Dedicated to Empowering and Informing the Burlingame Community

  • PSA: Elder abuse in the County

    As a favor to a long-time reader who requested such a post in order to gather ideas on what to do, I'll drift into a new area– elder abuse, especially financial abuse.  I am also aware of a case years ago that was never pursued by law enforcement even though there was ample evidence, in my opinion.  The long-time reader writes (edited down a bit):

    My parents have and are still experiencing Elder Abuse by their Caretakers. As of today, $300,000 and "counting." I have been in contact with APS, DA, Police, and much more. Jackie Speier's office at least inquired.  My Father will (probably die) of skin cancer within two weeks.  My mother is on 24/7 oxygen and has severe mental as well as other "end of life" medical problems.  Did I mention one of their caretakers made a Full Confession to the San Bruno Police- Case # SNB 2201541.  No arrests. This started 6 months ago.

    Again, this is coming from a long-time reader and I have not verified any of it, but if anyone has any ideas, I am sure they would be welcome.  The last census showed 17.5% of the population in San Mateo County is over 65 and the median age has been rising just like the rest of the country.

    Posted by:

    Joe

    4 comments on PSA: Elder abuse in the County

  • Follow the money….out of state

    Dan Walters at Calmatters.org is back on the economic case with a piece titled "California is leaking vital high-income taxpayers".  Before we go to his big picture, Calmatters also just reported the month-to-month changes:

    For the second month in a row, the Golden State’s tax revenues fell short of projections: The state in July collected about $1.28 billion less than expected, largely due to lower proceeds from the personal income tax, according to a Monday report from the state Department of Finance. California in June collected about $2.4 billion less than expected.

    That $97 billion dollar surplus burning a hole in Sacramento pockets could evaporate pretty quickly.  Here's some snippets from Walters' piece

    Since 2010, 7.5 million people have left California while 5.9 million people have come from other states.  That gives rise to a question: Who is leaving California and why?  The Chronicle found that 39,000 San Franciscans who had filed federal tax returns for 2018 had moved out of the city before filing 2019 returns. Collectively, they took $10.6 billion in income with them while people who moved to the city during that period reported just $3.8 billion in income.

    California’s top income tax rate, 13.3% on taxable incomes over $1 million, is by far the nation’s highest and when added to the top federal rate of 37% pushes the overall bite to more than 50%. Moreover, a tax overhaul during the Donald Trump presidency basically ended the ability to deduct state income taxes on federal returns.

    If anything, California’s taxes on the wealthy are likely to increase. Proposition 30, a measure on the November ballot, would boost the top marginal rate to over 15%, raising money for programs to battle climate change, and another tax hike is headed for the 2024 ballot.  Income taxes account for three-quarters of California’s general fund revenues and the top 1% of California taxpayers generate nearly half of those taxes.  That’s just 150,000 taxpayers in a state of 40 million, so even a trickle of departures has a potentially huge impact on the budget.

    Half of three-quarters is 37.5%.  Just saying.  The annual change in population has been trending down for 12 years, but we still need to destroy single-family residential zoning via SB9 to build more.  We are "leaking" vital taxpayers–nice phrasing from Dan.  And we are going to push more through the "leak" to fund climate change even after the Feds have just approved trillions for climate change.  All good.  Nothing to see here.  And in another slick Federal tax move, we are going to give the IRS $80 billion, but they still need to figure out what they will do with it.  Probably should have done that first.

    IRS

     

    Posted by:

    Joe

    1 comment on Follow the money….out of state

  • Active on the Avenew: 2022 Version

    Burlingame on the Avenue drew great crowds to Old B'game this past weekend.  It felt a little like old times when it was known as Art on the Avenue except the proportion of vendors selling "art" was way down.  The vendor mix didn't have the feeling of unique products or local flavor and it certainly isn't trying to be a high-end show like next weekend's Kings Mountain Air Fair up on Skyline Blvd., which is a juried affair, but our show was still very fun.  In the shadow of the giant construction crane, I caught Full House on Saturday doing R&B and R&R.  Saturday was warmer than Sunday.

    Sunday was downright comfortable and Wolf Jett brought two local Burlingame kids back to town playing "Cosmic Mountain Soul Music".  Frontman Chris Jones highlighted that he and drummer Jon Payne grew up in B'game, went to BIS and graduated from BHS.  He recalled eating at La Pinata, playing videogames at Roundtable and buying music at the Record Exchange.  Lots of fun was had!  Here's Wolf Jett getting cosmic.

