Pinecrest Parking Fines, Followed By Future Ideas, Sparks Lively Debate
Pinecrest, CA — The Tuolumne County Board of Supervisors voted to approve increased fines around Pinecrest Lake and, then some board members got into a heated debate about whether it was also the right time to discuss other proposals related to the popular recreation spot.
District Three Supervisor Anaiah Kirk has been pushing to increase the penalties for parking violations around the lake from the current $35, up to $100 for the first offense and $200 for the second. The board voted 5-0 to waive the required first reading of the ordinance and pass the second reading. A final required third vote/reading will occur at a meeting next month. Supervisor Steve Griefer, a former CHP Officer, argued that the increase to $100 is too low, and said he would like to see it go to $250, and others agreed. However, the County Counsel’s office indicated that there may be legal issues in the county rules about increasing it past $100 for the first offense. That item will be reviewed in the coming weeks before the final vote of the supervisors.
At the meeting, during public comment, the increase in penalties was endorsed by both Sheriff David Vasquez and Heidi Lupo with the Pinecrest Lake Resort.
Immediately after the vote, Supervisor Kirk then requested the board discuss having county staff also investigate things (and report back) on possible changes to fire lanes, a toll booth and/or fees for parking in the day-use areas, and a shuttle service to and from Dodge Ridge (to help with overcrowding).
Supervisors Jaron Brandon and Ryan Campbell raised questions about pushing those items forward, given that Pinecrest is not something on the board’s designated current priority list, and the potential large amount of time it would take staff to look into and implement those changes. Brandon noted that other board members also have priority projects in their district and this was not the way the board had previously decided to move those types of things forward.
Kirk said he has been lobbying for changes at Pinecrest for six years and argued that it ties into issues like fire and public safety, which are board priorities. Kirk would like to see changes ahead of Memorial Day and the upcoming fire season.
Supervisors Mike Holland and Steve Griefer supported having the conversation, while Campbell and Brandon took issue with it. Brandon added that he wasn’t necessarily opposed to the proposals, like parking fees, but the process of doing it this way (not earlier included on the board priority list). Kirk and Campbell then got into a heated back-and-forth debate that spanned several minutes. As it continued on, Kirk argued that they could have already finished the discussion during the amount of time they had spent arguing.
Campbell said Kirk was “shoehorning in a fairly major issue.”
The dynamics of the new board came into view.
Kirk, seeming to allude to a possible alliance between him, Griefer and Holland, following the recent election, stated, “I know you are not used to being the minority, Ryan, but get used to it.”
Campbell responded, “Oh, I am used to being a minority.”
Bradon then said, “That’s not what this is about.”
Campbell replied to Kirk, “The fact that you think in those terms is part of the problem.”
Kirk then said, “You guys, this is so simple (support for moving it forward).”
Kirk asked County Counsel Sarah Carrillo if the discussion he proposed having was legal under Brown Act rules, and she responded that it was, in relation to giving board direction at this time. No final decisions were being made.
A short presentation was delivered, and Kirk gained support from Griefer and Holland to direct staff to come back at a later meeting, for more discussion on Pinecrest, about fire lanes, message signs/communications, and a potential fee-based plan (toll booths for parking in lots).
