Letter: Parking revenue not adding up
To the community,
Another July 4 is history. And on Venice East the kiosks are in and paid parking is a reality. The fee for all-day is $10, but on the Fourth and four other holidays, the fee is doubled to $20.
As of July 9, the city had not striped the street for paid parking. So who knows how many spaces there will be? On the Fourth I rode my bike to the Keys Marina. There were a good many cars parked on Venice East. I guessed perhaps a hundred. I could have counted, but why count when I could guess using the city’s too often used method for creating a project.
Bill Crawford
Using the number 100 x $20, the city will bring in $2,000 on July 4. Projecting that number for five holidays on Venice East the sum will be $10,000 a year. In five years the sum will be $50,000. That’s the gross. After expenses, who knows what the net will be.
Yes, there will be midweek parking revenue. I have lived near the Keyes Marina 41 years and midweek parking is rarely packed, so it won’t be a gold mine.
I don’t know how may paid parking spaces the city will finally have. So projecting revenue created by paid parking is impossible. But I do know having lived here 46 years that locals are shy about paying to park. The best lesson on that is the city’s parking garage. City dwellers’ use it sparse. And the garage is in default.
Enough said.
Bill Crawford, South Lake Tahoe
Hmmmmmmmm
Parking revenues for the city over 5 yrs: $50K
P Off 3 visitors a year with tickets, lose $5000 per year per visitor by not returning, by 5 years: community loses $75K in revenue that would recycle privately throughout the economy.
This is NOT good decision making, however, I bet more than 3 visitors a year will make the decision to go elsewhere.
On the flipside, Keys Marina gets a big bonus because now, with the city’s help, they can charge daily for parking! Way to line a crumb’s pockets, City of SLT
Reno is taking out their malfunctioning kiosks. This was on the news last night.
The kiosks weren’t working on the 4th of July at Lakeside until later in the morning (setting up people for tickets, hmmm?).
New meter maid mobile. New Full Time positionS. New parking enforcement carS. More hmmm?
The didn’t start the pay for parking program at their own area, Lakeview Commons for the 4th.
It’s no different than the paid parking for Sno-Parks in the mountain passes ……….. It’s truly “double taxation” when taxpayers are charged fees to use state or federal property they already pay taxes on to maintain ! This City parking is no different.
In escense – we already own that property as taxpayers, and we literally pay government employees to sit around and dream up new ways to milk us outta more money for their salaries and pensions……….
The employees at Ski Run Marina used to park On Paradise Avenue.
Since the Kiosks have gone in, no one parks there. Instead they park in the neighborhood streets and walk a bit more.
I doubt that the small revenue the city receives warrants the nuisance that it causes the over 300 locals who work at the Ski Run Marina.
I imagine the city will study the revenues and reverse the decision to place kiosks in certain parts of the city. I certainly hope so.
Maybe the city can start collecting the TOT on vacation rentals. They allow possibly millions of tax dollars to remain with the vacation rental owners because of a non-system to insure compliance. Malfeasance of the first order or business as usual, you tell me. Is this corruption or just gross stupidity? Not to mention the disruption and annoyances created by vacationers having a good time, usually with alcohol, as they disturb the peace and tranquility of residential neighborhoods.
We go to the Fresh Catch for lunch and never been charged
Are we talking about the same parking lot ?
someday the Locals will figure out that Hal and the team did this to Ruin the Town
John A has it right, it is double taxation on property we already own. I have heard many locals recently saying they were not going to Lakeview Beach because of the pay for parking.
Kinda feels like the Lakeview project got done, looks great, is a success, then because the city had NO PLAN FOR A MAINTENANCE FUND we suddenly feel the city rifling through our pockets again.
Letdown.
