Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt: What happened in Burlingame

Even Cathy Baylock's staunchest supporters, those who campaigned for her and voted her in on November 3, admit that Baylock blundered when she filed historic papers on her neighborhood without talking to her neighbors or determining whether there was community support for her actions.

The aftermath of the mistake 

Let's look at the some of the results of Baylock's mistake:

• At least two homeowners in Cathy Baylock's neighborhood are out $3000 each for historical analyses of their properties.
• The entire neighborhood is under a cloud of uncertainty, per Anna Shimko.
  
• Baylock was left battling a publicity nightmare just weeks before the election, including losing the endorsement of the San Mateo County Association of Realtors.
• The Burlingame Historical Society is dealing with their own public image issues because Baylock used information from a report written by the Society. Despite the fact that Baylock used the information on her own initiative, unfortunately people see that she is a Board member and assume the Society condones her actions.
  

None of this sounds like a reasoned or logical approach to historic preservation.   It was a reactive, poorly considered response to a rumour.  There is no evidence that the action has had any positive effect on historic resources or the cultural environment of Burlingame, and it has created a lot of unhappiness in the Burlingame Park neighborhood, as well as creating expense and wasted time for city staff.

What about Burlingame's real need for historic preservation?

The real damage, though, is to the perception of historic preservation in Burlingame.  Historic preservation is a cultural and community good, and it should be something that citizens are incented to support and endorse instead of something they fear and avoid.  As Baylock said in 2008 when downtown property owners objected to being listed on the historic survey of downtown, "I hope we can allow this [historic inventory] as a tool and not a punishment for something."

Despite being on the City Council since 2001 and being mayor previous to this term, Cathy Baylock has not succeeded in creating incentives for owners of historic properties in Burlingame.  After the current controversy, the downtown plan was amended to suggest several incentives; however, most of them are either of questionable value or out of the reach of ordinary property owners.  Baylock's plan appears to be to invoke CEQA as the punishment to force compliance.  Yes, it will work, as threats frequently do, but at the sacrifice of willing participation and cooperation by property owners.  Without community involvement and active support for historic preservation, Burlingame is left with the bluntest of instruments to try to maintain its charms.   Long-term, this approach is disastrous for Burlingame's historic legacy.

Burlingame is still waiting for a truly sound historic preservation policy which will serve the community.   Other cities in California have accomplished a healthy balance between historic preservation, green building, and needed community development.  

Cathy Baylock will be mayor in a few days.  What will she really do for Burlingame's historic preservation?