Facing the Future
With 2012 well underway and finally having my sea legs under me on the City Council, it is time to improve my dialogue with you. Indeed, there are several interesting choices that will confront us this spring and summer and I need your thoughts. I try to always be accessible but we are all busy, so I hope you will forgive and even enjoy these periodic messages. Please let me know what you think -- remembering that life is short and that constructive criticism is always more appreciated than the unadulterated variety. Also, since there is quite a lot to tell you about, I am going to do a couple of these messages back to back. OK, here goes…
City Finances: This past year has seen a nice rebound in city income, although a lot of work lies ahead to get us to where we need to be. Hotel taxes are up as business travel expands and property taxes, the largest component of Burlingame’s budget, are flat whereas in many other communities they have fallen. This is a strong testament to the vibrancy of our community and the attraction of Burlingame, its great schools and parks, to families looking for more space or quality of life.
One of the initiatives I encouraged in my first year on the Council was to create five year budget forecasts as well as more indepth historic trend analysis. We now have financial plans for a 5 year horizon rather than the one year that I found we had been doing in the past. With this longer horizon, in which the significant debts we owe on pensions and retiree health become obvious, the Council agreed at last year’s budget session to set a spending growth limit of 2 percent (the City used to plan on 3% cost increases) and to bank the surplus revenues into reserves and against some of these debts. I will expand on this in the next letter.
Burlingame Downtown: We have one of the most attractive downtowns on the Peninsula – and that is not just my opinion, but the feelings of Sunset, the Daily Journal, and many others (you, I hope!). But everything needs upkeep and everything can be improved, and with that in mind the Council is in the midst of two initiatives. The first is a comprehensive plan to update and re-energize our Burlingame Avenue streetscape. The City has to tear up Burlingame Avenue to replace pipes and sewers, so we decided to get a two-fer: while we are at this necessary work, we will rebuild the Avenue better than it was before. With the help of expert consultants, several design meetings have been held with merchants, citizens and landlords. Some appreciable changes may be in the works, including shifting Burlingame Avenue to parallel parking rather than angled, creating 5 feet more sidewalk on each side. This change will cost about 10% of the parking spots on the Avenue but will make it much more stroller and pedestrian friendly and allow restaurants and merchants to spill out, creating an energy and vibrancy – or at least, that’s the concept. The additional cost will be covered by a special assessment on downtown merchants (with their approval) and through slightly higher parking meter rates.
Our other initiative is to look at new ways to provide parking downtown, including possible creating a parking structure so that we can free up some of the at-grade parking lots for public open space, housing, additional retail and other possible amenities. I will write more about this initiative in the next letter.
High Speed Rail: What a romantic concept – to be able to get on a fast train in Millbrae and arrive in comfort and style in LA two or three hours later. However, as many of you know, the means by which HSR might come through Burlingame could be enormously damaging – the least expensive method and one that is still in the Environmental Impact Report is to create an elevated structure on the Caltrain corridor that would be the equivalent of building an elevated 6 to 8 lane cement freeway, bisecting our City in deeply harmful and ugly ways. This is the very type of freeway that San Francisco was so pleased to get rid of on their bayfront, yet they and others are happy for Peninsula communities to be subject to them. It feels like Robert Moses all over again. The Council has said repeatedly and forcefully that this cannot be allowed to happen, that the line must run underground, but we are not at all sanguine that the Authority is listening or cares.
I must tell you that in a private capacity, I have also been working with a group of businessmen, investors and retired bankers examining the financial plans of the HSR system. Sadly, the Plan is just full of holes. You have no doubt seen that cost estimates have rocketed to $100 Billion, but what is often missed is that this $100 Billion buys only about half the system we were promised in 2008; gone are the lines to San Diego or Sacramento. More important, the funding for this system is nowhere available, which leads to the inescapable conclusion that the State of California will have to pay for it with debt. Not only is that bad for our budgets, but it may “crowd out” debt for other important repair work to our levees, roads and commuter rail. Plus, it seems to us that HSR may well require perennial operating subsidies. I just don’t think this is a good investment for California, nice as it is.
As I said in an open letter I think we would get a far greater “return on investment” elsewhere, including by investing in our own schools, universities, entrepreneurs and companies and the services that they can create.
In my next letter I want to bring you up to date on our other Downtown initiative, some interesting work that is going on over on the Bayside, a recent ordinance on wireless cell towers (which was done with amazing help of dedicated citizens and industry reps) and speak to you about our need for more playing fields and some possible options.
I am committed to keeping and improving Burlingame’s high quality of life. I can’t wait to make this happen with your help.