    Wolf Jett

    Posted by:

    Joe

    3 comments on Active on the Avenew: 2022 Version

  • High-Cost Rail – Part 158 Rubber-stamping the EIR

    The Chronicle and the Daily Journal dutifully put the CHSRA Board's rubber-stamp of the EIR for the Central Valley to EssEff section of the "bullet train" on their front pages.  The Chron sub-headed "Despite win, major hurdles remain for project" and the DJ sub-headed Millbrae's pending legal action about a parcel of land near the station expansion.

    Having your own Board "approve" your EIR is sort of like me approving the dinner reservation I just made.  The state legislature still hasn't had the courage to kill the beast as hoped back in May.  The Chron made some attempt to frame the challenges

    Major hurdles to the project remain. For starters, California hasn’t figured out where it will get up to $25 billion needed to build the San Francisco and Silicon Valley bullet train extensions.   Democrats in the state Assembly, led by the powerful Los Angeles delegation, had pushed for years to take a chunk of the $4.2 billion in bond funds for the Central Valley line and instead spend it on regional transportation projects in major metro areas that could eventually connect with high-speed rail.

    But that standoff ended in June, when the Rail Authority emerged with its bond funding intact, though its operations will be overseen by a new inspector general. Lawmakers also dropped a push to cut costs by using diesel-powered trains, rather than electrified track, in the Central Valley.  But the project has faced ridicule over repeated construction delays and soaring costs, with its total budget growing from $33 billion to at least $105 billion in the Rail Authority’s latest business plan — and potentially many billions more when the authority factors recent inflation into its estimates.

    Trains were initially supposed to start running in 2020. Now, the agency doesn’t anticipate the first trains will start running in the Central Valley until 2029, followed by Silicon Valley in 2031.

    Leave it to Quentin Kopp to summarize

    Still, the project faces critics who say it’s drifted too far from the statewide system voters approved in 2008. Quentin Kopp, a retired state senator and former chairman of the Rail Authority Board, laughed at the idea of bullet trains running into downtown San Francisco.  “That’s called much ado about nothing,” he said. “This is destined for the graveyard of boondoggles now.”

    I liked the Dilbert cartoon that ran in today's DJ–it's a fit with this non-news

    Dilbert illusion

      

    Posted by:

    Joe

    3 comments on High-Cost Rail – Part 158 Rubber-stamping the EIR

  • B’game better than “Climate best by government test”

    If you grew up with oppressive summer heat and humidity like I did, you really appreciate how nice the weather is in B'game.  Yesterday was a perfect example.  It was on the verge of being uncomfortably hot and a bit humid here.  High temperature was 88.  But down in Redwood City, with its motto "Climate best by government test", their temperature topped out at 100 degrees.  Yuck.

    And the Chronicle noted "Livermore recorded 102 degrees Tuesday afternoon, according the National Weather Service. Fairfield reached 105 degrees, and Vacaville hit 102 degrees."  Double yuck.  I haven't seen any reports of brownouts yesterday, but we aren't done yet.  When the "Burlingame For All" people reappear, remember why people pay extra to live here and why it's worth it.

    It is also time for the annual summer check-up on my ancient pear tree.  The yield goes back and forth year-to-year like last year.   The year before was a low yield too, but we had good harvests the two prior years.  This year I count eight, but they are already big and beautiful, so now we try to outwit the squirrels by letting them ripen, but not too much.

    Pears 2022

    Posted by:

    Joe

    3 comments on B’game better than “Climate best by government test”

  • 80% Voter Suppression in Burlingame

    The slimy little lawyer from Malibu who has no friggin' clue about anything in Burlingame has finally gotten his scummy little way.  Yesterday was the deadline for filing for the B'game city council election and we will have 1/5 of the election we would have had, thanks to someone who has probably never even graced our lovely avenues, roads or courts.  Our prior post covered the background of this travesty with our new five little districts here.   Further back you can read here.  As a B'game resident, you used to have five votes for the five seats on the city council.  They were all your council members and had to answer your phone calls.  No more.  40 percent of you (including me) get NO VOTE this year for city council even though three seats are up.  Another 40 percent of you can vote, but there is only one candidate running in your tiny little postage stamp district, so if you dislike them and their policies you are stuck writing in Ronald McDonald–and your fries will be cold.  Nice work scummy lawyer.

