Dedicated to Empowering and Informing the Burlingame Community

Fuchs or Facts

Fuchs' column today is entitled "Get Ready for the Garbage Wars" but, folks, Fuchs is not writing about Burlingame politics or Safeway propaganda. But later his column continues:

"If Burlingame Rosalie O'Mahony agrees, there will be three votes to hold a mail advisory ballot this summer on approving Safeway's plans for a new store, which were rejected by the Planning Commission and the City Council. An advisory vote would not be binding, but it would demonstrate what the voters in Burlingame want. Two votes for the mailed election are Galligan and Coffey.
What never came out during the Planning Commission hearings is that e-mails favoring Safeway's project ran 2-1 in favor. When the council heard the appeal, emails in favor of Safeway ran 3-1. That's an overwhelming expression of public approval."

Is this voodoo math? What about the resounding majority of speakers who spoke against the project at all those meetings? They did not hide behind emails/postcards, etc – they came out in public. I am sure if the "yes" emails are so overwhelming, wouldn't that have swayed the Mayor to vote for the project. Remember, she voted against the humongous store.

Could someone tell me where we could read these "in favor" emails – does Galligan still have them? Are they public record? Who is paying for this "advisory ballot"? This kind of mail ballotting is a very dangerous precedent and open to abuse. Perhaps our Council should add a few more issues on the ballot:(1) whether the City should pay for crossing guards, (2) why our city officials are paid so much compared to industry, etc (3) why do council member's life time health benefits begin after only 5 years on council?

There are so many issues, so few ballots!!

– Written by admin

Posted in

7 responses to “Fuchs or Facts”

  1. rich grogan

    Is anyone surprised that Coffey and Galligan would oppose the normal process of getting a structure built? Safeway initially started to use the process, but the were summarily defeated. Safeway’s tired old BEHEMOUTH structure just didn’t fly. Safeway has turned to their lackeys (Coffey and Galligan) to have them do an end-run on the process.

    We have heard the old argument about numerous emails in favor of a new Safeway store. To coin a phrase “where is the beef?” These emails have not been presented for review and inspection. It has been rumored that the vast majority of emails to the Council Members have come from outside Burlingame i.e.: San Mateo Park and Hillsborough.

    With the amount of civic concern regarding the crossing guards, I would rather see the money spent on a civic safety issue rather than commercial business construction project. Before Safeway mail/ballot issue is presented to the residents of Burlingame, please send a mail/ballot sheet regarding the City funding crossing guards to the residents of Burlingame.

    Unfortunately, the Crossing Guard issue will never make it to the residents, because it would show the true allegiance of Coffey and Galligan. Coffey/Galligan pro BIG BUSINESS. Coffey/Galligan NOT concerned about children’s safety.

  2. Gerald Weisl

    There are two questions (at least) on the Safeway issue:

    1. Should Burlingame allow Safeway to build a new store or renovate its old one?
    Of course, this would get a resounding “Yes!” vote.

    2. Should Safeway be allowed to build a humungous behemoth-of-a-store and create parking and traffic problems?
    The Planning Commissioners, who spent hundreds of hours studying the previous Safeway proposals, didn’t find the plan to be GOOD FOR BURLINGAME. They rejected the proposal because it wasn’t right for the City. They did not reject it because they did not want Safeway to be able to construct an up-to-date store.

    It is not a black-or-white, yes-or-no issue.

  3. Seamus

    I agree with Mr. Fuchs! We all want a better Safeway– is that clear .. but come back with a decent project- is that clear!! thank you!

  4. Pauline

    Is that clear – didn’t Coffey say that? “Come back with a plan based on the recommendations of the Planning Commission.” Of course – thanks to technology and the Burlingame Voice blog we can rerun it in full color – just so we are clear about what he is saying. What could have changed his mind?

  5. Seamus

    Pauline,
    What could have changed his mind??
    Coffey got re-elected!!

  6. rich grogan

    As Fuchs’ is wanton to do, he draws a conclusion that is not supported by any evidence and ignores the obvious. How in heavens name did he formulate his stated opinion of: “That’s an overwhelming expression of public approval.” The absence of the reporting of any verifiable numbers demonstrates his lack of wanting to report the truth and his willingness to distort reality. Fuchs’ position completely disregards all of those RESIDENTS, who PUBICALLY spoke out against the Behemoth Safeway Proposal as opposed to those RESIDENTS, who supported the Behemoth. If 3 to 1 or 4 to 1 ratio is to be considered overwhelming, then it should be reported that, approximately, 25 to 1 ratio of opposing the Behemoth store should be considered as EARTH SHAKING.

    Based upon what Fuchs had to say, one can easily deduce from the email ratios the following. The Planning Commission received a total of three (3) emails (2 to 1 ratio) and when the council heard the Safeway issue they received a total of four (4) (3 to 1 ratio) emails.

    Without seeing the actual emails it can be argued that ONLY four (4) people sent emails, because an individual could have sent an email to the Planning Commission as well as to the City Council. I would argue, four (4) people sending emails to the Planning Commission and the City Council should be considered a paltry response not an overwhelming expression of public approval.

    Without seeing the actual emails it can, also, be argued that none of the emails came from residents within Burlingame.

  7. Fiona

    Sometimes I wonder if one day I will be happily sitting in the council meeting and an amazing agenda item pops up out of Gags’ mouth – of course at the end of the meeting when most people have gone home or fallen asleep. Important news flash! … There is a proposed ballot – yes, Walmart wants to plop itself down in our little town!

    Could this ever happen in Burlingame or is this just a bad nightmare!?

Leave a Reply

RECENT COMMENTS

RECENT POSTS

CATEGORIES

ABOUT THE VOICE

The Burlingame Voice is dedicated to informing and empowering the Burlingame community.  Our blog is a public forum for the discussion of issues that relate to Burlingame, California.  Opinions posted on the Burlingame Voice are those of the poster and commenter and not necessarily the opinion of the Editorial Board.  Comments are subject to the Terms of Use.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE

All content subject to Copyright 2003-2026

Discover more from The Burlingame Voice

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading