way of reducing the sky-high costs of construction. And gubernatorial frontrunner Gavin Newsom has praised Truckee for supporting smart development.

For Truckee, the project is a culmination of a quarter-century journey. While the town dates to the 1870s, it only incorporated in 1993, because residents of the 34-square-mile town wanted control over land-use planning after years of new house-building on its outskirts by Bay Area vacationers. The final straw was the county’s imposition of a K-Mart outside downtown, despite objections to the traffic it would create.

The new town embarked on a general plan for Truckee. And after being asked for ideas, Truckee’s people seized on a vision of smart growth, with a bigger downtown offering more for year-round residents.

The obvious place for expansion was a Union Pacific railyard next to downtown. The town used a state grant to create a master plan for the railyard, then spent years convincing Union Pacific to sell the property. The town also collaborated with a patient Bay Area developer with ties to Truckee, Rick Holliday.         

Over the past decade, the plan has survived blows that have killed other projects. A CEQA lawsuit against the plan—litigation that routinely blocks approval of developments around the state—failed. The Great Recession put the project on ice. Then, in 2011, Gov. Jerry Brown and the courts killed the redevelopment program that Truckee was intending to use to finance the project.

Instead, Holliday secured more than $12 million in cap-and-trade dollars—on the basis that the railyard would be the sort of affordable, infill, higher-density development that means people drive less, and produce fewer greenhouse gases. With other cap-and-trade funds going to projects in more coastal and populated places, Truckee offered the possibility of a rural showcase.

The plan has been tweaked and updated repeatedly, in response to constant input by residents, many of whom have lived there since before incorporation and feel deeply invested in the project.

The operations of the railroad have been relocated, and roads, water and sewers have been put in. Construction on the affordable housing begins this summer.

“This is the most strongly supported project that I’ve ever seen in this community,” said Tony Lashbrook, the longtime town manager who retired last year.

As it goes forward, the project faces questions that could resonate across the whole state. Can California communities really pull off a modern development next to a historic downtown and make it seamless, adding value to both? How well does cap-and-trade perform as a financing mechanism? And will people really gravitate to more urban housing types in places that don’t meet the usual definition of urban?

If the project succeeds, it could be a signal moment for California’s mountain communities, as they struggle to keep and attract new generations of residents. When your thin-blooded Angeleno columnist visited freezing Truckee last December, I was struck by the community enthusiasm, including from millennials who moved to Truckee because they like the outdoors and because their employers let them work remotely. “Isn’t it great that we’re in charge and getting what we want?” one local asked rhetorically.

But others wondered whether people will have second thoughts when they see the four story-affordable housing building—tall for Truckee—go up. More recently, a grocery store that was supposed to be part of the railyard project pulled out after the town council approved a Raley’s outside downtown.

Still, it’s a good bet that the railyard will eventually put Truckee on the map for reasons beyond tourism and snow.

Joe Mathews writes the Connecting California column for Zócalo Public Square.

By Ted Gaines

To overtaxed Californians, every day feels like April 15. California sports the highest income tax brackets of any state, top-five gas taxes (and that’s without including the “cap-and-trade” fees on every gallon, which would push us to the top of the heap), the highest corporate tax in the western states, and so on down the line. And for all that money, the state’s taxpayers get broken down roads, crumbling spillways, and a laughingstock of a high-speed rail project that is attaining cult status in the annals of wasteful spending.

Ted Gaines

I say enough. That’s why I’m introducing a group of bills to ease the burden on the families and businesses who see too much of their money go to Sacramento with too little result.

Senate Bill 995 will raise the standard deduction by $1,500 for single filers and $3,000 for joint filers, creating a benefit that will be enjoyed by everyone.

Senate Bill 996 will lower California’s corporate income tax from 8.84 percent to 6.84 percent, and take us from ninth highest in the U.S. to 25th highest. California has lost 9,000 businesses or expansions to other states recently, and the legislature seems intent on taxing the rest of them out of state as soon as it can. But by giving them a chance to keep more of what they earn, we can retain businesses, and help them invest, expand, hire more workers and raise wages for their employees.

Senate Bill 1218 will make contributions to 529 College Savings Plans tax deductible in California. Currently, money in these plans grows tax-free but California is one of nine states that forces savers to use after-tax dollars to fund the plans. With college costs exploding and students graduating with heavy debt, we should make it easier for families to save. By letting savers deduct 529 plan contributions, we can help them build bigger college nest eggs for their children and grandchildren and free up more state dollars for our neediest students.

