The Burlingame Voice

Election 2019: Vote Colson and Beach

It is important that we have elections at the local level.  Candidates, incumbents and challengers alike, need to have the forum and walking around time to make their case to the public and for the public to provide input in a way that doesn't happen as much in non-election periods.  So challenger Mike Dunham is to be commended for throwing his hat in the ring against two strong incumbents--Donna Colson and Emily Beach.  He had to know it would be an uphill climb from the start, but as far as I can see he has mounted a credible campaign knocking on doors, doing debates and getting his points of view known.  While this race isn't as crowded as in the past as Russ noted here, it's still a race.

I have had one-on-one interviews with all three candidates and took copious notes at the Candidates' Night on Sept. 18th.  I discussed one issue that had a difference of opinion between the incumbents and challengers - pot dispensaries in town here.  But clearly the big area of difference is housing in town -- how much, how "affordable", how soon and where it should be built.  Ten of the twenty questions at the Candidates' Night were housing related.  If I boil it all down, the difference is that the incumbents believe they have enacted enough change via the General Plan update setting guidelines for 3,000 new units, the Lot F&N project, and developer fees to grow our housing stock as fast as is feasible.  The challenger, Mike Dunham, believes not enough is being done (e.g. "cities have failed to do their jobs") and the job:housing ratio is way out of balance; he believes it should be 1.5:1.  He said he would be fine with us not building anything on the Bayfront, but now that the General Plan has opened Pandora's Bayfront box we should also be adding housing on the Bayfront.

No regular Voice reader will be surprised to hear that I'm less enamored with adding housing than even the two incumbents.  I foresee issues with school classroom capacity, police and fire responsiveness, traffic congestion, and water supply reliability.  There are probably other deleterious impacts, but that is enough for now.  Mike Dunham has some positions that could ameliorate the problems-- adding a "head tax" on large employers adding more employees, building dense mixed-use projects downtown that he believes millennials like better, rent control, and making more street parking subject to residential parking permits.  He also suggested acknowledging that sea-level rise on the Bayfront is inevitable so we should just plan on abandoning some of that property in forty years since defending the turf will be too expensive.  In my opinion, some of these would work better than others and some are just plain counter-productive, but the issue is whether any will ever really happen?

I have to balance all of that with the incumbents' track records.  The city is pretty well run fiscally, decisions are transparent (which was not always the case 20+ years ago on the city council) and Colson and Beach are certainly approachable, available and energetic.  They also comport themselves in a professional manner.  One of the reasons I wait to make my recommendations is to see if other information becomes available, and a commenter on the first election post brought to our attention a May 2018 post by Mike Dunham that fails the professionalism criteria in my opinion.  Mike chose to have "no comment" on it when I asked him about it which is his prerogative, but when in office a politician has to own his or her actions.

When all is said and done, I will be voting for the two incumbents.  We collectively know a lot more about them than we did four years ago and both Donna and Emily have demonstrated commendable skills and energy in office.  I'm very glad we have had a wide-ranging debate over the last several months to reinforce my perspective.  You have two more weeks to register your opinion at the ballot box.

Two New Apps: SFO Noise and Earthquakes

Notices of two new, potentially useful apps arrived today courtesy of SFO airport and the CalTech/Berkeley/USGS consortium working on the earthquake alert system.

At www.flysfo.com/noise you can now see the permanent noise monitor readings and view the air traffic around SFO.  The noise abatement page has always been where you can file a noise complaint--for what that's worth.  The permanent noise monitors look like the one I had at my house for a couple of weeks.  The web page is updated in real time, but there is no indication of which noise level is being reported.  I have bookmarked the page and will be monitoring the monitors when it gets loud as it did two evenings ago.  Watching it for just a few minutes, it appears that the Hillsborough monitor consistently reports in at 2-5 points higher than the southern Burlingame site.