Whattheheck, the owners of vacation homes do not pay the tot themselves rather the renters pay the tax on top of the nightly rent. The owners are just lazy and don’t want to go thru the paper work
I read the blogs on Lake Tahoe News and it seems that there are an awful lot of people who live here that don’t like very much about SLT. I often wonder why someone would continue to live in a place that makes them so unhappy and for which they have such venomous criticism. SLT isn’t perfect, and while Tahoe is an incredibly beautiful place it’s not the easiest place to live with our harsh winters and our up and down economy due to the impacts of the national and international economies. Perhaps some people who have such disdain for this City should try living elsewhere where they can experience some happiness. What’s holding people here who are so unhappy about where they live?
And as usual Bill Crawford is offering up criticism to stir the pot, but he’s always lacked the initiative and imagination to offer up any solutions to anything, even while serving on the City Council. The only suggestions I’ve ever heard him make was to build a City Hall, but he never identified a way of paying for a City Hall, and to place boulders on Venice to prevent people from parking there. At least with parking meters people have the option of parking, that’s not the case with boulders. I suppose Crawford doesn’t suggest solutions out of fear of himself being criticized.
4mer: I’ve been reading these things since day one of this news site and while I have come to respect your opinion and usually agree with you, I feel like you’re just wrong on this whole parking issue. If there were a lack places to park it would make sense to charge. Since this whole paid parking thing is essentially just making people choose to park farther away from their destinations I feel like its destined to fail.
Me, well I already took your advice and left town a month ago. I reluctantly left, as I love Tahoe, but needed a place with more opportunity for my young family. Since I’ve been gone I’ve had days where I miss South Lake, but more days where I’m glad I got outta there, i walk through the woods here and dont see piles of other people’s trash that I’m compelled to pick up, why, because people here for the most part seem to actually respect their surroundings, whereas there are so many in Tahoe who take it for granted. I now live in a smallish city (90k pop) with shopping districts, residential districts, an expanding economy, people who take pride in where they live. I don’t have a rotating cast of neighbors who have nothing invested in the neighborhood in which they live.
The point being, I would have stayed in Tahoe if I thought it was going in the right direction. But since it seems to be becoming more and more of a pain in the arse to live there, almost impossible to own your home as a seasonal employee, and so volatile of an enconomy, it was time to go. So ask yourself, if it is such a pain to live there, and people like me who do love the place are no longer willing to put up with it (i.e. more restrictions, less economic opportunity, etc..) what kind of people will replace me?
On the parking issue, there are parking meters in certain areas of town here, but they’re reasonably priced, with reasonable enforcement hours and no enforcement on the weekends. Something that y’all may want to consider.
Not really sure where this rant was going, but as it relates to your comments, if all the people who love it but are sick and tired of the hassle of living there end up leaving you’ll end up with not much of a town. So I see this parking issue as something of another nail in the coffin of South Lake, but I do truly hope I’m wrong.
4-mer, your (and many others’) criticism of Bill Crawford for not offering solutions is misplaced, I think.
Many of us believe that it is not up to government to insert its nose in every little issue. There was no parking problem to begin with. And as was pointed out above, we already pay for our streets. The city CREATED a problem where none existed. Very common for governments to do that. Some of us wish that they would just go away and leave us alone.
Bill Good going!! Someone has to stir the pot.
Dogula- I agree the city created a parking problem where none existed. I live in a now “permitted area”. There used to be no cars parked on the street unless someone was visiting. Now, I and many of my neighbors park our cars on the street all day, every day to open up the space on our driveway for visitors. I know the city will say they gave us “guest permits”. What a pain. You come to my door for a visit and I have to go find the permit, give it to you so you can go back to your car and hang it on your rear view mirror, then come back to the house to see me. When you leave you have to go back to your car, get the permit, return it to my house, then walk back to your car to drive away.
None of the city council, city manager, city employees have imposed this situation on themselves.
