City Council candidates respond to South Lake Tahoe Chamber questions

SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, Calif. - The South Tahoe Chamber of Commerce Board recently asked the nine City Council candidates ten questions they felt were of most importance to its members. The questions focused mainly on topics relating to things that will or may affect both the local small businesses and the community in general.

Their board made the decision to not endorse a specific candidate this election, but instead rank them based on how much they align with the South Tahoe Chamber of Commerce goals based on their answers to the questions below.

Their rankings from “most aligned” to “least aligned”:

Candidate Scott Robbins returned answers too late to be considered in ranking but his answers are provided below. Please note, Bruce Grego is a member of the South Tahoe Chamber of Commerce.

Questions and Answers

1) How are you preparing to balance the City of South Lake Tahoe budget from the losses in sale tax income due to COVID as well as the loss of TOT income from VHRs?
BRUCE GREGO Maintain essential services, such as police, fire, roads and snow removal, and seek reductions in the balance of the budget.
CRISTI CREEGAN The City budget includes increases in property taxes from the recent much-higher home valuations. I understand that the recent survey regarding a tax on empty second homes, which add to our community’s burden by removing crucial housing units, inexplicably didn’t garner enough support to move forward but that is definitely a place to look for additional funds for the City, following increased education to our residents about it. Also, please see below.
DAN BROWNE YES - As Businesses and Families are being FORCED to Balance ane Pare their Budgets, it’s only FAIR and EQUITABLE that the City of South Lake Tahoe , DO LIKEWISE.
DOUGLAS WILLIAMS *no answer*
JOHN FRIEDRICH The City is facing potentially significant cuts to services due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The budget for the forthcoming fiscal year is more than $7 million less than the 2018-2019 budget. The loss of TOT revenues will be mitigated in part by construction of new lodging, such as the Hampton Inn property. I also support construction of appropriate scale, additional lodging options in South Lake Tahoe’s town centers -- Stateline, Ski Run Blvd., Harrison Ave., the Y, which would raise additional TOT, and benefit businesses operating in these areas. Expenses have been pared down significantly by city staff and council, so the only viable way forward in the short term to address our many pressing needs for investments in public safety, infrastructure, and other services is through an increase in revenues. If elected, I will work to engage the public in a participatory budget process to look at city finances in depth, in hopes of building larger public awareness of how current funds are being spent, where additional funds are needed for priority needs, and how best to pay for those services. The City’s Finance Committee, for example, could be opened up to the public. Here’s an article about participatory budgeting in other western U.S. cities and towns: https://www.westerncity.com/article/publicinvolvement-budgeting-options-localofficials.
KEITH ROBERTS I support increasing the TOT % to cover the revenue losses from VHR’s; the revenue losses due to Covid and the additional Funds
LEONARD CARTER Rising property prices creating more taxes and the recent influx of tourists should shrink the deficit. I understand that the shortfall is approximately 5 percent.
SCOTT ROBBINS The city investigated two options to close the presumed coming budget gap, a sales tax increase that would hurt working locals, and raise $5.4M annually, and vacancy tax that would cost nothing to locals, and would raise $20M. The city, in its relentless efforts to put tourists first and locals last, chose the sales tax. The solution to closing the budget gaps is two-fold. First, prioritize essential services, starting with the Fire Department, and second, cut non-essential spending, holding off on such vanity projects as a new city hall, and eliminating the small dollar waste, such as trips to Mexico, outside consultants, new logos, and endless tourist advertising, that demolishes trust in how our city spends the money it already collects. Second any truly needed additional revenues should come from tourists, not locals, through either an increase in TOT, or a 2nd home vacancy tax.
STACY BALLARD I am currently going through our budget to see what I believe deserves to be cut. I believe we must bring in more money from the people who are visiting Lake Tahoe.

