Whither City Hall?

Dedicated to Empowering and Informing the Burlingame Community

February 12, 2015

Sometimes I feel sorry for City officials. I don't mean the elected ones, I mean the staff. I especially mean the ones who have to interact with the elected ones on a regular basis. As a senior staff member sometimes you have to stick your (wet) finger in the air and figure out which way the wind is blowing. In some cases, it doesn't matter what you know is smart, good for the public fisc or even easier to accomplish. So when I read the opening paragraph of this Daily Journal article yesterday, I could sort of see a finger in the air.

Burlingame officials are considering moving City Hall, as part of an effort to leverage city-owned property into building more housing and parking, said City Manager Lisa Goldman.

Staff has already issued a request for proposals from developers willing to build more affordable housing on a city-owned parking lot south of Howard Avenue, so long as the company would also be willing to construct more parking spaces on a neighboring lot.

Going forward, Goldman said the city is also considering issuing another request for proposals, which would allow companies to develop housing at the City Hall site, under the agreement that the builder would also construct a new City Hall on another city-owned parking lot elsewhere.

Then last night as I was reading my email a finger of a different sort appeared unprompted. This time from a very plugged-in local person who knows a thing or two or three about real estate. That person wrote

Just read the article in the Daily Journal related to our housing discussion vis-a-vis City Hall and the city- owned lot swap ideas. Has marijuana become legal in Burlingame, or shall I say Burlingbong, because everyone at the City seems to be smoking it (not that there's anything wrong with that).

Where are we going to put City Hall? It's City Hall for God sake! Demo the building, move to temporary site and build something phenomenal on the same site. So it takes 18 months, big deal. Burlingame's been around a hundred years, are you really going to tell me that City Hall on Howard Ave South or in place of one of our downtown lots makes sense? Think long term.

On another topic, you tell me, but when I hear public-private partnership, I think two things: (1) loss of control and (2) leveraging our future for short term cash infusion. And for the council members to threaten us with a tax if we don't go along with their plan is passive-aggressive at best.

I could not have said it better if I had spent 20 minutes crafting it. Shall we give out the Fickle-finger of Fate award this early in the year?

Posted in City Council, City Finances, Downtown Specific Plan, Local Real Estate, Planning

8 responses to “Whither City Hall?”

Joanne

February 12, 2015

Geez City Hall is in a great spot where it is now! Why move it anywhere else??
San Mateo had their city hall near downtown years ago. Now there is talk about moving it back to downtown but finding the land to do this is nearly impossible.
Time to put down the bong!
pat giorni

February 12, 2015

“Wither” City Hall is more apt. This time Council is asking staff to stick it’s collective wet finger in a live electrical socket. Last I checked, city zoning is not agricultural regulation; yet we continue to hear barnyard braying from the current nanny (goat?)Council. I continue to be amused and entertained.
hollyrollerhotwire.com

February 12, 2015

Let it go.
The property,is worth a lot of money.
it would make National/International news t show a commitment The state of CA, San Mateo County, HSR’s “Showcase” for the rest of The Nation.
I believe this is a perfect opportunity to show the benefits of Section 8 housing.
The benefits of HSR, LSR-Low speed rail, BART, Sam Trans, Hwy 101 and 280, SFO.
How is it possible that no matter what level of education a person has, there is no place to live in Burlingame?
Turn City Hall into a Section 8 Development. I guarantee, The people who live there will take care of it as well as contribute to the community in every single way.
PLEASE PLEASE CONSIDER THIS IDEA!
hillsider

February 12, 2015

>hic<
hollyrollerhotwire.com

February 13, 2015

Hillsider..
Can you comprehend the amount of time and, time is money, attempting to get a viable general contractor to put fourth any estimate to present to the City of Burlingame?
I believe that the City Elders have no idea what they want.
What we need in the City of Burlingame is the opportunity to present a “show case” that all Silicon Valley Billionaire Think Tanks talk about but do absolutely nothing to solve.
Burlingame is the perfect place to start a “Human Redevelopment Community.”
Bay Front, Primrose.
These type projects have been done in Europe for @ 50 years.
Zuckerberg.. need some help to take off those rose colored glasses?
PS
Hillsider
Put it is sideways.
hillsider

February 13, 2015

I may have been off base in the past, Holy. I assumed you had been drinking when you are writing here, but perhaps you are a Burlingbong kinda guy. Redevelop this, old boy
Joe

July 8, 2015

The Daily Journal is kind enough to add the prospect of more taxes along with the “affordable housing” article today:
And though the city’s economic positioning has improved due to increased tax revenue, which has caused the general fund to grow substantially over recent years, there is still insufficient funding for the major projects being bandied by officials.
To generate the $35 million to $40 million necessary to build the new community center, $4 million required to build the park and $25 million needed to complete rebuilding the downtown streetscape project, the city should consider a general obligation bond or community facilities district, according to Gamble’s presentation.
http://www.smdailyjournal.com/articles/lnews/2015-07-08/burlingame-considers-tax-measure-bond-could-pay-for-new-community-center-bayfront-park-other-improvements/1776425146330
Lorne

July 9, 2015

Here’s a good primer on community facilities districts (Mello Roos)from Orrick law firm. Per pages 15-16,
“Even if both methods (general obligation bonds/assessed value taxes vs. Mello Roos/community facilities district) are equally capable of funding the desired project, there are still reasons to consider using Mello-Roos because it can address two areas of concern – district boundaries and tax rate – in ways that can increase the chancesfor a successful election.”
“A second consideration involves the Proposition 13 effect on property valuations. Californians are familiar with the phenomenon of two houses, essentially equivalent in value, where the ad valorem tax (assessed value tax) burden on the one is a multiple of the ad valorem tax burden on the other because the one was just purchased, and the other was
purchased many years earlier for a substantially lower price and as a result, under Proposition 13, it has a substantially lower assessed value. While the public is more or less adjusted to this discrepancy with respect to general taxes, and there is the consciousness that there is not much to be done about it anyway, when a general obligation bond issue is proposed, the difference in assessed values tends to be revisited in a new light.
Suddenly, in the context of considering whether to vote to tax himself for the new library, Mr. Smith realizes that if the measure passes, he will be paying twice or three
times as much as his neighbor; yet Mr. Smith also realizes that he will receive no more benefit from the library than the neighbor does. This issue does get raised and, irrespective of views on Proposition 13, significant numbers of people consider the result, in this context, unfair – and they can do something about it, by voting “no.”
But with Mello-Roos, a flat, per parcel tax can be used, or some other taxing method can be designed that conforms to the community’s sense of fairness for the particular project. This approach has proved successful in a number of instances.”
Source: https://www.orrick.com/Events-and-Publications/Documents/1180.pdf

ABOUT THE VOICE

The Burlingame Voice is dedicated to informing and empowering the Burlingame community. Our blog is a public forum for the discussion of issues that relate to Burlingame, California. Opinions posted on the Burlingame Voice are those of the poster and commenter and not necessarily the opinion of the Editorial Board. Comments are subject to the Terms of Use.