By Kathryn Reed
At larger newspapers people are assigned to write obituaries. In fact, when someone is on their death bed or getting up in years, it’s essentially prewritten. A few fresh quotes, date of death, and inserting services are the finishing touches, so to speak.
I suppose I could have started this months ago. Mentally, I did. Though the finality of it all will take some time to hit me, the reality is Bailey is gone.
Her vet, Kelly Doria, who I think the world of, came to the house less than an hour ago and euthanized her. Bailey would have been 15 in May.
Kelly was wise to tell me to make sure Bailey had a good summer because it may be her last. We walked when I didn’t want to. I threw the ball a little extra. She got more massages. She was in my Jeep going on errands or in Sue’s carpeted truck bed.
She went camping in September at Lake Almanor. She swam. She canoed. She laid by the campfire. If only she could talk – to hear her stories.
Walks at Cove East diminished to once a week, and at that we had to drive her to the trailhead. Finally, walks were something of the past. The seizures started in January. She had three the day before she was put down.
Sue and I took her to the Lake in mid-January. I don’t know if it was more for us or for her. I just felt like she needed to see the Lake one last time. She didn’t go in. She looked at it, walked on the beach near the Beacon a bit. I carried her across the snow. It was sad – and, yet, cathartic in some ways.
I remember bringing Bailey home – her riding on my lap. I thought Mike and I were just going to look at the litter. I’ve since been told there is not such thing as just looking at puppies. I picked her out. She was the smallest one of the black Labs.
I had grown up with Dachshunds, so a big dog was new to me – despite the few months I had with Mike’s other Lab, Gumbo.
She loved his Jeep, going out on the boat, swimming.
I remember her encounter with a skunk – the skunk won. It was the first time I had taken her in my car. I stunk, she reeked, the car was nasty for weeks. The bathtub looked like a crime scene as I used tomato juice to rid her of the stench.
Bailey endured a custody battle – with me finally getting full custody and Mike having visiting rights whenever he wanted. As her health began to severely decline last fall, I emailed to say her time was short and asked if he’d like to see her. He said her kiss from the previous winter still lingered.
Bailey was an outdoor dog much of her life. Then she slowly was an indoor-outdoor dog. And when Sue came along, she thought Bailey shouldn’t have to put up with the cold of Tahoe. From then on, the indoors were more her territory.
The first time Sue took Bailey for a walk it was really Bailey tugging her along. Bailey had her wrapped around her paws from the get-go.
A spoiled love sponge is what Bailey was.
When her people were out of town she stayed with family or friends. We even convinced her Tahoe Daddy (aka Billy) to leave law school last October for a long weekend to come stay with her one more time. We would find tennis balls in the hot tub after he was here – not knowing if Bailey got in or Billy threw the ball from there.
As Bailey’s back legs got worse, Roni and Brenda and Rene and Celine each loaned us ramps to put on the back stairs. It helped her immensely.
I’m not unique in loving a dog so immensely. We would go on walks, hikes and just sit. We’d talk. She spoke with her eyes, a gesture of her paw, a wag of her tail and her endless warm kisses.
She made me feel better me when I was down. She welcomed me back into her life when I took a six-month sabbatical from the Chronicle and my life in general. She showed me what unconditional love is.
I called my friend Joy for advice – more than once, but finally almost for permission. She asked me what Bailey’s eyes said. “Tired” was my reply. And they seemed sad. It was time. This is the most difficult decision I’ve ever made. Thank you to everyone who has been so supportive. Bailey was with me for a third of my life – we were best friends.
We spent the morning of Feb. 8 together … both of us on the floor. It used to be that when I’d cry she would console me. Today, her kisses were bittersweet. It only made me cry more.
I’m used to Bailey being behind me as I write. Lying behind my chair or in the hall. If I thought I worked alone before, I think I’m going to be in for a helluva rude awakening in the coming days and months ahead.
Goodbye, Bailey – I will always love you and never forget you.
Monday, March 24, 2008
SLT City Manager's report -- March 22, 2008
CITY OF SOUTH LAKE TAHOE
Electronic Version
March 22, 2008
MANAGEMENT OBSERVATIONS
Is it the truth?
Is it fair to all concerned?
Will it build good will and better friendships?
Will it be beneficial to all concerned?
Rotary International “Four-Way Test”
In this Edition:
State Budget Update
City Budget and Outreach
Lukins Water Update
New RDA Project Area Answers
Gangs and Graffiti
Tahoe Transportation District Reorganization
Collections Way Up
STATE BUDGET UPDATE
The Governor and the Legislature continue to talk about and deliberate on ways to cut the State’s $14 billion+ budget deficit. There is not yet a clear picture of what the impact of State cuts will mean to local government, and this situation must and will be monitored. Schools have been targeted for cuts, and road funds that go to cities and counties have been proposed to be “borrowed.”
Proposals by the Administration to release 22,000 prisoners into the community on a new early-release program ran head on into a proposal by the Legislative Analyst’s Office to cut safety sales tax to all cities and transfer the dollars to County Probation Department.
At the last hearing on the matter on March 12th before the State Senate’s Budget Subcommittee, State Senator Mike Machado, a Capitol veteran and the League staff present made the points already made by this office and others.
“Senator Mike Machado (D-Linden), subcommittee chair, pressed the Department of Finance representative about the quality of the Governor's proposal to release 20,000 inmates with non-serious, nonviolent drug and property crimes from state prisons. The LAO realignment proposal is intended to provide probation services to assist the transition of these 20,000 inmates into local communities.
The League testified that the LAO proposal has a policy disconnect because it would take money from cities currently dedicated to front-line law enforcement and public safety programs and give it to counties for probation services. It is highly likely that if 20,000 prisoners are released into local communities, there will be a significant and direct impact on local law enforcement. “
While many city revenue sources are protected by Proposition 1A and tax increment funds for RDA’s are constitutionally protected, city officials and interested persons must carefully monitor the deliberation on the State budget and its potential impacts on local governments.
CITY BUDGET OUTREACH AND PRECAUTIONARY STEPS
City government is not immune from State budget cuts and perils in the economy. In addition, City government wants to get the word out to the community about the City budget and ensure that there is outreach made to the community as part of the budget process. In April 2008, City staff will provide to the City Council and public a mid-year budget review of all City revenues and expenditures to date.
The following actions have been taken or are planned to be taken in approaching the mid-year review:
1. Estimate revenue conservatively and limit spending where possible.
2. Developed a City Budget 101 video that is available to the public and interested groups to explain where the City gets and spend public dollars.