Dude:
Thank you for your well thought out and polite response to my comments (and yours was not a rant). I am so sorry that you needed to leave Tahoe as I think your understanding of the local dynamics and your calm makes you the kind of person this town needs. I do worry about who will replace individuals such as you who’ve been displaced for all the reasons you listed. Since there is finite land in Tahoe I think that SLT which is possibly the most affordable of the west, north and east shores will eventually be bought up by people of some means who’ll want to have their little piece of paradise, further displacing workers who can’t make it on minimum wage jobs which are what is most abundant here. I’ve said for a long time that while this town needs more employment opportunities we don’t need more minimum wage jobs but rather industries that can pay a living wage, and as long as the only economic focus and job growth is on tourism that won’t change.
I have a different perspective on paid parking since I lived for so many years in an area that started out with free parking and looked a lot like Tahoe, but then it became commonplace to pay to park and those monies were used to improve streets, install lighting and sidewalks, address runoff, and do landscaping. And eventually there were adequate funds to construct all those amenities and to properly maintain them, and they looked really nice. In my 70-years of life the one thing I’ve seen is that nothing is free, and if you want something to look nice you have to pay for it and then pay to take care of it. I recognize that many people completely disagree with me on paid parking but I personally don’t have a problem paying my fair share if I want to park where there is a meter, otherwise it costs me nothing.
Also, I don’t think the reason the City implemented a parking plan was out of a lack of parking but flat out to make money so they can eventually implement some improvements. I also don’t have a problem with that.
Personally, I will avoid any parking area that requires filling out a form or purchasing a ticket. I will, however, buy an annual parking pass because it offers the convenience of not having to bring my credit card or cash. Parking kiosks discourage me from going to a specific place. I’ve already changed my plans several times due to the new parking fees at East Cove….deciding to go somewhere else instead. But, again, I would purchase an annual pass. Maybe the city should offer a combined annual all kiosks & garage parking pass.
I’m pretty sure that if I inherited beachfront property on Lake Tahoe I wouldn’t constantly whine about where I park all my vehicles.
I guess if you disagree with U.S. Govt., you should leave the U.S?
No solution is required for this mess other than to junk it!! It was stupid to start, and it doesn’t take a genius, or some overpaid consultant!, to see the solution is simply to remove those kiosks and ship ’em back to Newport Beach!
South Lake Tahoe is the paradise that you make it.
Want to focus on the problems? go for it-
All of my friends here are professionals who live in and care about this town, raising amazing kids and volunteering their time for worthwhile pursuits. These people are making it work and we have a fabulous time I might add.
I walk around MY woods and find pristine forest and amazing vistas, surrounded by people who are considerate and passionate about our environment. No trash, no problems, just athletes whirring by on another days’ pursuit.
I showed up years ago with about $32 to my name and a leaky 2 wheel drive truck. Now I have a healthy happy family, solid career, own 5 houses and 2 lots and the sky is the limit.
I love this place, it’s in my blood. Dude, Don’t get too carried away about all this pessimism on this forum. I’m glad you feel you made the right decision for you and your family but South Shore is like the 10 other towns I’ve lived in; they are what you make them and you have to pay to play.
4-mer-usmc is typically right and I find his commentary pretty much dead-on, so stick around 4-mer, you make this town better as well.
I enjoyed walking Cove East for photography and instant access to the lake and a short walk.
But with everyone walking their dogs – and letting them off leashes to chase the wildlife, and stepping through all the dog poop – it became a bummer.
Now with the parking meters – I’m done going there……… but if they’re gonna charge people to access Cove East – the city should enforce dogs on leashes and fine them for not, and the fees should pay for weekly doggie poop clean-up. JMO
4mer: thanks for your comments. I understand that paid parking can be instituted effectively and eventually help improve an area. It is way too early to tell if that will be the case. From what I read here and hear from friends who still live there it just seems this paid parking program has some serious flaws.
Atomic: perha
4mer: thanks for your comments. I understand that paid parking can be instituted effectively and eventually help improve an area. It is way too early to tell if that will be the case. From what I read here and hear from friends who still live there it just seems this paid parking program has some serious flaws.
