A Burlingame ownership budget should show the source and billing period beside each amount. Property taxes, City utilities, association charges and future repairs come from different records. Combining them before checking the address and service classification creates false precision. The Burlingame guide introduces the property questions; this budget worksheet uses two actual public annual tax bills and a separate, transparent City utility model to make the cost research practical.
The public bills were checked October 26, 2026 and cover July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2027. They identify 2 Kenmar Way and 1427 Floribunda Avenue, unit 307. They are evidence of their published annual charges, not future buyer assessments, market values or complete household costs. No owner identity or payment status is reproduced. The utility assumptions below are not assigned to either actual property.
Start with the actual annual tax bill
The County’s current 2 Kenmar Way bill, number 2026-267731 and account 027-130-110, shows $34,990.92 in ad valorem taxes and $947.44 in direct charges and special assessments. The published total is $35,938.36. The direct-charge section includes two school parcel-tax lines, federal and NPDES storm fees, City storm drainage, Bay restoration and mosquito abatement. Keep those lines separate from utility-service invoices and private association charges.
The current corrected bill for Floribunda unit 307, number 2026-404897 and account 105-660-200, shows $12,329.56 in ad valorem taxes and $578.80 in direct charges, totaling $12,908.36. Both examples identify tax rate area 004001 and a combined ad valorem rate of 1.1156 percent. Their different assessed bases and direct-charge amounts matter more than a generic citywide tax percentage when describing the actual published bills.
Even matching levy names do not establish identical amounts. The City storm-drainage line is $368 on the Kenmar bill and $65 on the Floribunda unit bill. The Measure GG line also differs. Reproduce the actual parcel’s current line rather than importing a neighbor’s amount. If a charge needs explanation, follow its administering agency and preserve the bill code, year and source beside the question.
Separate annual smoothing from future assessment
Dividing the published totals by twelve gives $2,994.86 and $1,075.70 for monthly comparison. Those are planning equivalents, not payment schedules or estimates of what a buyer will owe after a transaction. The County’s property-tax overview distinguishes assessment, calculation and billing roles, and identifies separate rolls. Obtain appropriate transaction-specific information about future assessed value and any supplemental bills before treating the current owner’s annual charge as the purchase budget.
Keep the first-year cash plan separate from a stabilized annual worksheet. A closing may involve prepaid items, later supplemental bills and different utility starting arrangements. If a lender’s proposed payment includes taxes or insurance, reconcile those amounts with the worksheet so they are not counted twice. No financing terms or future tax amount are assumed for these examples. The household’s actual loan and escrow information belong in their own documented fields.
| Component | 2 Kenmar Way | 1427 Floribunda Avenue, unit 307 |
|---|---|---|
| County account / bill | 027-130-110 / 2026-267731 | 105-660-200 / 2026-404897, corrected bill |
| Ad valorem | $34,990.92 | $12,329.56 |
| Direct charges / special assessments | $947.44, including City storm drainage $368.00 | $578.80, including City storm drainage $65.00 |
| Published annual total | $35,938.36 | $12,908.36 |
| Annual total ÷ 12 | $2,994.86 monthly planning equivalent | $1,075.70 monthly planning equivalent |
Source: County official no-login public lookup. Exact bill links and dated identifiers accompany the source record. These are not future buyer assessments or market prices.
| Assumed input | Bimonthly calculation | Six-period annualization |
|---|---|---|
| Single-family, 3/4-inch meter, 4,000 gallons | $84.03 + 4 × $9.79 = $123.19 water | $739.14 water only |
| Same classification/meter, 12,000 gallons | $84.03 + 4 × $9.79 + 4 × $10.98 + 4 × $12.18 = $215.83 water | $1,294.98 water only |
| 1-inch versus 3/4-inch meter base, separately | $140.05 − $84.03 = $56.02 | $336.12 additional base charge |
| New single-family/duplex sewer, assumed three bedrooms | $130.00 under published starting classification | $780.00 at unchanged amount for six periods; actual transition/history may differ |
Source: final schedule effective July 1, 2026. Water units are 1,000 gallons; six bimonthly bills, not twelve. No household total combines these models with real tax parcels. Complete separately: future taxes / actual account use / HOA / insurance / repairs / recurring maintenance / capital funding / one-time costs / source and quote date.
