From Volume 1, Number 3 Published September 14, 2000
Fate now rests in the hands of City Council

As expected, Glenborough Partners’ refusal to make enough changes to its proposed Burlingame Drive-in office project caused the Planning Commission to deny the ‘Statement of Overriding Considerations’. The 6-0 decision basically says the benefits of the project do not outweigh the negative impacts on the environment.

To the relief of sailboarders and local residents, a majority of commissioners found the environmental impacts to be too great. Many residents fear the congestion from 1500 additional workers funneling through the Broadway-California Drive and Peninsula Avenue-North Humboldt intersections each workday.

The new design has four stories rather than the five shown here.

Glenborough claims the project will house businesses that will generate $53 million per year in sales tax revenue, of which the city would get 1 percent ($530,000 per year). Unfortunately, there are no guarantees on this figure. With Congress recently extending the ban on Internet sales taxes for five years, it is easy to imagine one or two dot-com tenants making the sales tax estimate unreachable.

The next step is Glenborough’s appeal of the decision to the city council. It is scheduled for a vote on July 5. Since the bulldozers have already started grading the site at 301 Airport Boulevard, it appears the developer may be confident of the outcome.

Much of the interest in the appeal involve potential conflicts of interest by councilmen Joe Galligan and Mike Coffey. The conflicts could have the effect of shifting the balance on the council. In April, Galligan presented some of his Glenborough dealings to the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) but after much debate a 3-2 vote found no conflict-based on what commissioners had heard up to then.

Adding to the picture, in a May 18 San Mateo County Times article, a Glenborough spokesman stated that Galligan and Glenborough’s CEO ‘have been personal friends for years.’ Yet in the same article, Galligan was quoted as saying that the CEO was ‘a business acquaintance, he’s not a personal friend.’

Questions about a possible conflict for Coffey, a local commercial realtor, were only recently sent to the FPPC by city residents. This may not be resolved by voting time. The Drive-in project would double the total amount of commercial office space in Burlingame. An existing FPPC decision about realtors’ voting limits may affect his ability to vote on a large project in his specialty. To date, the FPPC has not conducted any investigations of its own on either councilman, but has heard only what the parties raising the issues have presented. At this time, all FPPC actions are just advisory notices, and complaints can be filed after a vote is taken. Citizens may want to attend the July 5 city council session or watch it on local cable Channel 22 at 7p.m. to see how the drama plays out.

Vice-Mayor Joe Galligan’s Economic Interests

Holder of $1.6 million worth of stock holdings in Greater Bay Bancorp, the parent bank of the project’s lender.

Past Director of the project’s lender, Mid-Penisula Bank, which is now a Greater Bay Bancorp. subsidiary

Served on Mid-Peninsula Bank Board within about three months of when 301 Airport Boulevard loan was being processed

Current Director of Peninsula Bank of Commerce, another Greater Bay Bancorp subsidiary.

Received five contributions from Glenborough interests in 1997 City Council campaign.