The Burlingame Voice

Travis AFB: Hypocrisy meter hits 100

My hypocrisy meter pegged at 100 yesterday reading the SF Comicle article about possibly using Travis AFB near Sacramento as an ICE detention center.  Forget about the proposed use, who proposed it or where it is and all the other stuff that people will endlessly disagree about in the political realm without changing anyone's mind.  My H-meter spiked because of this:

Federal officials have been looking for months for detention facilities in Northern California and other Western states that could have 850 to 950 detention beds.  Reps. John Garamendi, D-Fairfield, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, and Mike Thompson, D-Napa, told Hegseth in a May 5 letter that they were “deeply frustrated” and “gravely concerned” about using Travis as a migrant detention center.

Why might you ask?

They want the Pentagon to explain how building a detention center would affect Travis’ water and energy infrastructure.

Sure, filling 950 beds in an established major facility that has housed people since 1942 kicks off concerns about water and electricity.  But building thousands of units that have 2-4 beds in every city and town up and down the state?  Don't worry, there will be plenty of water, sewer capacity, electricity, parking, school capacity, police and fire--fergettaboutit.  Just don't use natural gas.  If you are a big-time Federal politician, you can just throw stuff against the wall and see what sticks.  Try that as a regular resident and you are a NIMBY using zoning codes and CEQA as a weapon.  Want to avoid big residential construction on the B'game Bayfront because it lacks said infrastructure?  Too bad.  From the DJ:

New and proposed state housing laws could mean housing on the Bayfront without specific city standards, despite the city’s intent to limit such development there in its general plan.  New housing was zoned for the north end of Burlingame, near Bay Area Rapid Transit, not on the Bayfront — though proposals for changing zoning there have been floated several times over the years.  The Burlingame City Council and Planning Commission, meeting April 29, in a joint session expressed that the laws will severely undermine the city’s ability to effectively plan its own new housing and undercut its environmental and safety goals.

Councilmembers expressed frustration that the state was continuing to remove local control from the city’s development process, citing its recent endeavors to meet its state-mandated housing requirements by building out housing in the North Rollins Road area.

The hypocrisy needle is pinned to the top of the meter.

Gov. Newsom sends The Voice a cell phone

Our governor has been busy trying to polish his record lately by being "out there" talking to people who disagree with him (he likes to call it "dialoging").  He started a second podcast that is offering guest appearances to such people as a sign of openness.  He's doing podcasts with other podcasters as well.  It's almost like the governorship is a part-time job.  His latest sign of "dialoging" came about as reported by the LA Times

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office said the governor has been mailing cellphones to chief executives of the top 100 California-based companies with his phone number programmed into the contacts since November in an effort to “connect more directly” with business leaders in the state.

Though many corporate chief executives probably did not need the governor to send a phone in order to reach him, his aides described his outreach as a gesture to get the attention of business leaders and show that he’s interested in their experience in California.

“Some CEOs have been surprised,” Salladay said. “Others we haven’t heard from yet and we’re heard from some who have communicated with the governor. It’s about information gathering about businesses in California and how they’re doing.”

That was last week.  The governor appears to be broadening his outreach again by reaching out directly to smaller media outlets.  Imagine my surprise when FedEx dropped off my very own Newsom burner phone pre-programmed with his number over the weekend!  It's a bare bones phone but it did come with a charger in case our conversations run longer than a cheap battery's life.  I won't get right on the horn with Gavin as I imagine the first 100 CEOs are taking up quite a bit of his time.  It will probably be best to wait a couple of weeks, but the "dialog" should be valuable.  Can you say High Speed Fail?  Reservoir?  What reservoir?  Stay tuned!

Fun with economics and the SF Examiner

I pick up the SF Examiner along with the other local papers when it's in the box.  It's a short eight page read in most issues and not a lot different in perspective than the SF Comicle.  So, you wouldn't expect to see some supply-side economics--that of the dismissed "trickle down" or "voodoo" variety-- in the Examiner.  My guess is they didn't even realize it Thursday when writing "Medicaid, SNAP cuts could cost California 140,000 jobs".   The lead reads

The federal budget plan directs the committees that control Medicaid and Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program spending to find a combined $1.1 trillion in cuts over 10 years to help offset trillions in tax cuts — and the report finds the resulting losses would hit California the hardest.

