State legislators representing San Mateo County are grappling with emergency wildfire response and key kitchen-table issues as they take first looks at Gov. Gavin Newsom’s budget proposal, released last week.
Lawmakers agree that this year’s budget — which is generally balanced, with a reported $363 million surplus — looks more optimistic than last year’s, which started with a roughly $50 billion deficit.
Marc Berman
But some, like Assemblymember Marc Berman, D-Palo Alto, are concerned that ongoing wildfire devastation in the Los Angeles area could have continuing impacts on the states’ economic prospects in ways the proposal could not account for.
“I think it was a good proposal, or a good starting-off point,” he said. “Unfortunately, the reality is that with the fires in L.A. happening right as the governor was rolling out his budget proposal, I think everything’s going to get a little scrambled by the tragedies.”
Josh Becker
The state has been working to up its response to extreme natural disasters like wildfires in recent years, state Sen. Josh Becker, D-Menlo Park, maintained. He cited billions put into hazardous fuel reduction efforts, development of the largest aerial firefighting force in the world and an increase in Cal Fire personnel.
Additionally, the governor’s budget proposal would deploy $2.7 billion of a recently-passed $10 billion climate bond to accelerate both water and wildfire resilience projects, Becker said. He also emphasized the importance of optimizing financial spending, particularly when it comes to preemptive mitigation strategies.
“I think the key is that we pursue the most cost-effective strategies, right?” he said. “We don’t need to underground 10,000 miles of wires. It doesn’t make sense, and it’s not cost-effective.”
Scott Wiener
State Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, said that despite looming uncertainties — like President-elect Donald Trump’s repeated threats to withhold federal aid from California, as well as the wildfires — the state’s budget status this year is much better than last.
“The budget is approximately balanced, which is great, and really a testament to work we did last year,” he said. “Obviously, we don’t know what Donald Trump is going to try to do to us that could impact the budget significantly, and the wildfires — we’re very, very committed to supporting the people of L.A.”
In devastating natural disasters like the Southern California fires, there will always be limits to controlling the impact, Wiener said. What the state can do moving forward is ensure up-to-date construction codes for new buildings to protect against wildfires.
Recommended for you
“As people rebuild, really making sure [they] rebuild to current modern building codes that are much more protective against wildfires,” he said. “Buildings built more recently with higher fire safe code standards are more resistant to fire, more likely to survive.”
Multiple lawmakers, including Wiener, said that housing would remain a priority for them as they worked on affordability and cost-of-living issues — previously designated as a priority for the state Legislature this year.
Catherine Stefani
Assemblymember Catherine Stefani, D-San Francisco, said in a statement that she thought the governor’s budget proposal allocated money to key housing needs.
“The budget prioritizes reducing housing costs by eliminating barriers to infill development near transit,” she said. “It also addresses development costs by advocating for reforms to mitigate risks and expenses that hinder housing production.”
Other initiatives laid out in the budget that could benefit average Californians include $7.1 billion for state-subsidized child care, $20 million for three-month supplies of free diapers and $2.4 billion for universal transitional kindergarten and pre-K, Berman said.
Berman, a longtime advocate for education funding, said he would review the budget proposal to slash funding for public university systems in the state by hundreds of millions.
“Funding higher education has been a big priority of mine all eight years in the Legislature. In fact, it’s probably the area where I’ve got the most budget increases for things like supporting students with basic needs and helping students transfer,” he said. “I look very cautiously and skeptically at any efforts to cut higher education budgets.”
“On the legislative front, tackling cost-of-living issues means addressing electricity affordability, said Becker, who was recently appointed to chair the state Senate’s Energy Committee.
“Number one would be energy affordability,” he said. “Electricity rates, we can’t have the kinds of increases that we’ve had, and we find we need to find a way to actually bring rates down.”
On his end and at the local level, Wiener said he would remain focused on prioritizing public transportation. Making public transport systems more robust benefits the environment, the economy and residents’ pockets, he said.
“If we do nothing and allow the status quo to proceed forward with inertia, we’ll see big service cuts by Caltrain, BART, Muni,” he said. “That will be extremely harmful to the Bay Area, harmful to our economy, make traffic congestion much worse, it will absolutely make affordability worse.”
Plenty of “promises” which I expect will be empty. A few notes… the budget is not balanced because pensions and liabilities haven’t been taken into account. Housing is a priority yet CA has blown $billions on a homeless problem they can’t account for, as the number of homeless increases. Billions in hazardous fuel reduction efforts? I’m assuming they’re talking about reducing fossil fuels instead of wildfire fuel. And now they don’t want to underground electrical wires when allegedly, electrical wires have caused various wildfires? As for education, it’s been shown that there’s no correlation between education spending and results. I could go on but I get the feeling many folks are well aware that these “promises” are most likely empty. The bigger question is why folks keep voting for these empty suits. You get the government you deserve so vote wisely in the future.
All school districts in San Mateo County are all overfunded already. ERAF funding is already going from schools back to city and county, because these school districts are too rich. But all these school board trustees want to participate in the overall greed and grift in San Mateo County. (just look at the corruption at the Community College district). So they issue bond after bond and tax measure after tax measure, which increases housing cost and is taking money from teachers and education and spend it on Debt and Interest payments and an oversized administration force to manage everything (except education it seems).
Two of the richest districts in America are San Mateo-Foster City and Redwood City. But because they put their money into the "School Choice" scheme, they are also the most segregated school districts in the county. That is how you mismanage funding, that is how you create wasteful spending and throwing more money at bad, mismanaged districts will not help.