Atomic: perhaps I was being a little dramatic with some of my comments, I too continued to find amazing vistas and people that cared, but I also lived in Sierra Tract and eventually became disgusted with what I would see on my daily walks into the forest behind that neighborhood, loose trash, TONS of broken glass, outdated signs from previous water projects that should have been taken down a while ago, a couple of makeshift shelters, an old burned out car frame, etc…
You’re right, every place is what you make of it, and the fact that I couldn’t find good employment is more my fault than anyone else’s, although the type of economy has something to do with it. I showed up there footloose and fancy free, with a degree, but not caring if I made a good living or not, and then six years later I found myself working the same restaurant jobs for a couple months here and there and hoping, like everyone else, that each season wouldn’t be the one that broke me. I did happen to land what I thought would be a steady management position, right around the time my first child was born. I thought “here we go, now we can be a little more secure,” only to see that business close due to poor financial planning on the part of ownership. When that happened I tried to find something, anything that would at least give me the dignity of work, but wasn’t even given a call back for jobs at Heavenly, maybe I was ‘overqualified’, I don’t know why I couldn’t get those jobs, but I do know I was willing to take a step back in order to stay there. Anyways, I tried to make it work and wish I could have, but you’ve got to play the cards you were dealt and as a poker player I know a lot of times the best move is to fold, so I did.
I would have loved to be a ‘professional’ in Tahoe, but I’m not really sure what that means. You a lawyer? Real estate agent? Govt. employee? Doctor? Great!! I’m not qualified for those things. Maybe one day I can go back to school.
Anyways, as I said before I do love it there and wish we could have stayed, but it just wasn’t meant to be I guess.
I too think it a little premature to project income and losses for parking (ala Crawford)- but would be interested in seeing any kind of projection the City had when they picked locations for the ‘meters’, for example: what they cost, how much to install, what projections the meter people had to offer (if any), what each neighborhood location was supposed to draw in the form of revenue to offset those costs, etc.
It looks to me at the moment very arbitrary, the Keys (as it’s popular), the Lakeview Commons (now that we’ve made it popular, but only a couple of days/week), upper Ski Run (as that’s an ‘overflow’ on busy ski weekends) – what was the rationale for placing them (?) . . . Eli mentions the people who park in the lot on Ski Run, but doesn’t mention those who try to follow that edict, but get ticketed anyway, if their actual use causes an overflow onto or near Ski Run Blvd (@ 55.00 per) – I’ll go back to the word arbitrary, as it seems that parking/parking management are not in synch as to any particular policy – this in itself will be very damaging as the company administrating the tickets is in So Cal, meaning that they can claim fees & fines against auto registration to make sure they get their money, making for a real mess.
Who decides that it be $ 55.00 – S.F. just went to $ 73.00 (the highest in the nation, a most dubious distinction !) – do they decide amounts based on the same demographics the Parks System uses to determine how much to charge for entry – if so, where do they get these people ?
Many questions not answered, just ‘catch-as-catch-can’ – to the detriment of creating any civic pride. . .for example, we know what the parking garage cost, how much behind we are, now floating an extension – were we also to make enough off of the metered areas to buy-down that debt as well ?
If so, Bill is correct in implying that the ‘overhead’ never mentioned may “shoot that in the foot” as well. . .
Dude:
I stated the following in my above posted comment:
“I’ve said for a long time that while this town needs more employment opportunities we don’t need more minimum wage jobs but rather industries that can pay a living wage, and as long as the only economic focus and job growth is on tourism that won’t change.”
Your remarks of an educated, obviously articulate person wanting to find employment making a living wage but there being nearly nothing available in SLT bears proof to my above quote. Lots of minimum wage jobs this town’s got; jobs paying a decent wage with any type of future are few and far between.
