The Burlingame Voice

Planting Trees: Official and Guerilla-style

The SF Comicle actually provided some value yesterday with a lengthy piece about a guerilla-style oak tree advocate in Oakland.  Here are a couple of good excerpts

Not long after a storm, Tim Vendlinski can be found in parks or small patches of grass around Oakland with a shovel and a few dozen acorns or oak seedlings in hand. He grabs his gardening tools from the trunk of his car, and with the swiftness of someone who has planted thousands of oaks in his life, he gets to work.  “How can you have a city named Oakland that doesn’t have any freaking oaks in it?” Vendlinski said.  His efforts represent a vigilante approach to urban forestry — a form of guerrilla gardening that is often at odds with the policies and standards of the city of Oakland’s tree supervisors. Both recognize the value of oaks, but they don’t always agree on where the oaks should go or how they should be maintained.

Oak trees are particularly important features of both urban and rural landscapes for several reasons, said Angela Moskow, an information network manager with California Oaks, a California Wildlife Foundation project focused on preserving the state’s oak trees.  Oaks foster enormous biodiversity — perhaps more than any other tree variety in California, sustaining more than 100 species of mammals, 170 species of birds and 4,000 species of insects, according to California Oaks.  Oaks are particularly good at sequestering carbon, both from the air and the ground.

I know the coastal live oak in my front yard has grown from 4' tall to 40' in the last 30 years and feeds a LOT of squirrels.

Oakland’s master street tree list, the list of trees approved to be planted on city sidewalks and medians, includes 59 tree species. Of those, eight are oaks. Only four of the trees on the list are native to Oakland, Vendlinski said, calling the list “horrific.”

Which leads me to back to B'game.  The city newsletter noted that

The Parks Division is in the process of planting 162 City trees throughout Burlingame in planter strip areas, tree lawns, and parks. The species of trees being planted will include red maples, eucalyptus Citriodoras, Chinese flame trees, crepe myrtles (Tuscarora), magnolia (Little Gem and Samuel Sommers), elms (Pioneer and Accolade), sycamores, Chinese pistaches, and Trident maples. This is the last of three plantings that will happen this year.

We got four of the 162 newbies on my street this week and I love them.  If you are interested in the "politics of trees" click through and read the whole article about what should go where, how it should or should not be watered, etc.  We live in a designated City of Trees regardless of whether SF wants to strangle our water supply or not. 

Water: One Man's Spigot is Another Man's.....Cesspool

There are days when I think the clowns at the San Francisco Comicle should pay me to read their fish wrap.  Once in a while the thought lasts a week.  This is one of those weeks.  The "editorial board" published a piece titled "S.F.'s spigot won't run forever".  That was in last Sunday's print edition.  The online version I just linked to was titled "Don’t let a few ‘monster’ storms fool you, S.F.’s water supply is unsustainable".  You think hey, maybe the public opinion polls, La Nina, the water measurements, the grotesque over-development or the warnings from Newsom might have sunk in?  Nope.  Didn't happen.  Here's what they said

On Oct. 20, state environmental officials sent an ominous letter to the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, which supplies drinking water to the city and nearly 2 million other Bay Area residents. It read in part:  “Proposed voluntary actions by water agencies on the San Joaquin River tributaries have fallen short of needed flow and habitat improvements, and viable proposals are not being offered at this time.”

What does that mean in layman’s terms?  It means Bay Area water users are unsustainably and likely unlawfully draining the sources of our supply — and killing the habitats and wildlife that rely on those sources. And we don’t have a workable plan to fix it.

For decades, San Francisco and the Bay Area have enjoyed one of the cleanest and most reliable water supplies in the country, 85% of which comes from Hetch Hetchy. But we’ve taken that resource for granted. The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission is decades behind other California water agencies in building alternative and sustainable new water infrastructure.

You have to love the unsubstantiated use of "unlawfully".  But what to do about this impending disaster that the Comicle has just discovered?  Well?  Let's get the new SFPUC general manager--a long-time EssEff insider, Dennis Herrera-- to force the Peninsula under its thumb.  How?  Let's start with Green Envy

San Franciscans are known for being sparing with our own water usage. But many of the nearly 2 million other Bay Area residents that use Hetch Hetchy water to are not nearly as parsimonious in their usage as we are.  San Francisco should not be complicit in the extinction of several aquatic species so that Peninsula homeowners can keep their lawns green.

