The Burlingame Voice

County Considering Closing Care Facility

One of our long time, active bloggers has been following the discussion about the future of the County-run long term care facility on Trousdale Ave., right across from the police station.  There will be a meeting of the Board of Supervisors at the Westin on Old Bayshore (instead of in Redwood City) this coming Tuesday at 9am.  Here is a bit of the discussion from an article in the Daily Journal from Jan 6th:

San Mateo County may close its antiquated long-term care facility in Burlingame, shifting residents to other care homes and potentially laying off hundreds of workers, rather than lose more than $9 million annually by renewing its lease.

Health System Director Jean Fraser is asking the Board of Supervisors to forgo another agreement for Burlingame Long-Term Care and instead open 32 more skilled nursing beds at the San Mateo Medical Center.

The real rub is this

The center at 1100 Trousdale Drive currently uses about 230 of its 281 beds and the average stay is a year although several clients remain indefinitely. Patients at Burlingame Long-Term Care are a mix of ages, no longer needing the acute care of the hospital but still requiring medical help.

So there are another 200 beds to be found if the "antiquated" building is closed.

County Supe Race - June 5th primary

Given how intertwined B'game is with San Mateo County's finances, we should pay a bit of attention to the other district Supes beyond our own (which is Dave Pine).  At the moment there are five candidates and local pundit Bruce Balshone has handicapped them by race and gender here.  The Daily Post handicapped them by money yesterday which was written before the fifth candidate announced:

Memo Morantes of Menlo Park has raised $37,329 for his bid for San Mateo County supervisor, leading a field of four candidates who hope to replace Rose Jacobs Gibson of East Palo Alto.  But his total includes a $25,000 loan he made to himself...In second place is Redwood City school board member Shelly Masur with $28,202.  She did not loan herself any money.

It sure looks cheaper to run in the southern end of the county than in the northern end, but check books are still opening.  Also according to the Post, Masur's donors include

Additionally, Karen Ross, California High-Speed Rail Authority deputy director, gave $300...

Soon it will be time to get past race, gender and cash to the issues.  To be continued. 

Friends With Benefits - Part 16 In Good Times and In Bad?

Daniel Borenstein writes for the Contra Costa Times and is published locally in the S.M. Mercury Times.  He's written a piece that is the first fresh bit of insight into how some of the public pensions are digging an even deeper hole than the estimated half trillion dollars

Pension plans depend on investment returns to help fund workers' retirement payments. Systems for public employees assume that good years will outweigh the bad and over time provide average annual growth of 7 to 8 percent.

But what happens if they skim off money during good years? It doesn't take a financial genius to figure out that will drag down investment returns. Yet, that's exactly what San Jose and Alameda County pension systems do.

We're talking tens of millions of dollars in San Jose and roughly $1 billion or more in Alameda County. These misnamed "excess earnings" -- there's nothing excess about them -- are diverted to other benefits.

He goes on to note

The city (i.e. San Jose) established the diversion programs in 1986. They are modeled after a state law that permits similar transfers for county-level pension systems. Alameda is one of only three counties -- Tulare and Kern are the others -- that take advantage of that law. The Alameda County program dates to 1985.

So it appears that San Mateo County is not diverting funds.  One wonders about the individual cities and towns in the County?  Here's another state law ripe for repeal since it ignores the basic concept of averaged long-term returns that is essential to pension funding.

Money Coming and Going

On the same day the San Mateo County Manager announced that he expects the County to lose $5.65 million from the state's reduced budget, million dollar-sized money was also being distributed.  The Daily Journal had a tiny piece noting

The Peninsula Health Care District Board announced it will distribute $2.15 million in 19 community health grants for 2012 to mostly nonprofit organizations advancing the health and wellness of residents in San Mateo County.  This year’s grant to the San Mateo County Children’s Health Initiative will cover 100 percent of the eligible children living within the district’s northern-county borders.

It would be very helpful to know where the two million is coming from and how it compares to past years.  Covering 100 percent of anything or anyone is pretty impressive these days.

Styrofoam Containers...Still Here

The Styrofoam container ban may have kicked-in at the start of the year, but the word is still not out there yet.  The City's Q&A document points towards the County for education and enforcement.  I won't say where dinner came from last night because I really like the place, but here's what it came in.

You have to wonder how the County will prioritize things like this given the financial pressure it is under.

Friends With Benefits - Part 15 Little Rhody's Example

While we have been following the on-going saga of public service pensions and some bloggers have been keeping us apprised of what other cities in the County are doing, here is the Wall Street Journal's quick take on major changes that have happened in Rhode Island

The plan enacted in November cuts $3 billion of the state's $7 billion unfunded liability by raising the retirement age, suspending cost-of-living increases until the pension system is 80% funded, and even moving workers into a hybrid plan that has a smaller guaranteed annuity along with a 401(k)-style defined-contribution plan.

How did they do it, you might ask?  The state treasurer notes that Rhode Island already suffers from the nation's fifth highest tax burden--a full 10.7% of per capita income.  Depending on which study you use California sometimes comes in fifth as well and the 10.7% number alligns well with where Gov. Brown thinks we need to be!  The RI state treasurer goes on to note that education and transparency were key, everyone in the system had to give something and they avoided blame for the mistakes of the past.  Wise words!

