Partly cloudy this evening then becoming windy with rain developing after midnight. Low around 60F. S winds at 10 to 15 mph, increasing to 20 to 30 mph. Chance of rain 100%. Winds could occasionally gust over 40 mph..
Tonight
Partly cloudy this evening then becoming windy with rain developing after midnight. Low around 60F. S winds at 10 to 15 mph, increasing to 20 to 30 mph. Chance of rain 100%. Winds could occasionally gust over 40 mph.
Of the four people running for three seats on the Belmont City Council, Deniz Bolbol brings up an interesting point in that many of the decisions of the current council are made by those who think in a similar way. While it is true there is not a lot of daylight between the council on several issues, it is a disservice to say that they make decisions in lockstep. However, a diversity of viewpoints on a council can be a good thing to make sure everyone in a particular city feels represented. Bolbol definitely represents a faction of the city that believes the current momentum is in the wrong direction.
While that perspective should not be discounted, it is not reason alone to change the makeup of the current body. In fact, the fact that the current council gets along and is getting things done should be a breath of fresh air for anyone who has paid attention to Belmont politics over the years.
We would never suggest that previous councils did not make progress. They did. The grade separations, the open space protections and the navigation through one of the worst financial calamities of this generation were significant achievements. However, there has been some recent progress toward remaking downtown Belmont into a walkable and viable destination, and the revisions to the city’s zoning has allowed for growing families to stay in place without an arduous city planning process to add to what could already be a stressful reconstruction project. The movement toward the creation of some affordable housing has been slower than we would prefer, but there has been some marked progress in recent years.
In fact, the phrase “marked progress” is a good way to describe the recent shift on the council and the city. But much more work remains. Part of that work includes keeping the older generation in mind when making changes and ensuring that new development does not overwhelm the city’s character, but rather add to it.
The current council does not mark a “sea change” but rather a settling down, and a move toward progress. That has been refreshing, but it is by no means perfect. Still, if the biggest knock on a council is that it gets along, then it has to be doing something right.
For those reasons, we recommend incumbents Warren Lieberman and Charles Stone, and appointed incumbent Julia Mates.
Having all Council members agree and think in a similar way on our big issues is detrimental to Belmont. This type of Overdevelopment thinking has resulted in plans for 4-5 story buildings in the Downtown Area; resulted in Council ordinances that proposed 6,000 sq ft McMansions where they don’t fit, larger secondary units and reduced garage requirements - these were repealed by the citizens of Belmont through a referendum. This Council’s “settling down” has caused massive traffic congestion and overcrowding of schools lowering our quality of life in our beautiful city. Deniz wants a more moderate approach to development. She wants to consider all sides and ask questions that others might not want answered.
Must be nice to have the luxury of not worrying about next month's rent payment, or about whether your friends and family will continue to be able to afford to live in the area. This is by far the "biggest issue" facing Belmont, young people and the working class cannot, by and large, afford to live here, let alone purchase a home and it's entrenching a society of haves and have nots and hurting our schools and childcare facilities ability to hire employees.
I disagree with the Council and don't think in a similar way - I think the only way to prevent our planet becoming consumed by fires and floods by 2040 is to drastically cut carbon emissions by putting more people near transit - 10 stories would be a good start - and dramatically raising the price of gasoline. This would also cut down on traffic congestion. By your logic I should also get a seat on the Council, because agreement is bad.
If you don't like what your neighbors are doing with their property purchase an easement or buy a fence.
How many more homes would you suggest Belmont to add for everyone who wants one to get one for really cheap? By then would this city still be a desirable place to live or own? People near transit only go to work and back? No other impact on the city resources and environment?
> In every activist movement there will be those who are disappointed that the dial was not moved 180 degrees. The work of Bolbol and others made significant improvements in the welfare of animals and represented the majority consensus that was achievable. Eric Brooks displays sour grapes over the fact the SF Supervisors chose to accept Bolbol's more moderate proposal. Those seeking "ideal" may not be pleased with just "good" but that's how democracy is supposed to work.
The below commentary is a glimpse into the way Bolbol works "with" others. It is an excerpt from a post on an animal rights forum, that was addressed to both Bolbol and the group members.
"I must point out that you, Deniz, took the lead on the effort to pass zoo reform legislation at the Board of Supervisors and that effort completely failed.
