IN MY OPINION...

The old line goes something like “a funny thing happened to me on the way to the Forum,”—that’s not exactly how it went for me a couple of weeks ago but close. It should read “a really sad thing happened to me AT the forum.” As everyone in the County knows by now and a topic that has been discussed from many different points of view, Rusty Gregory is considering closing June Mountain 3 days a week during the 2006-2007 ski season for financial reasons. Having lived in June Lake since 1975, this really came as no huge surprise to me. June Mountain has never been wildly successful midweek operation—bottom line corporate thinking of course would look at this fact in a hard and rational way. As the rumor mills began to grind in June Lake, the strangest opinion began to take form—the June Lake Advocates was somehow responsible for this decision which would lead to the ruination of June Lake. Aside from the silly standpoint (does the JLA really have this kind of power and influence--I think not), this was yet another way to discredit a 2-year old organization and further divide our fractured little community. The JLA, since its formation, has only worked to protect June Lake from outlandish development, ensure there is enough water, and protect the environment from thoughtless defilement. After a couple of encounters with friends who seemed to me to be in the JLA is to Blame camp, I decided to write a letter to the editor and once again try to explain what the JLA is and what it is not.

As the meeting of the June Lake Citizen’s Advisory Committee was coming up, I decided I would present these thoughts to the committee members and those assembled. Let me tell you, it was a packed house that I faced that night. I should have expected an unfriendly reception, given that the JLA has been met with hostility and maligning by the CAC from the first day it appeared before the Committee and dared to present a dissenting opinion. While I am an original member (and the person who keeps the membership records) of the June Lake Advocates, this presentation reflected my personal thoughts—not party-line speechifying. I began by introducing myself, telling the folks the different jobs I have held in June Lake and the County during my time in June Lake. Because many people never seem to hear the part about the JLA wanting sensible development (NEVER once have we said we wanted no development, but that theory continues to be the pervasive belief of many June Lake businesspeople), I decided to briefly reiterate what the JLA is all about. I began by stating that “the JLA is a group of 528 residents, second home owners and friends of June Lake who have”...when someone in the audience began yelling at me and basically calling me a liar—“show us that list of members”, “why aren’t they here speaking for themselves?”—others chimed in and on and on it went. I also noticed that many of those who weren’t yelling had the look of what I can only describe as pure hatred on their faces. I was given the floor to make my presentation at a formal and official meeting of a county organization and ended up facing an enraged mob.

Was I scared? You bet I was, and I’m not easily cowed, as many locals know. That moment of chaos probably only lasted a few seconds, but to me, it seemed like an eternity. Order was eventually reestablished, and I continued with my presentation.

And, for the record, I want to reiterate that the number of 528 members is absolutely correct (I can’t hear the screaming and feel the hatred in this format). I am not a liar. It frustrates me that the most vocal and most angry people in June Lake have formed opinions about the June Lake Advocates without ever once picking up the phone and asking Igor or me what the JLA is all about and hear the organization’s long-held goals for the June Lake Loop.

But back to that night--I went on to present some of my thoughts on the economic situation in June Lake, and what we might do to enrich it and to praise June Lake’s second home owners, another bone of contention in this debate. My final paragraph went something like this—“But wherever the truth may lie, I absolutely believe the time has come for all June Lake groups to sit down together, at a round table with no one in charge, each suggesting agenda items, and then begin to identify those different areas in which we can find some consensus. (Note: the JLA has suggested this in the past but it apparently has fallen on deaf ears.) Perhaps then we can actually begin to work together to preserve and protect June Lake AND improve the economy at the same time. This is a time for cooperation not confrontation.”

I really don’t know where all this is going to lead us—I know I was truly frightened, agonizingly saddened and frustrated beyond belief at the CAC meeting. I do know that we all must find areas on which we can agree, or I see no end to this hurtful and angry debate. Some people have said it was a set-up aimed at discrediting the JLA once and for all, but my presentation managed to diffuse the situation by speaking of cooperation and understanding. Again, who knows where the truth actually lies? I know I am not going to open up the JLA’s membership list for the business community to examine. We have members who actually own businesses here and others on our roster who are afraid of repercussions from this same group, and we are obligated to protect their names. Rusty Gregory and Paul McCahon both remarked that it IS in fact time for everyone to sit down together and following this really awful meeting our supervisor, Vickie Bauer, has suggested that a new group be formed—the June Lake Collective—including representatives of all the groups with an interest in the development in June Lake. I can only hope that this will actually take place.