Senate Bill 1231 is going to grant a $6 billion tax rebate to the people by sending a check to every Californian who filed a tax return in 2016. The governor estimates that California has a surplus of more than $6 billion this budget year, and that’s after fully funding our rainy day fund. That’s after increasing school spending by nearly 70-percent over the past 6 years. This money is extra, above and beyond the comprehensive plans and unreasonable demands of California state government. This is simple tax justice, and the overburdened California taxpayers deserve their money back.

Taxpayers need a champion in Sacramento. These bills are ambitious and taken together would strike a blow against the tax-and-spend politicians who are spoiled by their stranglehold on taxpayer wallets. Even with all these changes, California won’t transform into a tax haven. It still won’t fully compete with zero-income tax Nevada or zero-sales tax Oregon. But these bills are a giant step in the right direction, and they would let the people know that their fate isn’t to always get poorer so their government can get richer.

Ted Gaines represents the 1st Senate District, which includes all or parts of Alpine, El Dorado, Lassen, Modoc, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, Shasta, Sierra and Siskiyou counties.

By Scott Valentine

I was accosted in front of the grocery store the other day and I was asked to sign a petition that would allow for a public vote to contain vacation home rentals to the commercial core.

Interesting. I am all for the democratic process, but majority rule does have its issues. For example, if the majority voted for a set of laws that encouraged gender discrimination and devaluation of women in the workforce, it would still be morally and ethically wrong, even if the majority of people voted for it. A vote like that would never happen, but we still need to be very careful about how we go about voting for new rules.

Scott Valentine

Moving VHRs into the commercial center of town might help solve a problem in my neighborhood, but it also concentrates the issue in someone else’s neighborhood. Our commercial core happens to be where many of our underrepresented minority populations reside. It seems unjust for a white majority to simply vote away their problems, and place that burden on those that cannot defend themselves due to their population size. The VHR issue is not really being solved, just relocated.

There is however, another important issue here. We voted for Measure P. The recreation complex was supposed to be demolished this summer and the facility we voted for was designed to meet the changing demands of our local and visitor populations. Unfortunately, this VHR ballot initiative has derailed those plans, along with many other recreation initiatives. The city cannot go to the bond market to fund the construction of this facility since VHRs and the TOT tax they generate contribute significantly to the recreation budget. Put simply, no one will give us a loan if there is no mechanism to pay those loans back. We tout ourselves as having a recreation-based tourist economy. Yet here we are voting to reduce visitor lodging, and limit the primary funding source for our recreation budget.

As citizens, we need to recognize that improvements come at a cost. We also need to recognize that if we shoot ourselves in the foot on this November ballot, there is a very real possibility that we will not get a new recreation center, or we might have to settle for a less attractive version that does not meet everyone’s expectations. It is rare to have an opportunity to rebuild a rec center. We might only have one shot at this and we need to think about how to do it right.

It sounds to me like our citizens and our city leaders need to rethink how best to move forward and resolve some of these issues. I use VHRs when I go on vacation, and I would be a hypocrite if I voted to ban them in my neighborhood. I would also be a horrible human if I voted to relocate my problems into someone else’s backyard without first resolving the issue, or at least giving those residents a fair say. It is also important to recognize the interconnectivity of this issue.

A vote that impacts VHRs could effectively undermine our ability to radically improve recreation in our town. Placing something on the ballot without thought to the many unanticipated consequences of that action could set us up for a future that no one really wants.

Scott Valentine is a former South Lake Tahoe Parks and Recreation commissioner.

To the community,

Over the last nine months, the Tahoe-Douglas Rotary Club has sponsored five Adopt A Day of Nourishments. Bread & Broth has been thrilled to have this service oriented organization partner with us to help ease hunger in the Lake Tahoe South Shore community. With their generously donated funds and over 70 hours of volunteering, the Rotarians served over 450 nutritious, filling meals to grateful diners who come to Grace Hall for a free dinner and a chance to spent time with friends and acquaintances.

“Tahoe-Douglas loves supporting Bread & Broth and its wonderful volunteers,” said Ashley Colvin, Tahoe-Douglas Rotary Club’s president at B&B’s Monday meal on April 2. 

