Live music coming to South Tahoe beach area
The Live at Lakeview Summer Music Series has released the lineup for the summer concert series that starts June 20.
Now in its second year, changes include a larger stage, larger beer garden, and a much larger free bike valet.
Vehicle parking is limited. Off-site parking is available at the South Lake Tahoe Recreation Center, 1601 Rufus Allen Blvd.
The bands are:
• June 20 – Jelly Bread with special guests 4 Piece Puzzle (funk and soul)
• June 27 – American Jubilee Feat Brian Lesh and special guests Tracorum
(Americana)
• July 11 – Naive Melodies (live talking heads)
• July 18 – Achilles Wheel with special guests Lonesome Locomotive (rock, world beat, and blues)
• July 25 – Vokab Kompany (electronic funk)
• Aug. 1 – Polyrythmics with special guest Holy Ghost Tent Revival (world)
• Aug. 8 – 40 Watt Hype (Latin fusion)
• Aug. 15 – The Congress with special guests The Weekenders (rock)
• Aug. 22 – Lavish Green Tahoe Family Reunion with special guest Screaming Meg (South Shore)
• Aug. 29 – Arden Park Roots with special guests Island of Black & White (reggae)
More information can be found online.
Don’t forget you’ll have to pay to park.
tahoeadvocate:
Off-site parking available at the South Lake Tahoe Recreation Center on Rufus Allen is free. The paid parking will be in the vicinity of Lakeview Commons for people who prefer not to walk too far. As always, parking for the disabled is free.
Since you’ve amply succeeded in making everyone acutely aware of your opposition to paid parking why don’t you give it a rest and just try to enjoy the summer.
4mer-usmc– Obviously you don’t have to live with permits for your friends in front of your home or pay to park at your own property when you go to your beach.
It’s kind of hard to enjoy the summer when you’re always worried about parking citations at your own property.
I am glad to hear that I have made people aware of my opposition if only the other 87% of the people who voted against paid parking in the newspaper poll would keep up the pressure on the city council we might get it reversed and start welcoming tourists which we need desperately.
tahoeadvocate,
Enjoy the music you will hear instead of being at Lakeview Commons!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVFBK9GhS5Q
I hope it does well.
question how easy is it to get from State Line to Lake view Commons and back when the events occur.
MTT, piece of cake whether in a car or a bike (unless intoxicated). Thursday nights not overtly busy. But as said before, your best bet is just to park at the SLT Rec center off of Rufus Allen Blvd and walk the couple blocks to the beach.
Alright South Shore, let’s keep that amazing good vibe that accompanied every Thursday night Live At Lakeview last summer! Kudos to the city for working to make this happen again.
See ya all there!
tahoeadvocate, thanks for pointing out how the City always does its best to hinder, if not ruin, a good thing!! (Amazing how some can try to justify it!)
And hopefully, with the added stuff, like the expanded beer garden, those profiting from the concerts can pay for its clean up! (Thus, not shamelessly relying on volunteers, aka free labor!)
Parker:
“tahoeadvocate, thanks for pointing out how the City always does its best to hinder, if not ruin, a good thing!! (Amazing how some can try to justify it!)”
I think that the City sponsoring these concerts so they could be free for you and others to attend was a pretty good thing they did for the public. I suppose had they not agreed to do that and just charged On-Course Events for the use of the Lakeview Commons venue like they’re going to do with other events there they wouldn’t need to make up that money with paid parking so they can pay to maintain and improve that venue per the state of California’s requirements since it was the State that paid to construct Lakeview Commons through CTC grants.
There’s a lot of people in this town who think life’s a date and that the City—aka the other taxpayers, are just supposed to pick up the tab for them.
The state paid for it? Hal Cole sure tried to take credit for it last election.
But anyway, as said, those profiting and paying rent, the vendors, should be handling the maintenance! If there’s not enough rent to cover it, then the City really screwed up when they didn’t grant the concessions to the highest bidders. And I know they didn’t first hand! Some of Stan Scherer’s shenanigans that the City still chooses not to rectify!
And anyway, 4-mer, as we all know, you conceded previously, paid parking isn’t going to anything specific! It’s a money grab to cover dumb past City decisions!
The concerts are a good community addition! It’s unfortunate that the City is choosing to mess with it in this way!
