LEGEND NOTES PLACER COUNTY, CALIFORNIA SCALE: 1"=3000' APRIL 1, 2014 800-400-7072

SEE SHEET 1 FOR LEGEND AND NOTES PLACER COUNTY, CALIFORNIA SCALE: 1"=2000' APRIL 1, 2014 800-400-7072

Welcome to SquawPine Residents look to incorporation as a way to fight Squaw Valley village expansion. Is it a viable option? Friday, February 8, 2013 By: Melissa Siig, Moonshine Ink Staff Comments 0 One cold night last month, about 10 people gathered at the Squaw Valley home of Jonathan Kanter. There were no cheese and crackers passed around, or wine sipped. This was not a social event. The Squaw Valley and Alpine Meadows residents were there to discuss only one thing could their two valleys form a city as a way to exert control over the outcome of KSL Capital Partners plans to expand the Squaw Valley Village? Their answer we hope so. This grassroots movement to control the future of Squaw Valley is one way residents are looking to fight the proposed development, which at over 100 acres, 1,000 residential units, and an indoor water park, locals say would forever alter the character of the Squaw Valley community, and beyond. While KSL has responded to public concerns by reducing building height and adding environmental restoration and community benefits to the plan, Placer County cautions that incorporation will come too late to affect the village project. Peter Schweitzer has had a house in Squaw Valley for 12 years and is one of the residents leading the charge for incorporation. He laid out the reasons for seeking to form a new municipality. So the community has a voice in what occurs, he said. Right now we are disenfranchised, we are at the whim of the supervisors who want to grab revenue. Incorporation is not an easy task, however. The process requires that a minimum of 500 registered voters live in the proposed city limits, which is one reason why any town would need to include both Squaw and Alpine. Squaw just barely makes the cut with 563 registered voters, while Alpine only has 296. To jumpstart the legal process toward incorporation, a petition has to be signed by 25 percent of registered voters within the proposed area. Next, a comprehensive fiscal analysis must be completed. Based on what the two valleys generate on average in Transit Occupancy Tax $3.1 million a year plus Schwietzer s estimation of what the two valleys more than 2,200 homeowners and condo owners pay in property taxes ($10 million) not to mention what the ski area pays the incorporation group believes a city of Squaw/Alpine could support itself. I am sure financially it s viable because the tax base is so broad between Squaw and Alpine, Schweitzer said.

Truckee is a lot bigger and has more services, and hundreds of more miles of roads, and has a budget of $16 million, of which $5 million is for police. I think Squaw Valley/Alpine Meadows would have a budget under $5 million. Nevertheless, at a Squaw Valley Property Owners Association meeting held on Jan. 26 to provide an update on the Squaw development, Placer County Supervisor Jennifer Montgomery told the audience of 230 people that incorporation would not affect the outcome of the project. For self-determination in the future, it s a good idea to look into it, she said. But in terms of this project, after talking with LAFCO [Local Agency Formation Commission, the Placer County agency that oversees incorporation], it would not change this process, since the project goes forward under the rules it was submitted. But Schweitzer said there is a precedent for newly formed cities stopping or changing a development that was already underway. He cited the case of Goleta in Santa Barbara County. Although the city was created after the county had granted approval of a condominium project in 2002, the new city of Goleta refused to approve the project s final map, a decision that was later upheld by the California Supreme Court. Undeterred, the Squaw Valley group is planning some preliminary steps toward investigating incorporation. These include a voter registration drive in the two valleys and negotiations with consultants for an initial fiscal analysis, as well as discussions with attorneys about setting up a nonprofit organization to fund incorporation, talks with Placer County LAFCO officials, and getting the subject of incorporation on the Squaw Valley Municipal Advisory Council agenda. After all the analysis and data gathering is complete, and LAFCO has approved incorporation, the issue must still be put before voters. Schweitzer estimates it could take 18 months to three years to incorporate, plenty of time to impact the village expansion project, especially if it gets tied up in court. It might take them [KSL] two to three years to get their entitlements; they haven t even filed an EIR yet, he said. There could be lawsuits from Sierra Watch. In the meantime, the Squaw Valley project is moving forward, although there have been changes made to reflect public criticisms. The heights of four buildings have been dropped, with the tallest building now eight stories high. It was previously 10. The number one objection to the project has been height, and we hear you, Chevis Hosea, vice president of development for Squaw Valley Real Estate LLC, told the property owners association crowd. We have taken 15 floors off the buildings. Hosea said tall buildings serve a purpose they allow concentration of development on the valley floor, in an already disturbed area. This is not an on-mountain development; we are not sprawling on the mountain. That s the reason for height, he said. In a mountain environment, vertical development is good; sprawl is bad.

The reduction in building cuts down the number of total residential units over four phases from 1,295 to 1,093. In phase one, the 390 originally proposed units drop to 350. The developers also took into consideration public demand for environmental and community improvements. The development now includes plans to restore Squaw Creek at a cost of $1.5 million. (According to Hosea, the Squaw Village original developer, Intrawest, only promised $100,000 for the creek). KSL will also create a meadowlands interpretive park, extend the current bike trail, and offer on-site employee housing. A scale replica of the Squaw Valley development plan will be available for public viewing in the village around Feb. 14, Hosea said. While the concerned residents continue to see incorporation as their best bet to influence the Squaw Valley development, Supervisor Montgomery offered the people at the property owners meeting a piece of advice gleaned from her experience both as a supervisor and as a Donner Summit resident fighting the Royal Gorge development between 2007 and 2011: Work together to identify a project you can live with, she said. My fellow supervisors don t respond well to No. I know reaching a vision you all can live with won t be easy, but I encourage it. ~ Comment on this story below.