    20 percent of the town has an election.  This is real voter suppression to the tune of 80%.  Not the BS you read about in the paper where showing an ID to vote is somehow an insurmountable challenge.  It's right here in the vote YOU DON"T GET TO CAST.

    Ricardo Ortiz and Michael Brownrigg, formerly known as "Mike", are now unopposed in their north end districts.  The little lawyer from Malibu must be so proud.  No need for two incumbents to go to debates (although they probably will out of respect for the process), knock on doors, ask for endorsements, answer pointed e-mails about why they did this-or-that…or DIDN'T do this-or-that.  Congrats on the win, gents.

    The formerly ignored southeast end–the "Lyon-Hoag" section of town in the Old Days, has three newcomers vying for the newly created, open seat.  I applaud them.  The development and traffic windmill they are going to push against is massive, but they are willing to try.  Rachel Cyr, John Martos, and Peter Stevenson–welcome to the show.  The Daily Journal quick survey had this description of them:

    Rachel Cyr, a mother and businesswoman, is running against businessperson Peter Stevenson and John Martos in District 5.

    I find that a little odd and worthy of oversight.  I know Stevenson a bit and he has kids, so why is he a "businessperson" and not a "father and businessman".  I don't know Martos, but he must deserve some descriptor.  C'mon DJ, get it together.  Don't make me expose your bias before we even get started.

    Update 8/15:  I just heard from the city clerk that John Martos did not finish the filing process (i.e. he effectively withdrew).  He was listed as "pending" mid-last week.  So District 5 is Cyr and Stevenson, head to head.

    Posted by:

    Joe

    35 comments on 80% Voter Suppression in Burlingame

  • Late Summer Musings on Politics

    If you have read the Voice for much of its 19 years on-line you have run into the occasional "think piece" that spices up the usual fare.  The quiet weeks of mid-August before everyone gets back to our little town is a particularly good time for such a post.  With plenty of time to read things like book reviews of books I'll never read (perhaps that is the purpose of a book review), some gems can pop out.  Barton Swain at the WSJ did just such a favor in reviewing a new book about John Locke, the 17th century British philosopher.  Locke is sometimes referred to as "the first liberal".  Swain uses that as a jumping off point:

    One way to sum up postwar American politics is to say that conservatives try to stop liberals from breaking the liberals’ own rules. The “rules” in this formulation are those of liberalism in the broadest sense: constitutional principles, the rule of law, rights-based protections. 

    “Liberal” regimes aren’t supposed to impose a particular understanding of the Good on their citizens; they’re meant to ensure local and individual freedoms and enable citizens to figure out what the Good is for themselves. But some liberals—typically the highly educated and privileged sort—tend to forget they are liberals and try to define righteousness for everybody. They do this by reallocating citizens’ wealth according to their own ideals, regulating private economic behavior, dictating to local communities how they should govern themselves, imposing protean codes of correct speech and behavior on everybody else, and so on. Conservatives, in this admittedly biased way of putting it, are there to stop liberals from indulging these illiberal impulses; to remind them, in other words, that they are liberals, not potentates.

    Well put.  We see the potentates very clearly in Sacramento; and the county and our city are not immune by any means.  We see Sacramento "dictating to local communities how they should govern themselves" all over the place.  It makes one wonder why someone who just wants to serve the community, instead of climbing the political ladder, would want to run for city council when Newsom, the state senate and assembly can dictate how everything will run?  We have an election in 13 weeks.  We will have at least one brand new city council member (in the new, open seat that was dictated to us), a new assemblywoman and a new federal House member.  Here's hoping they will be truly Locke-style "liberals".

    Posted by:

    Joe

    1 comment on Late Summer Musings on Politics

  • My, what a big crane you have

    We last checked in on the Old Post Office project downtown (aka the Sares-Regis project) here.  We are about eleven months after the groundbreaking ceremony and the Big Dig phase is over.  This week an enormous construction crane was put in place.  I was struck, metaphorically speaking, with how it towers over downtown.  One of my regular downtown contacts told me that I missed the wild scene as the workers walked along the "arms" out to the end to put the counterweights in place on the short side (the left side in the photo).  Unfortunately, I took the photo before I heard about the daring feat and the counterweights are perfectly hidden by the traffic light below.  Does anyone think this will be the last big crane we see downtown?