Friends With Benefits - Part 14 A Half a Trill

The Sac Bee is reporting on a Stanford study about unfunded pension liabilities at the state level.  We've been following the general issue here, but the news is

California's three largest pension systems have promised $500 billion beyond their current ability to make those payments to retirees, according to a study released to today by Stanford University Professor and former Democratic Assemblyman Joe Nation and a student researcher.

 And the bottom line is

The annual cost to the state of delaying pension solutions is $3.4 million per day.

Ouch!

Golfer$ Bringing Dollar$

It took awhile for the SF Examiner to get this article up on its website, but the news is all good for B'game's coffers to the tune of $50k.

Peninsula leaders are cheering the United States Golf Association’s decision to house nearly half its staff in Burlingame during the event, allowing San Mateo County cities to bag coveted tourism dollars.

But many event staffers, and some players, will likely find themselves staying in San Mateo County. The USGA has contracted with Peninsula hotels for some 4,066 room-nights. Meanwhile, the rest of the staff will stay in downtown San Francisco, for about 4,314 room-nights.

The Convention Bureau is doing a great job overall and the Hyatt appears to have nailed the bulk of this windfall although I'm sure the other hotels will pick up some business too.

Government We Deserve

It's often said we get the government we deserve, but do we really deserve as little as we are getting in Sacramento at the moment.  According to one ranking we have moved down one slot to Number 50

California has moved down one slot on from last year to earn the title of the worst-run state in the country. In the fiscal year 2009, the state spent $430 billion, roughly 14% of all the money spent by states in that year. Compared to its revenue, the state spent too much - California had the 10th lowest revenue per person, and spent the 15th most per person. California is the only state in the country to be rated A-, the lowest rating ever given to a state by S&P. Despite the huge amount the state spends each year, conditions remain poor. California has the second-lowest percentage of adults with a high school diploma in the country, the second-highest foreclosure rate and is tied for the second highest unemployment rate in the U.S.

And the governor's response to all this and a $12.9B deficit over the next 19 months is:

Under the governor's proposal, California would impose a half-cent sales tax increase starting in 2013 and an income tax hike on high-income earners retroactive to January 2012. Both would expire at the end of 2016.

The upper-income tax hike would start with a one-percentage-point increase at $250,000 for individuals and $500,000 for joint filers. A separate increase would charge 1.5 percentage points on income between $300,000 and $500,000; a third bracket would impose two percentage points on income above $500,000 for individuals. (Amounts are double for joint filers.)

And to continue supporting the High-cost Rail nonsense that has ballooned to $100B.  One of his appointees to the Authority has a letter in today's Wall Stree Journal that reads like medical marijuana-induced fiction.  Meanwhile, CSU tuition hikes are planned at +16% and the budget trickery that is happening basically just sends the costs to the counties and cities.  Very sad.  Remember this when you are voting on the next set of Propositions.

High Cost Rail - Part 63 Taking it to Sac'to

Yesterday was a big day in Sacramento as the "new" business plan for High Cost Rail was unveiled at the High Cost Fail Authority's board meeting.  A number of B'gamers attended and spoke--all opposed--along with about 75 other members of the public.  Courtesy of one of the main watchdogs, here is a bit of a synopsis with links for more detail:

Cal Watchdog wrote an excellent summary of the nearly 2 hours of public comment at yesterday’s High Speed Rail Authority board meeting. Considering that the HSRA does not include public comment in their meeting minutes – which exacerbates the feeling of not being heard or acknowledged – this article performs a great public service of documenting these 60-second attempts to convey more than a sound bite.

Although Cal Watchdogger Katy Grimes quoted a full two dozen speakers, it was the necessary tip of the iceberg. For example, CARRD commented that they're using the same broken ridership models and that the Funding Plan which the board voted to approve may have trouble meeting its legal requirements. 

The HSRA will upload the board meeting video at: http://cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/2011_November.aspx

Cal Watchdog’s article and intro: http://www.calwatchdog.com/2011/11/04/hundreds-critique-rail-plan-at-meeting/

“Board Chairman Thomas Umberg announced at the beginning of the meeting that there were so many who had signed up to give public comments, there would only be 90 seconds allowed for each person to speak.  Before the public comments were finished, Umberg reduced the time allotted for comments to just 60 seconds."

“And speak they did. People traveled from Bakersfield, Fresno, Hanford and towns throughout Kings County. They came from San Francisco, the East Bay and the Peninsula, well-prepared with facts, figures and research, to tell the HSR board why the “boondoggle” rail plan should be shelved.

“There were only two of the usual city government brown-nosers in attendance, asking to partner with the Rail Authority to make sure that rail came through their cities.”

Congratulations to all who dedicated a day to voice their opinions and participate in the process, and thank you, Ms. Grimes, for such thorough coverage!

As we dig into the new $99 Billion dollar business plan that includes flip-flops on reusing parts of existing track as well as another fictitous ridership plan, we'll continue our coverage which you can check out here.