3/26/2014 Olympic Valley residents eye incorporation TahoeDailyTribune.com Margaret Moran mmoran@sierrasun.com Back to: August 1, 2013 Olympic Valley residents eye incorporation Incorporate Oly mpic V alley chair Peter Schweitzer, left, and board member Fred Ilfeld stand in Oly mpic Valley, with the Village at Squaw Valley in the background. Pictured is an overview of the proposed village expansion plan for Squaw Valley in a 3D model, with the lit area representing the ex isiting v illage. A larger model, with new features, will be installed soon, officials said. Normal model v iewing hours are from 1 1 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Saturday, at Base Camp, located in the v illage near Sierra Sotheby 's International Reality. «http://www.tahoedailytribune.com/news/7543189-113/valley-olympic-incorporate-squaw 1/4

3/26/2014 Olympic Valley residents eye incorporation TahoeDailyTribune.com 1 of 2 images» More online To learn more about Incorporate Olympic Valley, visit www.incorporateolympicvalley.org. OLYMPIC VALLEY, Calif. In an effort to exercise some control over local issues such as the proposal to expand the Village of Squaw Valley, some Olympic Valley residents are looking at incorporation as an answer. We feel that residents should have a say over a number of things in this valley, and that s something that should have happened long ago, said Fred Ilfeld, a board member of Incorporate Olympic Valley. (It) didn t, and this particular incident woke us up to the fact that we really acutely need it. The incident is Squaw s 101.5-acre capital improvement plan, which proposes the addition of 1,093 lodging units, 47,000 square feet in commercial space and new amenities at the west end of Squaw Valley. A updated plan is in the works, according to previous reports. We re incorporating so we have some say to keep it (the valley) in character, Ilfeld said. Not to stop change, but at least keep it in character and in line with the outdoor mountain site that this is. If Olympic Valley is successful in incorporating, it s believed the new town which would have identical boundaries to the Squaw Valley Public Service District would have jurisdiction over plans to expand Squaw, said Peter Schweitzer, chair of Incorporate Olympic Valley. Yet the motivation to incorporate extends beyond Squaw s expansion proposal. The purpose is local control it s over revenue generated here, determining what services we provide and the quality of those services, and over land use and development, Ilfeld explained. Snow removal, road maintenance, land use planning and regulation, and other services would be provided by the town of Olympic Valley, post-incorporation. Other services such as animal control and fire protection would be supplied by current providers Placer County and Squaw Valley Public Service District, respectively. INCORPORATION MOVEMENT http://www.tahoedailytribune.com/news/7543189-113/valley-olympic-incorporate-squaw 2/4

3/26/2014 Olympic Valley residents eye incorporation TahoeDailyTribune.com The original idea to incorporate included Alpine Meadows, yet several discussions and a poll among registered voters determined many were not in favor of joining the effort. A majority couldn t see an advantage, said Glenn Spiller, an Alpine Meadows resident and board member of Incorporate Olympic Valley, which was formally known as the Squaw Alpine Association. Reasons include concerns a town council would be mostly composed of Olympic Valley residents and the notion that Squaw Valley would take water from Alpine Meadows for development purposes, Spiller said. At the end of June, it was decided Olympic Valley would pursue incorporation on its own. At the end of the day, we wanted to move forward, Schweitzer said. We didn t need their votes to make this happen. To become a town in California, a minimum of 500 registered voters must live within the proposed town limits. As of April, the proposed town of Olympic Valley had about 538 registered voters. Incorporation is initiated by a petition signed by 25 percent or more of registered voters in a proposed town within a six-month period. Within a month, Incorporate Olympic Valley collected signatures from a little more than 50 percent of valley registered voters. I am very heartened by that, Ilfeld said. Those who signed the petition won t necessarily vote in favor of incorporation, Schweitzer said. It just means they support starting the state-mandated process by LAFCO (Local Agency Formation Commission) to determine its feasibility. Incorporate Olympic Valley hopes to file a finished application, including the petition, a map of proposed town limits and a plan for public services, in two weeks with LAFCO, Schweitzer said. WHAT S NEXT? If LAFCO accepts the application, Incorporate Olympic Valley can begin negotiations with Placer County on a revenue agreement to ensure incorporation does not harm the county financially. In conjunction, LAFCO will commission a fiscal analysis to determine if the town would be viable. According to Incorporate Olympic Valley, the proposed town would be financially solvent. It would generate an annual revenue of $4.3 million, with expenses falling short of that figure. http://www.tahoedailytribune.com/news/7543189-113/valley-olympic-incorporate-squaw 3/4

3/26/2014 Olympic Valley residents eye incorporation TahoeDailyTribune.com A public meeting would follow completion of the analysis, with a recommendation report from LAFCO s executive officer prepared beforehand. LAFCO then has the authority to approve, deny or conditionally approve the incorporation proposal. If approved, an election would follow in which a simple majority vote more than 50 percent must be in favor of incorporation in order for it to take effect. UPCOMING MEETING The effort to incorporate Olympic Valley will be discussed at Good Morning Truckee on Tuesday, Aug. 13. Incorporate Olympic Valley board members Fred Ilfeld and Peter Schweitzer will speak at the forum. Further, Chevis Hosea, vice president of development for Squaw Valley, will also provide the latest details on the proposed development at Squaw. Good Morning Truckee is from 7 to 8:30 a.m. on the second Tuesday of every month at the Truckee Tahoe Airport. It is open to the public. Price at the door for general public is $10, and $8 for Truckee Donner Chamber members. Price includes a continental breakfast. 2005-2014 Swift Communications, Inc. http://www.tahoedailytribune.com/news/7543189-113/valley-olympic-incorporate-squaw 4/4