The first bit of fun with economics is to correct the misstatement "to help offset trillions in tax cuts".  Tax rates get cut (or in this case, lower rates simply don't expire and revert upwards).  What happens to tax dollars collected after that depends on many factors, not all negative, but that is a topic for another day.  The article starts down the trickling path thusly

Such businesses would see their revenue shrink, which would trickle down to their employees further in the supply chain, across food production, farming and medical equipment manufacturing.  As firms would have to reduce salaries, staffing, or goods and services to make up for the losses, consumer habits would change too, reducing the amount state and local governments are able to collect in taxes, the report finds.

Additionally, nearly 140,000 California jobs would be lost in directly related fields such as agriculture, food processing, pharmacy and nursing, and indirectly related fields such as retail and manufacturing. The state’s gross domestic product would suffer a projected loss in 2026 of $17 billion.

All of this sounds dire.  One domino falling after another.  The Examiner finds it problematic because it's Federal (i.e. taxpayer) dollars that are disappearing.  But what is the difference if it were private sector dollars declining?  Businesses burdened by over regulation, crazy licensing and labor rules and high tax rates suffer the same consequences, minus the skim at each level of the government trough.  Will the tax-and-spend crowd notice the similarity at some point?

A trillion dollars is a lot of money anyway you look at it--even spread over 10 years.  Will getting some semblance of fiscal stability in the federal budget, deficit and debt be good in the long run?  We don't have a lot of choice given the recent trajectory.

Dunkin' on Caltrans and El Camino...again

It's the second biggest disgrace in B'game after the Broadway non-grade separation.  We know the Big Dig is coming to El Camino, but that will take years to complete so why is the road surface So Bad?   Former B'game city council candidate Steve Duncan is as outraged as I am.  His letter to the editor of the Daily Post is on the nose:

Dear Editor,

On a recent visit to Cabo, Mexico, I noticed that most streets are in better condition than our El Camino Real, Burlingame's state road.  Some so simple and basic as filling a road hole doesn't get done.  It's basic maintenance.  Calls to Caltrans, public works and other officials have resulted in nothing!

Meanwhile, drivers are dodging various moon holes and trying to prevent automobile damage.  The they have to worry about empty double-attached SamTrans buses travelling close to every 30 minutes.  Mexico is better at basic road maintenance than our Caltrans.

Residents, taxpayers, drivers, call Caltrans and your elected representatives.  Send them your automobile repair bills.

Steve Duncan

Burlingame

Steve is 100% correct.  The road is terrible and getting worse.  The right-most tire lane is bad due to the pounding from the buses and the whole surface is suffering from so many heavy EVs going back and forth (and not paying any gas tax for road maintenance).  What happened to tax "equity"?  Sending your repair bills to Caltrans is not as easy as you might think.  What's it gonna take to get a little basic maintenance?

CEQA in a topsy-turvy world

Lewis Carroll would resonate with current California politics since we are in an Alice in Wonderland upside down world.  Just look at how CEQA - the California Environmental Quality Act-- has become a hindrance that needs to be dodged.  The DJ notes:

Senate Bill 71, sponsored by state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, would extend exemptions for agencies like Caltrain from the California Environmental Quality Act for a myriad of projects.  CEQA typically necessitates detailed, often time-consuming, environmental reviews and impact reports. The current exemption is set to sunset in 2030.

“The main interest we have in this bill is that it would remove the current sunset date ... for a host of CEQA exemptions for transit projects,” Devon Ryan, officer of government and community affairs at Caltrain, said. “That does implicate a lot of things on the Caltrain-owned corridor, and we would be supportive of the continuation of this exemption.”

They pulled this eleven years ago as covered here.  It's not like the rest of the activities and projects on the Caltrain corridor are running so smoothly regardless of CEQA requirements.  Just look here.  And it's not just Weiner poking at the heretofore revered law.  Newsom is doing the same thing in Pacific Palisades and Altadena.

Who would have thought that the "evil developers" would end up being elected politicians?

Mullin Monitor: How Our Congressman Thinks

This is a "bookmark" post.  A bookmark post is a repository for future news items, quotes and press statements that don't tie together topically, but rather form a broad basis for understanding how someone thinks.  It is most useful for tracking elected or appointed officials who make statements on a variety of issues off-the-cuff, verses what goes out in edited press releases.  Our U.S. Rep. Kevin Mullin has been good about communicating what he is doing in D.C.  There have been several mailers, and his website is current.