The same fishwrap that whines about how many Sequoias were burned in the wildfires thinks we mere Peninsulans should let our lawns die--not realizing the trees live on the lawns and drink the same irrigation.  I know, it's complicated for someone who spends their day stepping over discarded hypodermic needles and broken glass.  But wait, there's more.  The "toilet to tap" trope rolls out with a new twist.  We get to be the City's septic tank:

Water recycling for potable use presents technical and legal challenges. It generally demands pumping treated sewage into the ground, pulling it out and treating it again before delivering it to customers. The Peninsula has storage capacity for this that San Francisco largely lacks.  Demanding better water conservation from neighbors while partnering on sustainable projects will be a tough needle to thread. Thankfully, Herrera has signaled that he’s up to the challenge. San Francisco residents need him to mean it.

I love that "neighbors" part.  With neighbors like EssEff we should all be getting Dobermans and an extra lock.  With what else they are exporting we should all be getting an extra lock anyway.  SF can build luxury senior living penthouses that rent for $324,000 a year with rooftop pools, but the poop should be filtered on the Peninsula.  You should read the rest of the EssEff BeeEss in the editorial--I don't have the heart to quote all of the "outflow".

 

 

 

BSD: Sandra Day O'Connor Intermediate School?

According to the DJ piece today, the B'game School District Trustees are planning to kick the can down the road on changing the name of BIS to RBG Intermediate.  The article notes

Burlingame School District officials looked to San Francisco’s attempt to rename some school campuses as a cautionary tale when considering the renaming of one of its own on Tuesday, pushing the idea off until next fall while they update the district’s facility naming policy.

“I don’t think anyone is taking it off the table for future consideration of changing names of the elementary schools,” Trustee Florence Wong said. “The hope would be that come the fall, there might be more energy for that.”

The push, minor as it is, given how few actual B'game residents have signed the petition is supposedly driven by a need for gender inclusiveness since all the elementary schools are named after guys--very important guys, but guys nonetheless.  The renaming advocates claim

During Tuesday’s meeting, (Sari) McConnell argued that Ginsburg’s career fighting for gender equity before being named to the Supreme Court was reason enough to honor her, making her a perfect candidate for replacing the name of the middle school.

So let's use the Shoe-on-the-Other-Foot test here and see if they pass.  If we want to honor a female trailblazer with strong credentials and a towering record of Supreme Court achievement, let's rename BIS for Sandra Day O'Connor - the actual trailblazer who joined the court in 1981- more than a decade before RBG.  What say you, petitioners, are your stated objectives real or is there another agenda? 

Jackie Speier to Step Down...Scramble Ensues

Here is some big news for the mid-Peninsula that should kick-off a scramble not just for the Congressional seat, but also for some of the County seats as upwardly aspiring pols recalibrate.  I can certainly understand the drain constant cross-country travel takes on one (been there, done that), so her announcement resonates:

California Rep. Jackie Speier became the latest Democrat to announce plans to leave Congress and not seek reelection in next year's midterms.  "Today, I'm announcing that I will not be a candidate for reelection to Congress in 2022," Speier said in the video. "It's time for me to come home. Time for me to be more than a weekend wife, mother, and friend.

"There's also another chapter or two in my book of life, and I intend to contribute to you, the communities I love on the peninsula and in San Francisco, and the country that has given me so much," Speier said in the video.

This change probably won't change policy votes emanating from our district since all of the leading candidates position themselves akin to Jackie.

Friends With Benefits - Friends in High Places

We have not had a Friends With Benefits post in a long time, but this one just came barreling out of the blue like a runaway freight train.  If you are going to have friends in high places, I cannot think of a higher perch than the White House.  The SF Chronicle has the story:

California is being denied $12 billion in federal transit funds. Here's how it'll hurt the Bay Area

A decision by the Biden administration to withhold $12 billion in federal transit funds from California could immediately affect services provided by the Bay Area’s 27 transit operators as they attempt to recover deep financial losses sustained during the pandemic, local officials say.