On the shaking front, the state has opened up the MyShake app to the public.  It arrived in the Apple App store yesterday and I have downloaded it.  The Chronicle article notes a Google Play version is also available and reports

Cell-phone alerts will be issued only when the system’s sensors detect a quake with a magnitude greater than 5.0 and a complex set of algorithms projects the shaking will cause significant damage. Just a couple such temblors hit California each year.

Alerts via the MyShake app will go out for earthquakes that exceed 4.5 magnitude and to areas projected to have minor shaking, about what would be felt in a building struck by a truck, said Richard Allen, director of UC Berkeley’s Seismological Laboratory and one of the architects of the warning system.

After the three reminders about earthquakes we have had in the last two weeks, it is a timely addition to your phone.

Local Celebrities Stop By B'game

Golden State Warriors "Outsiders" Drew Shiller and Grant Liffmann stopped by the Rec Center Monday night as part of a Park & Rec Foundation fund-raising speaker series.  Both young men grew up in B'game and played sports here before going on to bright turns in college.  What started as a bootstrapped show on Facebook Live has blossomed.  Now they are the "voice of the common man" on TV right after Warriors games.  They have drawn enough attention as Outsiders for their relaxed format to be copied around the country by other pro basketball teams and now pro football (the Eagles).  Grant is also doing some other announcing and looks to have a career in the making.

Attendees got almost two hours of discussion and all the Q&A the crowd of about 40 people could muster.  The pitch resembled the guys' show which is not surprising since their approach in TV is to give the impression of two guys sitting around talking basketball.  We got some insights on their careers, on specific players, the NBA, and the new Chase Center where the Outsiders will have a nice new studio.  They certainly will be better situated at Chase than at the "Wreck Center"  (hat tip to Hollyroller on the nickname) where we endured the harsh florescent lights and hard chairs.  Grant and Drew need audience support so follow them on Facebook, Instagram and watch their show--especially if the Warriors lose which they predict will be much more common this year than we have become accustomed to.

Big Postal Progress

There is big news of a positive nature on our poor beleaguered post office on Park Road ("the old post office").  A new developer has struck a deal to take over design and construction of condos, ground floor retail and underground parking while preserving the historic parts of the structure--as required by its historic designation.  This is welcome news on several fronts--the last proposed design was not good, but especially because the building has been languishing for years and was in danger of suffering "demolition by neglect".

The new developer, Saris Regis, has engaged BAR Architects out of the city to start over from scratch and from what the press release on the deal says, it appears Lot E next door will be dedicated to a Town Square feature which downtown could really use.  It just doesn't show B'game in a good light to have, for instance, the First Friday bands playing under a tiny pergola on the Ave. with people stopping on the sidewalk for a song or two.

Saris Regis isn't known as simply a design and construction management firm, so my guess is there is another part of the story that would include an outright purchase that can be solidified as the project details -- and the ensuing approvals -- come to pass.  This is all good news and to the extent it has had several council members' attention and effort being expended to come up with a more B'game appropriate design, they are to be congratulated.

It's my practice to not criticize development project (too much) until they are finished so I'll withhold too much praise in the same vein, but this does look like positive news for B'game's core.

Caltrans to the Rescue on ECR

Out of the blue, when we were least expecting it, Caltrans has ridden to the rescue of a substantial part of El Camino Real.  And the folks in town are all excited.  At the city council candidates' forum three weeks ago, I asked the question "what can be done for a short-term fix of El Camino as we await the multi-tens of millions of dollar Big Fix being worked on by the Task Force?"  It was question #4 of the evening and drew murmurs from the small crowd assembled.

Mayor Colson went first and noted that even though it is a state highway, our Public Works crews jump in and fill potholes on occasion, but otherwise we have a commitment from Caltrans on the Big Fix.  Emily Beach echoed that.  Mike Dunham noted there is no perfect answer, but his long term vision would be for more public transit by introducing dedicated bus lanes.  Not quite sure how one does that on a four-lane road, but we'll leave that for later.

In the meantime, let's luxuriate in the 15 sections of fresh asphalt that have been laid down in the right southbound lane--some of them quite lengthy.  Reading between the lines of the answer to my question three weeks ago, no one saw this coming.  Could there be more in the works--maybe on the northbound side?  Only the Shadow knows.

