Letters to the editor, Wednesday, May 21 | TahoeDailyTribune.com

Letters to the editor, Wednesday, May 21

Editor’s note: The Tahoe Daily Tribune’s deadline for letters about the primary election was Monday. Letters that were received ahead of the deadline will appear Friday. Election letters will still be accepted, but will run only on tahoedailytribune.com.

Follow the law with lawn signs

The months leading up to an election are always an annoyance to me, particularly because of campaign signs. I’m not really sure they serve a purpose other than to waste resources and create litter. I’m curious, however, if all of these politicians really received permission from the property owners where their signs were placed. I see signs on county, state and federally-owned property. Can you honestly tell me that Cal Trans and the El Dorado Department of Transportation agreed to these signs being placed? I think not. Politicians — please follow the law!

Leona Allen

South Lake Tahoe

Support Local Journalism

Time to remove meters

What were they thinking when they put parking meters all over town? We are not San Francisco or San Diego. It is not a part of who we are. We need to attract tourists, not repel them. Let’s encourage them to return and spend more money in our beautiful city.

It is time to get rid of the meters. Vote yes on Measure P.

Barbara Lein

South Lake Tahoe

Novasel the right choice for supervisor

It is very important that the District 5 Supervisor be a Tahoe Basin resident. Having been the District 5 Supervisor for 8 years in the 1990s, I experienced firsthand the all-consuming pressures demanding attention to west slope land use issues and the operational issues of our 2,000 plus employee El Dorado County. Living in the Basin compels the attention that will ensure that representing the Tahoe Basin will be our District 5 Supervisor’s highest priority!

In choosing which local resident candidate is best, criteria include: breadth of experience working on public boards and private organizations; demonstrated ability to build and sustain effective working relationships with other Board members, staffs, and constituencies of public and private boards; demonstrated good judgment in dealing with the public generally, and especially in dealing with persons who have issues coming before the Board; a personality that can be forceful without being offensive.

In considering the four local candidates for the District 5 position, Sue Novasel is the only candidate for which I can answer “yes” to having met all these criteria. Sue has served on the school district board for 11 years, is current Soroptimist’s Club President, and also serves on the boards of the Chamber of Commerce and Lake Tahoe Wildlife Care. She has built and sustained effective working relationships with the broad range of persons with whom she has worked in both public and private leadership responsibilities. She wants the job of District 5 Supervisor because she wants to serve our community by doing the job, and for no other reason.

Please join me in voting for Sue Novasel for District 5 Supervisor.

John E. Upton

South Lake Tahoe

Vote for Brown for supervisor

The time is ever so imminent for exercising our civic duty. We are entrenched in a supervisor race that is splitting District 5 apart. We are entrenched in a race that is a reflection of the dysfunction in America’s political environment today.

Citizens of the Tahoe Basin are refusing to elect a Supervisor from Pollock Pines, just as citizens of Pollock Pines refuse to elect someone from Tahoe. Both sides claim that only someone from their area will understand their needs. That is understandable to some degree, as all towns and cities of District 5 have their own vibrant communities, and all have their own individual needs. However, if we elect a Supervisor based solely on where they live, we are being as divisive as the politicians on Capitol Hill.

Our representatives in Washington have the mentality of “my way or the highway.” They only support issues that fall directly on their party lines, and nothing else. If we elect a Supervisor because they live in the same area as us, we are being as ignorant as our representatives voting for a bill just because their party tells them to.

Kevin Brown is the Supervisor candidate that will push through the discordant politics and represent our entire district. It does not matter if you are from Pollock, Meyers, Tahoe, or anywhere else — if you are in his district, you are a constituent, and he will listen to your importunate concerns. If you look on his website, you will see all of his qualifications that prove him to be not a politician, but a veritable leader. He stresses time and time again that he will represent not one individual town or city, but all of District 5.

Kevin Brown is ever so worthy of you vote on June 3.

Robert Morrison

Pollock Pines

Keep our library, vote ‘yes’ on L

In 2001, my husband and I became full-time residents of South Lake Tahoe. We moved to the area because of its spectacular beauty, pleasant climate and many opportunities to enjoy nature. What we didn’t know at the time was that the South Shore is rich in opportunities to learn as well with its excellent community college and high quality public library.

The small parcel tax we have had for 20 years, which has made it possible for us to have a full service library open five days a week, will soon expire. Measure L will renew that funding and allow us to continue to enjoy this valuable asset.

All of the money raised from previous library parcel taxes has gone to support the South Lake Tahoe Library and only the South Lake Tahoe Library. This will continue to be the case with funds raised by Measure L. The measure requires that an annual report be made to the County Board of Supervisors as to what has been collected and how it has been spent.