The denial of the transit funding is the latest twist in a long dispute over whether California’s 2013 Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act, which capped pension benefits for new employees, infringes on the collective bargaining rights of public transit workers in the eyes of the federal government.   In an Oct. 28 decision, the Labor Department reversed a determination it made in 2019 and essentially deemed California’s law improper because the pension rules changes were implemented via legislation and not bargained with public unions.

Of the federal transit funds California stands to lose, about $9.5 billion would come from the money earmarked for the state in the infrastructure bill approved by Congress last week. Also at stake in the decision is $2.5 billion in federal COVID relief funds allocated to sustain transit services during the pandemic, which had not yet gained Labor Department certification at the time of the ruling.  It’s the loss of the latter bucket of money that could be felt most immediately by Bay Area transit agencies and their riders.

The article goes on to describe the potential impact on BART, the transBay corridor project, Muni, and the Golden Gate Bridge district.  It doesn't mention Caltrain or the High-speed rail project by name, but you have to believe they are in the mix--or out of the mix in this case as the Feds throw their weight around.

I happened to get an cursory update on the Caltrain electrification project a week ago:  92 foundations for poles are complete, 67 poles have been installed and all 10 power transformers are in place.  86 new cars have been shipped from Switzerland, 73 are in Salt Lake City for final assembly and 1 is in test in Colorado.  There was no word on whether further Fed funds will be held up over the pension reform fight since this just popped into the public view.

Kaiseki in B'game

The Comicle restaurant critic, Soleil Ho, ventured down the Peninsula to lil ole B'game for some Japanese food and was impressed.  Here Sunday piece notes

For a long time, Kaiseki Saryo Hachi had the air of a secret — a restaurant that existed only in hushed whispers among those in the know. A pandemic-born pop-up with Michelin cred, it didn’t exist on any map. You had to text the owner directly to get a reservation and order the menu you wanted in advance, though there wasn’t an obvious menu anywhere online. And it was hosted in a ramen shop in a strip mall in Burlingame, sandwiched between a yoga studio and a sports memorabilia shop.  (That would be Lefty's Sports)

A precursor to modern tasting menus, kaiseki is an elaborate, multicourse style of Japanese cooking that centers seasonal ingredients and aims for a steady balance of color, texture and various cooking techniques. Only a few restaurants here, including Ranzan in Redwood City and Wakuriya in San Mateo, are dedicated to this genre.

I've dined at Wakuriya up in the shopping center in the San Mateo highlands Crystal Springs Shopping Center, but had not heard about our B'game option.  Ho writes

When I finally secured a reservation in July, I faced a procession of intricate, summery dishes, a $200 per person menu with 10 courses that impressed the whole way through. Eating here is intimate: just one seating a night, with just a dozen or so seats in the cafe-like dining room.  It’s hard to feel too serious when you can see people stroll past the windows, pumpkin spice lattes in hand, which can make eating here feel more comfortable for people who don’t love the pomp of fine dining. I think the ambience adds to the charm. Owner Yuko Nammo carries out each dish herself, while collaborator and husband Shinichi Aoki mostly stays in the kitchen during service.

Click through to the full article that describes the food so you can decide if you are up for $200 pp or not.  With this much press, you may not be able to get in for a while.

Covid Tracking: Here come the holidays

Halloween was a success this year; on my street anyway.  We had more Trick or Treaters than we have had for at least five years.  Tonight we turn back the clocks--yet another pointless changing of our bio-rhythms.  The grocery stores are full up with turkeys and in-boxes are filling with "early Black Friday deals".  Talk about unclear on the concept.  So let's use this past week as our Covid baseline for tracking purposes as the holiday gatherings accelerate and the boosters come available to those who will avail themselves.

Here's the data from San Mateo County for this week:

91.7% of the County over age 16 is vaccinated. Up another 0.4% from last week.

Total Cases: 53,201   +349 in the County for the week.  The new positives have been running about +350 for weeks.

Positivity: 1.0%   This gauge is flat again and with a mandate for weekly testing of those who refuse vax, it will likely stay very low as the denominator increases.

