The San Mateo Daily Journal is the first newspaper to announce its endorsements in the Nov 3rd Council race. The full article is here under the headline
Baylock, Keighran and O’Mahony for Burlingame City Council
You can and should read it on their website,( or the newstand version), where it concludes with the statement that:
The city may be known for its drawn-out political brawls over a variety of issues, but the recent calm approach to important issues has been a breath of fresh air. Brownrigg should be commended for his desire to further serve the city and we encourage him to stay involved in his capacity on the Planning Commission. But for now, the best choices for Burlingame are clearly the incumbents.
As an added feature, the paper has also printed the written responses to a list of questions it gave to the candidates here.
How can you possibly make that statement? Burlingame is in a mess. The quality-of-life has dropped to a new level with the enormous train horns from 4:45am in the morning to 12pm at night. For the sake of a few train travelers the entire city within 1 1/2 miles of the train are disturbed.
Why these politicans haven't filed a class-action lawsuit against Caltrain for the outrageous disturbance is beyond me.
That noise combined with the loud stereos along Burlingame shopping district and the hundreds and hundreds of leaf blowers has turned Burlingame into a major city noise level.
The years of holding up the Safeway store costing thousands and millions of dollars and the subsequent decision to have a Walgreens build an eyesore right next to the Safeway is absolutely craziness. How in the world did they hold up the Safeway store and in just a short time approve a thirty foot tall Walgreesm at the main entrance of Burlingame and El Camino. I want to know if any of these politicians received special favors to have that Walgreens built.
What this city needs to do is scrap any of the lifelong politicians who have built their database of special interest donors in favor of some fresh thinkers.
You should be very concerned over any person who is comfortable with staying in a government job for more than two terms. Very concerned.
Posted by: Everham | September 30, 2009 at 06:57 AM
Safe but uncreative dull endorsements.
Burlingame needs less of the dormouse-asleep-in-the-teapot and more of the forward thinkers to bring Year 2009 ideas, intelligent thinking and rational and reasoned decision making.
Posted by: Onwards and Upwards | September 30, 2009 at 10:16 AM
Yeah, let's sue Caltrain. That's a good move. Put the problem into a 3 year circle that would cost a half a million bucks. And Caltrain gets to say the feds made me do it. Real smart. What a moron.
If you don't like the 30 foot tall Walgreen go vote for the bright guy who wants buildings twice as tall in town. Idiot.
Posted by: commuter | September 30, 2009 at 10:33 PM
Are you saying that 30 foot is too high for the Walgreens? You have to be joking right? I have concerns about the parking for their customers - just as some of the commissioners did.
We should never underestimate "bright" - it certainly beats stupid and lazy.
Posted by: Sam | October 01, 2009 at 06:32 AM
The paper picked up on the fact that this council is working well together. The quote talks about the recent calm approach being a breath of fresh air. I don't want to see that change, so safe is fine with me.
Posted by: Hillsider | October 01, 2009 at 10:26 AM
Unscientific poll in Daily Journal this week with overwhelming result and show that some want change - good change - needed change - safe change - intelligent change.
All good for Burlingame
Posted by: Ch, ch, ch changes | October 01, 2009 at 11:33 AM
So brilliant from the staus-quo lovers. Don't you get it? The Daily Journal is about the last source who can make any judgement on anything that creates jobs and moves a city forward. As for the assesment our City Council is working peacefully together is further indication something is very wrong. Just before a city crashes and burns...there is a peaceful calm.
How can anyone say the 30 foot wall at the entrance of a citys main entrance is classy. How in the world did they hold up that Safeway because if its building for years and then overnight approve a 3o foot tilt up brick wall. LOL.
Something needs to be investigated.
I smell a big rat. FOLLOW THE MONEY AND EMAILS....
Posted by: Everham | October 01, 2009 at 02:43 PM
Are you suggesting that there is some kind of corruption at the planning comission that approved the wall?
Posted by: Mr. Slate | October 01, 2009 at 03:47 PM
That is a really good point.
Regarding the GIGANTIC WALLGREEN FACADE.
It looks like the City of Walgreens.
Thank goodness for Broadway.
Those small business's (Broadway)did it right..
The first time!
I think GIANT WALLGREENS OF BURLINGAME AVE.
will force people to really consider where they spend their money.
For example Wiemax, or Bev Mo.
Starbucks or Ill Picollo.
Corporate, or family?
Please consider where you spend your money in Burlingame.
PS.