Joining Colvin on the Rotary’s sponsor crew were fellow Rotarians Linda Bellotti, Matt Grime, Bob Senna and Brian Williams. These volunteers worked side by side with B&B volunteers and made the experience of helping others a fun and fulfilling event.

Service to others is a core value of the Rotary organization and their support of Bread & Broth’s goal to ease hunger is just an example of their commitment to serving those in need and improving the quality of life for others. B&B would like to thank the Tahoe-Douglas Rotary Club members and acknowledge their incredible service in support of B&B’s Monday meal dinner program.

Carol Gerard, Bread & Broth

By Jeff Meston

Last October, California experienced a series of devastating wildfires that destroyed property and took lives. In a four-month period, the state endured fires and floods from San Diego to Mendocino that destroyed more than 11,000 homes and commercial structures and killed 64 Californians.

Local government fire and rescue personnel and equipment comprised up to 80 percent available resources for mutual aid throughout the state. South Lake Tahoe Fire Department along with other fire agencies from around the basin engaged in these critical fire fights. 

Jeff Meston

Rising temperatures, prolonged drought and high winds – all ingredients that make for increased risk of catastrophic fires – are going to be a part of our lives and communities for the foreseeable future. 

Since 2000, we have witnessed 14 of the 20 largest wildfires and 12 of the 20 most destructive wildfires in California history. The Northern California fires generated more than $10 billion in insurance claims, making it the most costly fire disaster in our state’s history.

The question on the minds of all of those who live or have homes in the Tahoe basin is could it happen here? In 2007 we experienced the Angora Fire, which destroyed 254 residences, and damaged 35 homes. This fire loss was estimated at $141 million. Lake Tahoe is quite different from the Sonoma/Napa area as well as the Ventura/Los Angeles area. We do not currently have the regional firefighting capacity of our neighboring locations, as we live in a pine forest and we are very dependent on the California statewide mutual aid plan that was developed in the 1950s to bring us help. 

The Lake Tahoe Basin does not have adequate resources to battle a mega fire, and based upon history it’s only a matter of when that will happen. Lake Tahoe is relatively isolated with resources only able to traverse the main thoroughfares of Interstate 80 and Highway 50. 

In Santa Rosa, just 130 of the more than 400 requests for mutual aid were filled within the initial hours because dispatch systems were overwhelmed. Sufficient help to contain the fire didn’t arrive until the third day. This is in Santa Rosa, within the SF Bay Area, where large metropolitan fire departments like Contra Costa Consolidated Fire District, San Francisco Fire Department, Oakland Fire Department and the Alameda County Fire departments are located. 

California’s Mutual Aid System is recognized as a world-class system for communities to share disaster response resources. However, it’s a “reactive” system built to add resources as disasters grow beyond the capability of what’s on the ground. California’s fire service leadership is working diligently to change this system from a reactive to pro-active system.

One of the most effective tools for preventing fires from quickly spreading out of control, or to immediately address other natural disasters such as flooding and mudslides, is to pre-position fire strike teams in areas where high risks are predicted. A lesson learned from our recent fires is that pre-positioning works.  The strategy of deploying resources before disaster strikes (called pre-positioning) allows us to attack wind-driven wildfires in the first minutes or hours after they ignite, preventing them from becoming the urban conflagrations like those we witnessed last year. It allows us to give warnings to impacted communities sooner and to rescue mudslide and flood victims as disasters begin to unfold.

The California Fire Service leadership is asking Gov. Jerry Brown to allocate $100 million in fiscal year 2018-19 to reimburse local fire agencies for their costs to staff up and pre-position resources, to improve staffing levels in communications centers, to warn residents when their communities are in immediate peril, and to add GPS tracking to firefighting apparatus all over the state. 

The California Fire Service currently has to increase the pace and scale of everything we do to suppress fires.  Communities like ours, close to forest lands and wildlands are particularly vulnerable; we suffer from minimal escape routes within our community, and a lack of firefighting resources throughout the Tahoe basin. There is no better way to reduce risks and mitigate the impacts of climate-driven disasters than to be ready to fight fires and other disasters in the first hour.

We urge Gov. Brown and the Legislature for funding in the next state budget to implement these strategies.

