Certain buildings reveal more than bricks and mortar. They show who we believe deserves investment. In San Mateo, the Martin Luther King Community Center tells that story.
For decades, the King Center has been a cornerstone of the North Central neighborhood. In this historically underserved community, families gather, youth learn to swim and elders find a sense of connection. Yet once again, this vital facility risks being pushed aside while others move to the front of the line.
The city is now deciding which public spaces to rebuild first. That decision will reveal not only our priorities but our values. The city’s recent Facilities Condition Assessment provides one of the clearest pictures yet of how decades of deferred maintenance have left our community spaces in crisis. Of roughly 100 municipal buildings, 60 were analyzed in detail. Citywide repairs could cost more than $360 million, including $77 million in urgent health and safety fixes and approximately $15 million needed to fully modernize the King Center.
Both the King Center and Joinville Swim Center were built in 1968 and are long past their useful life. Joinville’s challenges are serious: seismic vulnerability, outdated systems, and leaks that could soon render it unusable. Those issues deserve attention. However, the King Center’s condition is just as critical and far more consequential for the community it serves.
The city’s assessment identifies noncompliant locker rooms, seismic risks and failing pool systems, with both pools out of code due to undersized plumbing and expired filtration equipment. The report calls for a comprehensive renovation, including new all-electric systems, and the complete replacement of both pools and decks. What the King Center needs is not maintenance. It is survival
Despite the scale of need, the King Center continues to receive less urgency and fewer guarantees of completion. That imbalance matters because the King Center is more than a recreation site. It is also being advanced as a resiliency center, a place designed to provide shelter, power and support during emergencies. In a city that has already endured historic flooding, resilience is not optional. It is essential infrastructure.
City leaders have taken important steps. The council created a $25 million capital reserve to help seed priority projects, and an $850,000 federal earmark for the King Center was secured through the advocacy of former Mayor Amourence Lee and Supervisor Noelia Corzo, along with support from city staff. Those are meaningful beginnings. But beginnings must become commitments. The city has already acknowledged that overall facility needs far exceed available resources and will likely require a future revenue measure. When that measure comes forward, the King Center must be named and protected as a top priority.
Recommended for you
But behind every spreadsheet is a story of people and place. The Joinville facility serves the
Shoreview neighborhood, while the King Center serves North Central, a historically Black, Latino and immigrant community that has faced disinvestment for generations. When one pool’s closure triggers swift mobilization and the other’s deterioration is met with more study, it sends a message no budget line can erase. Capital planning is a moral document. It shows whether every neighborhood is viewed as worthy of safety, access and dignity.
There is momentum to build on. Through the Koshland North Central San Mateo Collaborative, neighbors and organizations have turned vision into action. Working with the Parks and Recreation Department, the Collaborative has hosted cultural events, youth programs and listening sessions that reflect the neighborhood’s strength and aspirations. Beginning next spring, partners aim to launch after-school enrichment through the Police Activities League, peer counseling and wellness groups through Peninsula Family Service, and family engagement and health workshops with CORA, PCRC and BACHAC. This work proves the King Center is not a liability. It is a living asset.
For me, the King Center holds a deeply personal significance. Every weekend, my family and I are at the field and playground. My son, who turns 2 in December, runs across the same grass, now turf, that generations before him have played on. I want him to grow up learning to swim, play and belong at a center that shows his neighborhood matters and deserves the same investment, pride and care as every other part of San Mateo.
Residents who share this vision should voice their support as the city shapes its next capital plan and considers a funding measure. The King Center cannot take a back seat. If San Mateo truly believes in equitable investment, rebuilding the King Center must not be a footnote. It must be the headline.
Dr. Charles Hansen is a Koshland Fellow with the San Francisco Foundation, working with local partners to advance equity and resilience in North Central San Mateo.
(3) comments
Thanks for your letter, Mr. Hansen, advocating for the King Center. But based on the number of public spaces to be rebuilt, shouldn’t we focus on servicing the maximum number of public spaces, efficiently, with the money that is available? Instead of adding bells and whistles to selected buildings (taking money away from other buildings) shouldn’t we focus on the minimum number of features to service each building for as many buildings as possible? If folks want to add bells and whistles, then have the folks who utilize the building to pony up and donate funds to pay for those bells and whistles.
For example, if the King Center wants to become all-electric, then have users pony up to pay the upcharge to go all-electric. Estimate purchasing and installing the cheapest and most efficient form of power and the all-electric option and if users can come up with the difference, they can go all-electric. Otherwise, it’s not fair to other public spaces if the King Center takes more than their fair share of funds.
Yes, let's improve the King Center!
Given the $15M expected deficit for the City of SM, however, we will need to get smarter with our spending. Perhaps not spending $3M to rip out the bike lanes that keep kids safe in N. Central is a good way to start. The City has spent tens of thousands of dollars on meetings, surveys, mailers, workshops, consultants, etc. in debating this issue over the past five years. This is money that could have been used on the King Center.
Unfortunately this is funded by debt which at current rates roughly triples the cost. So we are really asking the public for $45M for a $15M facility. And your $360M figure is really $1.1B. And then we ask the question why communities go underserved, When you are paying triple the cost there is nothing left over.
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.