Judge rules on wording of Measure N ballot statements after Writ of Mandate filed

SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, Calif. - The El Dorado Superior Court Judge who heard the Writ of Mandate filed by former South Lake Tahoe Mayor and Councilmember Tom Davis has ruled in favor of Davis's complaint after a settlement agreement. He had said the word "only" should not be used on the ballot statements of those behind Measure N, and Judge Leanne Mayberry agreed.

As the El Dorado County Department of Elections prepares the Official Voter Information Guide for the election, they will include statements from the official supporters of Measure N and the official opposition and rebuttals. They needed a quick decision by the court so the department would have time to print the materials. The Judge heard from both sides in court on August 5. She said at that time she was learning to rule against the word "only," which is what the outcome eventually was when her ruling was completed on August 12.

Davis filed the Writ of Mandate after reading the statements made by the proponents of Measure N, the divisive vacancy tax proposed for homes not used at least 182 days per year. He said the statements were false and misleading by using the word "only."

The Writ said Amelia Richmond, Nick Speal, C.T. Row, Kira Richardson, and Alicia Halpern submitted a ballot argument in favor of Measure N for the November 5 election. In their argument, they stated, "YES on N: Can ONLY be spent on Housing, Roads, and Transit."

In a rebuttal to the argument against Measure N, Seth Howard, Dorothy Dean, Sierra Riker, Angelique Carl, and John Ruiz stated, “Funds can ONLY be
spent on housing, roads, and transit for the community – not 2nd homes.”

Judge Mayberry said the Measure N proponents had to change their Argument in Favor of Measure N and their Rebuttal to the Argument Against Measure N. According to the Elections Code, such an order can only be issued if the material in question is false, misleading, or inconsistent with the requirements of the law.

Through their attorneys, an agreement was decided upon that will have the verbiage in the voter guide read as:

“Yes on N: Can be spent on HOUSING, ROADS, TRANSIT & NECESSARY ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS."

The Rebuttal to the Argument Against Measure N must now read:

“Funds can be spent on housing, roads, and transit for the community, and necessary administrative costs – not 2nd homes.”

"WHEREAS, the Parties jointly assert that the amended language in the Argument in Favor of Measure N and the Rebuttal to the Argument Against Measure N is truthful, not misleading, and fully complies with the law," stated the Judge's opinion.

“When it’s information in the Official Voter Information Guide, it’s held to a higher standard,” said Davis. “The Measure N folks have been playing fast and loose with the truth from day one, but when they lied in the Voter Information Guide, I couldn’t let it stand.”

"Tom Davis and I have stood in front of my house talking about our classic Cadillacs. Tom could’ve easily stopped by for a chat instead of suing me, but decided on the lawsuit. This is emblematic of the difference between people who want to bring new residents to South Lake Tahoe versus people who don’t mind seeing the town hollowed out from the middle, leaving only very wealthy and very poor,” said C.T. Rowe, one of those named in the lawsuit.

“We want to thank former Mayor Davis for filing this court action, and we’re very pleased voters will be getting truthful information about the administrative costs of Measure N, which common sense would tell you are going to be massive,” said Sharon Kerrigan, Co-Chair of the No on Measure N campaign. “Measure N requires the City of South Lake Tahoe to track the occupancy of each and every home in the City. Over 16,000 of them in fact,” said Steve Teshara, Campaign Co-Chair. “We have little doubt that the size and cost to the City for tax program administration, including enforcement will be significant, and may in fact consume the lion’s share of any revenue raised by Measure N.”

"Voters can read the language changes and decide for themselves if it was worth suing ten local residents to inform voters this measure will fully cover its own administration, and still provide more than $19 million toward more housing, road repair, and transit each year," said the YES on MEASURE N group.

El Dorado County Elections and South Lake Tahoe City Clerk were also on the Writ as they are the two departments responsible for collecting and printing the ballot statements.

'This lawsuit was a desperate attempt by the opposition, funded by the real estate lobby, to sap resources and intimidate our grassroot campaign by nitpicking the three percent admin costs because they know residents of South Lake Tahoe overwhelmingly want to see a brighter future for our community with more housing options, better roads and improved transit," said Amelia Richmond, co-founder of locals for Affordable Housing. "Of course any good policy covers its own expenses - which Measure N easily does, leaving an estimated $19.4 Million dollars dedicated for housing, roads and transit each year, per independent analysis. The opposition also doesn’t want voters to know that the same analysis estimated the policy would also boost local retail spending by $27 million each year."