3. Develop a budget outreach and education program to solicit more community involvement in the process.
4. Monitor closely the State budget situation and take affirmative steps to protect local revenues while recognizing that structural reform in the State budget is needed
5. The City Manager imposed a hiring freeze for all non safety personnel except in cases where job offers had already been made and relied on by job applicants or the position is critical to ongoing operations (e.g. IT).
6. The City Manager is evaluating staffing and reorganization issues that will be reported to the City Council during the budget process as a means of reducing overall spending.
It is clear when one examines existing City fixed costs (salaries and wages, debt service, insurance etc), existing City infrastructure needs, and proposed projects contained in the Strategic Plan that there is insufficient new discretionary revenues available to maintain the current levels of service and undertake, complete and maintain all proposed strategic plan goals and objectives. Several steps are needed.
• Priorities have to be set for the level of City services provided and the dollar resources committed to these services.
• While containing spending, growing the local economy must be the number one priority. Making it possible for small businesses to survive and grow, diversifying the local economy by encouraging and supporting initiatives to bring new higher paying and environmentally friendly jobs into the community, making the City’s infrastructure available and attractive (curbs and gutters, sidewalks in high-traffic area, lighting, streets, drainage etc), attracting new commercial businesses needed and desired by the community (instead of encouraging the flight to shop out of town), and increasing the number of visitors all could make a difference in the lives of residents, the availability of jobs, the profitability of big and small businesses and revenues to City government to provide services. Economic development cannot be treated as just another option…it is an imperative without which we will falter and fall back into hard economic times with cuts in staffing and community service.
LUKINS WATER UPDATE
City staff and Lukins Water CEO met in late 2007 to discuss the status of the water system and improvements needed to ensure adequate flow for domestic and fire protection purposes. Mr. Lukins agreed to conduct a survey of his customers to determine their level of support for improvements, and he recently said that the customer survey will be going out in March. He also said he was pursuing certain water grant funds for system improvements.
Earlier this month, City staff and I met with staff of the State Public Utilities Commission to discuss system needs and improvements and assistance that the State PUC can provide. PUC staff acknowledged that the Lukins system needs major repairs. A copy of the Brown and Caldwell study done by the STPUD that described needed improvements was provided to them again. PUC staff suggested that the system improvements be broken down into segments that could be financed and made over time rather than expecting the company and all parties to tackle at one time the $18+ million in improvements needed to upgrade the entire system. PUC staff said they were meeting with Lukins management as well to approach this matter.
City RDA staff have now identified a grant program where up to $1 million could be secured annually (on a statewide competitive basis) for major infrastructure improvements and staff will be working with Lukins to identify the first improvements needed and propose application for these grant funds in the next calendar year. Lukins officials too need to step up bring forward an improvement plan for the system. City staff is also examining the ways in which a new RDA Project Area could provide some funding to make improvements so that the 900 plus customers of the system do not experience “rate shock” that drives them out of their homes.
NEW RDA PROJECT AREA QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
At a recent meeting of the Citizens Alliance that I attended, a number of important questions were raised about the proposed redevelopment project area that is being evaluated and will be considered by the City Council later this year.
Here are the questions and answers below:
Eminent Domain – The RDA plan now being written by staff for presentation to the City Council later this year will not propose the power of eminent domain for the new Project Area. The question was asked if a future City Council decided it wants to amend the plan to include the power of eminent domain, will the Agency have to again justify that blight exists?
Answer – Yes, in order to amend a redevelopment plan to include the power of eminent domain, a future City Council will have to find that significant blight remains in the Project Area and that blight cannot be eliminated without the use of eminent domain. In addition, the redevelopment plan would have to be amended which is a long and expensive public process.
“No Eminent Domain” Affirmation – A suggestion was made that if the City Council is truly opposed to including eminent domain in a new redevelopment project area then it should clearly state its intentions now.
Answer – The City Council passed a resolution stating its intention to eliminate the RDA’s power of eminent domain in a new project area at its meeting of March 18, 2008.
Project Area Committee (PAC) – A question was raised whether a Project Area
Committee (PAC) is needed for the proposed redevelopment project area.
Answer – A PAC is not needed for the new redevelopment project area plan because the Agency will not have the power of eminent domain to acquire residential properties. The RDA Agency would arguably need to form a PAC in connection with amending the plan in order to authorize eminent domain authority if a substantial number of low or moderate income persons resided in the project area and the amendment would grant eminent domain authority with respect to property on which any persons reside. The proposed plan could include a requirement to form a PAC in connection with any amendment to grant the Agency eminent domain authority.
Tax Increment Calculation – Does the calculation used by the City for the growth of
tax increment over time count the 2% Proposition 13 Allowable Annual maximum?
Answer - The tax increment for the Project Area will include the 2 percent inflation adjustment, plus value changes from ownership changes and new development. Prior to 1994 when AB 1290 was passed, taxing entities could elect to get tax increment from the 2 percent growth. This occurs in the existing Project Area. That was replaced by the statutory pass through payments that this Project Area, if approved, will need to pay.
Estimate of New Revenue to the RDA - How much new revenue is estimated to come to the City RDA if a new redevelopment project area is formed?
Answer - The RDA’s financial advisors are working on tax increment and other financial projections for the Preliminary Report. They are examining the estimated cost of public improvements and the amount of tax increment revenue to be received.
Plan Adoption – Under State law may the City Council place an ordinance adopting a redevelopment plan on the ballot to be confirmed by the voters?
Answer – State law establishes a statutory scheme for approving redevelopment plans. Legal counsel has confirmed that the Law does not appear to authorize the City Council to place an ordinance adopting a redevelopment plan on the ballot to be confirmed by the voters. However, any such ordinance adopted by the City Council is subject to referendum.
GANGS AND GRAFFITI
In recent weeks, areas in the City have been hit with graffiti and our local schools have had increased levels of anti-social behavior on campus. Police officials and City leaders continue to work with school officials to respond to anti-social activity on campus and are reflecting on other steps that can and should be taken.
This City government and the community cannot and should not tolerate graffiti or emerging gang-related activity. Both are insidious activities that unless stopped can grow and destroy the fabric and reputation of a community. Graffiti and gang-related activity is not just a police problem. It is a community problem that requires the focused attention and assistance of City officials, police, school officials, churches, probation departments, the courts, neighborhood associations, and community social organizations all whose leaders state in their actions that such activities are not acceptable nor will they be tolerated in our community.
I’ve instructed the Police Chief to examine with the City Attorney the City’s existing anti-graffiti and anti-gang ordinances to see if they are strong enough. I have asked him to particularly focus on the development of ordinances that require more parental responsibility for the actions of their minor children and determining whether a curfew is needed during certain times of the year for underage children, Over the next several weeks and months a dialogue with all interested parties needs to take place to clearly identify the problem and devise an articulated and comprehensive strategy to attack it. The Police Department will also be seeking special funds from the State to move forward with a comprehensive program, but with or without these funds, a comprehensive program will be developed.
