San Mateo City Council Candidate Summaries, 2017

Some thoughts on the seven candidates whose names will be on the ballot for the San Mateo City Council election on November 7, 2107:

These reflections are informed by six years of active engagement in San Mateo’s affairs, my current role as Public Works Chair, the statements of the candidates (available here - http://www.cityofsanmateo.org/2352/Meet-the-2017-City-Council-Candidates), and the candidates’ presentations at 2 out the 3 organized candidate forums.

These are my personal opinions.

Kara Cox

Evaluation Parameters*

I have based my evaluation primarily on two key parameters – Civic Experience and Follow the Money.

Civic Experience

In my opinion, experience in government is essential for a City Council Member. The notion of sending someone into a government position without intimate knowledge of the role they are confronting has proven detrimental in Washington. Let’s not experiment by sending someone unexperienced to San Mateo City Hall, which is complex and unyielding in its own way.

Follow the Money*                                                                      
My bias leans heavily towards grassroots candidates (defined here as receiving less than one third of their funding from businesses or unions). I like to see the majority of campaign financing donated from local residents or the candidate him or herself.  I don’t mind business, union or real estate interests per se, but major funding from outside the city should be looked at with a critical eye.  

* Data set pulled Oct 9 - totals have changed. For up to date reports on current contributions and loans please link here - https://www.cityofsanmateo.org/3739/24-Hour-Campaign-Contribution-Reports 

Candidate Summaries

Rick Bonilla   - http://www.bonillaforsanmateo.com/

Neighborhood: Hayward Park

Civic Experience: Strong

Bonilla has been closely involved with shaping the affairs of our city for over twenty years. His first major appointment was with Bay Meadows/Transportation Corridor Citizens Advisory Committee so he has been involved with the new development at that location since the beginning. This kind of deep knowledge of the history of San Mateo is invaluable for a City Council Member. I admire his gradual ascent to the Council as it allowed him to really learn and understand what is and is not possible in the context of City Hall.

Another quality that I like is that Bonilla is active and outspoken support of all San Mateo citizens, not just homeowners. He is an active supporter of unions and the equity value of all workers receiving a living wage. His leadership with regard to establishing Peninsula Clean Energy was critical for its success.

Follow the Money:

So far Bonilla has raised around 27K. Approximately half of Bonilla’s campaign funds come from unions. Individuals make up around a quarter of his donations. Real estate interest represent around 15%.

Summary: I support this candidate without reservation based on his experience and commitment to helping all San Mateo citizens.

Chelsea Bonini - http://www.chelseabonini.com/

Neighborhood: Beresford/Hillsdale

Civic Experience: Good

While I have not met Chelsea, I have heard only good things about her time on the San Mateo Foster City School Board as well as her standing and reputation within the Democratic Party. As with municipal government, leaders at the school board must engage with stakeholders with diverse opinions and high expectations. From my understanding, she has approached this challenge with bravery and determination. Link here for her detailed list of her accomplishments -

 http://www.chelseabonini.com/images/55460/Chelsea%20Resume%207.30.17.pdf

However, while there are definite parallels between the school board and city government, there is nearly no overlap in terms of personnel and process. It is for this reason I cannot truly unpack the extent of Bonini’s accomplishments on the school board, nor how she would adapt to the new challenge of Council Member.

Follow the Money: Grassroots Certified

So far Bonini has raised approximately 18.5K in order to run. Slightly over half of this is loans. Slightly under half comes from individual donors. She has taken no money from real estate interests and only a very small percent from the business community. 

Summary: While I do not doubt Bonini’s ability to be an ethical leader, as a Council Member she will face the additional challenge of no prior city hall experience

Mark DePaula - https://www.facebook.com/mdforsmcouncil/

Neighborhood: Not included in campaign materials

Civic Experience: Not Clear

At the one candidate forum he did attend, Mr. DePaula stated he is running on a staunchly anti-growth platform and wants a moratorium on all new constructions. He apparently has no previous experience in City government. He did not attend the second forum despite confirming that afternoon. At present there is no candidate statement or statement of qualifications available.

Follow the Money:

As this candidate plans to raise less than 2K detailed filings are not required.

