Throughout our history as a nation and a people, we have demonstrated a passion for independence and sovereignty. By nature, we begin at an early age to wrest control of our lives from those initially responsible for our health and welfare. In time, we learn, grow and eventually expand our horizons usually with an eye toward improving life for ourselves, our family, our community and our society.
Arguably, those who by choice or otherwise remain metaphorically tethered to the womb, whether individuals, communities or societies, often become dependent, complacent, passive or simply apathetic. As such, they can be taken advantage of, suffer from neglect, be suppressed or possibly abused. Perhaps more tragically, they may be stifled in development and growth, and may even begin to slowly decay without being aware of the malaise under which they suffer.
It is with this backdrop in mind that I began to question whether we as individuals and a community living in North Lake Tahoe have not ourselves become ‘tethered to the womb’ of our government in Placer County. And so, with a little research, I learned that others before me had, indeed, asked themselves the very same question. Between 1966 and 1993, five grass roots, community-based efforts were launched to investigate the feasibility of creating local, representative, community government, and severing our dependence on Placer County.
In the early summer 2008, I began a focused but informal process of meeting with a broad array of citizens, community leaders, historians, elected officials and agencies throughout the North and West Shores of Lake Tahoe, Alpine Meadows, Northstar, Squaw Valley and Truckee. My purpose was to seek counsel, opinions, perspective and education concerning the question, ‘Should the citizens of Eastern Placer County once again investigate the possibility of incorporating and creating their own city?’
The response from the 75 people with whom I met was overwhelmingly supportive that the feasibility of incorporating should be appropriately investigated. Of course, as with any question of this magnitude, there were passionate comments on the fringes. There was, however, clear agreement that if the economics of operating a city are sound, incorporating should be pursued.
The rationale for supporting further analysis covered the gamut from nearly apoplectic disdain for Placer County and what is perceived to be their patent abuse, to composed, thoughtful conjecture that the social and economic benefits that could accrue to our community would be significant. Perhaps most stunning, however, was the shared view amongst most with whom I spoke that as a community we are permitting our collective vitality and energy, and possibly our identity, to slip away.
The limited reluctance expressed, at its core, reflected what I believe to be the ‘humanness’ in all of us: the tendency to fear change (a perceived loss of control); time worn, stale grudges still clung to by senescent residents separated by nothing more than a zip code; classic turf issues; and unfortunately, focus on oneself versus the public benefit, (i.e., ‘I’ve got mine’).
Perceptions of the Placer County Relationship
Criticism voiced by the overwhelming majority of people with whom I spoke, specific to our relationship with Placer County, was extensive but clustered into six primary categories.
• Leadership: Lack of local leadership and the inability to influence decisions having impact on our area, restricts our ability to effectively participate in molding our future. Confidence in Placer County Supervisors and Planning Commissioners has eroded to near vapor. Decisions that are important to communities need to be made at the local level, in local venues, by locally elected leaders.
Without local leadership and decision-making, societies tend to segregate around special interests, opening the door to anarchistic behavior. Neighbors find themselves in bitter disputes with neighbors, e.g. the 64-acre Transit Center, the Tahoe City Parking Structure, the Kings Beach threee-lane/four-lane controversy. Lawsuits are filed with abandon, and a mosaic of organizations is formed to push forward agendas. Examples include NTCAA, NTDW, the Kings Beach Business and Citizens Alliance, the Tahoe Lakefront Owners Association, and most recently, the NTPA that sprouted from the Boulder Bay controversy.
• Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT): Of the approximate $9.6 million locally generated annual TOT taxes no less than 40 percent is retained by Placer County, and the balance is used to fund much needed infrastructure projects in North Lake Tahoe. This voter-approved agreement with the Board of Supervisors has been in place since 1996. Arguably, the funds retained by Placer County have been required to compensate them for some portion of the services it provides to our community. But County executives have recently indicated that the promises made in 1996 are no longer relevant, and that a greater percentage, without limitation, will be retained to offset budget shortfalls within the County.
This breach of the community’s trust has particularly troubling implications for our future as new developments in Squaw Valley and Northstar, The Ritz in particular, are completed and the County continues siphoning even more TOT funds that would otherwise remain in our community. And while the ultimate authority rests with the Board of Supervisors, it is the County’s CEO who has preemptive influence over the community’s utilization of TOT funds.
• Redevelopment Agency (RDA): The estimated $20 million of RDA funds amassed by our locally generated property taxes are under the sole control of Placer County’s Chief Assistant CEO. In the minds of many, the projects to which the monies have been potentially directed suggest an abundance of poor judgment. As an example, and regardless of one’s position on the merits of the project, the legitimacy of directing RDA funds to support a parking structure in Tahoe City was severely challenged.
Placing the decision solely in the domain of one person is problematic. The County will argue that the use of RDA funds is subject to approval by the Board of Supervisors in their Redevelopment Agency Five-Year Implementation Plan, but the reality is that the Chief Assistant CEO functions, in effect, as the proverbial ‘gatekeeper.’