I will be having the Police Department provide the City Council and public with an overview of this situation in April and bring forward recommendations for additional action at that time.
TAHOE TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT (TTD) CHANGE UNDERWAY?
According to the Assistant City Manager, members of the Tahoe Transportation District are considering a reorganization that would make the District more independent and have its own staff so that it can focus attention and energy on the delivery of on-the ground transit services to the Basin. The notion of a strengthened transportation delivery agency in the Basin has conceptually been approved by the City Council in the past as City government officials look beyond transportation planning to transportation implementation. If we are move toward a more “green” community and one that offers various modes of transportation opportunities other than vehicle (bicycle, pedestrian, bus, airlines etc) focus and attention by an invigorated transportation planning agency will help.
Before the TTD and TRPA vote on a change, I will have the matter of reorganization brought before the City Council for review and direction so that the matter and idea is publicly vetted.
Even with a strengthened transportation agency, City government will continue to own its own fleet of busses and the City Council will continue to make annual decisions on how State-restricted TDA funds are spent for the benefit of the 24,000 people who reside in South Lake Tahoe.
COLLECTIONS WAY UP
The Director of Finance reports that the collection of business license and transient occupancy tax payments owed the City are at an all-time high.
The Finance Department mailed out 3,245 business license renewal forms. As of March 17, 2008 only 31 or .096% are believed to be open and unpaid. TOT collections are also high. With the City generating over $10 million in TOT dollars annually, TOT is a significant source of revenue. There are 144 TOT-reporting properties per month, and as of March 31, 2008 there are 6 properties that failed to report and pay TOT and 7 properties that need verification that they are being used for long-term rentals and exempt from TOT payments.
Business owners and operators who intentionally do not pay business license, TOT and other fees owed the City are being pursued civilly and where fraud may be involved they are being pursued criminally.
The vast majority of business owners and operators in South Lake Tahoe pay their business license and TOT owed the City in a timely fashion, and we appreciate it. We have a great resource of responsible business owners and operators in South Lake Tahoe. The Director of Finance and her staff continue to do an excellent job of managing City finances and collecting dollars owed City government.
DAVID JINKENS
City Manager
Electronic Version
March 22, 2008
MANAGEMENT OBSERVATIONS
Is it the truth?
Is it fair to all concerned?
Will it build good will and better friendships?
Will it be beneficial to all concerned?
Rotary International “Four-Way Test”
In this Edition:
State Budget Update
City Budget and Outreach
Lukins Water Update
New RDA Project Area Answers
Gangs and Graffiti
Tahoe Transportation District Reorganization
Collections Way Up
STATE BUDGET UPDATE
The Governor and the Legislature continue to talk about and deliberate on ways to cut the State’s $14 billion+ budget deficit. There is not yet a clear picture of what the impact of State cuts will mean to local government, and this situation must and will be monitored. Schools have been targeted for cuts, and road funds that go to cities and counties have been proposed to be “borrowed.”
Proposals by the Administration to release 22,000 prisoners into the community on a new early-release program ran head on into a proposal by the Legislative Analyst’s Office to cut safety sales tax to all cities and transfer the dollars to County Probation Department.
At the last hearing on the matter on March 12th before the State Senate’s Budget Subcommittee, State Senator Mike Machado, a Capitol veteran and the League staff present made the points already made by this office and others.
“Senator Mike Machado (D-Linden), subcommittee chair, pressed the Department of Finance representative about the quality of the Governor's proposal to release 20,000 inmates with non-serious, nonviolent drug and property crimes from state prisons. The LAO realignment proposal is intended to provide probation services to assist the transition of these 20,000 inmates into local communities.
The League testified that the LAO proposal has a policy disconnect because it would take money from cities currently dedicated to front-line law enforcement and public safety programs and give it to counties for probation services. It is highly likely that if 20,000 prisoners are released into local communities, there will be a significant and direct impact on local law enforcement. “
While many city revenue sources are protected by Proposition 1A and tax increment funds for RDA’s are constitutionally protected, city officials and interested persons must carefully monitor the deliberation on the State budget and its potential impacts on local governments.
CITY BUDGET OUTREACH AND PRECAUTIONARY STEPS
City government is not immune from State budget cuts and perils in the economy. In addition, City government wants to get the word out to the community about the City budget and ensure that there is outreach made to the community as part of the budget process. In April 2008, City staff will provide to the City Council and public a mid-year budget review of all City revenues and expenditures to date.
The following actions have been taken or are planned to be taken in approaching the mid-year review:
1. Estimate revenue conservatively and limit spending where possible.
2. Developed a City Budget 101 video that is available to the public and interested groups to explain where the City gets and spend public dollars.
3. Develop a budget outreach and education program to solicit more community involvement in the process.
4. Monitor closely the State budget situation and take affirmative steps to protect local revenues while recognizing that structural reform in the State budget is needed
5. The City Manager imposed a hiring freeze for all non safety personnel except in cases where job offers had already been made and relied on by job applicants or the position is critical to ongoing operations (e.g. IT).
6. The City Manager is evaluating staffing and reorganization issues that will be reported to the City Council during the budget process as a means of reducing overall spending.
It is clear when one examines existing City fixed costs (salaries and wages, debt service, insurance etc), existing City infrastructure needs, and proposed projects contained in the Strategic Plan that there is insufficient new discretionary revenues available to maintain the current levels of service and undertake, complete and maintain all proposed strategic plan goals and objectives. Several steps are needed.
• Priorities have to be set for the level of City services provided and the dollar resources committed to these services.
• While containing spending, growing the local economy must be the number one priority. Making it possible for small businesses to survive and grow, diversifying the local economy by encouraging and supporting initiatives to bring new higher paying and environmentally friendly jobs into the community, making the City’s infrastructure available and attractive (curbs and gutters, sidewalks in high-traffic area, lighting, streets, drainage etc), attracting new commercial businesses needed and desired by the community (instead of encouraging the flight to shop out of town), and increasing the number of visitors all could make a difference in the lives of residents, the availability of jobs, the profitability of big and small businesses and revenues to City government to provide services. Economic development cannot be treated as just another option…it is an imperative without which we will falter and fall back into hard economic times with cuts in staffing and community service.
LUKINS WATER UPDATE
City staff and Lukins Water CEO met in late 2007 to discuss the status of the water system and improvements needed to ensure adequate flow for domestic and fire protection purposes. Mr. Lukins agreed to conduct a survey of his customers to determine their level of support for improvements, and he recently said that the customer survey will be going out in March. He also said he was pursuing certain water grant funds for system improvements.