Summary: Nonviable

Charlie Drechsler - https://www.facebook.com/sanmateostrong/

Neighborhood: North Shoreview

Civic Experience: Strong

Drechsler has deep roots in the community and has regularly served in leadership roles in pursuit of the good of his community. He held multiple terms as President of the North Shoreview Neighborhood Association as well as Block Captain for the Citywide Neighborhood Watch Board. In his capacity as a city worker, Drechsler has been elected by his peers as union president. He supports increasing the minimum wage. His vote against accepting a settlement from SPI was crucial for preserving the Bridgepointe ice skating rink.

In terms of direct experience working with the City of San Mateo, Drechsler has a lot. Over the past 16 years he has been on several commissions: Community Improvement (6 years), Public Works (5 years) and Planning (entering 5^th year).  He has served as the Chair of all three.

Follow the Money: Grassroots Certified

So far Drechsler has raised approximately 8K. Slightly under half is loans. Half is from individuals. He has taken no money from real estate interests and only a very small percent from the business community.

Summary: A grassroots candidate with a long and diverse track record for leadership and community service

Joe Goethals - http://www.joegoethals.com/

Neighborhood: Not included in campaign materials

Civic Experience: Strong

Goethals has been a Council Member since 2013 and has previously served as Chair of the Public Works Commission, as well as the Director of the Peninsula Health Care District. He is balanced, sympathetic and has the chops to do the job. He has a tremendous wellspring of faith in the good of people and is not the sort who rushes to judgement. Instead of quick, reactive solutions, Goethals diligently probes multiple perspectives before suggesting a course of action.

A key player in the nearly impossible task of finding a compromise which would allow the San Mateo ice skating rink to stay open, Goethals delivered on his promise to help and the ice rink has been reopened. These actions displays an incredible commitment to using the clout of his office in support of the agenda set by the citizens he was chosen to represent.

Follow the Money:

So far Goethals has raised a little over 41K. A little under half comes from individuals. Union support accounts for just under 20% and real estate interests make up just over 20%.

Summary:  An established and talented politician willing to put in the work

Robert G. Newsom, Jr. - https://www.robertnewsomjr.com/

Neighborhood: Sunnybrae

Civic Experience: Weak

Newsom has some limited experience with city government given time spent on projects for San Francisco, but has held no position or appointment related to San Mateo. He is open about wanting to pursue a measured growth agenda due to the impacts he and his neighbors are experiencing around the Sunnybrae. He also voiced support for a higher minimum wage. He attended both forums and seemed comfortable speaking in public and passionate about serving San Mateo.

Follow the Money:

As this candidate plans to raise less than 2K detailed filings are not required.

Summary: I think he would make an amazing city commissioner and hope he pursues other opportunities to get involved with helping his neighborhood

Eric Rodriguez - http://www.ericrodriguez.com/

Neighborhood: Aragon/Baywood

Civic Experience: Weak

I have met Rodriguez. He is clever and witty and I bet he is an outstanding Little League coach. I like that at the first candidate forum he highlighted the need for addressing the pension imbalance, which is a massive expense slowly inundating our city budget.

His experience with city management is limited to 2 years on the planning commission and he was passed over for the position of Chair by a vote of 4-1 by his peers. Rodriguez voted to accept money in exchange for rezoning the ice skating rink. He is running a glossy campaign, but, for me, substance is lacking.

Follow the Money:

So far Rodriguez has raised almost 70K. This is nearly double Goethals, who is the second highest fund raiser. Over half of his money comes from real estate interests. The National Association of Realtors (based in Illinois) and the California Apartments Association (Sacramento) have spent over 21K in support of  the Rodriguez’ campaign. No other candidate has recieved more than iK from these entities. Overall, over 50% of the total funding for Rodriguez has come from real estate interests. He has raised nearly 10K (approximately 15%) from out of the state while no other candidate recieved any funds from outside California. Less than a third of his donations come from individuals. He has negligible support from unions. 

Summary: With more years of civic engagement, Eric may prove himself worthy of a public office in San Mateo, but to vote for him now you must prioritize potential over actual track record and consider whether his major financial backers are in tune with your interests.

*Outline of My Most Prominent Biases

Bridgepointe Ice Skating Rink (Now reopened as Nazareth Ice Oasis)

The impetus for Joe Goethal’s dedicated negotiations to reopen the ice skating rink was Charlie Drechsler’s vote against a buyout (in addition to the votes of Commissioners Ebneter and Whitaker). Voting against a big pile of money in favor of an ideal takes guts. Committing yourself to finding the impossible solution takes dedication. Together Goethals and Drechsler delivered an amazing win for the community. While he was a Planning Commissioner Bonilla was so voracious in his denouncement of the rezoning he was forced to recuse himself from further meetings on the matter.