Renters Are Screwed

There have been a number of crazy rent control proposals floating around California and now five of them have actually been passed into law.  Rather than me describe the Unintended Consequences, let's let a Berkeley professor (in the actual subject matter being discussed) lay it out.  The Comicle buried the lead at the bitter end of today's article

Kenneth Rosen, chair of the Fisher Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics at UC Berkeley’s Haas School of Business and a real estate consultant, said California was making a mistake by adopting a cap on rent increases.

Research on local rent-control ordinances has found they reduce the supply of rental housing, Rosen said, by encouraging landlords to convert apartment units to condominiums or other uses and diminishing the incentive for developers to build new housing.  The rent cap will become a floor for many landlords, he added, who will raise prices by the maximum amount allowed each year — which is far higher than annual rent increases recently.

“From a housing policy point of view, nothing could be worse,” Rosen said. “It’s going to make housing less affordable.”

There you have it.  I'm guessing empty units are being pulled off the market as we speak in buildings more than 15 years old.  Next up?  A ballot measure to break down Prop 13 by going to "split rolls" separating commerical property from residential treatment and raising rates.  If this passes you can plan on much more pain for brick and mortar retailers and restaurants on B'way and the Avenue as the rents jump.

Self-aggrandizing Housing Advocates

I have to hand it to Cynthia Cornell.  I've been following Burlingame politics for 25+ years and I have seen very few people climb up on such a high horse as Ms. Cornell.  And that is saying something.  Rather than just opine about her, let's use her own words from a letter to the Daily Journal yesterday as evidence.  She is writing about a Peninsula Health Care District board meeting where she expects the board to just give away a huge chunk of B'game real estate to whoever can make "comprehensive 100% affordable senior and workforce housing" pencil out.  Any educated person knows that cannot be done without more taxpayer money being shoveled in at some point.  She then writes

There is no possible excuse to build any market-rate housing on public land during this housing crisis.

Really?  I'll bet I could walk into Lunardi's, Behan's, or Alana's and find dozens of people who might think "Gee, if it's public land perhaps the general public should get at least some of the benefit from its development instead of it all going to 'affordable' whatever".  They might think "mission creep" at our Health Care district is a bad thing.  Perhaps the community might think the sweetheart project on Lots F & N right downtown is enough of a public donation to her crusade.  She complains about board members Dennis Zell and Helen Galligan and puts words in their mouths that are quote-free and rely her impression of what was said, and then states

We (that would be the Royal "we") are shocked by the behavior  of these elected officials.  Were it not for the great leadership of Congresswoman Jackie Speier and support from state Sen. Hill and Assemblyman Kevin Mullin, D- South San Francisco, the board would continue to ignore the community voice.

What blather.  Her Highness Cornell doesn't speak for the community.  She doesn't even speak for a third of the community from where I sit.  The woman has never run for anything; never mind actually win an election.  Zell and Galligan are both well-known in the community for years and have won elections.  This stream of nonsense will continue as it has for some time as noted here.

But if either Zell and Galligan did tell Speier's staffer to "stay in her lane" as Cornell asserts in her letter, I say "Good on ya."  Maybe they should stay in their lane, let the local electeds do their job - which in my mind means keeping our Health Care district out of the housing business -- an take the consequences at the next election.

SFO Runway Noise: My Recording Results Are In

The results from the airport noise monitoring station that SFO installed in my very own yard for two weeks have come back.  You can see the equipment and some of the background here.  The monitoring was continuous around-the-clock, but I also kept track of 15 incidents that I found to be disturbing and gave them to the Airport Noise Abatement Office (ANAO).  They kindly correlated these incidents with specific flights and their parameters.

