Two years ago, San Mateo residents made a significant and forward-looking choice. By approving the city’s Stormwater Initiative, we collectively agreed to invest in long-overdue storm system upgrades to reduce flooding risk, protect neighborhoods and better prepare for increasingly intense weather. This was not a small commitment, and it came at a time when many households were already feeling financial pressure, but it was the right call.
And your investment is already paying off. Since the initiative passed, the city has strengthened wet-weather preparedness in tangible and measurable ways. Dedicated stormwater staff now inspect and clean catch basins and pipelines citywide, expanding maintenance well beyond what was previously possible. This year alone, crews have cleaned more than 1,200 catch basins and nearly 17 miles of storm drain pipes, improving system performance ahead of major storms. Sandbag stations are deployed in flood-prone areas each rainy season, and coordination with emergency services has improved overall readiness.
Additional examples of progress can be found at the Marina Lagoon. Ongoing pump station improvements, operational changes and planned spot dredging efforts that were incredibly difficult to advance before dedicated funding was in place are now moving forward. At the same time, the city is updating its Storm Drain Master Plan using current climate projections, ensuring future investments are targeted, data-driven and resilient.
This is what happens when our community invests in its future: we move from reactive fixes to proactive planning, reduce long-term risk and avoid costly emergencies. However, our work is never done. A similar challenge and opportunity now confronts us in another important area: our many public facilities.
Across San Mateo, buildings residents rely on every day for city services are deteriorating and in poor condition. Recreation centers, libraries, fire stations, swim facilities and community spaces (many built in the 1960s) are reaching the end of their planned lives. Unless new investments are made to keep these facilities safe, functional and code-compliant, they risk closure. Recent citywide assessments show extensive deferred maintenance, seismic vulnerabilities, outdated mechanical systems and accessibility gaps across nearly 60 facilities.
The estimated cost to address these needs ranges from $243 million to $367 million, depending on scope and safety requirements. These are not expansion projects or new amenities. They are core repairs required to keep buildings open and safe. Without intervention, we will see more closures, rising repair costs and fewer opportunities for thoughtful, long-term planning.
Recommended for you
Much like stormwater risk, our facility challenges did not appear overnight. They accumulated slowly as limited funding forced the city to focus only on urgent fixes. Historically, San Mateo has invested about $4 million annually in capital improvements, enough to keep facilities operating, but not enough to address systemic aging. Even with this council setting aside $25 million in Capital Reserves this year for facilities, the huge gap remains.
Looking ahead, the funding landscape is becoming more difficult. Federal infrastructure support is expected to tighten in 2026 and beyond, meaning fewer grant opportunities and increased competition nationwide. As with stormwater, the reality is clear: Cities that plan ahead and take action for themselves will be far better positioned than those forced to react later.
This is why the council has started exploring long-term funding options for general infrastructure, including the possibility of a local sales tax or bond measure. Importantly, no decisions have been made. The council is currently gathering survey data to understand what residents will support — a sales tax measure, a bond measure, both or neither, and whether now is the right time to consider a ballot measure. In 2026, we will review this input carefully and determine the most responsible path forward, guided by community input.
No public servant, this one included, ever wins brownie points from the community by saying we need to raise money from citizens, whether from taxes, fees or bonds; to fix problems that past councils have neglected over decades. However, I believe in telling people the truth, and the truth is, repairing our public facilities is a problem we can no longer ignore. Figuring out how we work together to address this challenge so future generations can enjoy our parks and learn to read, swim and do so much more in San Mateo, is the opportunity before us.
I am writing to the community today to make sure people are aware of the hard choices before us, and because I welcome your feedback and input. Let’s get the conversation started and keep San Mateo amazing for decades to come.
Danielle Cwirko-Godycki is a member of the San Mateo City Council.
The article is honest. As a 45 year resident of San Mateo in a senior property owner on fixed income house, I have experienced the deterioration of community centers and pools and parks across the city - this has had a negative impact on my quality of life. I do not think we should deny reality and solutions must be found in the very near future.
Thank you Dirk and Terrence. Wise comments. Taxing those who cannot afford it has reached its limit! We knew that time would come eventually. Now one way to help this problem is for exemptions for seniors, disabled, etc. Many states have that. For instance, So. Dakota has a property tax refund for seniors at a certain income level of less. Common sense, intelligent and compassionate. Many seniors are now hitting a brick wall for money. They want to stay in their homes, which they should be able to after years of work, contribution to taxes and communities. Especially paying taxes to school districts for decades when they have no children in the schools. Time for a change of thinking and planning, compassion for those who can't afford these taxes, bonds, etc. Especially when there is so much waste in government. Many of us have said for decades to stop the increases in pensions, etc. Paid for by those who struggle to get by.