Earlier this month, City staff and I met with staff of the State Public Utilities Commission to discuss system needs and improvements and assistance that the State PUC can provide. PUC staff acknowledged that the Lukins system needs major repairs. A copy of the Brown and Caldwell study done by the STPUD that described needed improvements was provided to them again. PUC staff suggested that the system improvements be broken down into segments that could be financed and made over time rather than expecting the company and all parties to tackle at one time the $18+ million in improvements needed to upgrade the entire system. PUC staff said they were meeting with Lukins management as well to approach this matter.
City RDA staff have now identified a grant program where up to $1 million could be secured annually (on a statewide competitive basis) for major infrastructure improvements and staff will be working with Lukins to identify the first improvements needed and propose application for these grant funds in the next calendar year. Lukins officials too need to step up bring forward an improvement plan for the system. City staff is also examining the ways in which a new RDA Project Area could provide some funding to make improvements so that the 900 plus customers of the system do not experience “rate shock” that drives them out of their homes.
NEW RDA PROJECT AREA QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
At a recent meeting of the Citizens Alliance that I attended, a number of important questions were raised about the proposed redevelopment project area that is being evaluated and will be considered by the City Council later this year.
Here are the questions and answers below:
Eminent Domain – The RDA plan now being written by staff for presentation to the City Council later this year will not propose the power of eminent domain for the new Project Area. The question was asked if a future City Council decided it wants to amend the plan to include the power of eminent domain, will the Agency have to again justify that blight exists?
Answer – Yes, in order to amend a redevelopment plan to include the power of eminent domain, a future City Council will have to find that significant blight remains in the Project Area and that blight cannot be eliminated without the use of eminent domain. In addition, the redevelopment plan would have to be amended which is a long and expensive public process.
“No Eminent Domain” Affirmation – A suggestion was made that if the City Council is truly opposed to including eminent domain in a new redevelopment project area then it should clearly state its intentions now.
Answer – The City Council passed a resolution stating its intention to eliminate the RDA’s power of eminent domain in a new project area at its meeting of March 18, 2008.
Project Area Committee (PAC) – A question was raised whether a Project Area
Committee (PAC) is needed for the proposed redevelopment project area.
Answer – A PAC is not needed for the new redevelopment project area plan because the Agency will not have the power of eminent domain to acquire residential properties. The RDA Agency would arguably need to form a PAC in connection with amending the plan in order to authorize eminent domain authority if a substantial number of low or moderate income persons resided in the project area and the amendment would grant eminent domain authority with respect to property on which any persons reside. The proposed plan could include a requirement to form a PAC in connection with any amendment to grant the Agency eminent domain authority.
Tax Increment Calculation – Does the calculation used by the City for the growth of
tax increment over time count the 2% Proposition 13 Allowable Annual maximum?
Answer - The tax increment for the Project Area will include the 2 percent inflation adjustment, plus value changes from ownership changes and new development. Prior to 1994 when AB 1290 was passed, taxing entities could elect to get tax increment from the 2 percent growth. This occurs in the existing Project Area. That was replaced by the statutory pass through payments that this Project Area, if approved, will need to pay.
Estimate of New Revenue to the RDA - How much new revenue is estimated to come to the City RDA if a new redevelopment project area is formed?
Answer - The RDA’s financial advisors are working on tax increment and other financial projections for the Preliminary Report. They are examining the estimated cost of public improvements and the amount of tax increment revenue to be received.
Plan Adoption – Under State law may the City Council place an ordinance adopting a redevelopment plan on the ballot to be confirmed by the voters?
Answer – State law establishes a statutory scheme for approving redevelopment plans. Legal counsel has confirmed that the Law does not appear to authorize the City Council to place an ordinance adopting a redevelopment plan on the ballot to be confirmed by the voters. However, any such ordinance adopted by the City Council is subject to referendum.
GANGS AND GRAFFITI
In recent weeks, areas in the City have been hit with graffiti and our local schools have had increased levels of anti-social behavior on campus. Police officials and City leaders continue to work with school officials to respond to anti-social activity on campus and are reflecting on other steps that can and should be taken.
This City government and the community cannot and should not tolerate graffiti or emerging gang-related activity. Both are insidious activities that unless stopped can grow and destroy the fabric and reputation of a community. Graffiti and gang-related activity is not just a police problem. It is a community problem that requires the focused attention and assistance of City officials, police, school officials, churches, probation departments, the courts, neighborhood associations, and community social organizations all whose leaders state in their actions that such activities are not acceptable nor will they be tolerated in our community.
I’ve instructed the Police Chief to examine with the City Attorney the City’s existing anti-graffiti and anti-gang ordinances to see if they are strong enough. I have asked him to particularly focus on the development of ordinances that require more parental responsibility for the actions of their minor children and determining whether a curfew is needed during certain times of the year for underage children, Over the next several weeks and months a dialogue with all interested parties needs to take place to clearly identify the problem and devise an articulated and comprehensive strategy to attack it. The Police Department will also be seeking special funds from the State to move forward with a comprehensive program, but with or without these funds, a comprehensive program will be developed.
I will be having the Police Department provide the City Council and public with an overview of this situation in April and bring forward recommendations for additional action at that time.
TAHOE TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT (TTD) CHANGE UNDERWAY?
According to the Assistant City Manager, members of the Tahoe Transportation District are considering a reorganization that would make the District more independent and have its own staff so that it can focus attention and energy on the delivery of on-the ground transit services to the Basin. The notion of a strengthened transportation delivery agency in the Basin has conceptually been approved by the City Council in the past as City government officials look beyond transportation planning to transportation implementation. If we are move toward a more “green” community and one that offers various modes of transportation opportunities other than vehicle (bicycle, pedestrian, bus, airlines etc) focus and attention by an invigorated transportation planning agency will help.
Before the TTD and TRPA vote on a change, I will have the matter of reorganization brought before the City Council for review and direction so that the matter and idea is publicly vetted.
Even with a strengthened transportation agency, City government will continue to own its own fleet of busses and the City Council will continue to make annual decisions on how State-restricted TDA funds are spent for the benefit of the 24,000 people who reside in South Lake Tahoe.
COLLECTIONS WAY UP
The Director of Finance reports that the collection of business license and transient occupancy tax payments owed the City are at an all-time high.
The Finance Department mailed out 3,245 business license renewal forms. As of March 17, 2008 only 31 or .096% are believed to be open and unpaid. TOT collections are also high. With the City generating over $10 million in TOT dollars annually, TOT is a significant source of revenue. There are 144 TOT-reporting properties per month, and as of March 31, 2008 there are 6 properties that failed to report and pay TOT and 7 properties that need verification that they are being used for long-term rentals and exempt from TOT payments.