Parker:
Have you ever considered watching a City Council meeting or reading a staff report? It’s amazing how much accurate information someone can glean from doing so. But then it’s so much easier and less time consuming to just repeat what one hears than take the needed effort to become informed.
4-mer, if you’re going to comment on my posts, you should accurately and clearly read them! I’ve gone to Council meetings, I’ve spoken at Council Meetings, and I regularly watch Council proceedings!!! I do have a full-time job, so I can’t be there every minute. And the Council is very inconsiderate by amongst other things, putting things off when you show up, or making a decision one time, and then reversing itself at a later meeting. So, I became discouraged, but still do what I can.
For instance, tried to find the previously debated consultant’s report that wasn’t online and the City wouldn’t furnish (and that you couldn’t come up with either!). Tried to get the justification for why the City didn’t go with the highest bidders with the Commons. And just got some vague, “It was a committee decision.” A committee that the fired Stan Scherer headed.
But then try not to be all negative and see the popularity of the Commons! Yet then have to see our City start to mess that up!
Parker:
“For instance, tried to find the previously debated consultant’s report that wasn’t online and the City wouldn’t furnish (and that you couldn’t come up with either!). Tried to get the justification for why the City didn’t go with the highest bidders with the Commons. And just got some vague, “It was a committee decision.” A committee that the fired Stan Scherer headed.”
What consultant’s report are you talking about? And what highest bidder with the Commons are you talking about? Some clarity would be helpful.
We will all soon see if paid parking will have any unattended consequences. I bet there will be many including problems at Lakeview Commons. Take a good project and event for the city and then charge $10.00 to park at a free concert.
I have a bad feeling about the paid parking. I need to go to the beach one last time before the meters are installed.
The resentment this will cause toward the city employees current and retired will turn into cries to file BK.
Gee 4-mer, You sound just like the City staff when I asked for the report, “What Report?”. You know, the one you said justified 30% raises, and thus corresponding pension increases that we have to pay for?!
And what concessions are down there?
Parker, Maybe the City staff personnel you were demanding various Commons related reports from weren’t being inconsiderate, maybe they thought you were just ignorant of how municipal contracts are awarded. Here’s a clue, the highest bidder is almost always eliminated because they are too expensive. duh.
Parker:
If you’re trying to reference a staff report (not a consultant’s report) that was presented about three years ago, that was already explained to you. But, one more time: the City identified certain management positions that were eliminated (100% of those salaries were gone because the individuals were terminated) and the remaining managers were given the added responsibility of managing a second department (now that person was managing two departments instead of one). The salary increase to those remaining managers was because their management responsibilities had doubled.
So, there was 100% salary being paid to a person; that person got terminated; now nothing is being paid to that person which is a 100% saving. The job of the guy who got terminated was given to someone else who already had their own job, so now that person was working at two jobs instead of one job. For that they got paid an extra 30% and the savings to the City was 70% since that amount wasn’t being paid to either the first guy who got terminated or the second guy who took on the first guy’s job along with their own. If you cannot or choose not to not understand a standard business concept and simple arithmetic then nothing more can be said.
Gee Parker, maybe the reason nobody knows what report you’re talking about is because you don’t know what it is. Or maybe you’re just incapable of articulating what it is you want. But then again your thought processes are so far flung they couldn’t be followed with a tracking device.
So in other words you can’t come up with it!!! It was a scam! Just like how the City is supposedly running so lean now, even though payroll is up from when the economy tanked in ’08!
All your circular talk doesn’t change those facts, and doesn’t change the fact that paid parking is a desperate attempt by the City to cover its spending problem! It was another blogger who pointed out our City has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. And thus, we should junk stupid ideas like this paid parking plan!
And Bijou Bill, so the City staff plays favorites with the taxpayers? And the highest bidder would be the most expensive? No, the highest bidder would generate the most money for our City’s coffers!
Parker:
The report to which you’re referring was a staff report that was contained in an agenda packet at a City Council meeting. Is that clear enough for you to understand? Why don’t you take some initiative to look something up instead of sticking to shooting off the hip comments? Judging by what you’ve said to me and your following post to Bijou Bill, you obviously possess no understanding of how business, bid awards, and accounting function. Its people like you who are taking this town down the sh***er. With all due respect, keep your day job.