Someone said that “June Lake is a dying town” and after talking with her following the meeting, we have agreed that June Lake is a “changed” town from what we both remember from the “old days.” Back in those good old times people seemed to move to June Lake to make a decent living, raise their children and enjoy the natural beauty and outdoor activities the Loop so generously provided. The change is that now some people move here as a financial investment. I personally don’t think these folks have done much research prior to becoming business owners in June Lake—it’s just not a spot to make a financial killing. Yes, there are fewer business establishments, but the old, tried and true ones are still here. Yes, there are no gas stations left in June Lake—could that be because newer cars can go as far as 500 miles at a pop; or maybe that large fuel companies no longer support the mom and pop type service stations and keeping up with governmental regulations has become prohibitively expensive; or that gas prices have skyrocketed, especially in our neck of the woods, or might it be that when most of the June Lake locals typically go out of town to do their shopping (Mammoth, Bishop, Reno, Carson City, wherever) they fill up because prices are lower and sometimes considerably lower. Off the top of my head I remember we had a barber shop (Andy retired), a hardware store (the Powers moved), a couple of beauty salons (the owners moved), some other restaurants (Mexican, the Old Dutch, the Green House), a fabric store, my own little Arts and Crafts consignment store, a medical clinic, a couple of banks and probably many others that I’ve forgotten. Some people harken back to those times to prove that June Lake is going downhill. Very few of these businesses however were operating concurrently; in fact, many of them occupied the same building at different times. People try new businesses; some fail, and some succeed. Some people are good business people, some aren’t. And some just simply move on.

But the unique and precious environment that is found on the June Lake Loop should be allowed to flourish and deserves to be protected, and that’s why I’m going to stay in this fight (way out of the limelight, you can bet on that)—to make certain that whatever development plans come down the pike and onto the June Lake Loop, there will be watchdogs to ensure that the development is done in a reasonable and sensible manner and with water sufficient enough to provide for everyone’s needs.

-Lee Vorobyoff

In Response to Mountain Plans

Often when people are angered or frightened, blame may be the only response they are able to muster. I can truly understand this but am hoping that something more positive may eventually be found. Following the announcement at June Mountain last week, there has been much blame issued, much finger pointing and much anger in June Lake regarding the Mountain’s operating schedule for the 2006-2007 season. There is clearly no doubt in anyone’s mind that June Mountain’s employees are the real victims of this decision, but corporate “bottom line thinking” seldom takes into consideration the needs of its employees and the local economy when it comes to making money. While for the first time in many years the Mountain has enjoyed several seasons of profitable operation, in the corporate mind you can never have enough “profit.” Some of the aforementioned blame and finger pointing has been aimed directly at the June Lake Advocates. This not only saddens me but is inflammatory and inappropriate. The JLA had no influence or input into the decision made by Starwood. In an odd sort of way it’s flattering and surprising to find that some people actually believe we have that kind of power. Could this be a ploy to initiate a “blame-game” strategy to further divide our small community? Could this possibly be a threat that if June Lake does not get in line with the corporate plan, they will in fact shut the Mountain down for good? Who knows?? But I promise you none of this is the June Lake Advocates doing.

Someone recently asked me “why couldn’t the JLA just have ignored the whole thing and let Intrawest do what they wanted to do in the first place? Then none of this would be happening now.” Well, the short answer is that we couldn’t ignore it. The June Lake Advocates is a group of 528 residents, property owners and friends of June Lake who have banded together to watch over future development on the Loop. We have never said that we want no development in June Lake. Remember our mantra “We’re not saying NO, we’re only saying HOW.” We simply seek to ensure that any future development is done in a sensible manner and does not harm June Lake’s beautiful and unique environment; additionally, we want a clear and accurate study of our water situation as we believe that all development will hinge on water availability findings; and thirdly, we respectfully request that the voice of the overwhelming majority of those same June Lake residents and property owners be heard by the decision-making bodies of Mono County. This voice of the majority was stated loudly and clearly in a survey sent out prior to the JLA’s existence. Neither Intrawest nor Starwood has ever expressed an interest in these surveys.