Business owners and operators who intentionally do not pay business license, TOT and other fees owed the City are being pursued civilly and where fraud may be involved they are being pursued criminally.
The vast majority of business owners and operators in South Lake Tahoe pay their business license and TOT owed the City in a timely fashion, and we appreciate it. We have a great resource of responsible business owners and operators in South Lake Tahoe. The Director of Finance and her staff continue to do an excellent job of managing City finances and collecting dollars owed City government.
DAVID JINKENS
City Manager
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Ap report blasts Tahoe agencies
AP Enterprise: Records show infighting hurt Tahoe fire prevention
AP on Bakersfield Californian ^ | 3/20/08 | Don Thompson - ap
Posted on 03/20/2008 2:30:00 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
Steps to prevent catastrophic wildfires in the Lake Tahoe basin, one of the country's most treasured natural wonders, have been hampered for years by bureaucratic infighting among agencies that often work at cross purposes, according to thousands of pages of documents reviewed by The Associated Press.
The failure of the agencies to adequately protect the basin was brought to light last June when the Angora Fire ripped through a thickly forested ravine and destroyed 254 homes near South Lake Tahoe.
Since then, blame has fallen on the overlapping agencies that have environmental and regulatory oversight of the Tahoe basin. A commission established after the fire is recommending ways to heal the rifts and will vote on its report Friday.
The AP's review showed just how glaring the problems have been over the years.
Using state and federal freedom of information laws, the AP obtained more than 4,000 pages of documents from local, regional, state and federal agencies involved in planning, environmental protection and fire prevention around Tahoe, the picture-postcard lake the straddles the California-Nevada border.
Most of the documents covered the three years before the Angora wildfire and reveal a tangle of agencies with competing agendas. Efforts to clear trees and brush were delayed - often for years - as agencies battled over methods and jurisdictional disputes.
The documents also showed the level of concern by homeowners and local fire officials, as the forests ringing the lake had become overgrown in recent decades.
As the Angora Fire was churning through houses and timber in June 2007, homeowners on the opposite shore sent a letter to a regional planning agency pleading for a fire road to be cut near their neighborhood.
"A catastrophic fire (is) waiting to happen," said the letter from homeowners in the lakeside enclave of Glenbrook. "Time is absolutely of the essence."
Shortly after, Tahoe-area agencies granted approval to build the four-mile-long fire road, a project that had been delayed for six years because of disagreements over whether it was necessary.
Elsewhere in the documents, correspondence between a California state forester and a local fire chief demonstrated the frustration felt by those who sought increased thinning of Tahoe's forests.
In an e-mail exchange from October 2004, Christy Daugherty, a forester who coordinated fire prevention projects with the California Tahoe Conservancy, lamented that the conservancy was being criticized for not thinning trees after years of being blamed for allowing too much logging.
She said the U.S. Forest Service had proposed logging in a particular area "but were held back by the League to Save Lake Tahoe, Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board and others."
"My guess is, if they had tried to treat heavy enough in the beginning, they would have got slammed by the public and agency people that don't understand forestry," Daugherty wrote to John Pang, chief of the Meeks Bay Fire Protection District.
"As much as it has frustrated me to feel like my advice has been ignored, I understand the need for the (conservancy) to be politically and socially acceptable," Daugherty wrote.
Pang replied, "I understand the need to avoid social pressures from stopping the projects. ... Yes, we've all got to be 'PC.'"
Pang went on to say that fire consultants felt they were being stonewalled by agencies such as the conservancy and the water board, which often did not favor cutting trees.
Trying to decipher how Lake Tahoe's environment is managed and which agencies are in charge is a confounding exercise.
To start, its shores are divided between two states, immediately creating an additional layer of bureaucracy.
Beyond the various state agencies, the U.S. Forest Service administers much of the land around the lake. Then there are regional water boards that are charged with maintaining the lake's clarity, multiple local governments and fire protection districts, and a two-state regional planning board whose regulations affect all the agencies, organizations and private landowners in the Tahoe basin.
Given the number of voices and their often competing interests, the interagency feuding that has contributed to the basin's tinderbox condition is not surprising, said Harold Singer, director of the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board.
"Part of this is personalities, and part of this is we're a regulatory agency and they are implementing agencies," Singer said in a telephone interview, adding that last year's wildfire has forced the agencies to work more cooperatively. "I think we've moved past that. I think the dynamics of working with other agencies has changed considerably."
His agency was criticized repeatedly throughout the documents for obstructing efforts to thin the forest.
In 2005, for example, the Lahontan water board's intervention on a thinning project so angered the California Department of Forestry regional coordinator that she told a colleague to ignore the board's request to monitor potential harm to wildlife.
One incident contained in the thousands of agency documents obtained by the AP provides an example of just the type of infighting the two-state commission that meets Friday hopes to end.
In 2004, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, which issues the umbrella regulations, changed its rules to allow more tree thinning along streams. That tactic previously had been banned to prevent runoff from fouling the lake's water.
Soon after, the Forest Service submitted a plan to experiment with a six-wheeled logging machine that was designed to selectively cut trees while limiting damage to the environment.
The Forest Service's plan hit immediate resistance from the regional planning agency and the Lahontan water board. They urged the Forest Service to try alternatives such as thinning by hand crews, which is more expensive, labor-intensive and time-consuming.
"This defeats the purpose," complained Forest Service project coordinator Dave Marlow in a March 2006 e-mail. "I think we are miles apart on this."
A back-and-forth followed that showed the level of dysfunction and distrust between agencies.
"This is our project, not Lahontan's, and I feel like they are pushing this down our throats," wrote Scott Parsons, a Forest Service vegetation specialist, in a June 2006 e-mail.
Singer, the Lahontan water board director, e-mailed a reply threatening to file formal objections to what he described as "a biased-looking study with a predetermined outcome," as the Forest Service attempted to show the machinery could be used along streams.
The agency was concerned the machine was too heavy and would compact the soil.
The water board's objections also angered 21 Tahoe-area fire officials, who gathered in January 2007 and considered using their political clout to pressure the water agency.
The fire chiefs said water quality officials were "inserting themselves into an area they do not belong," according to minutes of their meeting. "The demonstration project has been tied up for two years."
It wasn't until last fall, several months after the Angora Fire, that the machine was allowed to be used along South Lake Tahoe's Heavenly Creek, just east of the burned area.
AP on Bakersfield Californian ^ | 3/20/08 | Don Thompson - ap
Posted on 03/20/2008 2:30:00 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
Steps to prevent catastrophic wildfires in the Lake Tahoe basin, one of the country's most treasured natural wonders, have been hampered for years by bureaucratic infighting among agencies that often work at cross purposes, according to thousands of pages of documents reviewed by The Associated Press.