Issues over Party

My ideals lie in a time when party affiliation was a marker of how you lean as opposed to how you necessarily vote. I am not a member of the Democratic Party out of protest of their exclusive hold on Californian politics. If we are all Democrats what does it mean? If I figure it out, perhaps I will reconsider.

If you are into voting party line, your go-to-candidates Bonilla, Bonini and Goethals. All the candidates running are doing so as Democrats. The candidates endorsed by the Democratic Party were found to hold ideals most closely aligned with the overall principles of the party. Link here for their full recommendation -
http://www.smcdems.org/smcdems_endorsements_2017

Rick Bonilla

A mentor and friend for many years, Rick is a demonstration of the highest ideals of a public servant. His record is clear and consistent and his ideals unwavering. While no one is infallible, Rick is pretty close. So yes, I am a biased about him.

Letter to the Planning Commission, PA17-034

Dear Planning Commission,

I am writing tonight in to support 4 changes to the existing plans for the new sewage treatment plant; size, location, decentralization and sustainability.

1)      Size

The proposed plant, 78 million gallons per day, is far larger than necessary if measures are taken to seal the laterals and mains which have failed. Shoring up the whole sewage system will result in smaller peak wet weather flow predictions, the outcome of which would be the option to reduce the size of the proposed plant’s capacity. This would result in significant savings for the city, both in terms of capital outlay but also annual maintenance expenses as a larger plants uses more energy.

2)      Location

There are key shortcomings of the proposed plant’s location. Primarily, its location at the bay front is questionable. San Mateo County has been deemed the number one county in California at risk due to sea level rise. Placing the city’s sole sewage treatment plant in the direct path of where water is projected to inundate the coast is a risky proposal. And, even if we accept the existing site is the most satisfactory under expected conditions, it is essential that the plant be elevated as much as possible in order to avoid a catastrophic citywide failure.

3)      Decentralization

The most progressive practice advanced in the area of waste water treatment today is for processing to be dispersed throughout the city. There are two key benefits to this model. One, energy use is cut down due to the decreased distance waste must be pumped for treatment, resulting in annual cost savings. Two, having several substations dramatically reduces the likelihood of a citywide failure.

4)      Sustainability

Given San Mateo has no emergency water reserves, it is critical our waste water treatment plant process water to the level it is clean enough to drink, as well as keep supply available in the case of a disaster. Having multiple plants in dispersed locations with this capability would be the safest option to ensure the health and safety of our residents in all circumstances.

Thank you for your time and consideration

Letter to the City Council, Sewer Rate Increase (submitted Monday, April 17)

Dear City Council,

Last week, in my capacity as a Public Works Commissioner, I voted against raising the sewage rate a flat 36%. I did this not because I do not recognize the need to overhaul the existing sewage plant, nor because I deny the need for additional revenue in order to do so. My position has been, and remains, that because the impact of those households with faulty lateral lines is much higher those of citizens who do maintain their pipes, taxes should reflect this fact.

Ideally, the flat tax of the city would be set higher than 36% with discounts offered to homeowners upon proof their lateral is not allowing excessive water intrusion. In addition, San Mateo should have replacement required at Point of Sale, or, at a bare minimum, an inspection report should be required. According to SAMCAR more than 1800 homes sold in San Mateo (1810, precisely) over the last three years, and each represented an opportunity to improve our sewage system for everyone.

Attached is a picture, taken this Saturday, of raw sewage and pieces of toilet paper pooled on the sidewalk a few houses down from where I live in Hayward Park.  This kind of overflow will not improve under the current Clean Water Program because its high level planning does not adequately address major upstream dysfunction such as failing laterals.

We cannot truly have a clean water system in San Mateo if faulty laterals are not replaced. I also believe providing a strong financial incentive (such as a tax penalty for faulty laterals or higher rates for those who cannot prove compliance) is the best means of achieving a fully updated and sealed system.

It pains me that the city is proposing to spend nearly a billion dollars without addressing failing laterals in any capacity. A holistic approach is required to have truly clean water (and sidewalks) in San Mateo.

