Letters to the editor
August 21, 2005
The entire area of Lake Tahoe itself, and all the space above it, is public property belonging to all Americans. Except as they share in the common public ownership by all Americans of this unique national treasure, it does not belong to those few who are privileged, by great wealth or fortunate history, to own land adjacent to the lake.
What ownership rights to public property – the lake near the shorezone and the space over it – is TRPA intending to give away to private persons under the provisions of Shorezone Alternative 6?
As I understand it, the TRPA is planning on collecting a mere $100,000 as a consideration for giving away something that belongs to all Americans.
A local judge recently took notice that adding a private pier adjacent to a property increases the value by a million dollars.
Therefore the $100,000 would seem to be a token consideration for the further degradation of general public access to a lake the public indisputably owns.
Privileged wealthy persons would leap at the bargain 10 percent token payment to build private piers that further reduce public access to the shoreline. Presumably, they would pay 50 percent or more of the value added to their private properties, and count it a fantastic investment bargain.
Recommended Stories For You
The Shorezone Alternative 6, 200 new private piers, is a giveaway of public property rights that can benefit only a privileged few.
Only after there has been successful planning and negotiation of a system that gives all Americans public access to 100 percent of the Lake Tahoe shoreline should TRPA consider giving away public rights to the shorezone by allowing one single additional private pier.
R. S. Lynn
South Lake Tahoe
Ditto: We need safe crosswalk solutions
I agree with Richard S. Wolf – there has to be something done about pedestrian safety at crosswalks.
In a few cities around the country, the city has placed orange flags at either end of the cross walk. People grab a flag, wait until it’s safe to cross, take a flag, cross the street, and put the flag back in the box on the other side.
Granted, flags will come up missing – people take them as a memento – but the cost of replacement far outweighs the loss of one single death due to a crosswalk accident.
Also, the city and Caltrans need to look at the speed of traffic near the gondola crosswalk.
With it being a very busy place, drop the speed limit down. At those times when there is lighter traffic in the area, I have seen many cars speed through the area and a few close calls have happened.
Speak with public safety in mind first
I am writing in response to (Harveys and Harrah’s spokesman) John Packer’s comments regarding the DUI checkpoint conducted on the same night as the Journey concert (“Checkpoint on concert night was coincidence,” Aug. 12).
Mr. Packer, I am curious: Why would you like the public to be “notified ahead of time”?
So they would be able to avoid the checkpoint?
Are you afraid the delay might scare away the concertgoers that spend millions of dollars in South Lake Tahoe?
Or were you hoping those who were drinking and driving could’ve avoided the hassle of getting arrested and taken Pioneer Trail instead?
Or, maybe you meant that if they knew there was a checkpoint, they might not drive.
As a mother, community volunteer and youth advocate, I am offended by your comment. Someone in your position has a huge responsibility to do whatever you can to keep our community safe and that means supporting unannounced sobriety checkpoints regardless of the inconvenience or possible loss in tourist dollars.
Two years ago, a 14-year-old girl was hit and killed by a drunk driver on her way to school.
She was killed by a young man who was drinking at the casino corridor. If there was a sobriety checkpoint that night she might be alive today. If, however, there was a sobriety checkpoint publicized, as you suggested, the young man may have chosen to avoid it and she would be dead anyway.
Mr. Packer, please consider making it a priority to speak with public safety in mind first and tourist dollars second.
South Lake Tahoe
Trending In: Opinion
- Letter: ‘Thank you for keeping me updated’
- Tahoe Chamber Corner: Tahoe Chamber announces endorsements (opinion)
- Letter: Memorial Day celebration in Incline Village (opinion)
- Guest column: Vote to keeps El Dorado County Board of Supervisors intact
- Guest column: South Lake Tahoe needs to end craziness of onerous VHR regulations (opinion)
- Forest Service: Spread the word on Leave No Trace ethics in Lake Tahoe
- South Lake Tahoe police investigating robbery at credit union
- El Dorado County DA: Charges filed in 2008 death of baby in South Lake Tahoe
- Study finds bears hibernating less with warmer winters, access to human food (video)
- Hiker dies after falling from Yosemite’s Half Dome trail