The Burlingame Voice

91% of 390 Trees is a Lot of Trees

Last night's big confab with Caltrans and city officials regarding the El Camino Real renewal project was eye-opening for a lot of people.  Probably not regular Voice readers since we have discussed it in 2021 here and here.  The most eye-opening statement made last night was during the Q&A when Caltrans was asked how many of the giant Eucs were scheduled to be cut down.  The answer was "about 9% will remain".  There are about 390 of the historic ones in the 3-mile stretch.

The other way to phrase that is 91% of 390 Eucs will be taken out.  That's 355 giant trees.  Buried in the details of compacted soil, broken sidewalks, retaining walls, sight triangles, sulfur fungus, poor trimming around the power lines, etc is the lead:  355 eucalyptus trees are history--well, we thought they were historic since the grove is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, but really they're just history.  There will be 35 survivors who will stand in testament to their fallen brethren and to the ECR that once was.

There were a number of long-time B'gamers there and one that I had not seen in at least 6 or 7 years came over after the Q&A and asked the Big Questions.  He asked "how many people know about this?  And what are they gonna do when they find out?"  I've been asking myself the same question.  Another knowledgeable long-time local has asked 30 people if they are aware of the tree situation over the last few days.  General awareness is close to nil. 

This project has been in the works for years.  Maybe Caltrans and the city hasn't had a good idea of how many trees would have to go, but they do now.  In the interest of transparency, shouldn't the city send out the short, to-the-point notice that this is coming?  You bet.  Then wait for the outrage to arrive.

I'll double back with more on the proceedings soon.  There were numerous displays and a tabletop exercise looking at the Hillside and Bayswater intersections with measurements, planning tools and tree options.  In the meantime, here is Mayor Brownrigg introducing the B'gamers who are on the ECR task force with some Caltrans people seated behind.

Business Licenses: X misses the mark

Now that you have your ballot, you see that you have only one B'game-specific vote to cast--to increase (or not) the B'game business license fees.  (District 5ers also have a city council non-race to vote in since Rachel Cyr withdrew, but after the ballots were set.)  I'm of mixed mind on Measure X, and not because of a reflexive dislike of tax/fee increases although I do have that too.  I get that licenses have been $100/yr for every business forever, but I think the city missed the mark at the high-end of the tax schedule.  You won't find it anywhere but on the city site here, so I will retype the proposed schedule:

            Gross receipts of the business                    Annual license fee

           < $250K                                                        $200

            $250K to $1M                                                $300

            > $1M                                                           $750

That's it.   You can gross $1.25M or $125M and you pay the same amount.  Or $1.25B, looking at you Meta/Facebook/Oculus.  Not sure why there isn't a $20M or $40M level with a good-sized number attached to it.  Many cities take a percentage of gross receipts--I'm not in favor of that, but shouldn't some of the big companies adding crushing density and traffic to our town pay more than $750?

The other aspect of the measure that needs mentioning is the last bit of text which reads "....until ended by voters, requiring audits and all funds staying in Burlingame".  Sounds innocuous enough, but the Oct. 10 Daily Post ran a frontpage article titled "Ballot wording called misleading".  It describes a Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury report that calls out several ballot measures' language that may be misleading:

That included phrases such as "until ended by voters," which falsely implies that the measure includes a way for voters to repeal it later, the grand jury said.  The grand jury report, released on Friday, pointed to other deceptive "tricks and tactics" used in ballot questions, such as adding the feel-good phrases like "all funds spent locally".

Whooops.  Measure X is two-for-two.  We shall see if anyone decides to use the Santa Clara findings to challenge the result here in B'game.

After the Flush: Another epic government fail?

I was chatting with a regular Voice reader about our various topics, readership in other cities besides B'game (he thinks they exist) and he referred to me a "Mr. Water".  I like that.  It's just a bit narrow, but certainly accurate as far as it goes.  The Comicle has provided fodder for an examination of the other end of our water system--the part after the flush.  The Chron tied its piece to the algae bloom which is interesting and at least partially correct I imagine.  Regardless, here are some tidbits to consider as Planning Commissions, City Councils, County Supes and all the other development addicts go about their business of jamming more people (and their waste) into the Bay Area:

Algae blooms need food to grow, and this one had plenty: nutrients originating in wastewater that the region’s 37 sewage plants pump into the bay.  In other words — we wouldn’t have this problem without the poop and pee of the Bay Area’s 8 million residents.