Jeff Meston is fire chief for the city of South Lake Tahoe, president elect for the California Fire Chiefs Association, and serves on the board of directors for FIRESCOPE.

To the community,

On March 29, Bread & Broth’s Monday meal diners had a special treat, a delicious Filipino themed dinner. The evening’s meal was lovingly prepared and served by the Filipino community members for their annual Adopt a Day of Nourishment sponsorship.  

This fantastic group served up teriyaki chicken and vegetables, chicken adobo, steamed rice, coleslaw topped off with delicious desserts to the 93 attending dinner guests.   Needless to say, there were no leftovers at the end of the meal.

To prepare their meal the sponsor cooks began preparing the ingredients on Sunday, working late into the night and showing up again on early Monday afternoon to help with the dinner’s setup and finalize the cooking of the meal’s dishes. Once again coordinating the Filipino community AAD sponsorship dinner was Mila Seal who coordinated with the dinner’s anonymous donor and organized the 14 Filipino community members who participated in and lent their support to the dinner.

“Once again, we would like to extend our gratitude and appreciation to St. Theresa’s Bread & Broth for giving us the opportunity to share our time and blessings to our less fortunate brothers and sister,” wrote Seal. “And also, we want to thank each and everyone in the Filipino community, who without question, participated and shared their time, money, and effort to make this Adopt a Day possible. Again, thank you so much and God bless us all.”    

B&B is so very fortunate to have this wonderful group share their tasty cuisine and loving spirit with our dinner guests.

Carol Gerard, Bread & Broth

By Tara Parker-Pope, New York Times

Today’s teenagers have been raised on cellphones and social media. Should we worry about them or just get out of their way?

A recent wave of student protests around the country has provided a close-up view of Generation Z in action, and many adults have been surprised. While there has been much hand-wringing about this cohort, also called iGen or the Post-Millennials, the stereotype of a disengaged, entitled and social-media-addicted generation doesn’t match the poised, media-savvy and inclusive young people leading the protests and gracing magazine covers.

There’s 18-year-old Emma González, whose shaved head, impassioned speeches and torn jeans have made her the iconic face of the #NeverAgain movement, which developed after the 17 shooting deaths in February at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla. Naomi Wadler, just 11, became an overnight sensation after confidently telling a national television audience she represented “African-American girls whose stories don’t make the front page of every national newspaper.” David Hogg, a high school senior at Stoneman Douglas, has weathered numerous personal attacks with the disciplined calm of a seasoned politician.

Read the whole story

To the community,

A Lake Tahoe regional coalition of local water agencies including, Tahoe City PUD, South Tahoe PUD, North Tahoe PUD, Truckee Donner PUD, Northstar CSD, Squaw Valley PSD, and Alpine Springs County Water District strongly opposes a legislative proposal to tax Californian’s drinking water.

Introduced in 2017 as Senate Bill 623, it is called the Safe and Affordable Drinking Water Fee. It is aimed at residential and business water customers. This statewide water tax is proposed as a way to address a lack of access to safe drinking water for some people who live in rural, disadvantaged communities. We believe there are other effective solutions and appropriate funding strategies to address this important public health and social issue.

Your local, public water agencies are committed to providing safe and reliable water and support the intent of the bill. We understand the severity of the problem and the need for solutions. However, taxing Californians’ water is not the solution. The effect of the bill would essentially tax Californians for something that is essential to life, erode the affordability of water for local water users, turn hundreds of local water agencies into taxation entities that send money to Sacramento, impact families just above low-income thresholds, and would open the door to future taxes on water customers.

Most Californians have likely not heard of this proposed new tax. We believe our customers should be aware of this legislative proposal and our efforts to actively oppose it, unless amended to remove the water tax as a funding mechanism. Fortunately, we stand with a growing coalition of local water agencies across California who are pushing back against the proposed tax because it deprives them of local control and unfairly imposes a tax on a basic necessity of life, your drinking water.

For questions, contact your local water purveyor. Additional information can be found online.

Kurt Althof, management analyst Tahoe City Public Utility District

By Emily Klancher Merchant, The Conversation

The 2020 U.S. Census is still two years away, but experts and civil rights groups are already disputing the results.

At issue is whether the census will fulfill the Census Bureau’s mandate to “count everyone once, only once, and in the right place.”