And this is important. I and others who have a lot of experience getting measures passed at the Board of Supervisors approached you with alternate proposals and strategies that we felt would much more effectively win the day, and your response was to reject and even push away, all of that advice and possible support, and try to move a piece of legislation on your own without a solid coalition and strategy behind you pushing for change. The fact that you moved a vote on a measure at the Board without making sure first that you had the votes to win its passage was particularly telling and troubling. So I have serious concerns about your ability to coordinate with other organizers to actually achieve real gains immediately to stop animal suffering at the Zoo. All the wheel spinning that we experienced in last year's effort could actually lead to more harm coming to the animals at the Zoo because it left us with no independent Zoo oversight body at all, when we most certainly could and should have created one." - Eric Brooks, 2009
I agree with Kristin that this Council does represent a "sea change" from Councils prior to 2014. A good example is Measure I in 2016 to increase our sales taxes for infrastructure. All five council members enthusiastically endorsed Measure I, and refused to seriously discuss arguments made by opponents. In spite of that, 45% voted against Measure I. If there had been just one person on the Council who seriously questioned Measure I, there's a good chance it would not have passed. For democracy to function, it's crucial that all views are considered and discussed. That's why it is so important to elect Deniz to the Council, so residents will hear all sides of important issues so they can make informed decisions.
To suggest that “the biggest knock” on this council is that “it gets along,” the SMDJ has completely missed the boat on Belmont politics.
I’ve personally found it counterproductive to see some of the current council members bring up divisiveness from past councils time and again. It is expected that our representatives “get along.” And I have no doubt that Deniz Bolbol will conduct herself professionally as a council member.
Nevertheless, Deniz Bolbol’s whole candidacy is not about “getting along or not getting along.” But more importantly it is about the lack of representation on many important issues and about creating transparency.
While this Council is so focused on “getting along” on the dais, it has created divisiveness in the community by failing to represent the concerns expressed by the community as shown by the successful referendum petition against the zoning amendments this council adopted in 2015, for example. And this Council has failed to create an environment of transparency by getting rid of the Finance Commission, limiting the scope of the Measure I citizen committee, elimitated important details in minutes, etc.
We can debate on the issues which this Council has voted lockstep. But, let’s not minimize the importance of this election by suggesting that it is about “getting along” on the dais.
I’m voting only for Deniz Bolbol for Belmont City Council. It’s time for a change.
I don’t know how you can represent 10 square blocks of 4 and 5 story buildings, clustered around Ralston and El Camino, as not a “sea change”. This councils adopted City Plan will turn a suburban community into an urban one, add cars to the already congested roads, and children to already packed schools. Those who seek that living environment can choose Redwood City, San Mateo or Foster City – instead residents seek out Belmont for its distinctly suburban vibe. Nothing against renewal and moderate growth, but a 10-fold increase in residential density in a 1-square mile area IS a “sea change”.
I appreciate you making a factually accurate case for Bolbol.
I'm not sure people pick Belmont for its "distinctly suburban vibe" - we picked it because it was more affordable to live near the train station than Redwood City, and was located close to where my fiancee and I both work.
I also dispute the characterization of Belmont as a "suburban community" to begin with - Belmont has about 5800 people per square mile, which is comparable to San Jose, St. Paul, Minnesota, Syracuse, New York, and other places we would think of as "cities." Especially considering the housing shortage and the huge Fortune 500 company located just across the highway it seems reasonable to want to add more housing to an already pretty dense area.
It seems like putting more people near the train station is the best way to help alleviate this area's crushing housing shortage while having the least impact on traffic congestion.
So Belmont is the same as San Jose???...San Jose is the largest city in Northern California...and FYI...there are some 879 homes for sale today in San Mateo County...497 homes for rent and 400-500 apartments for rent depending on the source...and that today, right now...there's not a housing shortage, there's an affordability crisis...
Speaking of the train station: I'm curious as to what if anything the current council did to challenge Caltrain's cancellation of free parking at our station? The free parking deal was put in place years ago shortly after Belmont got a raw deal in the initiation of baby bullet service. (Basically our service was downgraded to the worst along the route, bar Atherton, and has never recovered. Just one more example of Caltrain's raw treatment of Belmont - to this day Caltrain shuttles Oracle employees to San Carlos and Hillsdale even though Belmont is closer, and then justifies our low service by the ridership levels that they manipulate down.). Free parking made the bad deal a little less bad, especially since their parking lot - which takes up over half a mile of prime real estate along El Camino - has stood mostly empty for the couple of decades I've lived here.