2) Are you for or against the proposed City one-percent sales tax hike? Why?
BRUCE GREGO No on Measure S. I wrote the argument against Measure S for the Voter’s Pamphlet. The City has to live within its means. More taxes will not solve the City’s failure to keep the budget balanced; it will only make local government larger; if measure S passes, be assured that in a few years, the City will be seeking another increase. Also, it should be noted that Sales Taxes have an automatic cost of living increase; as goods become more expensive, the more moneys the City receives in sale tax revenue. How much of the moneys we earn in the private sector should belong to us?
CRISTI CREEGAN No one wants to increase taxes, and I wish there was another way right now to ensure that we have enough funding for emergency services. But COVID responses required a shifting of the City's resources, just like it took some of mine, and probably yours. I want to see the City funded and able to respond to emergencies and I'm willing to invest in that, for the current and future safety of our community. And, because it's an across-the-board sales tax increase, it applies to anyone who buys things here (not groceries, as you know, which are exempt under state law), allowing our community to collect increased visitor dollars while also supporting local businesses.
DAN BROWNE AGAINST- ESPECIALLY in the era of COVID-19, we should NOT be asking our Locals or it’s Businesses, to be FORCED to Inflict or Impose a Tax Residents, Harming ALL Local Businesses through higher TAXES and possibly forcing more and more residents to SHOP and buy GAS in NEVADA.
DOUGLAS WILLIAMS *no answer*
JOHN FRIEDRICH I support Measure S. At the same time as COVID-19 and related budget shortfalls are cutting into city revenues, roads throughout our community are crumbling and in need of repair, we need strong funding for police and fire protection, and funds are needed to invest in needed infrastructure like broadband. As much as no one wants to pay additional taxes, at this time raising additional revenue is fiscally responsible, and needed to make crucial investments in South Lake Tahoe’s infrastructure, public safety, and quality of life. In addition, forecasts estimate that visitors will contribute nearly half of newly collected revenue, enough to offset the deficit in TOT revenues after Measure T is implemented. If viable alternatives to the 1% sales tax hike are identified by the
public and City Council, and if the ongoing effects of COVID-19 are less than expected, than the City could go back to the voters to repeal the sales hike increase.
KEITH ROBERTS I think we need to exhaust all efforts to find new revenue before we raise taxes; especially finding taxes that don’t affect our local full time Tahoe residents. However, our needs are growing and the demands from our city government are expanding; we need to keep up. Some of my fellow candidates claim that the 1% tax would make us the highest taxed city in El Dorado County; this maybe true but none of the other cities have millions of people coming each year and staying there; using city resources, requiring Police and Fire Safety; none of them have the extent of natural resources we need to protect and preserve. We are a very special place and sometimes it cost more to be in a special place; I hope we can match our needs without the additional taxes but I will support it as a last resort. As an Accounting Major in College; I know how to make the tough choices and also how to stretch our financial resources while avoiding waste and negligence with our funds.
LEONARD CARTER Against. It is regressive and I find it rather audacious that the council would seek a tax increase when many of the citizens are not gainfully employed.
SCOTT ROBBINS Locals pay sales taxes every time they buy school supplies, go to the hardware store, or the ski shop. Every time locals buy a beer, order take-out, or buy a coffee. It hurts those who work here for the least wages the most, and lakefront estate owners not at all. When locals buy expensive things, it costs them the most, but it costs the transient tourists who mostly spend small dollars at sales-tax exempt grocery stores the least. Better alternatives include raising the transient occupancy tourist taxes (TOT), adopting a second-homeowners property or vacancy tax, or better, actually prioritizing spending and cutting wasteful spending on such vanity projects as a new city hall. In its deliberations on Measure S, the city even considered the 2nd home vacancy tax. It was projected to raise $20M - four times as much money as the sales tax and would not hurt locals at all. The city chose to tax the locals instead. This is the nuts and bolts of putting tourists and second-home owners first, and locals last.
STACY BALLARD I am against it because it puts a burden on locals. I am for the One-Tahoe program that seeks to bring in money to help rebuild our infrastructure. I don’t agree with all the parts of the plan but I believe we should start treating Tahoe more like Yosemite and Yellowstone. We could make sure a percentage of the funding goes to protecting our lands from fire and making sure our fire departments have everything they need.