What I find the most frustrating about the current City Council is their 100% focus on increasing tourism through their great savior “Tourism Master Plan” for which 99% of jobs created will just be more minimum wage jobs, and there’s no discussion on creating better employment opportunities for the residents in this community. Is this what these City leaders want for the residents of SLT? An economic driver wholly dependent on the good graces of people willing to come here and leave behind a few bucks, with little if any opportunity for someone to find decent employment that enables them to buy a house and raise their family in SLT? The only organization that seems to be looking at the big picture of what it will take to make this town more marketable for diversified business/employment is the Tahoe Prosperity Center, and when they’ve appeared in front of the City Council they’ve been treated like an unwelcome stepchild. Truthfully, I believe that if any one of the City Council Members applied for a job to run a corporation with a budget the size of the City’s they’d never be hired based on their qualifications. Getting elected to a seat on the City Council doesn’t require any real qualifications; all it takes is convincing people to vote for you.
Wishing you the best for great success and happiness in your future Dude.
Reloman, the renter pays the TOT tax to the owner or the agent. The owner then pays the city the TOT. Do you see the possibility of the owner, let’s say, forgetting to pay the tax? As I said the city has lost millions of dollars in TOT taxes over the years.
Solo businesses tend to have sloppy books and I am being charitable.
Alot of questions have not been answered. Does the city get to keep 100% of meter revenue? What % of tickets does the city get? What does this whole program really cost? Three new full time positions, 2 new part time positions, new parking enforcement vehicles(insurance, fuel, maintenace), cost of kiosks and instalation. Not to mention staff to hand out permits. How long will we supplement this program 10 years like our parking garage? PS we did not have a parking problem but now we do!
Buck, Of course the city keeps 100% of the revenue. However, if a pro forma was done on this program and factored in the things you mentioned plus maintenance you would probably see an annual loss. But don’t forget the city’s original revenue forecast included roughly 3,000 annual parking tickets as a result of the meters and their associated violations.
The fact is that the city needs revenue just to pay the bills. 4-mer-usmc likes to point out that the parking program is to eventually implement improvements. There are no improvements associated specifically with this program. Nothing is being accrued. The city is forecast to again be a million or so in the red next year. Its just to pay the bills and not have to layoff more staff or cut salaries or benefits.
reza, I’m sure there is an upkeep or programing fee associated with the kiosks. It all costs and I sure hope the city council gets a full accounting of this program in the fall as was stated.
Garry Bowen— All the areas of paid parking which you’ve identified are city owned and supported recreational facilities. The comment made by Mr. Cole was the it costs the city a lot of money to maintain these beaches and the parking revenue will offset that.
What is wrong is the installation of paid parking at a recreational facility where the city bears no cost (i.e., Lakeside). It is privately owned, open to the public all year but a fee is charged only during the summer which helps defray the cost. All costs are paid by the non-profit company which owns it. Now, if you chose to visit the beach (summer or winter), you will have to pay to park or get a citation and all the money goes to the city. The non-profit company doesn’t receive any revenue from the city, even though some in this forum have claimed they are being paid. Not True.
Nobody that I know agrees completely with the paid parking plan in place in SLT but who really cares about the LPA millionaires that have used City property for their personal and so-called (non-profit) business free parking for years?… and their incessant whine? Cry me a river.
The parking area near Lakeside is City owned property and it’s not owned by Lakeside. With the TRPA’s RPU the City is supposed to assume some authority in ensuring that BMPs are installed, thus if people are going to be parking on the City’s property they will need to pave, do the BMPs, and stripe that lot. At some point in time that will be an expense to the City/taxpayers, but it will never be an expense to Lakeside. I do find some irony in Lakeside’s vocal criticism of the City’s charging to park on City owned property when Lakeside charges for entry to their beach. Apparently it’s OK for them to make money for what they provide but it’s not OK for the local government/taxpayers to make money for what they provide, and for what the City has been providing for free to Lakeside’s customers for years.
Yes folks, I have no problem with paid parking. So everyone go ahead and take all your pot shots, your low blows, strap on your jackboots, whatever it is you need to level at me and tell me how wrong I am because my opinion is different than yours. Heaven forbid that everyone isn’t in lockstep thinking (sarcasm intended).