Why is $9.5 BILLION being spent on free diapers, after school care and preschool? This is theft and an abuse of my tax money and all tax payers. Where’s my choice to not pay for the leech families who make irresponsible decisions ? This $9.5 billion couls fill potholes, not diapers and our third world streets could be paved.
They talk about decreasing the cost-of-living while raising taxes on gasoline to discourage driving; driving refineries out of California, thus reducing gasoline supply; and forcing homeowners to pay thousands of dollars to rewire their homes to handle electric water heaters and furnaces because they've banned gas ones. I'm not a Republican but it's impossible not to see how the current generation of Democratic politicians have wrecked California.
- Insurance cost nationwide average is now over $2,000
- yearly driving costs are averaging at over $12,000
According to AAA, driving 1 mile now costs over $2 per mile and it still subsidized with another $1-2 by the rest of us. Society pays for all the joyriding of a few.
(Gas Tax - the part that pays for infrastructure is btw. just 3 cents out of those $2, so it is certainly not the gas tax that is the problem - it's the subsidies to fossil fuel and car companies.
The biggest problem is that the county has not prepared for alternatives. And there are only two cheap options that could be implemented tomorrow to give people an option to save money:
- bus lanes
- bike lanes
Right now neither Josh Becker nor Marc Berman nor Scott Wiener are really strong in that department. Neither is the County Board of Supervisors - they are too distracted by eye-rolling.
Scott Wiener hasn't even been able to teach his YIMBYs the most important rule of all:
Before you push for high-density housing, push for high-density transportation first. Those are bus and bike lanes. No San Mateo YIMBY has done this so far.
And Josh Becker hasn't spoken out publicly against the City of San Mateo who is actively attacking California's and San Mateo's Climate Action Plan.
Becker and Wiener need to push for bills that outlaw "Bicycle Boulevards", "Bike Routes", "Slow Streets" without bike lanes. Laura Friedman did try, but where was Becker on this? Why are these awful things allowed in his district?
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(6) comments
Plenty of “promises” which I expect will be empty. A few notes… the budget is not balanced because pensions and liabilities haven’t been taken into account. Housing is a priority yet CA has blown $billions on a homeless problem they can’t account for, as the number of homeless increases. Billions in hazardous fuel reduction efforts? I’m assuming they’re talking about reducing fossil fuels instead of wildfire fuel. And now they don’t want to underground electrical wires when allegedly, electrical wires have caused various wildfires? As for education, it’s been shown that there’s no correlation between education spending and results. I could go on but I get the feeling many folks are well aware that these “promises” are most likely empty. The bigger question is why folks keep voting for these empty suits. You get the government you deserve so vote wisely in the future.
All school districts in San Mateo County are all overfunded already. ERAF funding is already going from schools back to city and county, because these school districts are too rich. But all these school board trustees want to participate in the overall greed and grift in San Mateo County. (just look at the corruption at the Community College district). So they issue bond after bond and tax measure after tax measure, which increases housing cost and is taking money from teachers and education and spend it on Debt and Interest payments and an oversized administration force to manage everything (except education it seems).
Two of the richest districts in America are San Mateo-Foster City and Redwood City. But because they put their money into the "School Choice" scheme, they are also the most segregated school districts in the county. That is how you mismanage funding, that is how you create wasteful spending and throwing more money at bad, mismanaged districts will not help.
Why is $9.5 BILLION being spent on free diapers, after school care and preschool? This is theft and an abuse of my tax money and all tax payers. Where’s my choice to not pay for the leech families who make irresponsible decisions ? This $9.5 billion couls fill potholes, not diapers and our third world streets could be paved.
They talk about decreasing the cost-of-living while raising taxes on gasoline to discourage driving; driving refineries out of California, thus reducing gasoline supply; and forcing homeowners to pay thousands of dollars to rewire their homes to handle electric water heaters and furnaces because they've banned gas ones. I'm not a Republican but it's impossible not to see how the current generation of Democratic politicians have wrecked California.
That sounds almost right:
- A new car now is on average >$50,000
- A used car now is on average >$30,000
- Insurance cost nationwide average is now over $2,000
- yearly driving costs are averaging at over $12,000
According to AAA, driving 1 mile now costs over $2 per mile and it still subsidized with another $1-2 by the rest of us. Society pays for all the joyriding of a few.
(Gas Tax - the part that pays for infrastructure is btw. just 3 cents out of those $2, so it is certainly not the gas tax that is the problem - it's the subsidies to fossil fuel and car companies.
The biggest problem is that the county has not prepared for alternatives. And there are only two cheap options that could be implemented tomorrow to give people an option to save money:
- bus lanes
- bike lanes
Right now neither Josh Becker nor Marc Berman nor Scott Wiener are really strong in that department. Neither is the County Board of Supervisors - they are too distracted by eye-rolling.
"... and new climate crises"
Scott Wiener hasn't even been able to teach his YIMBYs the most important rule of all:
Before you push for high-density housing, push for high-density transportation first. Those are bus and bike lanes. No San Mateo YIMBY has done this so far.
And Josh Becker hasn't spoken out publicly against the City of San Mateo who is actively attacking California's and San Mateo's Climate Action Plan.
Becker and Wiener need to push for bills that outlaw "Bicycle Boulevards", "Bike Routes", "Slow Streets" without bike lanes. Laura Friedman did try, but where was Becker on this? Why are these awful things allowed in his district?
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.