“For those of you who aren’t aware, when you flush the toilet every day, you’re flushing nutrients down,” Eileen White, executive officer of San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, said at a news conference last week. The waste arrives at the sewage plant and is treated, she explained, but those nutrients — mostly nitrogen and phosphorous — remain in the water that is discharged into the bay.  There has been no evidence of a raw sewage leak; rather, it’s the regular amount of those nutrients that have long made the bay primed for a harmful algae bloom like this one.

The regional water board has told agencies that it will probably require caps on nutrients in wastewater when their regional permit comes up for renewal in 2024. But upgrading dozens of aging treatment facilities could cost $14 billion, which would double or triple ratepayers’ water bills, White said in an interview.

There you have it.  We need another $14 billion, with a "B" that we don't have, to save the bay from ourselves.  The permit clock is ticking down and there is no real plan in place.  If you click through to the Chron article, about half-down is an interactive map of some of the wastewater treatment plants with their discharge rates and nitrogen loads of that discharge.  For example, San Mateo discharges 10.72 million gallons per day with a nitrogen load of 1,300.65 kg/day.  The B'game plant was not included on the map for some reason, but a bit of sleuthing around led to the SF Estuary Institute where we learn that B'game discharged an average of 2.8 MGD back in 2017-18.

We have built a lot of stuff since 2017 and there is a lot more coming --- and thus going.  At least the Rollins Rd. developments are close to the plant.  How many infrastructure failings will it take to stop?  Our sewer rates are already going up 32.7% by 2024, but it sounds like that may not be enough. Tell me again about "affordability".  The final kick in the teeth comes at the end of the Chronicle article

“We’re all in this together. We’re all going to have to pay for this,” Ian Wren, staff scientist at the environmental group SF Baykeeper said. “If you’re OK with that, we’re going to have a better bay.”

Actually, we are not "all in this together".  Many of us have been paying our water/sewer bills for years.  We've already passed bond measures for plants and pipes and figured out how to service them.  Let's let the YIMBYs and the developers kick in for the next round of flush capacity.

Calpers: Losses pile up and cities pay up

Watching the performance of the state's pension manager, CalPers, isn't quite like watching paint dry, but close.  It is the largest pension fund in the country--and it has to be given how poorly the state is run up in Sacramento.  While it may seem arcane and far away, here is the WSJ's take on why we should watch:

The California Public Employees’ Retirement System returned minus 6.1% for the year ended June 30, the fund said Wednesday.   A multiyear downturn could be costly for states, towns and school systems around the country and by extension their residents, leading them to squeeze money from workers, taxpayers or other government services.  Calpers’ stock portfolio returned minus 13.1%, while bonds returned minus 14.5%, the pension fund said.  (Ed:  Private equity made up some of the loss but relying on it is tricky as valuations are being written down left and right.)

The lackluster return will mean California towns, counties and school districts will face higher annual pension contributions during their 2024 or 2025 fiscal year.  U.S. state and local pension funds have accumulated hundreds of billions of dollars since the last financial crisis in 2008, thanks to blockbuster returns from an 11-year bull market. Last year, huge gains in public and private equity markets drove median returns to nearly 27%, a 30-year record.

Some states also topped up their pension coffers with tax revenues from the stimulus-fueled Covid-19 recovery.  But all of those gains have been outpaced by the growth in the cost of the benefits that state and local governments have promised.

We shall see what the impact on the city budget is going forward.  We have been holding on pretty well -- you can look here for the last update from March.  I'll get around to addressing the move to raise local business tax rates in a bit, but Calpers' performance this year highlights the variability and risk associated with being tied so closely to the state.

Local real estate update - The Ups & Downs

Two tidbits of B'game real estate news came in today from Zumper and the County assessor's office.  First the Zumper rental update shows B'game in the middle of the pack at $2,300 for a one-bedroom--up 1.82% year-over-year.  Two-bedrooms were a bit of a surprise with average rent off 11.6% at $2,830.  That's the only noticeable decline of all 20 cities surveyed.  Not sure what is going on, but the wave of For Rent signs on El Camino has subsided a bit yet there are still many available.  It's a good thing we don't have rent control.

On the assessed property value side, the DJ is reporting

San Mateo County’s property assessment roll increased year over year by $22.2 billion, or 8.34%, to a record high of over $288 billion in assessed value, San Mateo County Assessor Mark Church announced Tuesday.  San Carlos had an increase of 12.64%, South San Francisco was up 12.53%, Burlingame saw a hike of 10.77%, Millbrae increased 9.43% and East Palo Alto was up 9.29%.