The failure of the agencies to adequately protect the basin was brought to light last June when the Angora Fire ripped through a thickly forested ravine and destroyed 254 homes near South Lake Tahoe.
Since then, blame has fallen on the overlapping agencies that have environmental and regulatory oversight of the Tahoe basin. A commission established after the fire is recommending ways to heal the rifts and will vote on its report Friday.
The AP's review showed just how glaring the problems have been over the years.
Using state and federal freedom of information laws, the AP obtained more than 4,000 pages of documents from local, regional, state and federal agencies involved in planning, environmental protection and fire prevention around Tahoe, the picture-postcard lake the straddles the California-Nevada border.
Most of the documents covered the three years before the Angora wildfire and reveal a tangle of agencies with competing agendas. Efforts to clear trees and brush were delayed - often for years - as agencies battled over methods and jurisdictional disputes.
The documents also showed the level of concern by homeowners and local fire officials, as the forests ringing the lake had become overgrown in recent decades.
As the Angora Fire was churning through houses and timber in June 2007, homeowners on the opposite shore sent a letter to a regional planning agency pleading for a fire road to be cut near their neighborhood.
"A catastrophic fire (is) waiting to happen," said the letter from homeowners in the lakeside enclave of Glenbrook. "Time is absolutely of the essence."
Shortly after, Tahoe-area agencies granted approval to build the four-mile-long fire road, a project that had been delayed for six years because of disagreements over whether it was necessary.
Elsewhere in the documents, correspondence between a California state forester and a local fire chief demonstrated the frustration felt by those who sought increased thinning of Tahoe's forests.
In an e-mail exchange from October 2004, Christy Daugherty, a forester who coordinated fire prevention projects with the California Tahoe Conservancy, lamented that the conservancy was being criticized for not thinning trees after years of being blamed for allowing too much logging.
She said the U.S. Forest Service had proposed logging in a particular area "but were held back by the League to Save Lake Tahoe, Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board and others."
"My guess is, if they had tried to treat heavy enough in the beginning, they would have got slammed by the public and agency people that don't understand forestry," Daugherty wrote to John Pang, chief of the Meeks Bay Fire Protection District.
"As much as it has frustrated me to feel like my advice has been ignored, I understand the need for the (conservancy) to be politically and socially acceptable," Daugherty wrote.
Pang replied, "I understand the need to avoid social pressures from stopping the projects. ... Yes, we've all got to be 'PC.'"
Pang went on to say that fire consultants felt they were being stonewalled by agencies such as the conservancy and the water board, which often did not favor cutting trees.
Trying to decipher how Lake Tahoe's environment is managed and which agencies are in charge is a confounding exercise.
To start, its shores are divided between two states, immediately creating an additional layer of bureaucracy.
Beyond the various state agencies, the U.S. Forest Service administers much of the land around the lake. Then there are regional water boards that are charged with maintaining the lake's clarity, multiple local governments and fire protection districts, and a two-state regional planning board whose regulations affect all the agencies, organizations and private landowners in the Tahoe basin.
Given the number of voices and their often competing interests, the interagency feuding that has contributed to the basin's tinderbox condition is not surprising, said Harold Singer, director of the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board.
"Part of this is personalities, and part of this is we're a regulatory agency and they are implementing agencies," Singer said in a telephone interview, adding that last year's wildfire has forced the agencies to work more cooperatively. "I think we've moved past that. I think the dynamics of working with other agencies has changed considerably."
His agency was criticized repeatedly throughout the documents for obstructing efforts to thin the forest.
In 2005, for example, the Lahontan water board's intervention on a thinning project so angered the California Department of Forestry regional coordinator that she told a colleague to ignore the board's request to monitor potential harm to wildlife.
One incident contained in the thousands of agency documents obtained by the AP provides an example of just the type of infighting the two-state commission that meets Friday hopes to end.
In 2004, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, which issues the umbrella regulations, changed its rules to allow more tree thinning along streams. That tactic previously had been banned to prevent runoff from fouling the lake's water.
Soon after, the Forest Service submitted a plan to experiment with a six-wheeled logging machine that was designed to selectively cut trees while limiting damage to the environment.
The Forest Service's plan hit immediate resistance from the regional planning agency and the Lahontan water board. They urged the Forest Service to try alternatives such as thinning by hand crews, which is more expensive, labor-intensive and time-consuming.
"This defeats the purpose," complained Forest Service project coordinator Dave Marlow in a March 2006 e-mail. "I think we are miles apart on this."
A back-and-forth followed that showed the level of dysfunction and distrust between agencies.
"This is our project, not Lahontan's, and I feel like they are pushing this down our throats," wrote Scott Parsons, a Forest Service vegetation specialist, in a June 2006 e-mail.
Singer, the Lahontan water board director, e-mailed a reply threatening to file formal objections to what he described as "a biased-looking study with a predetermined outcome," as the Forest Service attempted to show the machinery could be used along streams.
The agency was concerned the machine was too heavy and would compact the soil.
The water board's objections also angered 21 Tahoe-area fire officials, who gathered in January 2007 and considered using their political clout to pressure the water agency.
The fire chiefs said water quality officials were "inserting themselves into an area they do not belong," according to minutes of their meeting. "The demonstration project has been tied up for two years."
It wasn't until last fall, several months after the Angora Fire, that the machine was allowed to be used along South Lake Tahoe's Heavenly Creek, just east of the burned area.
USFS may alter High Meadows
Matt Dickinson at (530) 543-2769.
COMMENTS SOUGHT FOR HIGH MEADOWS
MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL
South Lake Tahoe Calif. The US Forest Service, Lake Tahoe Basin
Management
Unit (LTBMU) is seeking public, agency and organization comments during
a
public scoping period through April 7, of a proposed action for the
High
Meadows Area near South Lake Tahoe California.
One of the largest land acquisitions in recent years, High Meadows
contains
exceptionally important watershed and water quality values and nesting
habitat areas for California Spotted Owl and Northern Goshawks. High
Meadows is in the headwaters of Cold Creek and an important watershed
system for Lake Tahoe. Recreation opportunities include excellent
access to
High Meadows, the Star Lake area, Monument Pass and the Tahoe Rim
Trail.
The proposed action follows extensive resource inventories, analysis
and
monitoring. It would establish a forest plan land-use designation for
the
1,790 acre High Meadows area, which was acquired by the forest service
in
2003. The proposal has three main elements: 1. management area
designation, 2. meadow ecosystem restoration and, 3. Access and Travel
Management (ATM) projects for roads and trails.
Management Area Designation is needed for this recently acquired land,
and
will describe suitable uses and resource management for High Meadows.
Restoration projects will enhance habitat and address decades of
impacts to
meadow, forest and streams, including vehicle traffic and cattle
grazing.