Burlingame Cases: 1,631  Up by 13 from last week. Cases in the last 30 days up a little to 60.

Even with some office workers being required to show up in the office and families thinking it's time to act like families again, the foundation of a safe holiday season seems like it is in place in San Mateo County.  Let's hope so.  Here is a chart from the Daily Post that shows the variation in death rates by county in the Bay Area--a 22.9% swing is huge and somewhat unexplained to date.

Lookout. Not one, but two wrong way parkers.

We haven't had a bad parking post in awhile.  There was this one that got the attention of San Mateo city staff and probably earned the driver a demerit.  Some incidents are more blatant than others.  And Lot Y is always good for a shake of the head or two.

A regular reader got a surprise last night when turning south on Capuchino--not one, but two wrong way parkers.  It's contagious.  I'll just guess what happened.  They pulled into the Post Office parking lot, it was full, they went around and saw the open spot to their left--"hey, it's only 30 yards going the wrong way on a one-way street and I gotta get to my dinner reservation."  The second guy sees the maneuver and does same.  It had to be dangerously entertaining leaving the spots.  If BPD wants the plate number, they know where to find me.

Fall Treehugger Post: Unusual Selection

The Fall colors seem a bit muted this year probably due to the nasty drought and perhaps less daily temperature change than usual.  I'm always fooled by how late the change comes to B'game as I was last year when the Japanese maple was the star of the show.

Not being a tree expert, just a regular treehugger, I don't know what this year's selection is, but it has cool "berries".  Located near the corner of Occidental and Ralston Ave.  It might not even qualify as a tree, but rather a shrub?  If you know, tell us.

City Council: Five Little Districts

Today each of us has five city councilmembers that are responsible and responsive to each of us.  That is about to end as a lawyer from Malibu is exploiting an arcane state election law to force the city to go to district-based seats.  You will soon have only one city councilmember who has the electoral need to respond to your concerns.  Get over it.  State officials like Kevin Mullin (our assemblyman) are good with criticizing B'game for following state law on campaign donation limits, but apparently can't be bothered to change state law to maintain our individual voting power at the status quo.  That feels like real work.  Get over it.

How to make the best of a terrible situation?  Hire a consultant, of course.  And so we have.  He's come up with three possible maps of districts that attempt to define: 

1. relatively equal population size
2. contiguous - districts should not hop/jump (like gerrymandered ones)
3. maintain "communities of interest"  (these are undefined, but you can assume it is not model-train hobbyists or your yoga classmates)
4. follow city/county/local government lines
5. keeps districts compact in both appearance and function

You can find maps A, B and C at the city sites I have linked to by letter.  Bear in mind there is no indication of which lots are residential (i.e. have voters) and which are commercial, industrial or city or school-owned (i.e. no voters) so the geographic size is not the best indicator.  And yes, B'game owns part of the bay--someday voters may live there too if we keep heading to "Buildingame" (hat tip Rob Adams).  Perhaps Mrs. Winchester and her house boat, The Ark, will return.

There are three proposals with five districts each, so 15 possible districts that range in size from 6,082 to 6,510.  Of course, the long running differences in voter turnout are not considered.  For example, 20 years ago in the 2001 election, we had 23 precincts plus absentee voting that 15% of voters used then.  The voter turnout varied from 12% in Ray Park/Murchison and 15% in Floribunda/Oak Grove to 36% Lincoln School/Devereaux and 38% in Howard/Rollins.  That is a 3:1 swing according to Old Math!  So running in different districts will carry different challenges.

The consultant's work goes to great length to assess the ethnic make-up of each of the 15 possible designs-- Latino, Asian, Black and "Other".  Those Others seem to be everywhere.  You have to wonder what happens if no one wants to run in one of the districts?  That would be funny!

The city is very interested in your comments so have at it here.  The council will be discussing it this Monday, Nov. 1st and probably well beyond that.  We live in interesting times.  Here is one possible map.