3) Given the results of the most recent economic study are you in favor or opposed to the building of the Loop Road?
BRUCE GREGO Opposed. The best study is the ballot box.
CRISTI CREEGAN I’m in favor of the creation of walkable, less car-dependent areas of locally-owned businesses, such as was created in the public/private partnership that led to the development of the Harrison Avenue Streetscape. I understand that years of work have gone into the development of the Main Street Management Plan. As a council member I would seek to understand all the background, the options, and the role that the city council can and will play in the decisions moving forward, with the understanding that this is a project of which the City is not the final arbiter.
DAN BROWNE OPPOSED - The voters and Residents NEED to have a say. ADDITIONALLY, this project only SERVES the needs of the STATE of NEVADA, and NEVADA CASINOS, at the EXPENSE of South Lake Tahoe Residents, Low Income and Multi-Generational Housing. What about OUR Convention Center and Our HOLE in the Ground.
DOUGLAS WILLIAMS *no answer*
JOHN FRIEDRICH I support routing traffic around the highway 50 revitalization project/main street corridor, but favor a different alignment than proposed to save existing affordable housing units and related cost of acquiring and replacing, and to reduce the amount of new pavement.
KEITH ROBERTS I do not support the Current Loop Road Project; it directs too much traffic away from the businesses on HWY 50; it displaces too many people without enough new housing; displaced children may need to travel further to school; it will increase traffic on Pioneer Trail; I don’t see it improving the travel needs of locals. The Idea of a Loop Road to diminish traffic through the Casinos for safety is a good one and to be able to avoid congestion through the Casinos would greatly enhance the travel experience for locals passing through for work or shopping. I will greatly support a plan that can accomplish this without so many negative impacts on our Residents
LEONARD CARTER Opposed until we find the will of the people.
SCOTT ROBBINS The Loop Road is an assault on our locals and neighborhoods by the moneyed interests of the casinos, developers, and resorts. This project will demolish much of Rocky Point, a predominately Latinx and Filipino neighborhood, and one of the few truly walkable and affordable neighborhoods in South Lake Tahoe. It will demolish homes. It will displace already marginalized families, the people who make our tourism industry work, many of whom are in mixed documentation status households, who will absolutely not qualify for replacement housing. It will bottle up our only eastbound evacuation route with a traffic circle that would further slow traffic in the event of a catastrophic fire. It will do these things to build a four-lane highway bypass to better speed tourists the Nevada casinos. Over a dozen alternative routings for this highway, many which would not demolish homes, have been studied and rejected. Only the Rocky Point demolition option has moved forward with environmental review, where real money gets involved. Arguments, at this point, that alternatives are still on the table, are simply disingenuous. After a summer of some of the worst impacts of over-tourism, of overflowing trash on our beaches and trails, and endless miles of traffic choking our air and roads, this project doubles down on more cars, more traffic, and more tourism. We are constantly told that locals must sacrifice for the tourists. We must sacrifice our beaches and trails to trash, we must sacrifice our neighborhoods to vacation rentals, and now, finally, that we must sacrifice our very homes. This must stop. Tourism should work for the locals, not against them. This project is not just bad public policy. It is wrong.
STACY BALLARD I am against the loop road.

4) 66 percent of the voters voted to indicate they wanted a say on the Loop Road. Will you honor their request by committing to an advisory vote on the issue?
BRUCE GREGO Yes, I have been a proponent of this ballot measure that was subsequently stopped by the opponents. I would also support a binding measure for this ballot question.
CRISTI CREEGAN More inclusion and transparency in the decision making process is always better so yes, I would support an advisory vote.
DAN BROWNE ABSOLUTELY YES
DOUGLAS WILLIAMS It is my firm belief that the federal government will never fund this, even more so after what covid has done to the national debt. I will not vote for eminent domain
JOHN FRIEDRICH Rather than voting for or against the current alignment and related main street/Highway 50 revitalization project, I favor working to gain consensus on an alternative that maintains existing housing, has no net increase in road pavement, while meeting the goal of moving traffic through the area outside of the redesigned, pedestrian friendly, reduced lane tourist core.
KEITH ROBERTS I absolutely agree the voters should have a say and a vote on the Loop Road; it is up to our City Government to make sure the Project it represented honestly and openly to the public before this vote. Several sides must be provided with accurate designs and an honest depiction of what is being proposed. Current proposal lists many negatives and few positives.
LEONARD CARTER This issue needs to go to a vote! Personally, I think there is a better solution than the existing loop road plan. However, if the people vote, I believe the City is bound to go with the vote of the people.
SCOTT ROBBINS This project should be stopped outright. I don’t oppose an advisory vote on the current, published, final form of this project, though I think the message from public has already been a clear an resounding “No”
STACY BALLARD Yes, I believe we need to explain the pros and cons of the project then let the voters decide to move forward or not.

