Letters to the Editor
Don’t dismiss Lyme disease
Dear Editor:
This is a public health disaster. Craig Burrows, the new Chief Medical Officer at Mammoth Hospital, stated to a room of staff that “there is no Lyme Disease in the Eastern Sierra,” even though a patient(s) tested positive, via a CDC Western Blot test.
The California Public Health Department also has positive tests from Inyo and Mono counties on file from recent years.
Regardless of how many positive cases are reported, as many are not tested or reported properly to the local Public Health Department. We have Lyme Disease, and other potential vector borne illness in Mono and Inyo counties. I would urge Dr. Burrows to reconsider his position.
Editor’s interjection: I spoke to Burrows Thursday. He said the above is not his view. Though Lyme predominantly has an east coast distribution and is uncommon in these parts, he has treated patients for Lyme in California and says he is anything but dismissive.
There was an article this summer in the Sierra Wave that a representative of our local Public Health Dept. published stating that there was no Lyme Disease in Mono County!
However, Mono County’s Environmental Health Director Louis Molina, during a phone call with me this summer, stated that there were in fact positive ticks for Lyme Disease from Inyo County, specifically from the Bishop Creek mountainous area above Bishop. There are a few people in Mammoth and Bishop that have every symptom of Lyme, including the rare bull’s eye target rash, but are being dismissed and set up for a potential lifetime of chronic illness and damage to their heart, joints, eyes, and immune system because of this kind of health care neglect.
Liana Dicus
Sunny Slopes
P.S. Why am I so fired up about this? I had Lyme for 13 years before diagnosis and treatment. By then, the damage was done and I had to fight like hell and spend my life savings to get proper treatment and testing, then understand my genetic detoxification glitches that required specific nutrients and diet to regain my energy and mind.
Our medical system is incredible for trauma or emergency interventions/diagnostics, but just because we live in a “pristine” remote area there needs to be a call for awareness and accountability, for our care providers to think critically and observe what’s happening to our patient population -an unnatural and dramatic increase in neurodegenerative diseases, depression, thyroid and adrenal dis-regulation, cancers, arthritis, etc. at younger ages then ever before.
I was living in Fair Oaks and had been hiking and mountain biking in the foothills and Tahoe prior to when I became ill (went from an athlete and working as an emergency nurse to disabled with fatigue in a matter of days in 1998 at the age of 31. I can only assume that’s when I contracted Lyme, but never recalled a tick/rash. I tested positive in 2011.
So many people have Lyme in the Truckee/Tahoe/Foothills area, it’s really an epidemic there. There are Lyme positive ticks in San Francisco park … to think that the ticks can’t be transported by animals or humans from Inyo to Mono county or wherever is nonsense. I know (heard of) of a few people here in the eastern Sierra that have contracted Lyme here or near here (Kern). I personally saw ticks in Benton near a small pool of irrigation water, and a friend’s dog there had a few blown up ticks and died 6 months later. None of it can be proven, that’s why it’s so important to at least consider the possibility for early treatment and potential preservation of quality of life.
Don’t do it
Dear Editor,
As a 38-year resident of Mammoth Lakes, I am writing to express my disapproval of the attempt to shoehorn a Multi-use Facility/Ice Rink into Mammoth Creek Park West (MCPW).
Mammoth has always, unfortunately, built first and dealt with problems later. This is an example of over-development on a project that in no way will fit the bill of a world class resort.
Proponents site Breckenridge as an example. Their facility is more than 250 feet from the nearest residence. They also have ample parking, sound berms and a road that separates their facility from a residential area.
By contrast, our proposed facility would be squeezed into a space no longer than 400 feet total, putting chiller/generator rooms and maintenance yards approximately 50 feet from multi-unit complexes! The parking situation here is also woefully inadequate. There are not near enough spaces for employees, coaches, teams, family and spectators. This will cause inevitable overflow onto town streets (illegal in winter) and business, as well as condo parking lots (liability). Traffic flows will be severely affected on a hazardous corner of Old Mammoth Road. Noise ordinance and light pollution will be a constant problem in the confined area.
All of this is will abut Mammoth Creek, one of the last wildlife watershed corridors left in Mammoth. This is a predominate east/west wildlife migration route. The amount of year round foot traffic and possible increase of trash associated with that will have major impacts. Remember, our county logo is “Wild by Nature.”
In general, this is a great project, but a terrible location. I propose the town extend its lease of the existing ice rink, give it a cover and let the skating continue for all. Money would go to our own school district; that can’t be too bad. Take the time to do this right.