Without getting into too much technical detail about A-weighted vs C-weighted (for low frequency sound) or the peak noise level of an event (Lmax) or the Sound Exposure Level that compresses the noise energy into one second, the measurements show:

The monitoring site at the Burlingame Park Neighborhood is relatively quiet with ambient noise levels of 48dBA, considering that most of the neighborhood is in an urban community setting. On an average day, there were 229 overflights, out of which 65 exceeded the noise monitor threshold and recorded a noise event. These events included departing aircraft engine start, ground idling, take-off thrust and initial climb thrust. Runways 01-Left and 01-Right departing aircraft accounted for the vast majority of the noise events recorded by the monitor.

The majority of SFO Aircraft noise events occurred between 12:00 am and 2:00 am, 5:00 am and 8:00 am and 5:00 pm through 11:59 pm. On average, there were 26 nighttime noise events during the duration of the monitoring session.

For this measurement the average aircraft generated Maximum Noise Level (LCmax) was 73dBC and the average Sound Exposure Level (LCE) was 83dBC.

The 15 events I flagged to the ANAO were mostly between 11 pm and 1:30 am since rousing myself to send myself a text to capture the exact time wasn't advisable around 3 am when some really bad events occur.  Two examples of the correlation are:

11:02 pm: A Qantas Airways’ Boeing 747-400, Flight QFA074 to Sydney, Australia, started its takeoff roll on runway 28L at 11:01:35 pm. The LMax was 68.7 dB, the SEL was 76.2 dB and the event was 42 seconds long.   (28L is one of the two the long runways that takes planes over Brisbane).

11:50 pm: An American Airlines’ Airbus A321, Flight AAL2902 to Charlotte started its takeoff roll on Runway 1R at 11:50 pm. The LMax was 65.1 dB, the SEL was 77.1 dB and the event was 40 seconds long.  (Runway 1R is the southern short runway that is closest to Burlingame at its origin).

As part of our on-going legal action that has yielded a partial "win" as described here, one of the challenges we have is convincing a judge that "substantial changes" in airport operations have occurred.  If that can be shown, then the idea that only people who have owned their homes since before 1980 can claim damages becomes invalid.  So I read with some interest the SF Chronicle article from Sept. 13 about pilots transposing the runway numbers that they punch into their computers that then determine from the runway length how fast to get airborne.  It's a fascinating and somewhat scary read, but the part that might shed some light on our run-up and back-blast concerns is

By registering runway 10L instead of 01L, the pilot made the computer system think it had 4,220 feet more runway than it actually had, investigators found. Runway 10L is 11,870 feet long; 01L is 7,650 feet. The computer alerted the captain to use the lowest thrust and flap settings, common for longer runways to reduce impact and wear on engines, the memo stated.

It resulted in a “takeoff with 400 feet of usable takeoff distance remaining,” the FAA memo concluded. A typical commercial airliner is traveling at 184 mph at liftoff, meaning the plane had about 1.5 seconds before reaching the end of the SFO runway.

After the incident, the airline reconfigured its planes’ computer systems, such as removing the slowest takeoff speed as an option at SFO.

That seems like a relevant change to highlight to the judge--which we will do as Round 2 of the complaints take place in Redwood City on November 5th.

Election Issues: Pot Dispensaries; Yea or Nay?

At the City Council candidates' forum that Russ reminisced about here, there were 20 questions asked of all three candidates.  One benefit of having a small slate is that every candidate responded to every question.  I'm working through the themes of the night with an eye toward the questions that illuminated differences between the candidates.  That is not as easy as it might sound.  One question that elicited a different response from the incumbents and the challenger was #9 about having marijuana dispensaries in town (specifically at the Bayfront) although I think the questioner really meant the industrial section of Rollins Rd rather than the Bayfront.  The potential city revenue was also mentioned in the question.

