Meet Seema Patel, Candidate For San Mateo City Council

Seema Patel is vying for a seat on the San Mateo City Council representing District 3.

As county elections officials begin mailing ballots, voters will prepare to decide between candidates running for several offices, and Patch has put together local voter guides and candidate profiles.

Subscribe

Learn more about Seema Patel:

Age: 45

What is your educational background?

I hold a B.S. in Physics and B.S. in Psychology from Harvey Mudd College and Masters degrees from the University of South Florida (Computer Science) and Carnegie Mellon University (Entertainment Technology).

What is your professional background?

I was CEO of my own robotics company for 8 years, building animatronic robots for science centers and children's museums and therapy tools for neurodiverse children. I then spent 12 years at Google, most recently leading the Experiential Design team for the Real Estate organization.

Have you ever held public office, whether appointive or elective?

San Mateo Planning Commission: Member (2021-present), Vice Chair (2023-2024), Chair (2024-2026); SMC Transit District Measure W Citizens Oversight Committee (2025-present); Civic Arts Committee (2022-2026), General Plan Subcommittee (2022-2023) and Community Relations Commission (2021).

What are the top three issues facing your district/constituents right now?

1. Housing affordability: San Mateo has failed to build enough housing for decades, driving up costs for working families and essential workers. 2) Street safety: multiple pedestrians have died on our streets in recent years, and dangerous intersections and stretches of roadway remain unaddressed. 3) The City's $18M structural budget deficit, and whether the Council protects core services and the workforce or turns to austerity and regressive taxes to close the gap.

What is one specific policy you would implement in your first 100 days?

I will establish a dedicated funding source for quick-build street safety projects, funded by a percentage of the transportation impact fee collected from new development. Right now, safety infrastructure competes against every other city priority for funding each budget cycle, which means known dangerous intersections can sit unaddressed for years. Tying a portion of the fee that new development already pays directly to quick-build safety improvements – better crosswalks, protected bike lanes, traffic calming – ensures that as San Mateo grows, the infrastructure to keep residents safe grows with it, without waiting on a general fund that is already under pressure. This is achievable in the first 100 days because it uses an existing fee structure and does not require new state authorization, only City Council action to redirect a portion of funds already being collected.

What is your plan to reduce homelessness, and how would you measure success after one year?

Homelessness is fundamentally a housing crisis compounded by a lack of behavioral health infrastructure. San Mateo County has made real progress toward its long-standing "functional zero" goal, adding significant shelter capacity – the 2026 Point-in-Time count found 1,095 people in shelter, up from the prior count – yet 1,145 people remained unsheltered, a number that has stayed essentially flat. That gap raises a real question I want the County and City to answer directly: are people declining available beds because of restrictive policies, an inability to bring belongings or pets, or a lack of trust in the system? We cannot solve what we do not understand. I will push for the County to study this specifically, and pair expanded shelter capacity with the behavioral health and substance use treatment infrastructure – including a sobering station, which San Mateo County has lacked since last May – that addresses why people are on the street in the first place. After one year, I would measure success by a measurable reduction in San Mateo's unsheltered count, real answers on why available beds go unused and tangible progress toward siting a behavioral health facility, rather than continued delay.

What is one specific change you would make to improve public safety?

Infrastructure safety must become the City's top priority, not an afterthought. San Mateo adopted a Pedestrian Master Plan in 2012 and a Bicycle Master Plan in 2020, yet many of their core recommendations remain unimplemented over a decade later. The City adopted a Vision Zero policy in 2015, committing to eliminate traffic deaths, but more than ten years later, fatalities have not meaningfully declined. In a recent five-month period, three pedestrians were killed and one was critically injured on our streets, and there has been a fourth death since – including two victims struck in a marked crosswalk, during the walk signal. That is not an acceptable outcome for a policy meant to eliminate exactly this kind of death. As a Councilmember, I will establish a dedicated funding source for quick-build safety improvements, funded by a percentage of the transportation impact fee on new development, so we finally implement the plans we have already adopted instead of letting them sit on a shelf while more residents are killed.

How would you improve transparency or accountability in local government?

The City currently provides only the 72-hour notice on Council agenda items required as a bare minimum under state law, which makes it very difficult for residents to research a topic and organize a response before a decision is made. I will push the Council to direct staff to publish a rough forward-looking calendar of anticipated agenda items as part of the annual strategy session, and to provide meaningfully more than 72 hours notice going forward – even when that means publicizing an item before the staff report is fully finalized. I also believe the Council should make far greater use of the City's own biennial Community Survey data to guide decisions, rather than relying primarily on the residents with the time and ability to show up to a meeting in person.

Why are you a better choice than your opponents?

I am passionate about representing every person in my district, not just the ones with the time and ability to attend a City Council meeting or participate in a workshop. As Planning Commissioner, I have regularly cited our City's community survey data and pushed for policies that reflect the actual needs and concerns of the majority of residents, not just the loudest voices in the room. I also have a reputation for being proactive – I don't wait for someone else to act. I founded Safe Streets for Everyone after people died on our streets rather than waiting for yet another study, and as a Planning Commissioner, I pushed for prevailing wage and apprenticeship standards on housing projects even when the sitting City Council was unwilling to advance them. I bring five years of hands-on land-use and housing policy experience, executive experience managing multi-million dollar budgets and teams at Google, and a genuine organizing background going back to helping lead the 2018 Google Walkout. Voters should choose me because I have already been doing the work and fighting for them for years.

What changes, if any, would you support regarding the role of federal immigration enforcement agencies, including ICE, and how they interact with state and/or local governments?

I unequivocally oppose any local cooperation with ICE. As a Councilmember, I will ensure San Mateo strictly adheres to the California Values Act (SB 54), mandate routine audits to guarantee no city resources, personnel, or databases are used to assist federal immigration enforcement, and work to establish protocols requiring signed judicial warrants before federal agents can enter city-owned or affiliated facilities. I also support funding for local rapid response networks and immigrant legal defense funds, so residents facing enforcement actions are not left to navigate the federal government without an attorney.

What role do you believe government should play in regulating or supporting the development and use of artificial intelligence?

I bring a personal perspective here: I was laid off from Google in 2025 as part of the industry's broader shift toward AI-driven efficiency. I believe government has a real role to play in ensuring this transition does not simply discard the workers whose labor built these industries. Locally, if City jobs are ever displaced by automation or AI, I will push for real retraining and transition programs, priority placement into vacant City roles, and maintain recall lists, rather than treating affected employees as disposable. I also believe local government should lead by example: any AI tools the City itself procures or deploys in resident-facing services should be transparent, auditable, and subject to the same public accountability as any other government decision.