Shady Rest would be a fantastic, already developed,area. If there are issues with the Forest Service, lets try to work them out. Mammoth Park East would also be desirable. A world class facility could be built there, on more than twice the amount of land with no adjacent residential areas.
Less-intensive uses (a dog park, for example) are more appropriate for MCPW.
Don’t rush into this. You have a chance to truly leave a lasting legacy of a thoughtfully planned facility that will benefit all for years to come, built in the proper location. Avoid mitigation of problems that will arise, and even possible litigation on a ill-conceived project location.
John Hellestoe
Mammoth Lakes
Don’t do it, part deux
Dear Editor:
The Staff Report for the Multi-Use Facility discussion provided to the Town Council is a biased and inaccurate presentation of where the hockey rink should be located.
The Report appears written for the purpose of validating the decision to relocate the rink to Mammoth Creek Park West (MCPW) versus being an objective evaluation of possible location sites. Here are just a few examples (including quotes from report) of what would lead one to this conclusion:
Cons of current site listed in report
1) “It is not a permanent site and if needed by the District the facility would need to be moved.”
This very same report states that, “given the useful life of the supporting infrastructure” and the 32 year length of the lease offered by the School District, the current site “in practical terms will be a permanent location”.
2) “The site is limited as to any future improvements, by size and ownership.”
The most important improvement everyone wants to see is a roof or shade covering. How does the size of the site or ownership (the School District has no issues with the installation of a roof/shade covering) have anything to do with this?
3) There is limited economic benefit to the current site.
This statement completely ignores the “economic benefit” of not spending $1.5 million to move the current facility. Consider: If this amount of money were simply earning interest while the Town moved toward a better solution, the interest alone would probably pay for the lease of the land at the current location!
4) “From a practical point of view this will become the permanent site (20-30 years)” How can this possibly be a “con” when one of the Town’s arguments for moving the rink is to have a permanent location, and the very first “Con” listed is that the current site is not a permanent site?
5) “Retains use restrictions and obligations (school use, parking expansion, snow removal, etc.)”
This “con” is equally baffling. In their letter, the School District states it “would agree to … the reduced restrictions on time of use … If the Town chooses to keep the ice rink at its current location.
Furthermore, a hockey rink at MCPW abutting residential areas will have greater noise and parking restrictions than the current site and/or greater design expenses and compromises to mitigate the impact. Just read the EIR from 1999 for a similar proposed project.
6) “The site does not lend itself to co-location of supporting facilities (i.e. community center)”
How important is this, really? Hockey and ice skating involve a very specific activity and equipment. Why is it important to be near a community center? People are either participating in ice rink activity or not.
Meanwhile, the Town is four square miles. How far away could the next activity possibly be?
7) “The lease costs over 20 years is similar to the relocation cost estimate” Is this true? As explained earlier, if the money to relocate were safely invested, the interest would more than cover the lease. Further, you have snow removal costs at either site, so that should not be factored in as a special cost for just current site.
Now, here are some of the cons of moving the rink to MCPW which the Report left out, and which contribute to the perception of it being biased:
1) There is not enough parking at MCPW, and it is questionable if enough parking can even be accommodated.
Just wait until you see kids disregarding the pedestrian underpass and jaywalking across Old mammoth Road at a dangerous curve because it is most expedient, carrying with them their cumbersome equipment.
2) A visible interruption to the natural beauty of the area. The diagram of the proposal for MCPW with the hockey rink turns the only nice, quiet, beautiful, woodsy centrally located community park into an overbuilt, crowded complex, leaving only a little play area for children, backed up into a corner, and presumably bordered on one or two sides with a 25 to 28-foot wall. Virtually all the open space in the current park – GONE!
3) Potential [inevitable] litigation. The close proximity to more than 200 residences will necessarily result in legal battles.
4) The ice skaters and hockey players mainly want just a shade covering, as expediently as possible, and waiting for a rink to be built in MCPW is clearly contrary to this desire of the majority of the most concerned town residents.
In addition, a Town survey of its own residents show that a majority of the citizens want to have the rink left where it is. And furthermore, Plan Your Parks, with Public consensus and Recreation commission acceptance of a preferred conceptual design including MCPW, does not include an ice rink.
The Report states that the current site has the following Pros:
1) It is the simplest to implement and has little or no community opposition
2) It continues the status quo plus expanded programming associated with the roof.