I've searched city council minutes and JPB minutes for the relevant time period and there is no mention of even a peep from our council about this. I suspect they didn't even notice.
So Kevin, glad you moved to Belmont for the train. On the current trajectory I wonder how much longer it will be before they close the station.
In my view, the biggest knock on this council isn’t that it gets along, but that it doesn’t respond to people it disagrees with, and shuts their views out of council discussions. I’ve written the council scores of emails over the past four years, on a wide variety of subjects, and have rarely received a response from any member, or heard my points discussed in council meetings. Others have told me they were ignored as well. Council members claim they are responsive, but it is only to people who agree with them.
Part of the reason this council gets along so well is that they almost never question the proposals or actions of city managers, and so, exercise no real oversight of city departments. It’s easy for council members to get along when they all trust city managers to do the right thing, and just accept whatever is sent their way.
When presented with evidence from me and others that proposals from city managers were wrong or harmful to residents, we were simply ignored. The only real exception was when the council was forced to reconsider its proposed zoning changes due to a referendum pursued by angry residents.
In addition, the council has taken a number of actions to limit transparency, including approving sanitized “action” minutes with few details, for council and committee meetings; refusing to video or audio record some committee meetings; and changing the rules for council meetings to limit public input.
The election of Deniz Bolbol is sorely needed to give a voice to a large portion of the population that has been ignored by this council, and to help restore transparency to city government. Otherwise, council members will have no incentive to change, and many residents will feel they have no hope of participating in city government.
I'm very glad the SMDJ came to the right decision here, but their reasoning is a little suspect
In the forums I attended and statements I've read Bolbol's statements seem like the adult version of the student council candidate who promises soda in the water fountains - we can have good schools, strong public services, and affordable housing without adding anything to the tax base. Most galling here are the attacks on Firehouse Square (66 affordable housing units, "too big") while also claiming the city "could have done more for affordable housing" in other locations. Those other locations paid millions of dollars to Belmont in housing fees that made Firehouse Square possible.
She also frequently mis-represented the state of the world - not sure "lies" is the correct word, but she made incorrect statements about things like:
- the number of parking spaces at Firehouse Square - the City Council's legal obligations - what is legally under the purview of a City Council - what Caltrain is doing to add capacity - that most residents were opposed to the General Plan & Specific Plan updates - I went to most of those meetings and the majority of the feedback wanted the City Council to do even more on housing than specified in the plan.
It's perfectly defensible to want no new development because of traffic, but it's not OK to constantly misrepresent the state of the city, and appear to have no idea what a City Council does or what policies it has the power to change.
It's also not defensible to pretend that we can less development without worsening a lot of trends around housing affordability and road quality - it's just setting yourself up for failure.
We live in this area because of great work opportunities and not its affordability. Kevin, I would concentrate on the former and not latter. Only way to afford here is to earn more, by innovating and working for better and better companies and not by attacking this candidate or that candidate. Unless there is money in this somehow ...
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!
(17) comments
Having all Council members agree and think in a similar way on our big issues is detrimental to Belmont. This type of Overdevelopment thinking has resulted in plans for 4-5 story buildings in the Downtown Area; resulted in Council ordinances that proposed 6,000 sq ft McMansions where they don’t fit, larger secondary units and reduced garage requirements - these were repealed by the citizens of Belmont through a referendum. This Council’s “settling down” has caused massive traffic congestion and overcrowding of schools lowering our quality of life in our beautiful city. Deniz wants a more moderate approach to development. She wants to consider all sides and ask questions that others might not want answered.
Must be nice to have the luxury of not worrying about next month's rent payment, or about whether your friends and family will continue to be able to afford to live in the area. This is by far the "biggest issue" facing Belmont, young people and the working class cannot, by and large, afford to live here, let alone purchase a home and it's entrenching a society of haves and have nots and hurting our schools and childcare facilities ability to hire employees.
I disagree with the Council and don't think in a similar way - I think the only way to prevent our planet becoming consumed by fires and floods by 2040 is to drastically cut carbon emissions by putting more people near transit - 10 stories would be a good start - and dramatically raising the price of gasoline. This would also cut down on traffic congestion. By your logic I should also get a seat on the Council, because agreement is bad.
If you don't like what your neighbors are doing with their property purchase an easement or buy a fence.