City Council: Rai$e A$ Much A$ You Need at $4,900/head

Nobody has watched the city council campaign contributions over the last 20+ years as much as I have, unless maybe they were on the ballot themselves.  Even then, I doubt it.  Back in 2007, B'game-specific limits were imposed.  That was the Dark Ages of fundraising.  These days you can raise a boatload of "outside" money, meaning from outside of B'game, by getting on one or the other social media platforms and begging.  It has already happened here.  So why the archaic limits?  You could ask "why any limits at all?" but let's save that for another day.  In the meantime, as the DJ is reporting:

In a split vote, the Burlingame City Council this week opted to increase campaign contribution limits from $719.93 to $4,900, scrapping the lower citywide limit and defaulting to the state rule allowing larger contributions from individuals and organizations.

The local rule, established in 2007, had set a $500 limit for individuals and $1,000 for organizations, numbers that have been adjusted upward to account for inflation over time. The most recent cap for organizations was $1,439.87. In the beginning of this year, a state rule went into effect limiting contributions to $4,900 from both individuals and organizations in cities or counties that had not previously set stricter rules.

We don't see all that many split-votes unlike the Olde Days in town.  But in this case, I love this logic.  It may be twisted, but B'gamers are not the ones doing the twisting:

“I think people should be able to raise within the limits of the state,” Councilmember Donna Colson said. “The state has told us what to do around housing, the state has told us what to do around transit, sea level rise, lots of things, so why wouldn’t we comply also with the state regarding the elections.”

I will get to the nuances of the soon-to-be-implemented district council elections next week, but in the meantime rai$e what you think you need and maybe a bit more because the dark money from outside B'game is waiting to pounce--particularly the YIMBYs.

The CA exodus is real, so why do we need SB 10?

There are plenty of people who foolishly believe we can build our way out of the so-called "housing crisis".  Dense development hasn't caused lower housing costs anywhere in the world--in fact, many of the densest locations are also the costliest.  And when the other quality of life components and job prospects are as good as the Bay Area, one would have to be extra foolish to try to out-build the demand and further diminish the quality of life.  But Sacramento has foisted SB 9 and SB 10 on us anyway.  Most of them couldn't get through Econ 101, but that is where we are at.

The Burlingame City Council will discuss what to do about SB 10 tomorrow night.  The Staff Report is super thin on SB 10:

SB 10. California Senate Bill (SB) 10 allows (but does not require) local agencies to adopt an ordinance to allow up to 10 dwelling units on any parcel if the parcel is within a transit-rich area or urban infill site. (Ed:  pretty much all of B'game).

The General Plan Update has already provided a range of multiunit residential and mixed use land use districts with a wide range of residential densities, and the Zoning Ordinance Update underway will provide refined development standards for the corresponding zoning districts.

Staff requests direction from the City Council on whether to pursue zoning allowed by SB 10.  Whereas SB 9-compliant zoning is required, municipalities may choose to adopt (or not adopt) SB 10-compliant zoning.

And the report claims that neither SB 9 or SB 10 will have any fiscal impact!  It might be time to double-check the thinking on that since residential property taxes never cover the cost of providing city services--never mind the costs to the school district that is pretty much out of real estate.

But let's look a little deeper courtesy of last Sunday's Mercury News piece with the sub-head "In an area noted for its booming economy, stunning weather and natural beauty, a majority feel their quality of life is in decline".  The Silicon Valley Leadership Group and the Bay Area News Group commissioned a survey by Embold Research to dig into this and it's not pretty.

In a foreboding breakthrough, for the first time since the poll began posing the question in 2018 a solid majority -- 56% -- said they expect to leave the Bay Area in the next few years...a similar majority said the region is headed in the wrong direction.  In the survey of 1,610 registered voters, 71% said the Bay Area's quality of life has declined in the last five years.

Two problems topped the list of increased concern being "serious or very serious"?  Drought (+41%) and Water Supply (+32%).  I'm glad to know I'm not alone on this.  The cost of housing was still the highest overall at 92% but only up 6%.  What if even half of the half of people that are considering leaving do so?  Even if it is only 10% that would be significant.   B'game has a huge amount of new housing already approved, in design and "in-the-dirt".  Maybe we should see how that all plays out?  I hope the council's direction to staff on SB 10 is a brisk, clear "forgetaboutit" so they can get back to ensuring our public safety, water supply, small business vitality, economic health and quality of life.