4-mer-usmc—– we all are already paying for the streets through our taxes. Do you pay to park on the street in front of your property?
What would you say if the city installed a parking meter in front of your house after you had met your property BMPs and only had room to park one car on your lot, with no parking for guests?
Lakeside does charge during the summer for non-property owners (the public, both locals and tourists) to use the beach but their costs are higher because they allow the public access (insurance, garbage, bathrooms, security, etc.) year around. Would you rather they stop charging and only allow property owners and their guests as they used to? I wouldn’t. We need public access to the Lake close to the Tourist Core and should recognize that the tourists would have to go all the way to Ski Run in CA or Round Hill in NV if Lakeside closed it off like the Meadows and Edgewood and Tahoe Shores.
Whattheheck, I fully do understand how the tax is collected as I have to pay it every month. I do know that some people collected and don’t forward it on like what happened with the OLD Block and the city was out a couple of hundred thousand dollars just on the Block. Other owners do not even collect it at all. This I do know for a fact.
tahoeadvocate:
Like I said, I don’t have a problem with paid parking. If I want to park where there are meters then I’ll have to pay the fee; if I don’t want to pay a fee then I have the choice and free will to park elsewhere where there is no metered parking. Also, meters are not in front of every home in SLT, and residents in neighborhoods with meters nearby can get parking permits so they don’t have to pay to park in front of their house. And with regard to Lakeside needing to charge admittance to the beach to pay their costs, I would suggest that the City is doing the same thing to pay their costs, without imposing any property tax increases to do so.
I used to live in an area where meters were located in all the shopping areas but weren’t in front of residences, but it was illegal to park on the street overnight in neighborhoods or else you’d get ticketed. The purpose was that the street cleaners came around at night and cleaned up the debris left on the streets from the prior day. Amazingly that wasn’t a problem for people, and we actually had clean, well paved streets that didn’t have trash on them. It took some time for that City to collect enough revenue from their parking program to fix all the streets but eventually it was done, and they were well maintained, and we had storm drains for runoff that weren’t filled with trash and backing up since the streets were routinely cleaned.
Like I said, I’m willing to do my fair share toward generating the revenue to fix this City’s crumbling streets and installing storm drains to carry runoff for proper infiltration so that all that road junk doesn’t keep going into the Lake. Not everyone agrees with my position and that’s their prerogative.
4-Mer, that’s good that the cost of parking is immaterial to your budget. But there are a whole lot of working poor in this area that just had the beaches taken away from them. As the positive reasons for living here decline people move off the hill and the exodus continues. This is all connected 4-Mer.
Good point, John. Maybe that’s just part of the plan. Get rid of the rif raf that doesn’t have money to burn.
I see the biggest impact being Parents. (People with Kids) they are the ones who need to drive to and park near the beach. The beach being a good family activity that should cost NOTHING. The price of parking could cause them to stay away, or a ticket could affect what is in the refrigerator.
This is not poor people on public assistance just young families who get by to live in a great place to live and raise children.
I grew up in the Tahoe Basin, there are hundreds of fee’s and thousands of rules that did not exist when mom was raising me and my sister. I suspect we may have moved elsewhere if it had been then, as it is now.
And I was raised North Shore, We we taught at an early age that the South shore was Dirty and full of Bad people. (Smiley Face)
JohnA I’m with you. We already pay for the parking. In a reverse situation, we, our tax dollars, paid for new drainage and curbs and pavement at the Big Meadow Trailhead on hwy 89 near luther pass. And then they put up NO PARKING SIGNS ! What the… Who is responsible for this decision? Once again, our County Supervisor is missing in action, Norma, where are you? We need your help getting rid to those no parking signs!