The task is hardly as simple as it seems and has serious political consequences. Recent changes to the 2020 census, such as asking about citizenship status, will make populations already vulnerable to undercounting even more likely to be missed. These vulnerable populations include the young, poor, nonwhite, non-English-speaking, foreign-born and transient.

An accurate count is critical to the functioning of the U.S. government. Census data determine how the power and resources of the federal government are distributed across the 50 states. This includes seats in the House, votes in the Electoral College and funds for federal programs. Census data also guide the drawing of congressional and other voting districts and the enforcement of civil and voting rights laws.

Places where large numbers of people go uncounted get less than their fair share of political representation and federal resources. When specific racial and ethnic groups are undercounted, it is harder to identify and rectify violations of their civil rights. My research on the international history of demography demonstrates that the question of how to equitably count the population is not new, nor is it unique to the United States. The experience of the United States and other countries may hold important lessons as the Census Bureau finalizes its plans for the 2020 count.

Let’s take a look at that history.

Census pioneer and promoter

In 1790, the United States became the first country to take a regular census. Following World War II, the U.S. government began to promote census-taking in other countries. U.S. leaders believed data about the size and location of populations throughout the Western Hemisphere could help the government plan defense. What’s more, U.S. businesses could also use the data to identify potential markets and labor forces in nearby countries.

The U.S. government began investing in a program called the Census of the Americas. Through this program, the State Department provided financial support and the Census Bureau provided technical assistance to Western Hemisphere countries taking censuses in 1950.

United Nations demographers also viewed the Census of the Americas as an opportunity. Data that were standardized across countries could serve as the basis for projections of world population growth and the calculation of social and economic indicators. They also hoped that censuses would provide useful information to newly established governments. The U.N. turned the Census of the Americas into a global affair, recommending that “all Member States planning population censuses about 1950 use comparable schedules so far as possible.” Since 1960, the U.N. has sponsored a World Census Program every 10 years. The 2020 World Census Program will be the seventh round.

Counting everyone isn’t easy

Not all countries went along with the program. For example, Lebanon’s Christian rulers feared that a census would show Christians to be a minority, undermining the legitimacy of their government. However, for the 65 sovereign countries taking censuses between 1945 and 1954, leaders faced the same question the U.S. faces today: How can we make sure that everyone has an equal chance of being counted?

In 1950, Ecuador’s democratic government saw the census as a means of “conquering the national territory administratively.” The military mapped rural areas that had not previously been drawn so that the census wouldn’t miss people living in remote places. They believed the census would help them establish control in areas that had previously remained out of reach due to decades of political turmoil and economic crisis.

In the process, indigenous communities who feared that the census would be used to further oppress them took up armed resistance. The government promised indigenous leaders that participation would help, not hurt their communities. However, the census did not include any racial or ethnic classification. As a result, the data it produced could not be used to address racial discrimination faced by Ecuador’s indigenous communities. It wasn’t even possible to determine the size of the indigenous population or to judge whether it had been counted completely.

Meanwhile in Nigeria, the government expected that its first post-independence census in 1962 would provide an empirical basis for representation in what was then a new democracy. Officials in Nigeria’s Western Region feared that residents would be unable to participate because the census asked for age, which many people didn’t know, simply because there had never been a reason to know. To facilitate participation, officials instructed local leaders to compile lists of dates of local historical events that people could use to determine when they had been born.

Despite these efforts, Nigeria’s 1962 census was plagued by accusations from officials in the various regions that some areas had been counted more completely than others. The government ultimately repudiated the results and repeated the count in 1963. The failure of this census weakened public faith in the ability of the government to either count or rule such a large and diverse population.

In the U.S., demographers began to recognize during World War II that the census was not counting everyone equally. Research showed that African-Americans were less likely to be counted than were white Americans. As a result, places with large nonwhite populations were underrepresented in the House and Electoral College. While the U.S. census has been able to reduce the overall undercount since then, it still disproportionately misses African-Americans and other people of color today.

Historical challenges to census-taking show that widespread participation is key to an accurate census count. These events have helped demographers understand that people are more likely to participate when they understand the process; are not worried that their participation will be used against them; and can easily identify themselves in the categories used by the census. Adequate funding to follow up with people who don’t respond by mail, internet or telephone is also critical.

A census that counts everyone is probably impossible. But if the census is to guide the equitable distribution of political power and federal resources, it must also strive to count people as equitably as possible.