5) Are you in favor of TRPA’s “One Tahoe” Basin User Fee?
BRUCE GREGO No. I do not favor allowing appointed agencies to control the number of visitors to basin. I oppose any appointed agency with the power to tax. The saying of “the power to tax is the power to destroy” clearly applies to this proposal.
CRISTI CREEGAN I am in favor of visitor management tools that allow our community a role in sustainable tourism. The TTD’s current concept needs to be refined but it is an interesting option to increase funds received by the city from those who visit it. I understand concerns about the impacts on commuters, low-income residents, and seniors, but I believe that those can be mitigated through sliding scale fees, timing of fees, etc. Similar fees are standard in many parts of the world as people understand that communities must be invested in to remain strong.
DAN BROWNE NO - That does LITTLE or NOTHING for South Lake Tahoe or its Citizens/Residents
DOUGLAS WILLIAMS I am against the One Tahoe program
JOHN FRIEDRICH I support the concept of having day visitors contribute more toward their impacts to our roads, public safety, trash, wildfire prevention, etc. However, I believe any proposed user fee should exempt locals and commuters, and local governments should have a say in how to best utilize fees collected to help mitigate visitor impacts, which would ease the burden on local taxpayers.
KEITH ROBERTS I am in favor of solving our traffic, pollution and congestion problems; “One Tahoe Basin User Fee” is a good idea of how to get funds to help with infrastructure but I worry about transparency that those funds actually go to fixing our roads. The larger “One Tahoe” plan is very complex and I don’t feel comfortable placing all the resources in one set of hands; it needs to be cooperative between many stakeholders; of course, making it even more complicated. I have further concerns because just offering public transportation doesn’t mean tourists will use it; to restrict personal transportation will negatively impact our residents. Additionally, I worry if Park N Ride Zones will be any safer than our current fears in the event of a fire. Plus our Lake is much more diverse and widespread in it’s tourist attractions, unlike Yosemite or Yellowstone where most of the attractions there are on all visitors lists of things to see and do.
LEONARD CARTER No! This is just a scheme to grow the bureaucratic agency, thereby empowering TRPA and disempowering the people.
SCOTT ROBBINS The TTD’s “One Tahoe” fee program is a message to our locals: Pay Us. Pay us $84 a year to live or work here. The people who live here have been arguing and begging for basin entry limits and congestion fees for years. A real fix for the endless miles of traffic clogging our roads and polluting our air. Fees on tourists. Not locals. The One Tahoe plan makes the absolutely incredulous argument, that both residents and non-residents must “share the burden” [see citation] of the impacts from non-resident over tourism. The idea that locals should pay any amount of fees to compensate for the traffic, congestion, and environmental exploitation brought by an industry of relentless over-tourism is abject cronyism made manifest. [* Citation from “Overview presented at the February North Lake Tahoe Resort Association/Chamber of Commerce First Tuesday Breakfast Club meeting.”, https://www.onetahoe.org/]
STACY BALLARD Yes, but there are details in the plan that I don’t agree with, that I think can easily be worked out.