Fuels reduction and forest health projects including prescribed fire,
will
address lodgepole pine encroachment on meadows.
ATM is a systematic approach to the design and maintenance of roads and
trails that provide recreation opportunities and administrative access
on
designated forest service roads and trails. The ATM- roads and trails
projects will expand non-motorized access and opportunities,
maintaining
the character of High Meadows. Some trails would be redesigned to
reduce
erosion or to connect to existing trails and destinations. Sections of
user-created trails would be eliminated due to their resource impacts.
Two
miles of road would be decommissioned and five miles of trail converted
to
non-motorized use.
A decision on the proposal will be made following an environmental
analysis
process and formal public comment period.
The management direction would be compatible with land uses in the
three
adjacent management areas- the Heavenly, Freel and Tahoe Valley
management
areas.
A public meeting is being offered to explain the proposal and accept or
receive public comment. The meeting will be held on March 27, 2008
from
6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at the Forest Supervisor’s Office, 35 College
Drive,
South Lake Tahoe.
Comments on the proposed action will be most helpful if received no
later
than April 7, 2008. Comments can be provided through the internet at
comments-pacificsouthwest-ltbmu@fs.fed.us. Please use subject line:
“High
Meadows Project†Comments can also be submitted my standard email to:
mattdickinson@fs.fed.us. For more information on this proposal and
providing relevant comment, contact Matt Dickinson at (530) 543-2769.
A complete and detailed description of the proposed action can be
obtained
on-line at www.fs.fed.us/r5/ltbmu and click on Projects and Plans, or
through a link on the welcome page. The proposed action may also be
viewed
at the Forest Supervisor’s Office, 35 College Drive, South Lake Tahoe
during regular business hours.
###
COMMENTS SOUGHT FOR HIGH MEADOWS
MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL
South Lake Tahoe Calif. The US Forest Service, Lake Tahoe Basin
Management
Unit (LTBMU) is seeking public, agency and organization comments during
a
public scoping period through April 7, of a proposed action for the
High
Meadows Area near South Lake Tahoe California.
One of the largest land acquisitions in recent years, High Meadows
contains
exceptionally important watershed and water quality values and nesting
habitat areas for California Spotted Owl and Northern Goshawks. High
Meadows is in the headwaters of Cold Creek and an important watershed
system for Lake Tahoe. Recreation opportunities include excellent
access to
High Meadows, the Star Lake area, Monument Pass and the Tahoe Rim
Trail.
The proposed action follows extensive resource inventories, analysis
and
monitoring. It would establish a forest plan land-use designation for
the
1,790 acre High Meadows area, which was acquired by the forest service
in
2003. The proposal has three main elements: 1. management area
designation, 2. meadow ecosystem restoration and, 3. Access and Travel
Management (ATM) projects for roads and trails.
Management Area Designation is needed for this recently acquired land,
and
will describe suitable uses and resource management for High Meadows.
Restoration projects will enhance habitat and address decades of
impacts to
meadow, forest and streams, including vehicle traffic and cattle
grazing.
Fuels reduction and forest health projects including prescribed fire,
will
address lodgepole pine encroachment on meadows.
ATM is a systematic approach to the design and maintenance of roads and
trails that provide recreation opportunities and administrative access
on
designated forest service roads and trails. The ATM- roads and trails
projects will expand non-motorized access and opportunities,
maintaining
the character of High Meadows. Some trails would be redesigned to
reduce
erosion or to connect to existing trails and destinations. Sections of
user-created trails would be eliminated due to their resource impacts.
Two
miles of road would be decommissioned and five miles of trail converted
to
non-motorized use.
A decision on the proposal will be made following an environmental
analysis
process and formal public comment period.
The management direction would be compatible with land uses in the
three
adjacent management areas- the Heavenly, Freel and Tahoe Valley
management
areas.
A public meeting is being offered to explain the proposal and accept or
receive public comment. The meeting will be held on March 27, 2008
from
6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at the Forest Supervisor’s Office, 35 College
Drive,
South Lake Tahoe.
Comments on the proposed action will be most helpful if received no
later
than April 7, 2008. Comments can be provided through the internet at
comments-pacificsouthwest-ltbmu@fs.fed.us. Please use subject line:
“High
Meadows Project†Comments can also be submitted my standard email to:
mattdickinson@fs.fed.us. For more information on this proposal and
providing relevant comment, contact Matt Dickinson at (530) 543-2769.
A complete and detailed description of the proposed action can be
obtained
on-line at www.fs.fed.us/r5/ltbmu and click on Projects and Plans, or
through a link on the welcome page. The proposed action may also be
viewed
at the Forest Supervisor’s Office, 35 College Drive, South Lake Tahoe
during regular business hours.
###
March 24 USFS meeting in Incline
LAKE TAHOE FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO MEET AT
SIERRA NEVADA COLLEGE, INCLINE VILLAGE
Incline Village, Nev…The Lake Tahoe Basin Federal Advisory
Committee
(LTFAC) is scheduled to meet from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., March 24,
2008
at the Sierra Nevada College, Assembly Room 139, 999 Tahoe Boulevard,
Incline Village, NV 89451. LTFAC will address issues related to
federal
activities at Lake Tahoe.
Items on the agenda include an update on the Total Maximum Daily
Load
development, and the progress of the Tahoe Working Group on the
Southern
Nevada Public Land Management Act Round 9 Capital project nominations,
followed by a Public Comment period.
LTFAC consists of 20 members representing a broad array of
constituencies. The Secretary of Agriculture chartered the first LTFAC
in
July 1998 to advise the Federal Partnership on programs and projects
within
the Lake Tahoe Basin. LTFAC’s charter has been renewed every two
years
with the most recent renewal occurring in June 2006. All Lake Tahoe
Federal Advisory Committee meetings are open to the public. Interested
citizens are encouraged to attend. Issues may be brought to the
attention
of the committee during the open public comment period at the meeting,
or
by filing a written statement with the committee through Arla Hains,
USDA-Forest Service, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit, 35 College
Drive,
South Lake Tahoe, CA, 96150. For more information on the Lake Tahoe
Federal Advisory Committee, visit the Forest Service web site at
http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/ltbmu/.
SIERRA NEVADA COLLEGE, INCLINE VILLAGE
Incline Village, Nev…The Lake Tahoe Basin Federal Advisory
Committee
(LTFAC) is scheduled to meet from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., March 24,
2008
at the Sierra Nevada College, Assembly Room 139, 999 Tahoe Boulevard,
Incline Village, NV 89451. LTFAC will address issues related to
federal
activities at Lake Tahoe.