3) It leaves open the other use options for the Park
4) It leaves open other future relocation options, should that be desired or necessary.
5) It maintains the current financial structure known costs/limits.
6) It recognizes past/current relationship between the Town and MUSD/MCOE”
Isn’t 1) above hugely significant? “Simplest to implement” and “little or no community opposition” in practical terms means far less costly than moving it, and far more expedient. A shade covering can be put on it for apparently $37,000 – $60,000 dollars (watch Public Comments of the September 8 and October 7 Town Council Meetings) versus moving it for $1.5 – $2 million plus, and it can be done and ready to go in weeks not years. This is all our hockey players and ice skaters want, and it is hard to understand why the Council is considering another more expensive, time consuming, and less popular plan.
At the October 7 Meeting, Councilman Colin Fernie conceded that a closed or partially closed hockey rink, instead of open, may be considered to solve some of the EIR mitigation problems. Is this a desirable compromise? Or is this a solution to achieve a single-minded endeavor to put a hockey rink where it really doesn’t belong?
So … would you choose the following plan? 1) Disregard of the environment and the value of beautiful surroundings. 2) Spend $1.5 to $2 million on this effort without guarantee of success, to implement a plan which the majority of the citizens either don’t want or don’t care about. Does this sound like the wise path to take to anybody? If this was your money, how would you choose to spend it?
Melissa Rapp (2nd homeowner)
Bell Canyon, Calif.
A man for all seasons
There is a time for all things. With the election over, the public has spoken, clearly, loudly, and unequivocally. This is the time for the No folks, like myself, and the Town Council, to acknowledge the will of the people, and vow to follow it.
Up until there is an election, that’s the time to argue vigorously in a free society, and, Lord knows, we did. But, once the public has voted, that’s the real deal. There can be no back-biting, no sour grapes, no woulda, shoulda, coulda, in a small town. We are not the U.S. Congress, (thank God), nor are we children on a playground. It’s time to come together and find ways to implement not just what is now the letter of the law, but the spirit as well.
Government has no right to put its own personal beliefs or desires ahead of the clearly expressed wishes of the governed. The only true purpose of government is to serve.
The public has announced that they want no nightly rentals in zoning restricted neighborhoods. The Town has to find ways to enforce the zoning regulations, and collect the unpaid T.O.T (transient occupancy tax). We all acknowledge that there is a demand for nightly rentals and there are places in Mammoth where such use does not violate the zoning code, and that’s where the demand must be satisfied. To the extent that limits visitor choice, that’s something our visitors and townspeople will have to live with.
As much as it would be fun to pout and cry and vow revenge, we must swallow our pride and move forward. I have spoken with Town Councilmembers, and, reflective of the faith I have in them, they have indicated an intention to do just that. Suffice it to say, a legacy of mistakes in the past has burdened this Council with a measure of public distrust that has been and will be hard to dispel. While this Council has managed to avoid “doing dumb stuff,” it has yet to accomplish enough successes to boldly distinguish itself. That said, I firmly believe those successes are yet to come. The Council is working on a lot of “smart stuff” that will bear fruit in the future and make this town better.
For example, the Council has dealt with one of the most infuriating things lately, besides nightly rentals, which has been the inability of the Town’s outside contracted plan checkers to get a plan checked and back in a reasonable period of time. While this may not seem like a big deal if you are not building something, if you are, and the winter is rapidly closing in, it’s an imminent disaster. I personally had to wait five plus weeks for a set of plans requiring a simple check to be done and then it was done wrong. Kudos to the Town Council for seeing to it that the company responsible for that debacle and many others were fired. Even more important, our new plan checkers have a contractual obligation to get the plans done in a reasonable period of time. Locals deserve that kind of service from our government.
Meanwhile, Mammoth has grown up as an adjunct to Mammoth Mountain. We are a town that needs an identity that everyone can get on board with, not just a collection of shopping centers and places to sleep. Are we the best mountain sports town in California?, I certainly think so. Whatever we decide, an identity is something that can give us a sense of purpose in what we do and help to set priorities for what public services and facilities we need. The Town Council, Town staff, and related quasi-governmental organizations such as Mammoth Lakes Tourism, Mammoth Lakes Recreation, Housing, and so forth, are hard at work on this interesting question. Good stuff will follow as long as we go forward in a united and cooperative fashion, and find ways to direct the terrific energy that is, and has always been Mammoth Lakes. In the end, it’s all about having fun, and that’s got to be our message to the rest of the world.
Paul Rudder
Mammoth Lakes
