In response to various stories on the county elections and development plans
Placer County Supes Overwhelm Local Vote
In 2021 after the election results were confirmed for the Placer County board of supervisors campaign, statements by three of the newly elected supervisors ensured that the communities’ voices would be represented and entrusted. Supervisor Holmes stated: “I want the residents of District 3 to know I appreciate the trust and confidence they have placed in me to continue to represent them and provide responsible governance. I do not take the responsibility lightly and will continue to serve with dedication and commitment.” Supervisor Gustafson stated: “It was an honor to have been appointed by the board of supervisors, but to have the residents of the communities I serve provide me with their vote of confidence is incredibly humbling. I cannot express the level of gratitude I feel having been entrusted with such an important responsibility.” Supervisor Jones also stated: “I am excited to serve all the constituents in District 4. I thank you for electing me and my commitment to you is that I will work extremely hard to support and represent you.”
The Village at Palisades Tahoe Specific Plan is back before the Placer County board of supervisors for a second time. The supervisors’ actions since taking office do not reflect the overwhelming communities’ disapproval of the project, with more than 600 letters submitted to date to Placer County.
Based on the public comments submitted, there is no sign that the majority of the residents within Placer County support the Village at Palisades Tahoe Specific Plan. So where is all the involvement from the community? We are worn out and have for the most part given up when it comes to projects involving Placer County. The end result is pretty much predetermined, the box for “community involvement” is just a check mark, and most projects end up in litigation before being dissolved. Four out of the five supervisors, who reside in completely different environments, continue to overrule our one local vote. It’s unfortunate that thousands of taxpayer dollars will once again be used to challenge a project that is only supported by Placer County supervisors for the estimated tax dollars generated and not by the majority of the constituents that they represent.
~ Jim Sajdak, Tahoe City, via letter
In response to the My Shot column titled Tahoe Basin Area Plan Amendments are Essential in the Jan. 12 print edition.
Public Agencies Refuse Public Criticism
Steve Teshara’s contention in the January 2023 Moonshine Ink opinion piece is that the TRPA and the Prosperity Center (an unelected organization) are above public criticism. Have they noticed Lake Tahoe hasn’t gotten any bigger? There aren’t fewer houses, there are more. There isn’t less traffic, there is more. Lake clarity is worse, not better. There are more invasive species in the lake, not fewer. Thirteen projects are on the books in Crystal Bay and Placer County. Yet the TRPA and the Prosperity Center promote providing more incentives for large development. Doesn’t more development in an overdeveloped area deserve scrutiny? Teshara, Prosperity Center, and TRPA have to stop treating people with constructive criticism as enemies.
Lack of affordable housing is an issue at Lake Tahoe. But allowing those that make over $400,000 per year to qualify for “achievable housing deed restrictions” (an invented term) is so far from the definition of workforce or affordable housing that it is laughable. It’s not the solution. It was the public that repeatedly pointed this out to the county and TRPA. TRPA’s final response, “We are working on an update…”
Why not invite valid criticism of major area plan amendments to big development? What are you trying to hide? No parking for multi-family developments? Kings Beach buildings up to 71 feet high? Continuous building walls up to 500 feet long? Single family homes/condos downtown in Kings Beach? RV parking in public parking lots?
Bad deals try to smother criticism. Under a regulatory process that favors development, will there ever be enough? Where is the backstop?
Read placer.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/64725/Proposed-TBAP_Implement-Regs_Track-Changes-102022.
Decide for yourself what you want for Tahoe’s future. Write preserve@tpac.org. Watch our video at youtube.com/watch?v=WKzPL-EwEUw.
~ Ann Nichols, Crystal Bay, via letter
Author
