This is the first in a series of question-and-answer sessions with the mayors of local towns. This interview was conducted by Almanac Staff Writer Rory Brown and Managing Editor Richard Hine.
By Rory Brown
Almanac Staff Writer
Menlo Park Mayor Nicholas Jellins says he is not only comfortable with the contract the city agreed to last week to turn over its three new public pools to a private operator, but he is “excited about the prospects for enhanced services, not only because of the provider, but largely because of the new facility.”
In a question-and-answer session on March 1, Mr. Jellins said it’s the intent of the plan to give the community access and fees comparable to those at the former Burgess pool.
During the hour-long interview, Mr. Jellins dealt with several other issues, including a proposal to build a golf course and playing fields on the open space of Bayfront Park.
QUESTION. Are you comfortable with the council’s 3-2 vote to turn over the operation of Menlo Park’s new public pools to a private organization, Team Sheeper LLC?
JELLINS. I’m entirely comfortable with the decision. I am excited about the prospect for enhanced services, not only because of the provider, but largely because of the new facility.
Q. Is the community going to have the same access and fees — or at least comparable access and fees as we’ve had before?
JELLINS. That was entirely the intent. From my evaluation of the proposal, that is what we have asked the contractor to provide.
Q. What role will the Parks and Recreation Commission have with regard to public access to the pools?
JELLINS. The hours proposed by the contractor would be reviewable by the Parks and Recreation Commission for their comment and input before staff would agree one way or the other.
Q. So, the hours and fees will be reviewed, and ultimately City Manager David Boesch will sign off on it?
JELLINS. Right. And if there’s disagreement on whether [the hours] are adequate, it’s a matter that council can decide. But we’re not necessarily involved unless there is some dissatisfaction with the arraignments.
In my view there are provisions for organized team swimming and coaching. There may be lane hours, and hours reserved for certain kinds of activities, but not to the exclusion of general lap swimming or recreational swimming.
The Belle Haven pool is a different matter. We were able to keep that pool open for a full year back in 1999. We provided swimming activities for kids going to school in Belle Haven. They would get in the water, have a lesson, and go back to class. I’d love to see more of that.
The Burgess pool opening and contract is just a start. There was impetus to make a decision about that now because of the imminent opening [of the new pools in April].
Q. With all the proposed development projects — on El Camino Real, in Linfield Oaks, the hotel/office complexes, building and expanding the schools — is this the time to cut back city services?
JELLINS. Our city annually sets its budget irrespective of events going on around us — we do it every year. This year, there’s a context that’s different than last year, which is different than the previous five years. There’s always something else going on.
We, in fact, have been cutting city services for the last three years.
Some might have suggested five years ago, “Is it time to consider placing barriers to development in our community?” When the economy’s going wild, why not take advantage of the opportunity to build greater revenue capacity? Our council at that time declined to support revenue-generating activities in our city. That was a budgeting kind of decision, yet that was in the context of a land-use decision.
It is accurate that we make decisions within the context of other issues confronting the city — the budgeting decision is part of a continuing process. We have expenditures that are ongoing as a result of personnel programs that carry over from year to year. There’s very little we can do in the short term to enhance revenues.
When we sit down to establish a budget every year, much of the decisions have already been made because of what occurred the preceding year. That is essentially why we decided last year to enact a carryover budget, so that we might undertake a more complete budget evaluation this year.
This year, we also have the background of union negotiations and expiring contracts for all four unions; proposed changes among our adjoining districts — school district, fire district and local entities — and an election in the fall.
Q. Have you decided to seek re-election?
JELLINS. I’ve been encouraged to seek re-election, and I’ve been encouraged that others have decided to consider running as well. I have given more than seven years of my life in elected office, a couple more in appointed office in the city. I don’t know whether or not I’ll do this again.
The public is probably not generally aware of the kind of sacrifice that we make to serve — the paucity of financial [remuneration] and, really, the toll that it takes on an emotional level that carries over from the time spent in meetings, and as you prepare for meetings.
Q. There’s a great deal of concern over whether government can continue to afford the current level of public pensions. What do you think?