If you want to talk about the real, big picture, interconnected problem in SLT it’s the lack of decent paying jobs in this community which pay a living wage so people can support themselves and their families and continue to live and work here. Just about anyone you’d ask why they left SLT says the same thing: I can’t make enough money to live there unless I work two or three jobs and then I have no time to spend with my family. The fact is, certain powers that be have been and remain too shortsighted to recognize that tourism creates mostly minimum wage jobs that don’t pay a decent wage and perpetuates poverty, or they already have their long-established businesses where they can manipulate artificially low wages and they don’t want any better paying jobs to come into this community and create competition for workers which would then require them to start paying more for their share of the worker bee pool.
Everyone talks about the company in southern California that’s going to collect the money for parking tickets. Why can’t we have a company in SLT that does that same thing for so many other cities in this State? Why can’t telephone and on-line computer tech support be in SLT instead of India? Why can’t call-in insurance support services be in SLT? And the list goes on. I can guarantee that those jobs would pay more than minimum wage, and having some competition for workers would create a more level playing field wage structure. The leaders in this community need to be proactive in making these types of things happen and not just sit back and talk about creating more minimum wage tourism related jobs, in essence throwing a bone to the little guys, and those bones never have much meat left on them.
The real problem is that the majority of people in this town can’t make a decent living; the solution is to create an environment where industries can come here and bring decent paying jobs. But as usual, some people with money and control keep the little guys scrambling for the crumbs that fall off their cake plate. Bottom line, if people could make a decent living in this town paid parking wouldn’t be such a big issue. I don’t understand why people aren’t angry and demanding that the leaders in this community do something to create an economic environment where they can actually make some folding money instead of nickels and dimes. Instead people continue to focus on the minutia rather than the big picture.
This is a vacation resort area 4mer. There is no industry here except the forest service, Heavenly and the casinos. Ski bums, second home owners and those running from the city come here to chill out and not take work seriously. If you want to live in the mountains and have a real job move to Denver.
The League to Enslave Lake Tahoe, TRPA, and the City of South Lake Tahoe have been chasing business away for many years. You’re just now noticing the confluence of events that have taken their toll on this area.
Government is not the solution to our problem, government IS the problem!
Everyone here keeps talking about bring industries that can pay a living wage, but I am wondering where we would be able to put these building to house the business complexes they would take up acres of land with over 80% coverage, I am pretty sure we have very little land that would fit this need. And if we did it would be years of lawsuits to get it built.
A.B.:
My husband and I moved to SLT almost 14-years ago and believe me we noticed the “confluence of events that have taken their toll on this area” a long time ago. When I attempted to find work where I’d been paid $30 an hour plus having good benefits and was told in SLT I would be paid $11 an hour with no benefits that circumstance was made crystal clear. I am a 5th generation Californian, born in Palo Alto and we moved to Tahoe to live in a manner similar to what I experienced when I grew up, before California became flooded with people moving here to enjoy and suck the life out of my State.
Bob:
You prove our point exactly. Why is it that SLT can only be a tourism economy? A more diversified industry would create better paying jobs and make the impacts of the national and international economies that completely sink tourism less volatile on our economy.
And as far as me moving to Denver, since I’m a 5th generation born Californian I suggest that I stay and all you latecomers move back to wherever it is you came from. My grandfather was one of those people who built the infrastructure throughout all of California’s mountainous regions that brought power to places like SLT long before there were any Casinos or anything else. My long dead relatives came across this country and helped settle California; my great-great grandfather, great grandfather, grandfather and father all camped in Tahoe when there was nothing and for most of that time it wasn’t even called Tahoe. I have no intention of leaving MY home.
Spouse of 4-mer-usmc
PS: And if you people don’t like what I’ve said you know where you can go. No wonder this town is failing.
4-Mer, you and I largely agree about how to create more and better jobs. But that misses the point. Entry level and even beginning professional positions are normal everywhere. The fact is the paid parking is a nearly perfectly regressive fee and it hits the lowest paid the hardest. Even as a beginning CPA with a young family I could not have afforded parking here. That’s about as well paying a starting job as there is, but I had daycare and diapers that were the priority.