Both incumbents, Emily Beach and Donna Colson, put pot dispensaries pretty far down their list of priorities and thought we should "go slow".  Mayor Colson noted the use of pot among high school students already and that Rollins/Bayshore is soon to be a new, residential neighborhood.  The challenger, Mike Dunham, took a different approach.  He noted that he didn't think of it as a revenue issue, but rather that since 63% of B'gamers had voted to legalize it then it should be allowed to be dispensed.  He also noted the preponderance of 40-60 year olds using it for chronic pain.  Since the forum, Mike Dunham and I have had a one-to-one interview and the issue came up again--this time in the context of the eternal question "What do we do about Broadway?"  Mike's thinking is that a dispensary on B'way would drive traffic and benefit all of the merchants and restaurants on the street.

As luck would have it, the day before my interview with Mike Dunham I was a guest of the CEO and the Chief Strategy Officer of Caliva for a tour of the San Jose facility where they grow, package and sell/distribute all sorts of THC and CBD products.  I worked with both individuals in the tech industry for years and now they are onto something entirely different that I found eye-opening.  I'll just mention a couple of points pertinent to the Burlingame question of allowing or disallowing a dispensary.  First, it very well could be a revenue issue.  Caliva is one of the very top sales tax payers in San Jose--and SJ is big town.  At the candidate forum, question 19 asked about "affordability" and the continually escalating sales taxes (like Measure I that we addressed here).  There are more taxes coming from the state, the county and the schools on every ballot.  So the money does matter.

The foot traffic into Caliva was continuous while I was there at midday.  The CEO indicated they get between up to 1000 walk-ins per day even though they make more than 1,000 deliveries per day.  That last point is also pertinent to the B'game decision.  B'gamers already have delivery options from Caliva or Eaze among others, but a retail space allows for an informed sales staff to help particularly with the CBD wellness, pain relief, anxiety relief side of the story.  CVS was offering some CBD oils in store, but that relationship was quelled by the feds and CVS customers did not have the benefit of an informed sales staff there anyway.  The issue of a dispensary in town, yea or nay?, probably isn't enough to swing one's city council vote either way, but it does show some of the thinking of the three candidates.  Here is the Caliva location in an industrial section next to a recycling facility in San Jose.

 

Feeling Jealous of "Menlo Dark"

I had never heard Menlo Park referred to as "Menlo Dark" until an article in today's Chronicle quoted someone calling it that.  But I have heard our own little burg called "Boringame" since 1983.  So the Chron piece about three investors buying the Guild movie theater, doing a "substantial renovation" and reopening it as a live music venue operated by a non-profit just made me green with envy.  Here are a couple of bits of the article

When the theater opens, it will still be called the Guild and will have either the same or similar marquee to announce rock, jazz, country and comedy acts three to five nights a week in an open-floor configuration Drew Dunlevie said.  “It’s a Silicon Valley impetus. We need more culture here,” said Dunlevie. “We are doing this because we are all tired of having to go to the city to see shows.”

The sleepy downtown, which Mueller said has earned the nickname “Menlo Dark,” has never had a stand-alone music venue. The closest it came was in the 1960s when there was live music at Magoo’s Pizza on Santa Cruz Avenue. This is where an Atherton kid named Bobby Weir joined together with a Palo Alto guitar teacher named Jerry Garcia and a recruited bassist named Phil Lesh to first perform as the Warlocks on May 5, 1965, before later becoming the Grateful Dead.

Where else does that sound like?  Yep, Boringame.  And a little historical factoid is that Phil Lesh was living in Burlingame around that time while attending college nearby.  There are a few buildings in B'game that might work for this sort of thing and there are plenty of B'gamers who are also tired of going to the ever-dirtier city to see shows.  We just need the benefactors--and some city leaders with vision and willingness to encourage such a venue to come to be.  With all of the development going on one can hope that 10 or 15 thousand square feet could go for such a spot.

Update, Sunday 9/29:  At least Broadway was alive last night with a solo guitar player at Il Piccolo and council woman Emily Beach playing with some guest performers for her annual BCE charity show.  Sure felt nice to be able to hear music in two places on B'way.  Il Piccolo is planning for Friday and Saturday music to be a regular event!  Here is Rebbesoul playing last night.