Respectfully

Dear Planning Commission, Thank You

I came tonight to thank all the planning commissioners for their service. Though we may not always agree, I fully appreciate the time you dedicate to our city.

However, I am here in particularly to praise the three commissioners who voted against accepting the offer to rezone the Bridgepointe rink. I honestly don’t believe SPI would have issued its reversal without your firm stance. Sue Lempert called you heroes, and I believe she was right.

Faith in government is low right now in no small part to the belief that our representatives are not standing up for citizen’s rights and dignity when they are challenged by corporate entities. United Airlines recently provided us with a visual of what this sort of bullying can entail.

In February, I spoke against supporting the Bridgepointe package both from an ethical perspective and due to the fact allowing a buyout from the General Plan sets a bad precedent. I still think these are the most important reasons to have denied the rezoning. But even considering the matter from a purely monetary perspective, the numbers didn’t add up. A new rink would have cost upwards of 20 million not including the land. 8 million, the price of the sellout, was a small portion of the replacement cost.

Diane, Charlie, John – Thank you for not voting for less than we deserved. You told SPI to go back and bring San Mateo a better offer – and they did. Bravo…I am most grateful.

Letter to the Planning Commission, Bridgepointe Ice Skating Rink

Dear Chair, Vice Chair and Commissioners,

I am here tonight to remind you, once again, how important this issue is to this community and to ask that you do everything in your power to bring back an ice rink for use by the citizens of San Mateo. For those of you who missed the beginning of the struggle to regain what was promised the people in our community, it has been a long, relentless battle against a company who cares more about the bottom line than maintaining the spirit and meaning of its agreement with our City.

Many who have been here before could not be here tonight and others are frustrated at the length of the process and lack of results. This makes sense.

The loss for the children who were growing up engaged in an activity they cherished and lost the opportunity to practice is heartbreaking and I hope this will not have to continue for another generation. But we are running out of time if something is truly going to change for the better in this fight.

It has been many years now since the applicant begin this campaign to substitute retail for recreation. At one early meeting I brought my newborn son. He is nearly three and ready to skate, provided there was a location. And no, once a year at a small, crowded rink during the winter months does not count.

Looking at the bigger picture, if the City does not enforce development agreements they have no meaning. Accepting a payoff for changes to the Master Plan, in my opinion, sends the wrong signal and sets a dangerous precedent.

I wish you would force the reopening of the Bridgepointe skating rink, because that is what seems just to me. However, if you choose to take the course of action prescribed by the applicant, do so with caution, put the money in a trust and consider all loopholes.

Ultimately, keep in mind - there is no win for most people here except a permanent ice skating rink. Please make that happen, somehow.

And finally, this time, whatever you decide, make the agreement ironclad and beyond negotiation. The future of our City is depending on it.

Thank you

Letter to the Council regarding the October 2016 Public Works Meeting

Dear Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Council Members,

I wanted to take a moment to share with you the current public sentiment surrounding the possibility an underground sewage storage tank will be placed below Fiesta Meadows Park.

First and foremost, I thank the people who spoke at the October Public Works meeting.

To summarize my beliefs and findings from that night, I do not have objections with an in system storage approach to fixing the City’s Sanitary Sewage Overflow (SSO) problem. In terms of accepting the findings of the staff, I agree it will provide a beneficial function with relative ease once installed. However, I have extreme reservations about accepting any proposal for this strategy if it means interrupting one of our city parks for an extended period of time, especially one so close to an elementary school.

Parks mean quality of life, and that is something San Mateo has come to represent. Quality elementary schools, another hallmark of San Mateo, function best without close proximity to major construction projects even if the duration is limited. Let us uphold what we stand for and find another place.

Public Comment

This is not just my opinion. Over and over at the meeting I heard the same testament – this park is the heart and soul of our community, a place to play, grow up and meet the neighbors, the only place they can go without driving through the painfully long slog of cars and buses already isolating Fiesta Gardens from the rest of the city. The locals love it dearly and many go there almost every day.

While four years may mean little in terms of a grand infrastructure project, to the citizens of Fiesta Gardens and the students of adjacent elementary school it means a tremendous amount of irreplaceable time with their families. Further, several hundred more children and adults rely on Fiesta Meadows Park for organized sports including AYSO and Abbott Middle School. These children deserve the opportunity to grow up playing sports locally.