Use the final City schedule and correct billing period
The final fiscal year 2026/27 fee schedule is marked effective July 1, 2026. It supplies a single fee column, unlike an earlier current-versus-proposed comparison still available online. The water model uses the final schedule’s bimonthly base of $84.03 for a 3/4-inch meter and the single-family consumption tiers. One unit is 1,000 gallons; this is not a hundred-cubic-foot model.
At 4,000 gallons in a bimonthly period, the example is $123.19 for water. At 12,000 gallons, it is $215.83 because each portion of use receives its applicable tier. Repeating those assumptions over six periods gives $739.14 and $1,294.98, a $555.84 annual difference. The arithmetic illustrates sensitivity to use. Actual meter size, account classification, seasonal consumption and billing adjustments require the property’s records.
The same schedule lists a $140.05 bimonthly base for a one-inch meter. That is $56.02 more per period than the assumed 3/4-inch base, or $336.12 across six identical periods. Confirm the meter before using either figure. Multifamily, duplex and other water classifications have a different consumption line; a single-family tier model should not be assigned to a condominium unit merely because its tax record is available.
Model sewer from the applicable account history
The City’s billing explanation describes an initial residential sewer basis tied to bedroom count, followed by the development of winter-use history and a three-year historical average. The final schedule lists $130 bimonthly for a new three-bedroom single-family or duplex classification. Its $780 annualization assumes six unchanged charges. It is not a guarantee that an actual new owner’s first year remains at that amount as the account’s history develops.
For an established account, request the basis used rather than applying the outdoor summer water bill directly to sewer. Ask how the relevant winter periods and current rate affect the actual charge. Keep the explanation and the bill together. A bedroom assumption, an average-use figure and a direct bill are different inputs; replacing one with another without explanation can distort an annual comparison.
Confirm the service boundary as well. The City’s utility page states that unincorporated Burlingame Hills sewer belongs to the County system and is not billed by the City. The County’s district table lists a $2,294 annual residential equivalent for Burlingame Hills SMD in fiscal year 2026/27. That is a separate district reference, not an extra charge to add to the City model or a rate assigned to either example parcel.
Keep maintenance, repairs and insurance as separate evidence
Use a property inspection to identify current work, then obtain bids for defined scopes. Immediate repairs, unfinished projects and recurring upkeep belong in separate categories. The historical Kenmar planning action does not establish current condition or a remaining construction cost. For a shared-building property, obtain the actual maintenance allocation and financial packet before deciding which components the owner must fund directly.
Insurance needs an address-specific proposal. The California Department of Insurance guide distinguishes replacement cost from purchase or land value and explains the association-versus-unit coverage question. Record the quote date, covered property, limits, deductible and relevant exclusions. No premium, private policy or repair allowance is invented for either public-bill example. Keep those fields unresolved until appropriate evidence supports them.
Bring a complete ledger to the financing discussion
Sale-related lateral work illustrates the distinction between a public fee and a project price. The final City schedule lists $283 for the sewer lateral test encroachment permit and $746 for the replacement-with-cleanout item. Those are City fee entries, not contractor quotations or proof that either task is needed at a named property. Check the actual testing and certification history through the City’s procedure, then obtain a scoped proposal for any required private work. Put the agreed transaction responsibility and timing beside that evidence rather than treating a permit fee as the entire repair budget.
For each line, record whether the amount is an actual dated bill, a tariff calculation, a scoped quote or an open estimate. Add the billing period and next refresh date. Preserve direct charges already included on the tax bill so they do not reappear as independent annual expenses. Keep one-time application, permit and project costs outside recurring-service totals unless the worksheet clearly explains how they are being funded.
Use the financing guide to organize the broader payment discussion and the San Mateo County guide for jurisdiction context. A useful budget can contain unknowns. What makes it reliable is that the known figures remain traceable and the unanswered questions are specific enough to resolve before the buyer depends on the total.