Items on the agenda include an update on the Total Maximum Daily
Load
development, and the progress of the Tahoe Working Group on the
Southern
Nevada Public Land Management Act Round 9 Capital project nominations,
followed by a Public Comment period.
LTFAC consists of 20 members representing a broad array of
constituencies. The Secretary of Agriculture chartered the first LTFAC
in
July 1998 to advise the Federal Partnership on programs and projects
within
the Lake Tahoe Basin. LTFAC’s charter has been renewed every two
years
with the most recent renewal occurring in June 2006. All Lake Tahoe
Federal Advisory Committee meetings are open to the public. Interested
citizens are encouraged to attend. Issues may be brought to the
attention
of the committee during the open public comment period at the meeting,
or
by filing a written statement with the committee through Arla Hains,
USDA-Forest Service, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit, 35 College
Drive,
South Lake Tahoe, CA, 96150. For more information on the Lake Tahoe
Federal Advisory Committee, visit the Forest Service web site at
http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/ltbmu/.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
SLT city manager talks about redevelopment at the Y
On February 28, 2008 I attended a meeting of the Citizens Alliance. At this meeting held at Barton Hospital more good questions were asked by those present about the proposed new community improvement financing tool known as Redevelopment Project Area # 2. While responding to those present, I also wanted to share the information with you and your reading public. I truly appreciated the invitation to attend the Citizens Alliance Meeting and look forward to attending more meetings.
Eminent Domain – The RDA plan now being written by staff for presentation to the City Council later this year will not propose the power of eminent domain for the new Project Area. The question was asked if a future City Council decided it wants to amend the plan to include the power of eminent domain, will the Agency have to again justify that blight exists?
Answer – Yes, in order to amend a redevelopment plan to include the power of eminent domain, a future City Council will have to find that significant blight remains in the Project Area and that blight cannot be eliminated without the use of eminent domain. In addition, the redevelopment plan would have to be amended which is a long and expensive public process.
“No Eminent Domain” Affirmation – A suggestion was made that if the City Council is truly opposed to including eminent domain in a new redevelopment project area then it should clearly state its intentions now.
Answer – A resolution expressing the City Council’s intention to eliminate the RDA’s power of eminent domain in a new project area will be voted on at the City Council’s next meeting on March 18, 2008.
Project Area Committee (PAC) – A question was raised whether a Project Area Committee (PAC) is needed for the
proposed redevelopment project area.
Answer – A PAC is not needed for the new redevelopment project area plan because the Agency will not have the power of eminent domain to acquire residential properties. The RDA Agency would arguably need to form a PAC in connection with amending the plan in order to authorize eminent domain authority if a substantial number of low or moderate income persons resided in the project area and the amendment would grant eminent domain authority with respect to property on which any persons reside. The proposed plan could include a requirement to form a PAC in connection with any amendment to grant the Agency eminent domain authority.
Tax Increment Calculation – Does the calculation used by the City for the growth of tax increment over time count the 2%
Proposition 13 Allowable Annual maximum?
Answer - The tax increment for the Project Area will include the 2 percent inflation adjustment, plus value changes from ownership changes and new development. Prior to 1994 when AB 1290 was passed, taxing entities could elect to get tax increment from the 2 percent growth. This occurs in the existing Project Area. That was replaced by the statutory pass through payments that this Project Area, if approved, will need to pay.
Estimate of New Revenue to the RDA - How much new revenue is estimated to come to the City RDA if a new redevelopment project area is formed?
Answer - The RDA’s financial advisors are working on tax increment and other financial projections for the Preliminary Report. They are examining the estimated cost of public improvements and the amount of tax increment revenue to be received.
Plan Adoption – Under State law may the City Council place an ordinance adopting a redevelopment plan on the ballot to be confirmed by the voters?
Answer – State law establishes a statutory scheme for approving redevelopment plans. Legal counsel has confirmed that the Law does not appear to authorize the City Council to place an ordinance adopting a redevelopment plan on the ballot to be confirmed by the voters. However, any such ordinance adopted by the City Council is subject to referendum.
David M. Jinkens
Executive Director
South Tahoe Redevelopment Agency
Eminent Domain – The RDA plan now being written by staff for presentation to the City Council later this year will not propose the power of eminent domain for the new Project Area. The question was asked if a future City Council decided it wants to amend the plan to include the power of eminent domain, will the Agency have to again justify that blight exists?
Answer – Yes, in order to amend a redevelopment plan to include the power of eminent domain, a future City Council will have to find that significant blight remains in the Project Area and that blight cannot be eliminated without the use of eminent domain. In addition, the redevelopment plan would have to be amended which is a long and expensive public process.
“No Eminent Domain” Affirmation – A suggestion was made that if the City Council is truly opposed to including eminent domain in a new redevelopment project area then it should clearly state its intentions now.
Answer – A resolution expressing the City Council’s intention to eliminate the RDA’s power of eminent domain in a new project area will be voted on at the City Council’s next meeting on March 18, 2008.
Project Area Committee (PAC) – A question was raised whether a Project Area Committee (PAC) is needed for the
proposed redevelopment project area.
Answer – A PAC is not needed for the new redevelopment project area plan because the Agency will not have the power of eminent domain to acquire residential properties. The RDA Agency would arguably need to form a PAC in connection with amending the plan in order to authorize eminent domain authority if a substantial number of low or moderate income persons resided in the project area and the amendment would grant eminent domain authority with respect to property on which any persons reside. The proposed plan could include a requirement to form a PAC in connection with any amendment to grant the Agency eminent domain authority.
Tax Increment Calculation – Does the calculation used by the City for the growth of tax increment over time count the 2%
Proposition 13 Allowable Annual maximum?
Answer - The tax increment for the Project Area will include the 2 percent inflation adjustment, plus value changes from ownership changes and new development. Prior to 1994 when AB 1290 was passed, taxing entities could elect to get tax increment from the 2 percent growth. This occurs in the existing Project Area. That was replaced by the statutory pass through payments that this Project Area, if approved, will need to pay.
Estimate of New Revenue to the RDA - How much new revenue is estimated to come to the City RDA if a new redevelopment project area is formed?
Answer - The RDA’s financial advisors are working on tax increment and other financial projections for the Preliminary Report. They are examining the estimated cost of public improvements and the amount of tax increment revenue to be received.
Plan Adoption – Under State law may the City Council place an ordinance adopting a redevelopment plan on the ballot to be confirmed by the voters?
Answer – State law establishes a statutory scheme for approving redevelopment plans. Legal counsel has confirmed that the Law does not appear to authorize the City Council to place an ordinance adopting a redevelopment plan on the ballot to be confirmed by the voters. However, any such ordinance adopted by the City Council is subject to referendum.
David M. Jinkens
Executive Director
South Tahoe Redevelopment Agency
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)