I'm struggling to get excited about writing up last night's City Council debate–and for once it's not because of the candidates! The League of Women Voters traditionally hosts these debates in City Hall and the moderator is intentionally from somewhere else and knows neither the candidates nor the local issues. Unfortunately last night that led the moderator to ask a long series of what was essentially the Same Question Over and Over again about the city budget. It's certainly a critical question and there are divergent opinions between the incumbents and the challenger, but four or five angles could have covered it. It would have been even more informative if the League had realized that with only three candidates, a one minute time limit per question is unnecessary and counterproductive to learning what they really think.
So putting the format limitations aside, the main debate was over finances. Challenger Ricardo Ortiz summarized his perspective in his closing statement when he asked, "If everything is running so well, why is there no money for the Broadway overpass? No money for the Burlingame Avenue streetscape upgrade? No money to upgrade playing fields or build a rec center? No money for the pension liability?"
The incumbents, Terry Nagel and Jerry Deal, used their time to highlight how reserves have increased lately , how open the budget study sessions are, how the budget increase has been held to 2% this year and how Ortiz' suggestion to bring in more hotels to bring in more Transient Occupancy Tax isn't sound business (in their opinion). Ortiz' returned several times to the Grand Jury report that he quoted as saying the city needed to put away $6.7M but was $3.9M short while the incumbents noted that the on-going employee negotiations were private sessions that could not be discussed in midstream. Both fair points, but not the kind of fireworks B'gamers have seen in the past.
On other issues, Nagel noted that the proposed Peninsula Ave interchange has been discussed many times and "we have managed to beat it off" each time. While Ortiz noted three options and said he didn't like any of them, the incumbents basically said they didn't have enough information.
On high-speed rail, both Deal and Ortiz reiterated their opposition to the project from the beginning and their on-going opposition to all configurations while Nagel was much more guarded saying that she was definitely opposed to the four-track option but in her capacity on the MTC she was working to get to "yes" on a plan that would secure the federal funding. Here are the candidates
Debate 2.0 will be held this coming Sunday, Oct. 30th from 4-6pm at the Burlingame Women's Club on Primrose across from the Post Office. Hosted by the Citizens for a Better Burlingame, it will feature the candidate asking question of their opponents as well as longer answers. See you there!
Leave a Reply