Executive Summary: The Wrong Theory of Development is being Applied to the Lake Tahoe Basin

I. This letter is written on behalf of the entire Environmental / Conservation /

Citizen Action Community at Lake Tahoe in opposition to the Tahoe Regional

Planning Agency’s (TRPA) proposed Regional Plan Update (RPU) for the Lake

Tahoe Basin.

A. In October 2011, TRPA’s approach to the RPU changed radically. Drastic modifications of core governance issues are being made that endanger the Environmental Thresholds it was created to protect.

B. This new approach began with the hiring of two new planning staff members from neighboring Reno, Nevada.

C. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the RPU was delivered in April of 2012. The target date for RPU’s completion is December 2012.

II. TRPA argues that the furious pace of the massive changes is prompted by the

“threat” of Nevada’s withdrawal from Bi-State Compact if TRPA fails to comply

with the demands of Nevada’s SB271.

A. We do not believe that SB271 is the primary motive for either the speed or

extent of unprecedented changes; it is, rather, the excuse to open the door to

large-scale development.

1. We believe special interests have converged to manipulate TRPA and exploit this national treasure.

2. As a result, we believe serious procedural errors have been made that endanger the Basin including inadequate public notice and a lack of due diligence given the nature, volume, and extent of the new changes.

III. While presented as a new form of “21^st Century Environmentalism,” it actually

rests on an existing theory of development known as “New Urbanism.”

A. The theory has experienced some success across North America but is dependent upon specific conditions that don’t exist in the Basin.

B. While it sounds good and promises much, it is being used as a Trojan Horse for the delivery of the high-density “Mountain Resort Development Model” and is a template for both environmental and economic disaster at Tahoe.

IV. The theory of development that we believe should be used in the Basin is known

as the “National Main Street Model,” a well-known and validated preservation-

based economic development model arising from local community-based

initiatives to revitalize distinct towns and neighborhoods. Understanding that no

template fits all circumstances, it promotes local project determinations of

tremendous diversification while understanding that can also result in “no

project,” which is fine, if determined democratically by the local community.

A. Quite the opposite of the grandiose and prescribed schemes of resort developers, actions are initiated and evolve from the ground up in a cooperative context.

B. This model fits the circumstances in most of the Tahoe Basin because it favors projects that are sustainably scaled and paced, via the existing infrastructure, that are well suited to the fragile physical environment as defined by existing Environmental Thresholds.

V. You have been contacted because we believe that far too many key individuals, agencies, and departments are unaware of what is happening that

is so uniformly opposed by the entire Conservation / Environmental / Citizen-

Action Community (CECAC).

A. Lake Tahoe belongs to America, not to two small-town planners and a bi-state agency that is deliberately ignoring its primary responsibilities.