The property tax revenue generated is approximately 1% of the annual property assessment roll and this year will increase to $2.88 billion. Approximately 45% of the revenue will go to schools within the county, 25% to the county, 18% to cities, 10% to special districts and 2% to former redevelopment agencies.

One factor in the growth of the San Mateo County secured roll is new commercial development. In all, 64.6 million square feet of new construction are expected to be completed in the county over the next six to eight years. A total of 9.12 million square feet are under construction, 13.9 million square feet have planning approval, and 41.6 million square feet are under review. Approximately 17 million square feet of new construction have been completed in the last five years, according to the Assessor’s Office.

That puts numbers to our collective amnesia about the drought.  And who knows, a lot of this new real estate may be underwater as John Horgan notes in his column:

According to Dave Pine, chair of the OneShoreline Board of Directors and a member of the county’s Board of Supervisors, projects to counter climate change along the shore could take decades to finish.  And, even then, they might not be enough to ward off the worst aspects of what could be coming. “This will take generations,” he predicted.  To that end, OneShoreline and the county are examining the need for an ultralong-term parcel tax to help to finance the myriad construction efforts under discussion.

You knew where that was headed, right?

Minimum Wage: San Mateo backpedals hard

There is plenty of herd mentality in city councils up and down the Peninsula as the hue and cry to "Do Something" drowns out common sense.  The herd mentality can trample on all sorts of issues.  Think back about two years when this happened

On September 21, 2020, the Burlingame City Council adopted an ordinance to establish a minimum wage of $15.00 per hour for all Burlingame businesses beginning January 1, 2021.  On January 1, 2022 and every year thereafter, the minimum wage will be adjusted based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) percentage increases. A negative CPI will not lower the minimum wage. There are no exceptions for tipped employees.

That has led B'game to a planned January 1, 2023 minimum wage of $15.60+ 2022 CPI.  We won't know the final CPI kicker for another 6 months, but figure it will be 7+%.  Now San Mateo is preemptively backpedaling hard on their formula as noted in the DJ

To help small businesses coming out of the pandemic struggling with rising costs, San Mateo’s City Council will cap its current minimum wage amid rising inflation.  At its June 20 meeting, a council majority recommended setting a Consumer Price Index cap at 3.5% for its minimum wage.  The current minimum wage is $16.20 an hour. The council cited the need to help struggling businesses stay afloat, guard against inflation and provide long-term budget stability.  Cities use CPI because it is predictable for employers and workers and keeps pace with the rising cost of living.

Someone should tell Janet Yellen about the CPI's predictability.  Here is the herd mentality on full display in San Mateo

Mayor Rick Bonilla disagreed with the council majority on a 3.5% cap, calling it too low and suggesting higher rates of around 5%. Bonilla noted minimum wage workers are most affected by a CPI cap and have the most challenging time.  “The businesses will take care of themselves. The workers don’t have any other way. There’s nobody else to help them.” Bonilla said. “It’s us. If we don’t, nobody else will.”

Translation:  I get to pick the winners and losers in my city and consequences be damned.  San Mateo's website does not mention if Bonilla has ever signed the front of a paycheck.

Here's the math on a 7% jump in B'game.  $16.70/hr - no ifs, ands, or buts.  Happy Independence Day.

Rec Center is Up and Running

Last night was the preview opening for donors who sponsored various parts of the new building and its furnishings.  I'll leave the critique of the architecture for another day since this was a great event with a lot of civic pride and gratitude for something getting done in town under supply chain and labor duress too.  The final cost was not mentioned, but that will eventually be known and compared to the $58.3M budget.

Mayor Ricardo Ortiz did the introduction and turned the new stage over to Donna Colson who has done a lot of the work on the project since the very beginning--along with Ann O'Brien and Cathy Baylock (back in the day, about 12 years ago).  Donna had a long list of people to thank and a reminder that there are still some choice sponsorship opportunities to be had.  Here she is on the two-way stage (the doors open fully so the audience can be on either side).  I snapped the green roof and the Elm room upstairs to give you a feel for the lovely design aesthetic.

There is a lot more to see so head on over.  It's a winner.

 

Parklets are mostly staying; 8 go away

We touched on the parklet initiative that helped many restaurants get thru the tough Covid times.  Parklets are popular and with the arrival of Spring they should see continued high use.  Today is the day restaurants have to start paying for a "cleaning fee" as we noted here in January.  $250 per month.  No April Fooling, today is the day.  So I checked with the city and so far eight establishments have decided to discontinue their parklets.

