League to Save Lake Tahoe leadership change leads to many unanswered questions

By Heather Gould
The press release announcing the resignation of Rochelle Nason as executive director of the League to Save Lake Tahoe consisted of the usual PR fluff — statements from the president of the board praising her efforts over the years and statements from Nason herself casting the matter as a purely personal decision.
But does her abrupt departure from the organization signal a larger change in the approach and method of operation at the League? Did her fiery, take-no-prisoners stance no longer work in a changing political landscape? Had Nason’s personal demeanor alienated even allies of the League? Was she asked to leave?

With mounting pressure around the basin on environmental organizations and agencies to loosen the reins and with the state of Nevada’s threat to pull out of the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency for being too restrictive, a more collaborative movement is underway to consider a broader range of options regarding projects and regulations around the basin, including those considered by some as less environmentally sound.

But Nason stuck to her guns, drawing a line in the sand beyond which she would not go. Nason’s unwavering stance and refusal to compromise on the core mission of the League may have diminished the organization’s effectiveness. She may have come to be seen as more “extreme” as public opinion in the basin has shifted.
And did Nason marginalize the League by focusing too much on smaller issues rather than the big picture? A knowledgeable local official who has known Nason for 20 years and worked with her professionally said “They’re in the weeds and decks of people’s backyards when we need to be working on a much bigger issue.”
Nason was never shy about voicing her opinion, whether facing down a crowd of angry residents or speaking forcefully at public meetings and she didn’t hesitate to take officials to task for what she saw as their shortcomings on matters of environmental concern. Her manner, sometimes, even alienated those partial to the League, said the source. “Word got back to the board.”

Nason appeared to shoot herself in the foot recently when she seemed to excuse environmental violations by the owners of the estate where the League holds its annual fashion show. The League quickly issued a clarification in the matter, putting out a statement expressing concern about the violations.
And the League’s willingness to litigate – Nason, herself, is an attorney – struck a sour note with many, who saw such tactics as hostile and counterproductive, taking time and resources away from other environmental efforts. Though even with Nason gone, the League is still full-speed-ahead on a legal appeal of the Sierra Colina project.
The League contends that litigation is the last resort not the first line of attack and it works largely within the system to advance its cause. Nason was often the first, and only, person to comment on projects and plans as they came forth. And she was one of only many powers at the League, but as the public face of the organization, became a lightning rod.

Nason, who split her time between Berkeley and Tahoe, said traveling back and forth had become too burdensome and contributed to her decision to step down, according to the press release. However, her status as only a part-time resident of Tahoe left in question her commitment to the community.
Nason could not be reached for comment. “She’s pretty much out of here,” said a League staffer who answered the phone at its offices. Spokespersons at Full Court Press, the PR agency hired by the League to handle Nason’s resignation and other League affairs, declined to answer questions or elaborate on Nason’s departure, providing the press release as its only statement. The Mountain News was also unable to contact the League’s board president, Robert Damaschino. “The board is playing things close to the vest,” said a source close to the organization.
League Spokeswoman Amanda Royal offered this statement. “We are excited about the future. Times of transition always offer opportunities for positive change. The League’s supporters should rest assured that we will continue steadfastly with our core function of being a strong watchdog for the lake and inspiring the public to Keep Tahoe Blue.”

Laurel Ames, who served as executive director of the League in the early 90s, just prior to Nason, noted the tough skin required in the role. After decades as a community member, the treatment she received from the general public turned negative and critical once she joined the organization. It’s saying something that Nason lasted as long as she did, said Ames, who only lasted a few years on the job herself.
No matter what one’s feeling about Nason or the League, she grew the organization from a one-man operation into a powerhouse with a large staff and significant influence around the basin and beyond.
Even those who have been on the other side of the fence from Nason had some positive and encouraging words. South Lake City Councilwoman Claire Fortier, who has been a vocal critic of the League, offered this statement: “I wish (Nason) well and hope all is happy in her world and with new leadership I hope we can kind of iron out a lot of the emotional differences. There’s always going to be disagreement on the issues, but sometimes it becomes emotional and I’m into really looking at the issues.”

Some believe Nason had gotten a little off-kilter as of late, letting her personal feelings spill over into her professional life. Over the past five years, said the environmental official, she had become “paranoid and distrustful” of potential collaborators and allies who were operating in good faith. “Without trust, you’re dead in the water. . . . Sometimes people need to move on. Rochelle has been there too long.”

Nevada State Senator John Lee, who originally advocated for the state’s withdrawal from TRPA and conducted a hearing on such a bill, said Nason was nothing but professional when addressing his legislative committee. “It was ideology vs. ideology. It was never personal... It was a very open dialogue and I appreciated that... I wish her well. She’s a very valuable person. She should do well for herself. She’s very capable.”