The Burlingame Voice

Caltrain - Eminent Domain

As we await the alternative analysis on High-cost Rail and what that means for eminent domain takings of properties along the rail right-of-way, here is a report from the San Mateo County Times on SAMTRANS takings for regular old Caltrain upgrades.

SAN CARLOS — Transit officials voted Tuesday to use eminent domain to take portions of land from several San Bruno property owners in order to make way for a new Caltrain station and rail bridges.

It goes on to note:

Under eminent domain, authorities are allowed to take an owner's land as long as certain conditions are met, such as showing the acquisition of a piece of property is necessary for a project to happen. In this case, Caltrain needs some parcels to serve as a staging ground for construction, while others will be part of the project itself.

Eminent domain usually comes after negotiations have stalled, San Mateo-based attorney Andy Turner, a specialist in the field, said Tuesday in a phone interview.

At the end of the eminent domain process, owners are entitled to receive fair market value for the land taken. But property owners can contest in court both the seizure of their property and the amount of money they get. It's not clear in this case how much cash authorities have offered to the owners.

I continue to hear rumors that some property owners in towns south of us have gotten some early notice.  Anyone have any confirmed news?

Parcel Tax - Community Colleges

From today's San Mateo Daily Journal comes word of a new parcel tax for the 220,000 parcels in the County:

Residents countywide will be asked to consider a $34 annual parcel tax to support three community colleges in June after the San Mateo County Community College District Board of Trustees voted unanimously last night to seek the measure.

On Wednesday, the San Mateo County Community College Board of Trustees unanimously supported placing a four-year, $34 annual parcel tax on a special June 8 ballot. Such a measure could generate about $6 million annually for the district, said District CFO Kathy Blackwood. It requires two-thirds approval to pass.

B'Game Supe?

With the San Mateo Daily Journal reporting that B'game resident

County Supervisor Mark Church will run for the elected position of chief elections officer and assessor-county-clerk-recorder and is expected to make a formal announcement today.

Church was not available for comment yesterday but it was confirmed through his office he was seriously interested in taking over for Warren Slocum, who announced Wednesday he would not seek re-election, and filling a job once held by his father.

The chess pieces are in motion in Redwood City, first with local Dave Pine indicating

Dave Pine, trustee on the San Mateo Union High School District Board is more definitive about his plans if Church runs and is elected to the seat now held by Slocum.

“I would say now that I will seek the seat if it is open,” Pine said.

and also, another possible hat-in-the-ring

Burlingame Councilwoman Ann Keighran said running might be a possibility.

“Many people have asked me to run so I can say that I would be considering it but I don’t know at this point,” Keighran said.

The time gap is one factor to consider but so is the rarity of an open seat.

“They don’t come around too often,” Keighran said. “When someone takes a position, they tend to be in there for the full time.”

My take is that B'gamers would rather have one of our own in RWC than not.  Please read the whole article to follow the details about appointments vs special elections.

County Tax Trial Balloon

In an article in today's San Mateo Daily Journal, there is a series of trial balloons for more county taxes.  For instance

Possible taxes include a utility user’s tax, an expanded business license tax, a second effort for Measures Q and R — the previously unsuccessful campaigns for taxes on rental cars and parking at San Francisco International Airport — and increasing the transient occupancy tax from 10 percent to 12 percent.

These might translate to additional revenue if they don't suppress business.

According to the County Manager’s Office, a 1 percent utility users tax increase (phone, wireless, electric, gas, water and cable) would generate $2 million. The same percentage for commercial parking facility operators — essentially the former Measure Q — will raise $500,000 a year. Measure R, taxing vehicle rental businesses, is estimated at $3 million while a uniform business license tax is yet to be determined.

B'gamers will recognize the TOT increase as similar to our last ballot measure which was successful.

In weighing the likelihood of success at the ballot for any of the measures, county leaders are looking to how surrounding jurisdictions fared during the November 2009 election. Voters in six cities increased the transient occupancy tax from 10 percent to 12 percent, making the unincorporated county alone at the 10 percent level.

Keep in mind the magnitude of the County government as it is now.  The article states "The current county budget is $1.76 billion."