Douglas County asks amendment to SB426, stays neutral pending 'no lane reduction' language

The Douglas County Board of Commissioners voted unanimously to remain neutral on Senate Bill 426 — which would expand Tahoe Transportation District authority in the Lake Tahoe basin — and asked legislators to add language clarifying that the measure must not authorize lane reductions on Highway 50. Commissioners also voted to support Senate Bill 69, a separate economic development measure.

The move came after public comment and a presentation by Tahoe Transportation District staff about the bill's intent. Elizabeth Lernhardt, a Zephyr Cove resident, told the board she was “here to alert you to Senate bill 426, which dramatically alters the governance of Highway 50 …” and urged the county to demand “transparency and local input before SB426 advances any further.”

Tahoe Transportation District Capital Program Manager Tara Steyer said the district used existing Red Rock Canyon language as a model and that the bill’s stated goal is to reduce unsafe shoulder parking and move vehicles into designated off‑road lots. “TTD will not be pursuing any traffic calming or road diets on Highway 50,” Steyer said, adding that TTD’s work focuses on off‑highway parking, transit and trail connections. She said the district had discussed the bill with Sheriff Dan Coverley and that the sheriff supports the measure as written.

But residents and several commissioners said the bill’s language is ambiguous about “traffic calming” powers and could be interpreted to permit lane reductions or narrower lanes. Zephyr Cove resident Beth Wallace told the board the amended bill, “opens up a can of worms. What if it did reduce lanes? … This could mean a decrease of lane width, which I don't think is particularly safe.”

Commissioners sought a clear, written assurance from the bill’s sponsors. Commissioner Gardner moved that the board support SB69 and remain neutral on SB426; Commissioner Rice offered a friendly amendment asking staff to request clarifying language that would explicitly prohibit lane reductions on Highway 50. That amendment was accepted and the motion carried unanimously.

Why it matters: residents and county officials say Highway 50 is an essential evacuation route for wildfire and other emergencies. The county’s request for language excluding lane reductions reflects a concern that any new authority over the corridor should not reduce vehicle capacity or emergency access.

What happens next: the board asked staff to request that bill drafters add explicit language forbidding lane reductions on Highway 50. The county noted key legislative deadlines — bills must clear committee by mid‑May and final passage typically occurs later in the month — and said it will monitor the bill as it moves through the Legislature.

Votes and action: The board adopted a motion to support SB69 and remain neutral on SB426 while requesting an amendment to prohibit lane reductions on Highway 50. The motion passed unanimously.