The 33% increase to the City’s upper managament: department heads and managers happened about 5 years ago. The increases were deemed necessary by a comp and class study (yep, another out of area paid consultant) to be able to attract ‘top contenders’ to compete with ‘comparable’ cities.
Because of these added costs, furloughs started: the first year had two per month; and the second year had three per month.
Along with the furloughs, frontline FT and PT staff hours were decreased. Golden hands shakes were offered to some.
A year and a half to two years ago, the city implemented layoffs, forced retirements, and not filling any empty positions to ‘balance’ budget constraints.
They have increased some current salaries (to ‘compensate’ for workloads), increased PT hours and are now adding 3 FT and more PT positions to cover the metered parking areas.
I am against all metered parking anywhere.
Hope the concerts and SUP races are successes this summer.
To the city leaders: live within your means (and that could mean going back to basics: PD, FD, snowremoval); enforce TOT collections and parking fines during snow conditions, add a small surcharge to lift tickets and gondola rides; and, focus on our residents’ and visitors’ experiences by not dinging us every place we go with excessive signs and fees.
Parker, I offered you a clue and you rejected it. I guess you will just have to continue on without one.
Noodle: (or is it Brad)
Thank you for the reminder about the Comp and Class Study. I would add that this was initiated in February 2005, it was requisitioned by then City Manager David Jinkens, and it included a job analysis of all City employee positions and not just upper management department heads and managers. I never reviewed the results of that Study and don’t recall who was sitting on the City Council at that time who was responsible for approving whatever the recommended increases were and to which positions.
2005 – When the economy was humming along, and the contracts with the employee Associations/Unions were extremely generous. Then the recession came and now the City and taxpayers are left to address the decisions of that former City Manager and his predecessors and that City Council and their predecessor Councils. The majority culprit in the retiree pension debacle is CalPERS: CalPERS in the early 2000’s was saying that they were so flush with money for retiree pensions that no entity would really need to pay anymore into the pension program, then they (CalPERS) due to their investment decisions lost about half their money in the recent recession. By law all entities must make their portion of their CalPERS retiree benefits whole thus requiring them to pay much more into the system now.
For what it’s worth, SLT isn’t alone in this circumstance: every jurisdiction at every level of government from local, to state, to federal is now grappling with these same retiree pension and healthcare liability cost problems. It’s a big part of the reason that there have been so many bankruptcies, because those government entities realized that they would never have the money to pay those long-term benefit liabilities.
FYI, Personal attacks conveys a lack of one’s own conviction!! You can’t disprove what I say, you know I”m
right, so you engage in personal attacks! Yet I’ll say this one last time!!:
The study that justified such an absurd pay increase, and thus also a significant pension liability increase, and thus a reason we’re in a such a financial hole and look to do such dumb things like paid parking was a scam of the highest order!! Gee Dave Jinkens commissions a study, and voila’ he gets a huge pay increase, and so do all his appointees!!
The Council brought it up and approved it one meeting, w/o EVER notifying the public they were going to discuss such an absurd increase!! And it was passed shortly after the City claimed it was broke (heard that before?) and scared the Public into passing a sales tax increase! History can sure repeat itself!!
The City Mgr., I will give credit to, though! In return, to show his gratitude, he shamelessly acted like certain Council Members’ crony for the rest of his time.
I asked for a copy of the study at the time, and just like w/ you 4-mer, I got, “What study? Don’t know what you’re talking about?” I was told to look online. Wasn’t there!
When we started this debate about paid parking, 4-mer, YOU cited it! With a previous story, you said it justified the pay/pension increase that has us trying to do such silly things like paid parking! Hence, I’ll say it one last time, Where’s the study? They wouldn’t furnish it to me! And now you talk in circles about it. In other words, it was a scam!!!
Parker:
In the words of Bijou Bill:
“I offered you a clue and you rejected it. I guess you will just have to continue on without one.”
Sending my best wishes to you for much success in your life and in your business endeavors. Enjoy the summer.
Don’t worry 4-mer. He’s one of those people who becomes further entrenched in being wrong when confronted.
Ask him ‘how many weathers make a climate?’.
We shouldn’t have to do others peoples homework.
Ahhh, personal/inaccurate attacks illustrating how invalid and intellectually bankrupt their arguments truly are!!!
Aaaaaand that proves the point.
Ride a bike to a great music gig, thanks SLT for the summer music.