6) Are you in favor or against TRPA’s Main Street traffic and paid parking Program?
BRUCE GREGO I was one of the proponents of measure P stopping paid parking in our community; my view has not changed. It seems at every opportunity the government seeks to expand fees and taxes. Public transportation has been a failure, yet government continues to attack at every opportunity the use of automobile. The parking issues we face today is due to bad planning for the use of automobiles with TRPA, among others, making planning decisions based upon public transportation systems that don’t exist. Look at the public transportation facilities in the basin; the building at the Y is not being used and a similar facility in Tahoe City is an empty shell. We should not permit any new development without meeting actual parking needs as opposed to artificial zoning parking standards. Main Street traffic is part of the loop road plan. I do not support reducing traffic lanes between the casinos. No on the Loop Road.
CRISTI CREEGAN As part of the larger concept of sustainable tourism, yes, I am in favor of similar management tools that allow our community to be a part of the management of where visitors go, park, walk and take part in our built and natural environment. Use of these strategies is very much modeled on Measure T as a similar management tool, in that under the implementation of Measure T overnight visitors will be funneled to a central location for the bulk of their trip. Controlling visitor behavior so it best supports our community can be handled using management tools like traffic controls and parking requirements.
DAN BROWNE AGAINST - This Council and/or future Councils SHOULD not Relinquish ANY PLANNING or TAXING authority to ANY entity especially the TRPA or the TTD.
DOUGLAS WILLIAMS The Paid parking program will be required in the casino core as a condition of the event center. As a council member of South Lake Tahoe I would have no control over the Nevada Casinos
JOHN FRIEDRICH I support the Highway 50 main street revitalization project to create a more pedestrian friendly area, and would also like to see investment made in creating more walkable community hubs through South Lake Tahoe, including Ski Run Blvd., Harrison Ave./56 Acres, Sierra Blvd., and the Y.
KEITH ROBERTS Yes I am in favor of it and also seeing it applied to the full Tourist Corridor; my concerns are that we need a City Council that will make sure that it IS IN FACT; “Environmentally Sustainable, matches The unique natural Environment,” like the plan says! Many of these details get lost without the proper oversight. The recent USFS beach and campground closure clearly displays that visitors are not coming here for our casinos and shops; they are coming here for our beaches and surrounding natural beauty. If we can create
a main Street that is contemporary and modern but focuses on what nature has provided us with; that will be a main Street we all can be excited about.
LEONARD CARTER Against. We tried parking meters and it was turned down by the people.
SCOTT ROBBINS Day trip tourists should pay to park. Locals should get free-parking passes, though possibly time-limited in some high demand areas. We need to get a handle on the number of cars coming into our basin and neighborhoods. Efforts to charge basin entry fees will, realistically take more than a decade, if they happen at all. Parking fees on tourists, not locals, will help reduce the number of cars by encouraging carpooling and public transit use, especially when combined with free bus service.
STACY BALLARD I am not in favor of the loop road, I am in favor of the rest of the plans ideas.

7) Are you in favor or against the split tax roll State Proposition 15?
BRUCE GREGO Against. Same thoughts as stated in first question above. More tax revenue more government. Modifying Proposition 13 passed in the 70s will increase costs to business and consumers alike. No on 15.
CRISTI CREEGAN For.
DAN BROWNE AGAINST - Once again, in the era of COVID-19, we, the people, don’t need to be Raising TAXES on Local Businesses and Corporations.
DOUGLAS WILLIAMS Proposition 15 is another nail in the coffin of small businesses. That is why I am one of the leaders in our area trying to defeat it. I have connected various large commercial property owners and leasing agents with the area representive, his name is Eric. If any of your members need lawn signs or posters I have them available
JOHN FRIEDRICH For.
KEITH ROBERTS I am completely against Proposition 15; 2 reasons – while I understand it is only being applied to businesses, I do not trust our State Leaders not to piggyback this to residential in the near future; we should not budge an inch on this. Secondly; additional expenses on our businesses will trickle down to higher costs of all goods and especially for renters; as the taxes go up for the Landlord, so will the rents for the tenants.
LEONARD CARTER Against. This is a regressive tax. Commercial real estate is weak due to the on line sales as it is. Business will be forced to charge higher prices to pay the increased taxes. This in turn will hurt the poor in our community. This is the State trying to get around Prop 13. The pro prop 15 committee will not answer how taking 11 billion out of the economy will not have a regressive effect on the economy somewhere.
SCOTT ROBBINS This is a state issue. The City of South Lake Tahoe is not involved, nor uniquely impacted by CA Prop 15. I’m not generally not in favor of raising or lowering taxes through accounting gimmicks. I object to raising effective property tax rates by increasing tax-purpose property value on selected parcels but no others, and I object to the decreasing of effective property taxes by artificially ignoring increases in property values. I object to them because they are both dishonest. Proper accounting shouldn’t be a matter requiring political courage. If we are to have property taxes, then across the board, be it residential, commercial, industrial, they should all be based on the actual value of the property, and politicians should be willing make their case to either raise or lower the rate itself the merits their arguments. Gimmick like this are at the root the erosion of public trust in government.
STACY BALLARD Yes, I agree with it.