Questions and concerns mentioned include:

·          In a time when we are regularly disconnected from our physical environment how can you take away a badly needed athletic field for so long?

·         How are you measuring the impact of the diesel exhaust and particulate matter from all those trucks [one every 5-10 minutes during peak construction] on Fiesta Garden elementary school students?

·         Where will local children go to play when they are virtually trapped in their neighborhood during peak traffic hours?

·         Have you considered the idiopathic risk the project presents to Fiesta Garden residents?

·         How can you account for the daycares in the area which will lose a valuable resource for so long, perhaps destroying their businesses?

·         Why select a construction site in an area already struggling with horrendous traffic?

·         Who will compensate the Fiesta Gardens HOA for the effective loss of their recreational resources, an adjacent playground and pool, throughout the project’s implementation?

Finally, I want to highlight the contribution of the children who sat through the drudgery of a commission meeting and overcame their shyness to speak on behalf of the park they love, as well as the mother who bore the cost of a babysitter in order to defend the park she and her children use nearly every day.

However

There was only one point made during public comment to which I feel a rebuttal is in order.

One speaker characterized this problem as being us (longtime San Mateo homeowners) versus them (people moving into new developments such as Bay Meadows and the future Station Park Green), blaming new development for the SSO problem. This, I believe, is incorrect.

Let’s do the math:

Based on what we learned from the staff presentation, the current sewage system maxes out at 60 million gallon a day (MGD). According to the figures shown and taking population growth into account, the projected demand on the system on heavy flow day will be 98MGD in 2035. 16MGD of this will be baseline use on a dry weather day (up from 14MGD in 2014). The excess water inundating the system on wet water day represents the remainder, or 82 MGD. At our meeting the staff offered that most projections for the state of California indicate half of this can be directly tied to the failure of lateral (secondary) lines. Under this assumption, after an aggressive process of fixing laterals (which would not address the other needs of our aging sewage plant), our full capacity demand would be 57MGD, or 3MGD below the limit of our current system. New developments have the latest technology, as opposed to the major problem, old and broken terra cotta piping dating back to the 1950s or before. For this reason, residents in brand new buildings will not be expected to make more than perhaps minor contributions to the problem of SSO in San Mateo. One negligent homeowner in an established neighborhood can do far more damage in terms of water infiltration than people residing in newly built multi-family housing.

Financial Considerations

Beyond quality of life issues, there is still the matter of money. This project will have an extended negative impact on Fiesta Garden home values. People want to buy homes in San Mateo not only because they believe it will give them access to our outstanding parks but also because they trust their investment will hold value. On both account you would be betraying the citizens of Fiesta Garden to approve a storage tank under their community park.

Conclusion

There has to be a better place than an already established park next to an elementary school for an in system storage tank. The entry of the Corporation Yards on the list of possible locations is an exciting development. Hopefully this site, or one of the other less residential areas under consideration, will prove feasible for the tank our city needs.

Thank you,

Kara Cox

Vice Chair, Public Works Commission (for identification purposes only)

Dear Planning Commission,

I am writing on behalf of the PA15-031, Hillsdale Terraces. It is an ideal location for location for high density housing.

Most of this project area has been empty for decades and the continued underdevelopment of this prime space is quite frankly an embarrassment and failure on the part of the City of San Mateo. Now is the time to approve more housing for our city.

My expectation is many people who are able to attend tonight will not focus on the dire need for housing in the area. Instead, their overwhelming concern will be parking. Some homeowners, who already possess designated off street parking of their own, want to stop desperately needed new residential development because they won’t be able to consistently park directly in front of their houses. This is one of the ultimate NIMBY conceits.

I have said it before and I will say it again, proudly and apologetically, – people have a right to live more than cars should have right to a place to park.

Please consider the bigger picture, which is our housing supply is not keeping pace with our job creation, leading to urban sprawl impacting 101, 92 and consequently all San Mateo’s major thoroughfares.

Just today at my son’s school another student’s caretaker told me she lives in Gilroy. When I was writing this at 5:30 pm Google Maps says it would take 2 hours to drive the 70 miles from San Mateo to Gilroy. Even under the best of times this does not translate into an ideal commute. But as long as no housing is built in the transit core of the Peninsula the sprawl will continue with negative consequences for human health and the local environment.

This is a crisis. Please act accordingly.

Kind regards,