The little Wallgreens on Broadway seemed very adequate
Posted by: Holy Roller | October 01, 2009 at 05:05 PM
Walgreens Burlingame Avenue District is a very successful store and brings customers and business to downtown
The Chevron gas station would not have been "adequate" to hold a new Walgreens store - even for big and small rats!
Posted by: Sam | October 01, 2009 at 05:55 PM
I think the new Walgreen's looks like a slice of cheese and it must be so as the rat returns to get a bite every so often.
It's rather large and tall for my taste. But if I need any items I didn't get at Kmart I'll surely stop in if I can find parking around BevMo.
Posted by: BeenAround | October 02, 2009 at 07:11 AM
Hope Voice editors will feature this as a new thread (sic) because it is exciting news that this event will be televised:
There will be a candidates' Forum moderated by the League of Women Voters on October 6 from 7:00-9:00 pm in Burlingame Council Chambers.
The Forum will be televised on live on the local Burlingame Channel and streamed on the website. (source city website)
Hope the candidates will include a link on their individual websites of both Forums.
Hope this Debate will be as informative and exciting as the Chamber's forum which separated the wheat from the chaff!
Posted by: Sam | October 02, 2009 at 07:30 AM
On Walgreens and BevMo-would you rather see the store fronts vacant like so many others on the Ave? Both of these will create foot traffic that is desperately needed to revive the retail environment. And since when is Blgm Ave and ECR the gateway to Burlingame? and even if it is, was a gas station a more welocoming building?
So Everham, do you plan to call for an investigation of Planning Comission members for approving the Walgreens project? You may be accused of political motivation since Mr. Bronrigg was on that comission.
Posted by: Mr. Slate | October 02, 2009 at 12:34 PM
What was the vote from the council - shouldn't that be where you start after all didn't they overrule the Planning Commission?
Posted by: Sam | October 02, 2009 at 03:47 PM
FYI, the City Clerk's office confirmed that the upcoming LWV debate will be streamed "live" AND then archived on the city's website for those who miss it, just like the Council meetings.
Posted by: Lorne | October 02, 2009 at 04:36 PM
Considering Aurgumentation and Effective Reasoning and the hope for a healthy debate; that Walgreens I believe in no way represents the classy town of Burlingame and Hillsborough. My reasoning is based on the look of many smaller towns north of 94010 which are nice but in my opinion not in the same league as 94010. (Sorry for my boldness)
It is like Starbucks diluting their brand by selling instant coffee.THey just don't get it.
As a visionary, here is Burlingames future when you cheapen your brand:
Property Values will Drop
Average medium income will drop
Crime will increase
City revenue will drop
Infrastructure will degrade
Pride of citizens will decrease
Participation in government decrease
Government corruption will increase
Game over
So with regard to the BevMo and Walgreens property owners; let us know just how they are connected to our City officials.
Posted by: Everham | October 03, 2009 at 09:25 AM
Neverham - did you get involved while they were "cheapening the brand" (sic) with Walgreens and BevMo? Did you attend the meetings and state your "cheapening the brand" concerns?
We have a great number of empty store fronts who our "cheapening our brand" and it would be constructive and productive for you to try to find businesses who want to come into those properties and help our economy.
Walgreens and other merchants are necessary to keep our downtown vibrant - even if we have to confront the big "change" word with a new building that has been extensively discussed by the planning commission and council at public meetings - with ample time for public comment.
Posted by: Sam | October 03, 2009 at 11:13 AM
Everham..
Is there a Bev Mo, Target, Wallgreens, in Carmel, CA. WE already have GAP, Banana Republic, Pottery Barn, Sephora.
Those corparations refuse to do the basic maintenance to the landscape in front of their business's.
They rely on Citt of Burlingame volenteers.
Is there no council member that is able to see how little those corparations care about giving back to the community?
Once we start selling out to corparate america, we-Burlingame become a cliche.
I looked at that Wallgreens today, again.
Has anyone seen how GIGANTIC that place will be? (The facade)
Something REALLY went wrong with the approval of that design.
REALLY WRONG!
Posted by: Holy Roller | October 03, 2009 at 04:04 PM
Holy Roller, you had ample opportunity to voice you concerns during the planning process and council process over Walgreens.
Posted by: Sam | October 03, 2009 at 06:37 PM
Today when I drove past "Wallgreen Ave," I finally remembered what that "new landmark" reminded me of..
The US Pentagon Building.
Nice!
You are right Sam.
But I do not follow things like that because I put my faith in the Elders I vote for who sit on Council.
Posted by: Holy Roller | October 04, 2009 at 05:32 PM