JELLINS. It is a topic that’s ripe for discussion. It’s certainly in the public’s mind. There’s a tension that exists between the provision of post-retirement benefits and our ability to attract and retain competent staff. For some of us there is a philosophical impetus to use the public enterprise — meaning government employment — to serve as a baseline to maintain the quality of life of a certain percentage of residents.
Q. Bayfront Park has become a big issue. After your election in 2002, you were quoted in the Almanac as saying: “Most of what I promised to do was decide particular issues as they are raised by our community — rather than to develop or devise ones on my own.” When did the community call for a golf course at Bayfront Park?
JELLINS. What I understand to be the history of the matter is that we have been tasked with devising means of offsetting the operational budget deficit for the park function and a former landfill.
Over a number of years, dating back to 1999, we began looking at how to address the shortfall through subcommittee and staff investigation. We looked at a range of active recreational uses at Bayfront Park. A subcommittee comprised of members of the Parks and Recreation Committee, members of the general public and staff identified golf use as one that would be viable.
That’s where golf use came from. That’s historical fact.
Q. Some people feel like this golf course idea has come out of the blue.
JELLINS. I didn’t think of golf use. It wasn’t my idea, I’ll tell you that. It is an idea that has currency. If you believe the proponents, then it is a viable use at that site.
Q. Do you see any permitting issues with regard to putting playing fields on wetlands in Bayfront Park?
JELLINS. Of course, there’s a potential issue. There’s an environmental review process that will flush out all the permitting issues. It’s just not right for that at this point.
Q. As mayor, what would you like to see the council accomplish this year?
JELLINS. There are several top objectives on my list. Among them are to get the city’s financial plan in order so that we enact a budget that reflects the economic realities and the residents’ preferences for programs, activities and services provided by the city.
I would also like to make substantial progress on enacting a plan for future development and use for properties along El Camino Real and the downtown area.
Also — and these are not necessarily in order of preference — I would like to see the city continue its efforts to address the challenges created by the economic differences between the Belle Haven neighborhood and the balance of the city. That needs to come in a variety of ways.
First, the recognition of the social service needs and differences. Second, a recognition of the educational differences created by the Ravenswood School District and its deficiencies. Although our city doesn’t have control or very much influence what the Ravenswood School District does, its success or failure has ramifications on the entirety of the city — its image and success.
Last among my priority goals is to achieve a turnaround in the city’s revenue-generation capabilities in the sales tax area.
Q. If you, Mickie Winkler and Lee Duboc seek re-election, why should residents vote for your camp? What difference does it make if your camp or the other camp — represented by council members Kelly Fergusson and Andy Cohen — has majority control of the council?
JELLINS. I’m not going to get into that. That’s a bit too hypothetical. It hypothesizes any number of unknowns. I think that’s a bit out on the edge for me to address at this point.
Q. Four years ago, when Ms. Duboc, Ms. Winkler and you were elected, you congratulated voters for securing “a new future for Menlo Park.” Have you accomplished what you wanted? Have you secured the “new future” you were referring to?
JELLINS. Absolutely. I would say that the approach of our current City Council gives much greater recognition to our position as a part of the region than the former council on which I served my first four years. Our council members take part in regional activities, and serve actively on regional boards of commissions. That is not to say each and every one of our council members from the prior council didn’t serve to some capacity, but at this point, the bulk of our members are involved actively in one pursuit or another in regional affairs. That’s a change from the previous council.
Second, council members are much more engaged in the internal processes of our government than before. This is in some part due to a change in the city management. We brought on Dave Boesch and his style is different than our previous city manager.
Q. You said the council is “engaged in the internal processes of government” — can you explain that?
JELLINS. Our current city manager’s open style of management allows for access and input from council members to members of the city staff that did not generally occur before. [Mr. Boesch] places a great deal of confidence in his staff, and feels comfortable with their interactions with council members.
Q. That’s council members interacting with staff outside the public council meetings? Are there any risks involved with that, such as staff members thinking they’re getting council direction?