Emily Klancher Merchant is an assistant professor of science and technology studies at UC Davis.

To the community,

If you had walked onto the Lake Tahoe Community campus on April 3, you would have never guessed that there were 325 sixth-grade youth and 220 agency and volunteer workers throughout the corridors, all learning information on how and why to keep themselves safe from drugs.

“Choices, what are yours?” was the theme of our efforts in keeping our youth drug free. With the country’s attitudes and norms about drug use changing, times are even more difficult for our kids. Attitude changes in marijuana use is very confusing and many of us struggle to get our youth to understand the dangers that could lie ahead for them. Many of our kids have people they love who use various drugs at home. With that the propensity that they will use is of great concern.

The adolescent brain and body are developing, and this development doesn’t stop until into one’s 20s. I don’t think anyone out there doesn’t want their child to reach their full potential intellectually or emotionally, but it could happen for your child if they do choose to use. Experimentation with gateway drugs; alcohol, tobacco, or marijuana could lead to other drug use and even death. Several of us who believe in this event have first- hand experience with this.

With the conclusion of our 15th annual Drug Store Project want to thank the many agencies, service clubs, businesses, and volunteers who provided this program for our youth.

Teaching our youth about the dangers of all drugs; marijuana, alcohol, tobacco, e-cigarettes, over-the-counter as well as prescriptive medications, gets more challenging each year as states provide new legislation and products are packaged to entice our minors. This year our 320 sixth-grade students had the assistance of over 200 volunteers to send a clear message that they are valued. The agencies and groups who provided this program strongly believe that a difference can be made for our kids. Collectively we believe that if youth are provided knowledge about the effects drugs have on the body, the mind, family and social life, productivity, and overall life experiences, many more will choose not to experiment and not to participate in drug use.  If we can collectively put off the “age of onset” to experimentation, then we can see a difference for our youth.  Less drug use means less demand. Less demand is less costly in lives and in all facets of the economy. 

We’re especially proud of the South Tahoe High School Friday Night Live members, themselves past participants in the program when younger, who took their day to emphasize to the younger youth that drugs do not need to be a part of their lives. They can “choose” to stay healthy and safe. We also continue to have the assistance of our California National Guard assigned to the Joint Task Force Domestic Support – Counter Drug and Naval Air Station-Fallon military personnel. 

Tahoe Youth & Family Services is the agency under which our program is based. It takes money and people to make this event happen for our youth. The Drug Store Project continues to be supported completely through donations, grants, and in-kind donations from businesses.

I’d like to extend my gratitude to the following entities: Barton Health, California Conservation Corps, California Highway Patrol, CALSTAR, Cal Tahoe JPA, Camelot Party Rentals, Douglas County Search & Rescue, El Dorado Community Foundation, El Dorado County District Attorney, El Dorado County Mental Health, El Dorado County Probation Department, El Dorado County Public Defender, El Dorado County Search & Rescue – Tahoe Team, El Dorado Sheriff’s Office, El Dorado County Superior Court, Harrah’s Foundation, Harrah’s HEROS, Joint Task Force Domestic Support-CD, Kindred Hospice, Kiwanis Club of Lake Tahoe, Kiwanis Club of Tahoe Sierra, Lake Tahoe Community College, Lake Tahoe Resort Hotel, Lake Tahoe Unified School District, Lake Valley Firefighter’s Association, Lake Valley Fire Protection District,

Naval Air Station Fallon, Nevada Funeral Services, Pro Leisure, South Lake Tahoe Fire Department, South Lake Tahoe Police Department, Soroptimist International of South Lake Tahoe, Soroptimist International of Tahoe Sierra, South Lake Tahoe Police Officer’s Association, South Tahoe Drug Free Coalition,

South Tahoe High School Friday Night Live, South Tahoe Middle School, Tahoe Optimist Club, Tahoe Douglas Fire Protection District, Tahoe-Douglas Rotary Club, Tahoe Turning Point, Tahoe Youth & Family Services, Zephyr Cove Elementary, and Community Volunteers.

We hope that children and their parents openly discuss the dangers of all drugs on a regular basis. Get educated together and know what is happening in your community. We invite every parent of a child who experienced the program to take the time to complete the parent survey online. Your input will help our program for future years.

Gratefully,

Lisa Huard, Drug Store Project coordinator