SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, Calif. – An ordinance and city code amendment related to the Heavenly annexation received a second reading at the City of South Lake Tahoe City Council meeting on Tuesday, Nov. 20, per procedure. This comes after council passed the first reading and moved annexation proceedings forward at the Nov. 5 meeting.

The item appeared on the consent agenda and was passed by all councilmembers, except Cristi Creegan, due to a recusal. That didn’t happen before Shaydar Edelmann, Heavenly vice president and general manager, reiterated his disappointment in the city canceling their parking agreement.

The city previously made the decision to cancel their Heavenly parking agreement in June, citing the resort’s lack of cooperation and support for the annexation as reasons.

---

---

Edelmann recited Heavenly’s contributions through the partnership to council and the positive results it had brought about.

“The city is the only partner making the choice to deteriorate this experience,” he said. The resort vice president went on to explain that Heavenly’s snow removal on the roadways leading to the resort is a casualty of the canceled agreement. He raised public safety concerns as well as concerns about the damage to visitor experience.

---

---

He said that the resort was having conversations about annexation in good faith with the city, but expressed the resort’s surprise when the city changed the scope of annexation from just the California base area to the entirety of the California side of the resort.

“That change, far beyond any city services,” Edelmann said, “shifted the tone of our conversations and in canceling the parking agreement, which was done because we wouldn’t immediately agree to annexation, you took away something we all care about, snow removal.”

He added, “Removing these longstanding positive working relationships is not bringing us closer.”

Before concluding, Edelmann requested the city allow the resort plow the roads, saying it has historically performed at a higher level of service.

Due to the item falling under the consent agenda, council could not comment on the matter at that moment.

However, council circled back to the topic at the end of the meeting when Mayor Cody Bass asked to bring an item back to discuss Heavenly not only plowing and sanding, but also monetarily contributing to road maintenance costs.

Although he said the ball is in Heavenly’s court to make parking happen, said the city is looking at a potential public safety issue.

He explained his proposed item would require staff calculating the maintenance costs required from Heavenly guest traffic on city streets.

“This doesn’t take the ball out of Heavenly’s court to get parking, to get the benefits of annexation,” he said. “The ball’s still in their court. I think it’s just a reasonable way for us to come to a middle ground on this public safety concern, as well as for us to get some funding for the use of those streets in this year.”

Councilmember Tamara Wallace seconded the item, “Because I think we should have the conversation.”

As of Wednesday morning, Nov. 20, the city did not have a date for when that discussion will take place, but it will appear on the next released agenda planning calendar.

Now that the Heavenly annexation has passed its second reading, the city and county will now work on negotiating the tax sharing agreement. This is all required before submitting the annexation application to El Dorado County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for approval.

In speaking with city attorney, Heather Stroud, after the Nov. 5 council meeting, this process may take several months.