How many more homes would you suggest Belmont to add for everyone who wants one to get one for really cheap? By then would this city still be a desirable place to live or own? People near transit only go to work and back? No other impact on the city resources and environment?
> In every activist movement there will be those who are disappointed that the dial was not moved 180 degrees. The work of Bolbol and others made significant improvements in the welfare of animals and represented the majority consensus that was achievable. Eric Brooks displays sour grapes over the fact the SF Supervisors chose to accept Bolbol's more moderate proposal. Those seeking "ideal" may not be pleased with just "good" but that's how democracy is supposed to work.
The below commentary is a glimpse into the way Bolbol works "with" others. It is an excerpt from a post on an animal rights forum, that was addressed to both Bolbol and the group members.
"I must point out that you, Deniz, took the lead on the effort to pass zoo reform legislation at the Board of Supervisors and that effort completely failed.
And this is important. I and others who have a lot of experience getting measures passed at the Board of Supervisors approached you with alternate proposals and strategies that we felt would much more effectively win the day, and your response was to reject and even push away, all of that advice and possible support, and try to move a piece of legislation on your own without a solid coalition and strategy behind you pushing for change. The fact that you moved a vote on a measure at the Board without making sure first that you had the votes to win its passage was particularly telling and troubling. So I have serious concerns about your ability to coordinate with other organizers to actually achieve real gains immediately to stop animal suffering at the Zoo. All the wheel spinning that we experienced in last year's effort could actually lead to more harm coming to the animals at the Zoo because it left us with no independent Zoo oversight body at all, when we most certainly could and should have created one." - Eric Brooks, 2009
At the least she stood for something. Making mistakes is better than faking perfections.
I agree with Kristin that this Council does represent a "sea change" from Councils prior to 2014. A good example is Measure I in 2016 to increase our sales taxes for infrastructure. All five council members enthusiastically endorsed Measure I, and refused to seriously discuss arguments made by opponents. In spite of that, 45% voted against Measure I. If there had been just one person on the Council who seriously questioned Measure I, there's a good chance it would not have passed. For democracy to function, it's crucial that all views are considered and discussed. That's why it is so important to elect Deniz to the Council, so residents will hear all sides of important issues so they can make informed decisions.
To suggest that “the biggest knock” on this council is that “it gets along,” the SMDJ has completely missed the boat on Belmont politics.
I’ve personally found it counterproductive to see some of the current council members bring up divisiveness from past councils time and again. It is expected that our representatives “get along.” And I have no doubt that Deniz Bolbol will conduct herself professionally as a council member.
Nevertheless, Deniz Bolbol’s whole candidacy is not about “getting along or not getting along.” But more importantly it is about the lack of representation on many important issues and about creating transparency.
While this Council is so focused on “getting along” on the dais, it has created divisiveness in the community by failing to represent the concerns expressed by the community as shown by the successful referendum petition against the zoning amendments this council adopted in 2015, for example. And this Council has failed to create an environment of transparency by getting rid of the Finance Commission, limiting the scope of the Measure I citizen committee, elimitated important details in minutes, etc.
We can debate on the issues which this Council has voted lockstep. But, let’s not minimize the importance of this election by suggesting that it is about “getting along” on the dais.
I’m voting only for Deniz Bolbol for Belmont City Council. It’s time for a change.
I don’t know how you can represent 10 square blocks of 4 and 5 story buildings, clustered around Ralston and El Camino, as not a “sea change”. This councils adopted City Plan will turn a suburban community into an urban one, add cars to the already congested roads, and children to already packed schools. Those who seek that living environment can choose Redwood City, San Mateo or Foster City – instead residents seek out Belmont for its distinctly suburban vibe. Nothing against renewal and moderate growth, but a 10-fold increase in residential density in a 1-square mile area IS a “sea change”.
I appreciate you making a factually accurate case for Bolbol.
I'm not sure people pick Belmont for its "distinctly suburban vibe" - we picked it because it was more affordable to live near the train station than Redwood City, and was located close to where my fiancee and I both work.