Offical statements aside, Mullin thankfully responds regularly to local reporters and those are the types of insight that will feed this bookmark post.  I seem to recall he made some ad hoc comments on the La Quinta Inn purchase by the County, and I think he did come out against the sheriff keeping her job.  Rather than go search those out, a quote in the Chronicle this week will kick off the bookmarks.  After two pieces of immigration legislation went to vote in the House and drew some California Democratic "ayes", the Chron wrote this:

The House Democrats who backed both immigration measures — Gray, Josh Harder of Stockton, Mike Levin of Oceanside (San Diego County), Dave Min of Orange County and Whitesides — all represent battleground districts.

“I think there’s a basic political calculation with some of the purple seaters,” said Rep. Kevin Mullin, who represents a solidly blue district on the Peninsula and didn’t support either measure.  “I think immigration is a potent issue, and we’re clearly in need of some kind of comprehensive reform. I’m not going to pretend that immigration wasn’t a potent issue in the campaign, especially in swing districts. I’m in a different district,” Mullin said.

I won't veer off into the specific topic.  Readers can get that coverage anywhere.  I do find it interesting that Rep. Mullin can a) appreciate that some CA reps have purple districts whose constituents they need to consider ("political calculation") and b) he appears to be less inclined to think his constituents might also have varying opinions on certain issues--so less "calculating" is needed.  One might say "look at the last dozen District 15 elections" (or maybe more) and conclude he doesn't ever have to think "purple".  I'm not saying he does or doesn't.  I'm just bookmarking an interesting quote and anticipating more in the future.

Putting Two and Two Together on our "Crisis"

It is one thing to believe someone cannot put two and two together and get four.  It's another to see them demonstrate it in front of 300 people in a hotel ballroom.  Last week the Burlingame/SFO Chamber of Commerce held its annual meeting at the Hyatt and added something new--a panel discussion with three local politicians.  The panel, moderated by City Manager Lisa Goldman, included B'game mayor Peter Stevenson, Diane Papan's District director David Burruto and San Mateo County Supervisor David Canepa.  Each had an opportunity for an opening remark.

Canepa started enthusiastically by highlighting how he travels all over the country and the world and people constantly tell him how much they love San Mateo County.  How lucky we are to live here and how many of them would like to do the same.  And it's more than just our fabulous weather.  It was a glowing opener and something many of us also experience, especially if we get more specific and mention B'game.  Canepa then proceeded to talk about our "housing crisis" and how we need to build a lot more affordable housing, so people and businesses stop leaving the county.  The notion that we cannot outbuild the global demand to live here that he just described never actually occurred to him.  It was remarkable.  It would have been great to ask, "exactly how much new, affordable housing we should build?"  5,000 units?  Should we accommodate a doubling of the county population (about another 750,000 people?) Should we triple it?  Should we perhaps address some of the other areas that go into the total cost of home ownership--some of which he might actually be able to do something about?  Should it all be "stack and pack" cellblock designs so it will be "affordable"?  That would have been fun.

Given it was only a 20-minute talk, Lisa Goldman only got to ask one additional question out of a big pile submitted by the audience.  She did a quick tally and determined that about half were asking about the Broadway grade separation.  All three panelists responded.  I listened closely.  There was mention of "close coordination", "better communication" between agencies, "making it a priority" and the challenge of working around "electrified Caltrain".  In other words, five minutes of bobbing and weaving because there is no viable plan to deal with the new, bigger cost estimate.

Here's the panel at work.  Lunch was good.

Moss Landing battery fire: don't waste a good crisis?

With all of the focus on CO2 it's easy to forget there are a lot of other, way more dangerous pollutants being released during emergencies.  The Moss Landing lithium-ion fire adds hydrogen fluoride to the list.  Where's my college chemistry book when I need it?  The various wildfires over the last four years have spewed mega tons of particulate matter ("smoke") and who knows what else from burning cars, houses and businesses.  But all the Sacramento and local government focus has been on our cars, stove tops, BBQs and water heaters.

Only now is our camera hound governor is calling for an investigation into the massive Moss Landing battery plant fire even though it is either the fourth or fifth fire there in the last four years.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A fire at the world’s largest battery storage plant in Northern California smoldered Friday after sending plumes of toxic smoke into the atmosphere, leading to the evacuation of up to 1,500 people. The blaze also shook up the young battery storage industry.

