Last Newspaper Checks in for Incumbents

Today's San Mateo County Times became the last of the three local papers to issue its endorsements for Burlingame City Council under the headline:

Editorial: Re-elect Keighran, Baylock and O'Mahony to Burlingame City Council

The editorial goes on to state:

However, the three incumbents have done an excellent job guiding the city and deserve to be re-elected so they can follow through on the work they began in previous terms on the council.

A prime example is a new Safeway to replace the old one on Howard Avenue. After years of wrangling, the new grocery store is slated to open in December 2010 with a design that addresses the concerns of nearby residents and business owners.

Keighran, Baylock and O'Mahony all have good ideas on how to improve the downtown area.

So the final tally between the Daily News, Daily Post and San Mateo Times is:

Mayor Keighran -- 3

Vice Mayor Baylock -- 3

Councilwoman O'Mahony -- 2

Commissioner Brownrigg -- 1

Comments

[Fiona]

I do not agree with this endorsement but in the spirit of being fair as in parsing and clipping and cutting the newspaper articles, I would like to add what the newspaper wrote about Mr. Brownrigg:

- "Brownrigg, a venture capitalist and former U.S. diplomat, has the kind of business and financial skills that would help the city stay fiscally prudent and grow the business base to increase city revenues. His experience on the Planning Commission has given him expertise on city matters and he is well qualified to serve on the City Council."

[KRn]

Brownrigg over O'Mahony. It is easy to endorse incumbents as a blanket. It is clear the Brownrigg has the experience to lead.

[fred]

Brownrigg has more experience than O'Mahony? Really? Who's buying that one?

[SJM]

I am still waiting for Michael to acknowledge that he is wrong about the bond issued by the city to cover the Calpers liability. This was a clear example of refinancing expensive debt with cheaper debt and he played politics with the question at the debate. The longer I wait the more I distrust his motives.

[Fiona]

Rosalie's "experience" as a council member for 20 years is over and above "experience". Nobody can devalue that kind of experience.

Anyone who has taken the time to meet and ask Mr. Brownrigg's questions about the issues have stated that, along with other pluses, they value his "experience" - ie his business and financial experience in the business world.

[Lorne]

SJM -- Pension obligation bonds are not simply a matter of "high to low" refinancing. You're refinancing a "soft" liability based ultimately on actuarial/accounting assumptions into an actual "hard" debt obligation. Only when the bonds mature will one know if it added economic value. At this point, Burlingame issued a series of bonds costing more than 5% annually interest; they, in turn, handed the $30 million dollars over the Calpers (net of the issuance costs they had to pay to their investment banker), and Calpers invested these proceeds. Given what the market has done since the funds were invested, I would imagine the proceeds are worth less than $30 million -- but, we're still stuck with a $30 million debt liability (which, by the way, did not require voter approval)

[Lorne]

Meant to also include this link for more additional detail on how these bonds work:
http://www.csmfo.org/download/index.cfm?fuseaction=download&cid=1337#306,20,Why Do Cities and Counties Issue POBs?

[Mr. Slate]

Where did I get the idea that the City was paying CAPERS about 7.5% on this "soft" liability before the bond? If that is the case, then the 5% with all its uncertainties sounds like a good alternative.

These links serve only to muddle the issue unless you comment on how they relate to this specific transaction. The link above serves to once again, show that the unfunded penision liabilities are not just a Burlingame issue and the use of bonds to fund these are common. The big question is: what alternative would Mr. Brownrigg have used to the Bond?

[libr]

Brownrigg over Baylock. She can contribute off council, and embroil herself in that silly society, preservation, and bookeeping (hmm)

[hillsider]

The thing I like about her is you know where she stands on things like the bullet train and neighborhoods. Michael has been a planning commissioner for 8 years but his take on the latest flap is that he needs more information. Don't get that.

[TJ]

Sometimes the things candidates don't say are more important than the things they do say.

Has Browrigg ever said that the investing he has done is primarily in China, the most pollutted country in the world. His campaign material and his rhetoric never mention this. What does a diplomat do anyway? And what was he a diplomat to? China?

Keigrahn's campaign material never mention the fact that she has brought $0 dollars to the city. Oh, the revitalization of Broadway is her claim to fame...what revitilization? There are still empty storefronts and what exactly did she do anyway?

I know OMahony and Baylock have brought in serious money for infrastucture, bike paths, etc. that is documented, not just campaign chatter.

[JROC]

Good question! What should the Council have done instead of the Bond? What options were available and which one does Mr. Brownrigg think they should have taken?

[Computer]

Sometimes councilmembers that work "anonymously" says more about them than what they do upfront and personally and honestly.

[why]

If Brownrigg has the best financial experience to be on the City Council - why did he vote FOR the High Speed Rail? Didn't he have to foresight to see the impact on Burlingame and other communities that the HSR will eventually travel through? Didn't he see that it is NOT wise to be adding a large bond obligation to our already financially strapped state?

[CandidateUnendorsed]

The Daily Post tells us today that the San Mateo County Association of Realtors has "rescinded its endorsement of Candidate Baylock after she blocked the sale of her neighbors' home by turning in documents that showed the home had historical value".

The newspaper reports that a $3,000 property analysis found "that it wasn't historic". No surprise to anyone and should not have been to the Historical Society who had conducted a previous house history on this property.

Is this unusual for an organization to rescind their endorsement of a candidate?

[Just fishwrap]

It's more unusual than a cub reporter continuing to misreport the news. Any article that says anyone blocked anything is immediately suspect since that didn't happen.

This piece from the Daily Compost is no different except that more council members are quoted saying we need to change the code. But who can tell since all of the quotes are month old. It just fishwrap.

[Burlingamer]

It is never "fishwrap" when an endorsement is rescinded by an organization such as this one. Are you blaming the reporter on this one too?

Go ask those who have also changed their support over this issue.

[Vote tomorrow]

Thanks for the reminder of who got the endorsements this time. I appreciate it!

[JoJoBird]

Well, well, well - a rescinded endorsement.

That must be a first?

[endorsments?]

Actually the folks at the San Mateo County Association of Realtors do things differently than most organizations.

Last election they endorsed more candidates than there were seats. One election they endorsed a candidate that didn't even show up for their interview.

Makes you wonder if their endorsement really means anything anyway.