8) Are you in favor of reallocating funds away from the Police Department and into mental health and other social services?
BRUCE GREGO No. I support the expansion of mental health services, but I do not support the reduction of police service.
CRISTI CREEGAN My understanding of the South Tahoe Alternative Collaborative Services (STACS) program that the SLTPD is creating in partnership with several other relevant mental health and social services agencies is that funding sources haven’t been determined yet. There are grant funds available for such programs that could be applied for by the partnership. And if such a program was effective, as is hoped, in removing calls and responsibilities associated with mental health and homelessness from the SLTPD, then a corresponding reallocation of funds would be appropriate. If the program did not effectively reduce the department’s responsibilities in this area, then a reallocation would not be appropriate.
DAN BROWNE YES - Especially when one sees four (4) COPS and COP Cars throwing CHRISTMAS MARY to the ground and CUFFING her in the process.
DOUGLAS WILLIAMS I am against defunding the police. At any one time we have no more than 2 or 3 officers patrolling our streets. Last year there was a crazed man who killed 2 people in the bay area. One of our patrolmen spotted him as he was casing out Heavenly Village considering a mass shooting. Thank the stars we have the police we do.
JOHN FRIEDRICH I support the new South Tahoe Alternative Collaborative Services (STACS) program, developed by South Lake Tahoe Police Chief
David Stevenson. This will allow the Police Department to better focus its resources, while better service will be provided to people in our community experiencing homelessness, addiction, mental illness, or recovering from domestic violence. The need for both strong funding for the Police Department, as well as more programs to help our citizens, is why we need new revenue, whether
from Measure S or other sources.
KEITH ROBERTS we need to allocate more funding for mental health and social services especially with regard to our homeless in South Lake Tahoe
but I do not support taking funds away from our police force; relieve them of some responsibilities that might be better served by those trained in specific fields but leave the funding in place to help them more to do their job!
LEONARD CARTER No. Keep the funding at existing rates to the police and raise other funds for this experiment. With my background in social work, I would mandate that strict definable outcomes for reduced crime, be used to evaluate this type of program. I would cherish the chance to be part of the requirements for mental health workers and/or social workers to be used in a law enforcement setting.
SCOTT ROBBINS The STACS program has the strong support of our new police chief, Dave Stevenson. It is based on the successful Cahoots program in Eugene Oregon, which both saved money and improved outcomes. Asking police officers to be the sole first responders for homelessness, mental health crises, and drug addiction, is the most expensive possible approach, and provides the least beneficial outcomes to all. If successful, STACS will allow our police department to better serve the community and focus efforts on their core mission of public safety.
STACY BALLARD Our STACS program, which I think is what you're asking about was started from the ideas our local BLM (#Irunwithmaude) group
brought to Chief Stevenson. We worked directly with him and are excited at the progress he’s made because this program helps his officers too. Similar programs take 20 percent of the calls and send them to more appropriate services which give our officers more time to focus on crimes that are higher priority.

9) What are your top 5 priorities if you are elected?
BRUCE GREGO *summary, full answer attached* lost tax and revenue due to failure of project 3, expand public input and time for review of
agenda packets, be more affirmative and take lead on fire safety, negative impacts on community due to failure of project 3, road
CRISTI CREEGAN Housing, funding for Emergency Services, support for businesses as part of an overall emphasis on sustainable tourism, catastrophic
fire preparedness, and increased effective collaboration with jurisdictional and agency partners.
DAN BROWNE *no answer*
DOUGLAS WILLIAMS Affordable Housing (for those making under 64k a year), Fire Safety, Roads, Public Transportation, Budget Issues
JOHN FRIEDRICH 1. Affordable Housing. 2. Sustainable tourism that supports our local economy and local businesses, while reducing local
community impacts like traffic and trash. 3. Sufficient revenues to repair roads, and to support public safety, fire protection, and snow removal. 4. Development of walkable town centers featuring local businesses, art, music, at Harrison Ave./56 Acres, the Y, Ski Run Blvd, Sierra Blvd, etc. 5. Municipal broadband to provide high speed, affordable internet for all.
KEITH ROBERTS Affordable Housing for our growing Work Force needs; Tourist Management; Transparency on our City Council; Budget Shortfalls
due to current events; Managing the City’s Growth in Development and New Businesses.
LEONARD CARTER roads, overtourism, salaries and retirement, loop road, commitment to priorities
SCOTT ROBBINS Fire, Housing, Over-tourism, Economic diversification, Environmental stewardship
STACY BALLARD *summary, full answer attached* 1. Quality of life for our local community with an emphasis on our low-income residents. 2.
Police oversight and a Cahoots type program. 3. Better resources for mental health & addiction services. 4. Supporting local businesses. 5. Tahoe is an international tourist destination for a reason - it's one of the most beautiful places in the world.