Public safety is number one! No neighborhood should live in fear of flooding especially due to lack of infrastructure updates. Minimum maintenance of that lagoon threatens public safety. How can we continue to grow at the current rate and add more stress to an over burdened system, without funding? But no one wants to pay more taxes. How many taxes are slated for the next ballot? Too many! This council has a huge challenge in selling this new tax to voters.
As the old saying goes, there is no free lunch. If you want to live in a beautiful, safe city, someone has to pay. Prop 13 showed us what a war on taxes cost the education and housing needs of a community. No one likes to pay taxes. But we need our military and our local police to keep us safe. our fire departments always on alert and ready for action; our streets cleaned and paved. Visit a country without taxes and experience the difference. It also depends on having honest politicians at all levels of government. sue lempert
"there is no free lunch" and yet the city council is supporting "free" car storage everywhere? Why?
There should be an universal permit system that outlaws overnight private car storage. Anyone who really needs to store their private stuff in their garages and on their driveways can always pay for storing on a public street. That money (several thousand dollars per car spot per year) can then be used to pay for safety personnel and infrastructure.
Problem solved.
San Mateo County has the richest school districts, the richest transit agencies, the richest cities in the Nation - and still keeps asking for more taxes.
Easy Gerd, First time I have ever heard of this concept. And, I like it! The city paves and maintains those streets for drivers and bikers, not parkers...Right? Homeowners think the street in front of their home is for their private use and get angry when someone else parks in front of their home. Homeowners do not own the street parking. It is provided for everyone to share, with natural competition based on a first come first serve basis for every space. Curious to hear how people feel about ownership of street parking.
Dear Sue - the lack of revenues due to Prop 13 has been debunked several times. You can't tell me with a straight face that with SMC's $5Billion assessment has not gone through the roof. I am sure that our current assessor will be most happy to assess your house for its current value and then make you pay. With all of the sneaky parcel taxes and special assessment for our education systems as well as explosion in government employment, even in our own cities, there appears to be no shortage of funding. Perhaps our city managers can explore the elimination of dated and no longer relevant programs to free up some dough. While we are at it, you are outdated as well.
Thanks for your guest perspective, Ms. Cwirko-Godycki, but every election period, we see plenty of efforts from government to raise money from citizens, so it doesn’t seem like public servants have any issue with winning brownie points, unless it is to determine who can place more measures on the ballot to raise money from citizens. If governments would do their part to curb waste, fraud, and abuse, I think many citizens would be okay with shelling out their hard-earned money.
But when you have public transportation operating at 100% all day, every day, with ridership at 50% or below (especially during the COVID era) shelling out money to prop up ever-increasing union transportation worker salaries, pensions, and benefits, it becomes more of citizens subsidizing unions. Same with taxes to support education. We’re not supporting kids getting a decent education. We’re only supporting ever-increasing public education worker salaries, pensions, and benefits. And in several of today’s articles, we hear the Grand Boulevard Initiative will cost between $750 million to $1 billion. More money for union workers, whether we truly need all the bells and whistles being proposed, or not.
Perhaps if governments made an effort at fiscal management, folks would be more amenable. For instance, San Mateo wasted money to institute bike lanes and remove parking spots because they wanted “free” money for union workers. And didn’t San Mateo recently institute a higher city minimum wage than that of all of California? As it is now, I’d bet most if not all the “new” money is going towards unions and their ever-increasing salaries, pensions, and benefits. If folks are fooled into voting yes on new tax measures, don’t be surprised when unions come looking for raises.
Folks, don’t fall for any manufactured sob stories. Vote NO on every proposed tax until governments do their part in fiscal management. If you change your mind, don’t worry, Democrat public servants will propose new tax proposals early and often.
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!
(8) comments
The article is honest. As a 45 year resident of San Mateo in a senior property owner on fixed income house, I have experienced the deterioration of community centers and pools and parks across the city - this has had a negative impact on my quality of life. I do not think we should deny reality and solutions must be found in the very near future.