    S-R crane

    Posted by:

    Joe

    2 comments on My, what a big crane you have

  • Solar variability: A tale of two days in B’game

    I told you about my "going solar" a year ago here.  So far, the system has been trouble-free and good amounts of juice are flowing back to PG&E.  But here in B'game we are feeling the trailing effects of Tropical Storm Frank from down south and have had a few cloudy, muggy days this week.  That got me curious as to how my solar system was responding.  But first, let's look at Calmatters.org for the latest electricity news from Sacramento.  On June 27, Calmatters reported that

    The expansive energy bill that so angered clean-energy advocates and local officials — for its capitulation to short-term reliance on fossil-fuel and its closed-door negotiations — won lukewarm passage in California’s Legislature late Wednesday and was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom today.

    Republican members railed about being shut out of brokering the details of the plan that would manage California’s fragile electricity grid during summer power drains. Democrats saw the bill’s reliance on dirty energy sources to prop up power generation as a backward step.  During prolonged and pointed debate, the legislation was characterized as “lousy” and “crappy” — and those were the legislators who supported it.

    “This was a crappy trailer bill that was dumped on us Sunday night,” complained Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, a Torrance Democrat. “This was a rushed, unvetted fossil-fuel heavy response.”  “It’s a lousy bill,” said Hayward Democratic Assemblymember Bill Quirk, “but it’s the best hope we have for keeping the lights on.”

    You can click through to read the rest of the gnashing of teeth, but the bottom line for me was delivered by a Wall Street Journal piece titled "America's New Energy Crisis:  Fossil fuel plants are closing faster than green alternatives can replace them."  There is total (peak) capacity, baseload capacity, time of day needs, etc. but when push comes to shove, how do the rooftop panels right here in B'game behave?  The Enphase system app conveniently does a year-over-year comparison, so we now know that a monsoony, cloudy day will drop solar energy production by 44.7%.  Almost cut by half.  It's gonna be hard to "keep the lights on" with that kind of green variability.  Looks like Newsom did something right for a change. 

    Enphase report

                 THIS YEAR                                                          LAST YEAR

    Posted by:

    Joe

    3 comments on Solar variability: A tale of two days in B’game

  • Calpers: Losses pile up and cities pay up

    Watching the performance of the state's pension manager, CalPers, isn't quite like watching paint dry, but close.  It is the largest pension fund in the country–and it has to be given how poorly the state is run up in Sacramento.  While it may seem arcane and far away, here is the WSJ's take on why we should watch:

    The California Public Employees’ Retirement System returned minus 6.1% for the year ended June 30, the fund said Wednesday.   A multiyear downturn could be costly for states, towns and school systems around the country and by extension their residents, leading them to squeeze money from workers, taxpayers or other government services.  Calpers’ stock portfolio returned minus 13.1%, while bonds returned minus 14.5%, the pension fund said.  (Ed:  Private equity made up some of the loss but relying on it is tricky as valuations are being written down left and right.)

    The lackluster return will mean California towns, counties and school districts will face higher annual pension contributions during their 2024 or 2025 fiscal year.  U.S. state and local pension funds have accumulated hundreds of billions of dollars since the last financial crisis in 2008, thanks to blockbuster returns from an 11-year bull market. Last year, huge gains in public and private equity markets drove median returns to nearly 27%, a 30-year record.

    Some states also topped up their pension coffers with tax revenues from the stimulus-fueled Covid-19 recovery.  But all of those gains have been outpaced by the growth in the cost of the benefits that state and local governments have promised.

    We shall see what the impact on the city budget is going forward.  We have been holding on pretty well — you can look here for the last update from March.  I'll get around to addressing the move to raise local business tax rates in a bit, but Calpers' performance this year highlights the variability and risk associated with being tied so closely to the state.

    Calpers FY loss

    Posted by:

    Joe

    5 comments on Calpers: Losses pile up and cities pay up

RECENT COMMENTS

RECENT POSTS

CATEGORIES

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.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE

All content subject to Copyright 2003-2026