10) What is the number one problem facing our City currently?
BRUCE GREGO Housing. So far it seems that any solution involves more regulations and greater complexity. The TRPA has just created another
commission on housing with 21 members! The solution is not more regulation, but less. Not more fees and charges, but less. We also need to face the reality that not all housing needs can be met locally or will be meet in a timely manner, and an express bus system from Carson City and South Lake Tahoe needs to be developed; presently any trip with the current bus system between South Lake Tahoe and Carson takes two hours or more. I believe this last point needs to be explored to assure that our local economy is adequately supported with our needs for labor.
CRISTI CREEGAN The assumption that any one group can successfully manage the City’s priorities without collaboration with other groups and
jurisdictions.
DAN BROWNE *no answer*
DOUGLAS WILLIAMS We are having a huge issue with housing, our current locals, they are our lifeblood. They keep everything together. I have a
solution that may alleviate some of the pressure within the next 6 months. We have hundreds possibly thousands of empty homes that no one has entered in 5, 10 years. maybe longer. The city currently has over 2 million dollars of federal housing funds that have built up over the years. We would contact these owners to find out if they were interested in renting them out if we could finance the repairs for them. Half of the income after expenses would go to the owners the other towards paydown of the loan.
JOHN FRIEDRICH Affordable Housing for our local workforce. I support immediate action to confront our affordable housing and homelessness
crises, which will be exacerbated if spikes in COVID-19 again lead to widespread unemployment. This would harm both tenants and landlords. I support the affordable housing projects under development, and also support permitting Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), and incentives for making more second homes available as long term rentals.
KEITH ROBERTS Tourists; how do we manage the growing tourist visits without further hurting our fragile environment; ruining our quality of life as residents yet supporting our business owners and our city with the revenue it brings. These are tough questions with many correct answers; I do not want to stop, eliminate or slow tourist visits but I want to hear from all our residents where we can make this better for everyone.
LEONARD CARTER commitment to priorities. Every election cycle, road improvement is at the top or close to the top of every candidates priorities.
Yet, this priority appears to get lost. This is an indication that the City has a functional problem. The general concept of what City governments should do, when asked of the citizens across America, are these: police, fire, roads, City planning. A lack of true priorities has ended in a sense of chaos that then effects the City finances.
SCOTT ROBBINS The number one problem facing the city council, is its failure to properly prioritize funding for the Fire Department. The number one problem facing our locals, is over-tourism. The phrase “Tahoe needs tourists” has long since become a “get out of responsibility free card”. It’s become an excuse for the casinos, developers, and vacation rental investors to justify the exploitation of our environment, the displacement of our locals, and the sacrifice of our neighborhoods and homes. We are presented with a false choice between recklessly unlimited tourism and no tourism at all. Tourism economies are brittle. Service sector jobs tend to be low in pay, low in benefits, and most significantly, low in stability. Tourism is seasonal and typically the first thing on hold during economic downturns. We must address the most negative impacts of over tourism and pursue policies that support economic diversification to reduce our reliance on this singular industry. Our city can encourage and assist in the development of non-tourism industry:
- Continued expansion of Barton Hospital into a center of excellence for orthopedic and sports medicine, much like the Steadman Clinic in Vail, which brings in fellowships and patients from around the world.
- Expansion of outdoor wilderness education programs through LTCC and to attract schools such as NOLS.
- Improving wired internet service that supports the relocation of business to Tahoe which can operate locally and serve clients remotely.
Most critically, the expansion of local non-tourism businesses will help our service economy, enlarging a customer base that lives, buys, and shops here year-round, helping to level-out some of the seasonal boom-and-bust of the tourist cycle. Tahoe will always be a tourist destination, but that need not be the only thing we are.
STACY BALLARD My priorities, above, are in order of what I believe are the problems Tahoe is facing. When we take care of our local community
and empower them to improve their lives, we support local businesses and give people a better experience when they come to visit. Creating equality for our locals and visitor is very important as well.