Earthquakes: Early Warning in Mexico

We do it all here at the Voice.  Topics galore that go from intensely local to lessons learned from afar.  Today's WSJ has an article about the early warning systems - plural - serving Mexico City.  They have three.  We Californians have a half of a system and nothing that reaches regular residents.  Here's the lessons that I drew from the piece:

-A non-profit called Center for Seismic Instrumentation and Registry (CIRES) has the government stamp of approval, but two tech start-ups, Grillo and SkyAlert are taking a different, more digital approach.

-CIRES has 96 sensors on the Pacific Coast that feed a system that makes public announcements on TV, radio and public places with the idea of a one-minute warning.

-Grillo and SkyAlert want to send alerts via wireless networks to phones, Twitter and in-home alarms--in other words more immediate and personal.

-The choice of sensors is important to avoid false alarms with a choice between cheap Asian sensors and better Japanese sensors (I know, both are Asian, but Japan has been working on this problem for years.

The Local Angle:  First, here is you reminder that the BNN Emergency Drill Day is coming up on October 12th.  Last year's is described here.  Find the closest one to you and join it.  Second, if we are to be burdened with high-cost, high-speed rail, the least the Authority can do is spend a little of the $100+ billion on an early-warning system and interface the trains to it.  You could argue Caltrain and Amtrak should also do that and they should, but they aren't doing 110 mph through densely populated areas.

Reminiscencing running.

Seeing the campaign lawn sign sprouting and having attended the recent Burlingame City Council Debates, my thoughts turn nostalgic.

A few differences between council races of the past 15 years or so and this one were the noticeable lack of candidates, the lack of audience members and the lack of any media covering the event.

Why only three candidates for two open seats? (Two of whom are incumbents.) In the past, there have been 6-9 candidates vying for two open seats. Perhaps it's the lack of issues? The questions the candidates fielded were almost exclusively centered around one subject—housing.

Back in the day, (hey I’m waxing nostalgic here) there were all kinds of questions on a great variety of topics. During my multiple runs for a seat on the dais, I can recall having a stack of 3 x 5 cards with bullet points and notes outlining issues that I anticipated might be asked that were important to Burlingame. One of my fellow candidates saw my notes and leaned over and whispered, “Hey, do you already know what’s going to be asked?” My reply was, “No, but I can sure make a pretty good guess.” The questions ranged from what was the council going to do about the constant filth on Burlingame Avenue to why Burlingame didn’t have free Wi-Fi to why the city wasn't going to pay for sidewalk repair anymore to bay front development to of course the architectural plan for a massive 63,000 square foot downtown Safeway. ( Simply look at the Burlingame Voice categories in the sidebar to get a sense of the issues that have been bantered about.) There were lots of concerns the residents wanted council candidates to address, more than the aforementioned short list. There were lots of residents who showed up to hear what the answers might be. Standing room only as I recall. Not to mention that if they could not attend the debate at City Hall, they could attend the debate at Burlingame High or the one at Burlingame Intermediate or the one at First Presbyterian Church. Once we even had a debate at the Atria Senior Center.

There were no reporters in attendance—at least none that I knew about. I know the media can watch a recording of the meeting, but that doesn't give a reporter the opportunity to “carpe diem” and ask follow-up questions of the candidates on the spot. In fact, it’s been a few days now and I have not seen a single article about the differences between what one candidate said and what the others said. Wait, aren't they called “debates?”

In the spirit of nostalgia, the debates I participated in were truly that—a variety of candidates with a variety of perspectives. They were lively affairs; some might even say, “Heated.” A debate could make or break a candidate. The aftermath and local media coverage, from several local newspapers, were important litmus tests. Gone are the days when the local newspaper, The San Mateo Daily Journal sponsored and ran the debate. Apparently they aren’t even covering it anymore. Thank goodness for The Burlingame Voice!

Also gone are the days when local races were won and lost by a few votes, (for example, I lost once by only 8 votes! Another candidate lost by only 21.)

Maybe all the concerns from the past have been addressed? Maybe the only questions left are where to build, how much to build and how high to build. At least that was my impression.

Here’s to the good old days.