John:
Seeing as my husband, the 4-mer-usmc (and way more diplomatic individual of the two of us) is at work right now I thought I’d respond to the hardships of young families. I agree that people start out at entry level positions with commensurate salaries and not at the top with top salaries, and that young people making the choice to have children need to make sacrifices for that choice. I also remember when I was a kid and my parents took us places where there was paid parking which they couldn’t afford that my Dad always dropped my Mom and us kids off at the entrance and then went and parked the car in the free parking locations and walked back and joined us. At the end of the day he’d walk back and get the car and then drive back and pick us all up. And when we were able, we just walked with my parents. My folks didn’t expect that the rules should be altered to accommodate their needs, but it was a different world then.
Spouse of 4-mer-usmc
The “confluence of events” that led to the demise of the middle class jobs here and throughout the country is the horrific failure of reaganomics and it’s hate the gubmint , hate all taxes whether reasonable or not, deregulate(esp.banks) and privatize everything scam for the rich.
The fact that people still repeat those stupid reagan quotes is a testament to the power of the 1%ers control of the media and overwhelming, willful ignorance.
It won’t be long until the working class won’t have to worry about parking their vehicle, they won’t be able to afford one.
BB~welcome to 2013. Reagan became President nearly 35 years ago, and he was NOT a ‘no tax’ guy. He spent quite freely. AND embraced the first Amnesty program. How’d all that work out for us?
But really, it’s time to stop blaming him for obama’s failures.
Things were going well with the trickle down until ’09 when that ni… uh, nincompoop Pres. Obama took office and ruined the economy? Is that your WorldNutDaily talking point? Ignoring the fact that 30+ years of supply-side economics has resulted in the massive transfer of wealth from the bottom and middle to the top will not make it go away.
30+ years of supply-side economics?
You’re deluded and uneducated.
We haven’t had an actual free market system since the early part of the 20th century. You can start the decline with Wilson and then get deep into the tank with FDR. Republicans have been nearly as bad as Democrats, it’s all about politicians maintining their own power after all. But constantly bashing the people who create real wealth and jobs is foolish.
Never forget that anything the government gives to one person, it first had to take from someone else.
Dogula:
“Never forget that anything the government gives to one person, it first had to take from someone else.”
Well, since I never had any children and thus never had offspring that utilized the California school system I suppose that line of reasoning would lead me to believe that I should never have had to pay any school taxes since the use of my money was going to someone else. Interesting concept.
Spouse of 4-mer-usmc
I have been following this topic with great interest for a while and I agree with a lot of points made on “both” sides of the issue. Yet, I have to agree with those who claim it will become a financial albatross around the cities neck. According to data I have researched on the internet, an average “meter enforcement worker” makes $36K a year. Times 3…. Approximately $110K. Part time? For arguments sake half that. Add another $36K for 2 = $146K for salaries. Now how about that city benefit package? Heath care, 401, sick and vacation pay? How about workmams comp insurance, general liability insurance, average cost of buying enforcement vehicles per year over their lifespan, maintenance of those same vehicles.
How about the cost of the extra plowing in the winter to make sure the spaces are always accessible for raising revenue? Shoveling out the kiosks? Even without all the data for questions raised I believe it is fair to extrapolate all of this into a potential overhead of $200 to $250K per year to maintain.
Is it going to support itself or are we going to be using our tax dollars to maintain losing investment?
Remember all the money collected at Lakeview Commons can only be used to maintain Lakeview Commons because it was a federal waterways project.
The city bought the meters over a year before they had a public meeting about them. Joanne Conner tells people they can park in the Keys Village center and block those businesses if they don’t want to pay to park at a meter on Venice. She also said they put meters on Venice because boat trailers were breaking down the curbs and they needed a way to maintain the curbs.
I feel like the bulk of our travel business comes from the Bay Area. These folks are likely far more savvy at finding parking then we could ever aspire to be. I Doubt that they are naive enough to pay $20/day when they can drive around a bit and get some free park. Also this is their opportunity to come out to “the country” and escape the high parking fees and nuisances of the city, we are taking that experience away. My $.02