I also dispute the characterization of Belmont as a "suburban community" to begin with - Belmont has about 5800 people per square mile, which is comparable to San Jose, St. Paul, Minnesota, Syracuse, New York, and other places we would think of as "cities." Especially considering the housing shortage and the huge Fortune 500 company located just across the highway it seems reasonable to want to add more housing to an already pretty dense area.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belmont,_California
http://www.governing.com/gov-data/population-density-land-area-cities-map.html
It seems like putting more people near the train station is the best way to help alleviate this area's crushing housing shortage while having the least impact on traffic congestion.
http://www.redwoodcityhistory.org/timeline/
1959 - Redwood Shores annexed to Redwood City after being rejected by Belmont and San Carlos;
So Belmont is the same as San Jose???...San Jose is the largest city in Northern California...and FYI...there are some 879 homes for sale today in San Mateo County...497 homes for rent and 400-500 apartments for rent depending on the source...and that today, right now...there's not a housing shortage, there's an affordability crisis...
Speaking of the train station: I'm curious as to what if anything the current council did to challenge Caltrain's cancellation of free parking at our station? The free parking deal was put in place years ago shortly after Belmont got a raw deal in the initiation of baby bullet service. (Basically our service was downgraded to the worst along the route, bar Atherton, and has never recovered. Just one more example of Caltrain's raw treatment of Belmont - to this day Caltrain shuttles Oracle employees to San Carlos and Hillsdale even though Belmont is closer, and then justifies our low service by the ridership levels that they manipulate down.). Free parking made the bad deal a little less bad, especially since their parking lot - which takes up over half a mile of prime real estate along El Camino - has stood mostly empty for the couple of decades I've lived here.
I've searched city council minutes and JPB minutes for the relevant time period and there is no mention of even a peep from our council about this. I suspect they didn't even notice.
So Kevin, glad you moved to Belmont for the train. On the current trajectory I wonder how much longer it will be before they close the station.
In my view, the biggest knock on this council isn’t that it gets along, but that it doesn’t respond to people it disagrees with, and shuts their views out of council discussions. I’ve written the council scores of emails over the past four years, on a wide variety of subjects, and have rarely received a response from any member, or heard my points discussed in council meetings. Others have told me they were ignored as well. Council members claim they are responsive, but it is only to people who agree with them.
Part of the reason this council gets along so well is that they almost never question the proposals or actions of city managers, and so, exercise no real oversight of city departments. It’s easy for council members to get along when they all trust city managers to do the right thing, and just accept whatever is sent their way.
When presented with evidence from me and others that proposals from city managers were wrong or harmful to residents, we were simply ignored. The only real exception was when the council was forced to reconsider its proposed zoning changes due to a referendum pursued by angry residents.
In addition, the council has taken a number of actions to limit transparency, including approving sanitized “action” minutes with few details, for council and committee meetings; refusing to video or audio record some committee meetings; and changing the rules for council meetings to limit public input.
The election of Deniz Bolbol is sorely needed to give a voice to a large portion of the population that has been ignored by this council, and to help restore transparency to city government. Otherwise, council members will have no incentive to change, and many residents will feel they have no hope of participating in city government.
I'm very glad the SMDJ came to the right decision here, but their reasoning is a little suspect
In the forums I attended and statements I've read Bolbol's statements seem like the adult version of the student council candidate who promises soda in the water fountains - we can have good schools, strong public services, and affordable housing without adding anything to the tax base. Most galling here are the attacks on Firehouse Square (66 affordable housing units, "too big") while also claiming the city "could have done more for affordable housing" in other locations. Those other locations paid millions of dollars to Belmont in housing fees that made Firehouse Square possible.
She also frequently mis-represented the state of the world - not sure "lies" is the correct word, but she made incorrect statements about things like:
- the number of parking spaces at Firehouse Square
- the City Council's legal obligations
- what is legally under the purview of a City Council
- what Caltrain is doing to add capacity
- that most residents were opposed to the General Plan & Specific Plan updates - I went to most of those meetings and the majority of the feedback wanted the City Council to do even more on housing than specified in the plan.
It's perfectly defensible to want no new development because of traffic, but it's not OK to constantly misrepresent the state of the city, and appear to have no idea what a City Council does or what policies it has the power to change.
It's also not defensible to pretend that we can less development without worsening a lot of trends around housing affordability and road quality - it's just setting yourself up for failure.
Soda in the water fountains is better than drinking kool-aid any day!
We live in this area because of great work opportunities and not its affordability. Kevin, I would concentrate on the former and not latter. Only way to afford here is to earn more, by innovating and working for better and better companies and not by attacking this candidate or that candidate. Unless there is money in this somehow ...
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.