• The Structural and Dysfunctional Relationship with Placer County:
> In the grand scheme, Placer County government is geographically, socially, politically, economically and environmentally out of touch with our community.
> Decision-making is 100 miles away. The residents and community-at-large has no such access. This theory applies equally to budget decisions, staffing decisions, and everything that affects our local services.
> Four of five Supervisors are not elected by North Lake Tahoe voters. Our issues take little, if any, share of mind by 80 percent of the Board.
> Our District 5 Supervisor, as focused, dedicated and concerned as she may be about the best interests of North Lake Tahoe, has a very large area to represent and manage. As strongly as she was supported as a candidate in the last election, our area represents only between 15 percent and 20 percent of the total voters of the District. An estimated 80 to 85 percent of our Supervisor’s constituents are located in the Meadow Vista area and other communities surrounding Auburn. Ultimately, to be effective as a Placer County Supervisor, the District 5 representative must be able to work within the political dynamics of an organization where four out of five voters may have a significant conflict of purpose.
> Placer County’s budget has increased nearly four-fold over the past 10 years, while the population for the entire County has increased by less than double. And yet, the percentage of taxes we pay to the County continues to increase. Until the census is completed in 2010 we will not be certain, but it is reasonable to anticipate that findings will show the population of Eastern Placer County has grown at a far slower rate than the rest of the County. Many see us as the proverbial ‘cash cow’ for the coffers of Placer County without a corresponding benefit commensurate with our financial burden.
It is also anticipated that following the 2010 census, portions of Auburn may be folded into District 5. Should that be the case, one cannot help but ponder the impact on Eastern Placer County’s voice and influence within the District.
• Placer County Planning Commission: Appointed by the Supervisors, and lacking balance in interests, the Commissioners are void of the sensitivity and independence to consider projects in North Lake Tahoe with a local perspective. Guidelines established by the TRPA notwithstanding, the financial benefits that accrue to Placer County from new development are implicitly juxtaposed with the social and environmental priorities of Eastern Placer County residents.
• Placer County service levels: Degradation of County services to our community has been a topic of discussion for some as evidenced by the road clearing challenges faced by both Squaw Valley and Alpine Meadows last winter.
With continuing budget constraints, services to our area will likely diminish. In January, the sheriff’s offices announced a consolidation of services to Tahoe City from Kings Beach and Carnelian Bay. And more recently, the County announced that once-local 911 dispatch services will be provided from Auburn. And yet, the taxes from our community continue to flow to Auburn and as previously mentioned, will by extension increase as more of the local TOT is arbitrarily retained for County budget needs west of Donner Summit.
Benefits, Concerns and Doubts about Incorporation
In the course of meeting some 75 of our fellow citizens, a number of potentially beneficial outcomes of incorporation were offered.
• Control of our own destiny. Self governance.
• Greater return and management of our TOT.
• Control and management of our RDA funds. Local determination of the best ways to benefit our own community.
• Locally elected, local leadership with decisions made locally.
• Community planning, development and control at the local level.
• Greater influence with the TRPA and the potential for a seat on the Governing Board.
• Improve efficiency of public services.
• Focus on improving our local region.
• Create an environment to stimulate and enhance the potential synergies from linking local communities and resorts.
• Evolve from thinking as an individual to thinking as a community.
• Leave a promising legacy for those who follow.
The question of considering incorporation of a community elicits numerous voices of concern or doubt that tend to be fairly consistent. Most of these concerns must be addressed during the Comprehensive Fiscal Analysis (CFA) required by the Local Area Formation Commission (LAFCO).
• Taxes will increase. In fact, a city cannot increase taxes without a two-thirds vote of support by its registered voters.
• Another level of government would be created. Only those services not retained by the newly incorporated city would remain with the County thereby eliminating a layer.
• Financial burden. Economic sustainability is the cornerstone to health and prosperity. LAFCO, through the CFA, requires analysis of the economic viability and sustainability of any proposed new city before approving that a measure be placed on the local ballot.
• Timing is not right. Interestingly, perhaps more than any time in our community’s history, the timing for such analysis may be ideal.
• City boundaries are too large to manage. This question would be evaluated as part of the CFA.
Next Steps
I would like to suggest that we form a steering committee of those interested in exploring the question in more detail, to determine what actions and questions should be more closely considered. Those who have the inclination, whether proponents or opponents, could come together to consider the landscape and make an educated decision as to next steps.
We have a simple choice. We can look for opportunities to enhance and improve our community for ourselves and generations to follow, or we can be complacent and acquiesce to the status quo.
Those interested, contact northtahoeinc@sbcglobal.net. As with all my prior interviews and inquiries, responses will be held in the strictest of confidence.
~ Randy Hill, Tahoe Vista