June Lake business owners feel they have been betrayed by this announcement; however, a look back over many years clearly indicates that while June Mountain is now making a profit, it has never been particularly successful during midweek operation. The costs directly related to skiing, food and housing during ski vacations generally prohibit discretionary spending for most families. Additionally, I believe that our local businesses suffer owing to the fact that June Lake residents seldom support these same businesses—they prefer to shop in Mammoth, Bishop and the Reno/Carson City area.

Another response to the announcement has been anger toward our second homeowners. I have heard that June Lake’s second homeowners do not have the right to interfere with the politics and general issues involving June Lake. That is simply not correct. Second homeowners pay property taxes, they do in fact support local businesses when they are in town, and are walking-talking free advertisements for our community. Instead of maligning our second homeowners, we should honor them as an important part of June Lake’s economy.

I believe that to rely on one business for the success of an economy is really a mistake; it’s like putting all our eggs in one basket. Rather than looking solely to the Mountain to improve the Loop’s economic health, we need to support our Supervisor’s ongoing effort to introduce more affordable housing. Permanent middle-income residents employed locally (in education, law enforcement, USFS, as examples) will actually support the local economy on a year-round basis. We need to look at the educational issues that have driven many residents away over the past years. We need to talk for ourselves on behalf of June Lake, rather than letting some corporate interest do the talking and then reap all the benefit.

Wherever the truth may be, I absolutely believe the time has come for all June Lake groups to sit down together at a round table with no one “in charge”, each suggesting agenda items, and then identify those different areas in which we can find some consensus. Perhaps then we can actually begin to work together to preserve and protect June Lake AND improve its economy at the same time. This is a time for cooperation not confrontation.

JLA STATUS REPORT

February 20, 2006

Just a note to inform JLA Board members and Advisors about recent items of interest:

1. December 20, 2005; met with the LADWP in L.A. to discuss numerous concerns about the amount of available water and diversion rights and basically brought them up to speed about what is happening in the Loop. They agreed to meet with us when they meet with the Save Mono Lake Committee usually monthly.

2. December 22, 2005; Stanford Law Clinic, on behalf of the JLA, submitted a letter to the Mono County Planning Department stipulating what should be included in the Intrawest Water Study.

3. January 23, 2006; I briefed the Regional Transportation Board (Comprised of three Mono County Supervisors and two Mammoth City Officials), about our primary concerns with the June Lake Transportation Plan. The Board directed the Planning Department to prepare a point-to-point response to the JLA and advised the CAC that our concerns need to be resolved by the CAC/JLA.

4. January 30, 2006; the JLA filed a complaint with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) on the June Lake PUD stating the following appeared discrepancies:

a. Misplaced, damaged, destroyed and unknown location of records.
b. Not complying with SWRCB 2002 inspection findings denoting water diversion right applications that expired in 1995 and reduced combined diversion water right limits.
c. The 2004 Master Water Plan Update does not reflect combined diversion rights limits: the PUD thought they had 666 acre feet of diversion rights when they only have 281 acre feet and the buildout estimate is 430 acre feet.
d. Some metering is not being performed in compliance with water application regulations.

5. February 8, 2006; met with the owner of the June Lake Marina who is very concerned about the level of June Lake. Basically, during the last 10 years the lake has fluctuated between 2 _ and 4 feet below the prior 25 year average. Seasonal fluctuations in the lake were normally only 6 to 7 inches. He wonders why June lake has dropped 2 _ to 4 feet while Gull and Silver lakes fluctuate seasonally and have not dropped.

6. February 8, 2006; we met with the USFS to discuss our concerns with the USFS lease with June Mountain and requested a position paper from the USFS to settle the unrest caused by Rusty Gregory's statement that "if he doesn't get enough warm beds in the Rodeo Grounds development he will close June Mountain."