The fire at the Vistra Energy lithium battery plant in Moss Landing generated huge flames and significant amounts of smoke Thursday but had diminished significantly by Friday, Fire Chief Joel Mendoza of the North County Fire Protection District of Monterey County said.

Brad Watson, Vistra’s senior director of community affairs, said two “overheating events” happened at the battery plant in 2021 and 2022 because the batteries got wet. A third incident happened in 2022 in the neighboring Elkhorn battery plant that is owned by PG&E, he said.

I'm all for huge, grid-based battery storage.  We need it if we have any hope for stability

California was an early adopter of battery storage and leads the nation with more than 11 gigawatts of utility-scale storage online, which can meet nearly half of the demand on the state’s main grid for four hours per day.

But like first-generation EV chargers that fail regularly, the devil is in the details.  As Rahm Emanuel said "you never want a good crisis go to waste".  That's the order of the day.

 

  

Friends with 3 million e-Benefits

Back in May, just before the new fiscal year started, the AP reported that

Newsom announced on Friday a $26.7 billion deficit, but it’s really closer to $45 billion. That’s because Newsom didn’t include roughly $17.3 billion worth of actions he and lawmakers already agreed on. Those included a cut of $3.6 billion in primarily one-time funding to some school, welfare and climate programs. The plan also delays and defers about $5.2 billion in spending for various programs, including $1 billion to fund rail and public transit systems.

So how do you manage a massive deficit?  The same way you eat an elephant.  One bite at a time.  Here's an easy morsel from the city e-newsletter this week.

The California E-Bike Incentive Project application window is officially open.

During this application period, the program will award up to 1500 vouchers to income-qualified residents for incentives up to $2000 that can be redeemed at numerous participating E-Bike retailers. Additional application windows with more incentives will become available later in 2025.

1500 x $2000 = $3 million.  It's a good thing more "incentive$" are coming.  Perhaps the only way to get quickly through the Broadway interchange in 2026 will be on an e-bike.  In the meantime, what is Spin's incentive to haul away deserted e-bikes? (hat tip:  regular reader)

Gasoline prices: Get ready for more pain

After reading about our Air Resources Board move this month to tighten gasoline "standards" even more I was reminded of this post from 2015.  The California average was $3.22 back then and in February 2017, I noted the price of regular at the Peninsula Ave. Shell was $3.05.  With apologies to composer Mary Hopkin

Those were the days my friend
We thought they'd never end
We'd sing and drive forever and a day
We'd buy the fuel we choose
We'd fight and always cruise
For we were young and sure to have our way

Today regular at that Shell station is $4.99, 64% higher than 2017.  And we need to get ready for more pain at the pump as Calmatters writes about the November 8th CARB vote

The new rule’s potential effects on California fuel prices are largely unknown. The air board said today that oil companies typically already pass 8 to 10 cents per gallon of costs on to consumers because of the state’s fuel standard.  Environmentalists and consumer advocates opposed the new rules, warning the changes will boost alternative fuels — such as biofuels made from cow manure or soy beans — that may have limited environmental upsides, and will allow oil companies to stay in business because they can buy credits or switch to producing those fuels.

In an initial assessment released last year, the air board projected that the proposed new standard could potentially raise the per-gallon price of diesel by 59 cents and for gasoline, 47 cents, in 2025. Air board officials have since disavowed that estimate, writing last month that the analysis “should not be misconstrued as a prediction of the future credit price nor as a direct impact on prices at the pump.”

Oh, let's not "misconstrue" anything.  We just won't make any forecast.  Other estimates put the gas increase at 65 cents per gallon or higher.  Meanwhile over in EV world, where CARB would like to push all of us, the WSJ has a piece titled "The Withering Dream of a Cheap American Electric Car".  Tesla has backed-off building a $25,000 car and all the other, non-profitable car companies see no way to succeed making a cost-competitive version either.  The Lucid CEO notes

“That market is notorious because you get into mass manufacture—terrible, low margins,” he said of the low-price EVs. “To install the manufacturing base for millions of these units makes little sense to me.”

Abandoning the idea of a $25,000 car comes as a blow to those who were betting that the electrification of the automobile was on track to happen seemingly overnight—with EVs for every pocketbook replacing the tens of millions of vehicles on the roadways.

Get ready to pay more--probably a lot more--because 12 unelected, activist bureaucrats say so.  By the way, it pays well too for a part-time gig.  CARB Chair Liane Randolph is pulling down $278,876 in pay and benefits.  She's probably buying premium.