As a resident who hopes to spend many more years here, I treasure our local library as a major resource for everyone in our community. I hope you will join me in voting for Measure L.

Kay Henderson

South Lake Tahoe

Library is a wealth of knowledge

As a homeowner and longtime resident of South Lake Tahoe, the library is important to me because it provides a link to knowledge, and everyone knows knowledge is power: Power over poverty, power over ignorance, and power over circumstance. To live and work in a community where power is in the hands of only the few would be quite stifling and recalcitrant.

Luckily for all of us, the citizenry of South Lake Tahoe feels otherwise, and votes accordingly. I only hope that the prevailing wind, with an emphasis on technology, will see the broader picture and realize that not all citizens have access to the same resources. The library provides that link to technology and to knowledge that many lack in their homes and residences. Please vote yes again to keeping our library open and accessible to all! Vote yes on Measure L.

De-Anne Hooper

Executive director, South Lake Tahoe Family Resource Center

Yes on P to eliminate paid parking

The study and practice of politics should focus on values. In our system of government we value the social contract. We are governed by the consent of the people. When the elected breach the contract, they lose the moral authority to govern. So What?

On the subject of Measure P, paid parking on city streets, city government has lost the trust of the governed. The city cannot get it straight about the revenue from paid parking (if there is any). How will it be used? However, we do know that the city is spending public dollars on its campaign to defeat measure P.

Our city government does not value clear information. It has blurred the lines between fact and fiction to deceive citizens on Measure P. We want clarity, not unclear muddied statements.

Jacques Monod (Nobel Prize for biology) in a letter to a 13-year-old boy said, “I prefer to speak of the hatred of lies rather than the love of the truth, since one is never sure of holding the truth, whereas with lies, one is almost always able to detect them, to discover them, and to denounce them.” Monod hit the bull’s eye on the truth and lies. Fuzzy statements confuse and mislead too often intentionally.

Vote yes on Measure P.

Bill Crawford

South Lake Tahoe

Paid parking was a bad idea from the start

I grew up In South Lake Tahoe and have called it home since 1959. Free beach access is a right. This privilege should not to be limited by a person’s ability to pay. A fee is a form of tax whether it is paid by parking meter, an annual pass or a ticket. Free means free, not sort of. What does a ticket for parking do to promote that “god feeling” about visiting South Lake Tahoe? Fewer meters, fewer irritated visitors. Am I wrong?

Parking meters themselves have not shown any “real net” income if total expenses are considered. The City of South Lake Tahoe is now using tax payer dollars to campaign against Measure P instead of showing us the audited accounting of the program. It must be about the “ticket income!”

My very first job was in the ice cream parlor where Sprouts is today. I was schooled in the concept that the tourists were our “golden geese” and it was my job to make them happy while they deposited their golden eggs into our community. To make them welcome and show appreciation was my first concern.

It is my understanding that many other communities are rethinking their own existing paid parking programs because of the negative effect paid parking has had on business. Rethinking! That is dangerous territory left to politicians. Make up your own mind. Are these meters and tickets really what you want in South Lake Tahoe?

The economic outlook is going in the right direction, now is the perfect time to abolish this bad idea and start over in a win-win direction that has more merit and supports the long-term good of our locals and business community. Vote yes on Measure P.

Susanne Hoy

South Lake Tahoe

Give meter program a chance to be successful

It seems that the argument against paid parking hinges on trust. Is the city lying to us about the viability of parking meters? Even opponents acknowledge the metered parking program makes money — partially from fees and partially from fines of motorists who apparently can’t read. Enough said. I live in Al Tahoe and this is how I see it.

The City built Lakeview Commons with grant money — tax money from other places. That seems like a good deal … free money! Almost. The city is required to maintain this large facility and that takes money … ideally from those who use the facility. Sound fair? The city must also pay to maintain associated parking areas.

The city — represented by our neighbors whom we have elected and hired to make tough decisions for us — have concluded that parking fees are a relatively equitable and effective way to help pay for this maintenance.

Free parking is not an essential public entitlement, but an asset funded by our taxes. Parking, whether along a road, at a business, or at a public facility, is never “free” though the costs may appear invisible because we are accustomed passing those costs to others.

Lakeview Commons is a spectacular location and very popular, but if, as a visitor, parking for a small charge is not worth it to you, or you are unwilling to walk an extra block or two, then you must not value that opportunity. In that case, someone else can take your spot.

In addition, metered parking encourages walking, biking, and use of alternative transportation. Meters discourage monopolizing parking areas, giving someone else a chance to park and visit local businesses. The money for the meters is already invested. What a waste if we didn’t give the city a fair chance to make the program more successful.