Back in December we noted staff said "Burlingame is currently home to 43 parklets occupying 88 parking spaces" so eight discontinued is about 20%.  That's not bad--about 80% keeping them even with the new fee.  Now let's hope the fees get put to the use they are intended to provide.  The restaurants are motivated to clean up inside the parklet.  It may even be a health code thing if the code was updated, but walking around town one sees a different story on the outside of the parklets.  Street sweepers cannot get into the nooks and crannies between parklets, curbs and cars so this will have to be a manual job.  Here is one example.

City Revenue: Down but not out

We touched on the fiscal effects of reduced travel and thus reduced hotel tax ("TOT") four months ago with the expectation that things could be serious.  The Daily Journal is reporting on the figures presented to the council and notes

The city gathered more than $29 million from the tax in 2018-19, nearly 35% of the city’s revenue that year. But last year that figure plummeted to $5.7 million, and the city this year is on track to collect $10 million as some travel returns.

While TOT revenue is projected to rebound to between $22.7 million and $26 million by 2026-27, as the city grows, its other revenue streams are expected to similarly increase. Property tax and sales tax are projected to account for 39% and 24% of the city’s revenue this year, respectively, and the TOT less than 15%.

Despite the ongoing hit to the TOT, councilmembers emphasized the city’s ability to maintain service for most with “not a single blip” thanks to a conservative budget structure and nearly $45 million in the city’s general fund prior to the pandemic.

Those reserves are the key to keeping away "the blips".  How fast we dip into them for how long and for what purpose is perhaps the most important decision a city council can make.  Here is the tentative plan

A tentative budget proposal indicated the city could dip into its reserves by $2.5 million this year and again by $4.8 million, $5.3 million and $5.6 million (Ed:  that's $18.2M or 40% for those keeping track at home) over the following three years until a surplus is again achieved in 2025-26. But as (City manager Lisa) Goldman pointed out, the projections include considerable planned infrastructure spending that could be pulled back if needed.

Projects include the Broadway grade separation, El Camino Real repaving and other road upgrades and park improvements. Councilmember Donna Colson expressed her support for proceeding with the projects as planned and seeking other ways to reduce the deficit.

“I just don’t think you can save your way to success, I really believe that you have to invest in your community … and if you want the high-quality services, and you want the good roads and … everything to be state of the art, we have to figure out a way,” she said. “Whether it’s through the business licensing fees or really just working on economic development, I want to figure out a way to close that gap.”

The "business license fee" increases that are being bandied about are raising concerns among the Mom & Pop operations in town.   Numbers are flying around, some substantiated, some less so.  I think there is general agreement that a business like Meta/Facebook on the bayfront should be paying more than an ice cream shop.  The devil is in the details in between.  I recall a funny story relayed to me by a reliable source.  When Virgin America was looking to locate its headquarters in B'game, they met with the mayor (Mary Janney at the time) and the city manager.  Virgin asked for a reduced business license fee and the two B'gamers looked at each other with a look somewhere between amusement, confusion and embarrassment at being such a small town operation and replied "It's a $100 flat fee".  Virgin moved in......

B'game History of Auto Row

Burlingame has been synonymous with car dealerships for as long as anyone can remember.  The marques that have been and continue to be sold here are legendary and the sales taxes the city collects are important contributors to our town's finances.  The total runs about $1.2 million per quarter--the highest of any category.  Even more interesting is the history of how we became known for our Auto Row which you can learn about from an expert this coming Sunday, Feb. 13th at 2pm.  At the Lion's Club hall in Washington Park, the Burlingame Historical Society is presenting its first live meeting in two years.

Society member, classic car enthusiast and long-time Burlingame Auto Row salesman Richard Griffith will present Tales from Auto Row. Using many historic images from the Society’s collection, Richard will discuss why one of the first auto rows in California was in Burlingame and how Auto Row has evolved over the last century. With many decades of experience, Richard has tales to tell! This is a presentation car lovers will not want to miss!

Richard's knowledge of all things car-related stems from his involvement with classic Hudsons, BMWs, Porsches and Audis--the later two marques he sold at Rector for, well, we'll let him tell you how long.  He's a trusted advisor on makes, models, values, and trouble-shooting as well as the go-to historical repository of our important local businesses.  I'm expecting some insights into cars that live in The Candy Store, the local Concours d'Elegance, and all of the cool brands that have come and gone here.

The presentation is free to the general public and, of course, the Society realizes there is a football game starting at 3:30 so they promise to finish by 3pm.  Bring your mask.