Thank you Dirk and Terrence. Wise comments. Taxing those who cannot afford it has reached its limit! We knew that time would come eventually. Now one way to help this problem is for exemptions for seniors, disabled, etc. Many states have that. For instance, So. Dakota has a property tax refund for seniors at a certain income level of less. Common sense, intelligent and compassionate. Many seniors are now hitting a brick wall for money. They want to stay in their homes, which they should be able to after years of work, contribution to taxes and communities. Especially paying taxes to school districts for decades when they have no children in the schools. Time for a change of thinking and planning, compassion for those who can't afford these taxes, bonds, etc. Especially when there is so much waste in government. Many of us have said for decades to stop the increases in pensions, etc. Paid for by those who struggle to get by.
Public safety is number one! No neighborhood should live in fear of flooding especially due to lack of infrastructure updates. Minimum maintenance of that lagoon threatens public safety. How can we continue to grow at the current rate and add more stress to an over burdened system, without funding? But no one wants to pay more taxes. How many taxes are slated for the next ballot? Too many! This council has a huge challenge in selling this new tax to voters.
As the old saying goes, there is no free lunch. If you want to live in a beautiful, safe city, someone has to pay. Prop 13 showed us what a war on taxes cost the education and housing needs of a community. No one likes to pay taxes. But we need our military and our local police to keep us safe. our fire departments always on alert and ready for action; our streets cleaned and paved. Visit a country without taxes and experience the difference. It also depends on having honest politicians at all levels of government. sue lempert
"there is no free lunch" and yet the city council is supporting "free" car storage everywhere? Why?
There should be an universal permit system that outlaws overnight private car storage. Anyone who really needs to store their private stuff in their garages and on their driveways can always pay for storing on a public street. That money (several thousand dollars per car spot per year) can then be used to pay for safety personnel and infrastructure.
Problem solved.
San Mateo County has the richest school districts, the richest transit agencies, the richest cities in the Nation - and still keeps asking for more taxes.
This is greed - nothing more, nothing less.
Easy Gerd, First time I have ever heard of this concept. And, I like it! The city paves and maintains those streets for drivers and bikers, not parkers...Right? Homeowners think the street in front of their home is for their private use and get angry when someone else parks in front of their home. Homeowners do not own the street parking. It is provided for everyone to share, with natural competition based on a first come first serve basis for every space. Curious to hear how people feel about ownership of street parking.
Dear Sue - the lack of revenues due to Prop 13 has been debunked several times. You can't tell me with a straight face that with SMC's $5Billion assessment has not gone through the roof. I am sure that our current assessor will be most happy to assess your house for its current value and then make you pay. With all of the sneaky parcel taxes and special assessment for our education systems as well as explosion in government employment, even in our own cities, there appears to be no shortage of funding. Perhaps our city managers can explore the elimination of dated and no longer relevant programs to free up some dough. While we are at it, you are outdated as well.
Thanks for your guest perspective, Ms. Cwirko-Godycki, but every election period, we see plenty of efforts from government to raise money from citizens, so it doesn’t seem like public servants have any issue with winning brownie points, unless it is to determine who can place more measures on the ballot to raise money from citizens. If governments would do their part to curb waste, fraud, and abuse, I think many citizens would be okay with shelling out their hard-earned money.
But when you have public transportation operating at 100% all day, every day, with ridership at 50% or below (especially during the COVID era) shelling out money to prop up ever-increasing union transportation worker salaries, pensions, and benefits, it becomes more of citizens subsidizing unions. Same with taxes to support education. We’re not supporting kids getting a decent education. We’re only supporting ever-increasing public education worker salaries, pensions, and benefits. And in several of today’s articles, we hear the Grand Boulevard Initiative will cost between $750 million to $1 billion. More money for union workers, whether we truly need all the bells and whistles being proposed, or not.
Perhaps if governments made an effort at fiscal management, folks would be more amenable. For instance, San Mateo wasted money to institute bike lanes and remove parking spots because they wanted “free” money for union workers. And didn’t San Mateo recently institute a higher city minimum wage than that of all of California? As it is now, I’d bet most if not all the “new” money is going towards unions and their ever-increasing salaries, pensions, and benefits. If folks are fooled into voting yes on new tax measures, don’t be surprised when unions come looking for raises.
Folks, don’t fall for any manufactured sob stories. Vote NO on every proposed tax until governments do their part in fiscal management. If you change your mind, don’t worry, Democrat public servants will propose new tax proposals early and often.
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.