JELLINS. I think there’s always that risk. You, hopefully, will have council members who recognize that they don’t have authority to tell a staff member other than [Mr.] Boesch what council concurs what to do. But it’s more in terms of the council members’ ability to garner information about various activities going on at the staff level, directly from the staff member or department head who’s managing that enterprise, rather than having to go through the city manager to get that information. You want to know what’s going on in public works? Go ask the public works director. It allows the council member who wants to be informed, to find out what’s happening.
Q. In 2002 there was a backlash to the Santa Cruz Avenue traffic-calming project, and to decisions made by the council majority of the time that were perceived as anti-business. Do you think any decisions by the current council over the past three years will spur any kind of a similar backlash?
JELLINS. Due to the inherent nature of political campaigns, I am certain there will be efforts to characterize the decision-making and policies of current members of the council, whether or not they run for re-election, as a reason whether or not to vote differently this time. While I might disagree with the term “backlash,” perception is part of the message. Just as it’s the legislator’s role to promote compromise, it’s the role of the press to present conflict. If we all agreed about everything, there wouldn’t really be a need for an elected legislature; we could just have an autonomous ruler, but we don’t, and that’s a good thing.
Q. Matt Henry, who recently quit the Planning Commission in protest over what he saw as possible cuts in Belle Haven services, said in an op-ed piece in the Almanac: “I am constantly bewildered by the lack of vision that exists in this city. The real solutions to the problems in Belle Haven have been ignored for years, and these problems have compounded year after year, and only Band-Aids have been applied.” What do you have to say to Matt Henry?
JELLINS. I recently had lunch with [Mr. Henry] and we talked about these very things. In part, the passion that he’s expressed, and the passion he has for the continuing need to address disparity of opportunity for Belle Haven’s residents, motivates my desire to press for change. I sincerely appreciate [Mr. Henry’s] willingness to speak out, and I concur that there’s much more that needs to be done.
Q. You voted recently, with Ms. Duboc and Ms. Winkler, to elect yourself mayor, when the council’s mayor-appointment policy says the gavel should have been passed to council members Fergusson or Cohen, who have not previously served as mayor. If you don’t follow the policy, why not rescind or revise it?
JELLINS. I continue to be amazed that there are those that still make an issue of this. As far as I was concerned, we made a decision on December 6, and that’s the last time the five of us will make a decision about that matter in this council. We’ll have a decision to make next year if all five of us return to reorganize our government.
Q. Do you think there should be a mayor-appointment policy, or should it just be that the majority rules?
JELLINS. It’s a guideline for any given council to decide what they want to do.
Q. So why not just remove the policy?
JELLINS. Because it’s not necessary to remove it.
Q. Are you opposed to the policy?
JELLINS. I’m not opposed to that policy or any other. An individual council decides who it wants to be its leader. If this council or some other wishes to make a policy to describe the process in making that decision, they could do that. It seemed to me that we already decided December 6, and let’s move on.
Q. Are there any other issues you want to address?
A. It is a continuing goal of mine to encourage my colleagues to perform their role in a manner that allows a public debate to ripen and blossom without the influence of an elected official having signaled or lobbied the decision before it comes to council.
Looking back over my time on council, I’ve always believed that we should keep an open mind until we come to the ultimate decision. I attempt to the best of my ability to do just that, and that is why reporters my sometimes find my answers somewhat less forceful than they would like.
Some of my colleagues may signal what decision they will make, but I haven’t made up my mind. That’s why it’s difficult for me to understand and listen to complaints that decisions have already been made in regard to Belle Haven services.
When a colleague on one side or the other makes a statement, that undermines the public confidence in what we do. I strive to serve in a manner that provides inspiration.
Nicholas Jellins: A three-time mayor
Nicholas Jellins is completing his second four-year term on the Menlo Park City Council, and won’t say yet whether he will seek re-election in November.
This is the third time he has served as mayor, the title given to the council’s chairman.
Mr. Jellins received a bachelor’s degree in 1979 from Harvard College and a law degree in 1982 from the University of Virginia.
A lawyer, he specializes in real estate and has an office on Menlo Avenue in Menlo Park.
From 1996 to 1998, Mr. Jellins was a member of the Menlo Park Planning Commission. He has served on several regional bodies, including as chair of the San Mateo Criminal Justice Council and president of the League of California Cities, Peninsula Division.