Scott Brown

South Lake Tahoe

City didn’t listen to public on paid parking

It is not inherently a bad idea to install parking meters as a means of generating funds and creating an incentive to use other forms of transportation for environmental concerns. How you go about initiating such a program should be carefully thought out and presented to the public with the objective of hearing their concerns before a concrete plan is set into motion. While there may have been open meetings before the meters were installed, there were obviously no adequate measures taken to address any of the problems citizens pointed out at these meetings. Instead it was another case of city officials making decisions for the public without actually listening to the public.

A plan for addressing negative impacts to local businesses and immediate residential areas adjacent to these metered parking zones was not formulated to anyone’s satisfaction. A realistic assessment of how much money would be generated by these meters was not initiated. Which areas the public felt would be appropriate for parking meters were never considered.

Trying to address these problems now is a bit like trying to save a sinking ship. This plan as it exists needs to be abandoned before any more money is lost and more ill will is accrued. Trying to meet expected income by issuing endless parking citations is not in the best interest of our city. Our city council needs to step up, admit they didn’t think this project through and start listening to their constituents. Vote yes on Measure P.

Linda Goodman

South Lake Tahoe

Paid parking program is ‘fatally flawed’

If anyone really believes that paid parking is going to save this town, we are in some kind of serious trouble. As a former business owner (Fleet Feet at the Swiss Chalet), I took a look at the city’s revenue projections and conclude that this program is fatally flawed as a revenue source. A “year round” beach parking program … seriously? There is way too much overhead and only a few months to earn revenue. The parking garage should have been a clue that this parking meter plan was dead on arrival.

If the city’s goal is to “hit-up” the tourists, they should find a method that doesn’t scream “gotcha.” For a town on life support, we need to be very careful how we decide to tax tourists and locals. Vote yes on Measure P.

Steve Madison

South Lake Tahoe

Voting ‘yes’ on Measure P

With little or no consideration for the businesses and residents near paid parking, I have found the city’s ill-conceived parking program to be one giant headache. It has adversely impacted my home and my business. The parking police are not friendly and seem hell bent on giving everyone a parking ticket. We are a tourist economy that relies on repeat and happy customers. People come here to get away from urban hassles. This program is working against that goal and pushes locals away from popular lake entry locations. Since locals have not and will not support the meters they are parking anywhere except near kiosks which further impacts businesses and nearby homes.

I am voting yes on Measure P to remove this blight from our community.

Keri Smith

South Lake Tahoes

Choose candidates that can be trusted

Being an American is a gift and a duty when almost 1.4 million troops have given their lives to found and keep America free. Selecting leaders with integrity and respect for our principles is a duty of being an American. In Nevada politics, I have seen the wizards behind the curtains pulling the strings. Many candidates do not respect their party’s platform, the principles developed by the people of their party.

Some “Republican” candidates refuse to sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, telling us their negotiating position would be weakened. They must think we are stupid. If an elected official signs the pledge, his opponents know he will not support wasteful taxes. Their opponents are forced to negotiate wiser use of our hard-earned tax dollars. That is a strengthened negotiating position!

Elected officials that ignore our principles exhibit a lack of integrity. Did you raise your children to ignore the rules? Would you marry a person that tells you one thing but always seems to do another? How can candidates that don’t respect our principles be trusted to represent us? Look behind the curtain, and choose the candidates that can be trusted to respect our values.

Shawn Meehan

Minden

Remove meters, vote ‘yes’ on P

“Yes” means “no” and “no” means “yes.” That’s the ballot choice for Measure P. The City Council wrote the measure. Is that confusion intentional? I wonder.

The debate over the meters is being fought primarily on the financial front where confusion also abounds. In the city’s reports, the actual revenue collected is significantly less than the projected revenue anticipated giving us a net loss in our bank account but still looking like a profit in our budget.

Furthermore, in selling this program to the community, the city said the supposed profits were necessary to save two police jobs. Later they said those profits were necessary to maintain Lakeview Commons. (By the way, the concessions there were contracted $35,000 for that.) Then they said the money would go to the neighborhoods to decide how they would like to spend it on improvements. Also they could build a new bike and walking path at Venice Drive. Let’s see, after that the Lodging Association was warned that without meters, their TOT tax would go up. (Excuse me, that takes a vote.) Fear was further spread to the Fire Department when told that their benefits would likely decrease without the meters’ profits. What profits? Why the fear? What about those two police jobs anyway? What is really going on? It feels like there is a hidden agenda somewhere.

While the confusion gets unraveled, let’s keep our free parking. Vote yes on Measure P to remove those meters.

Carole Beller

South Lake Tahoe


Support Local Journalism

Readers around the Lake Tahoe Basin and beyond make the Tahoe Tribune's work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.

Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.

Your donation will help us continue to cover COVID-19 and our other vital local news.