Jerry Deal falls in
Depending on who you talked to in the past, there may or may not have been a big rift between the Burlingame City Council and the Planning Commission. But if there wasn’t a rift before, there certainly is one now.
At issue is the pace of city development - its charm, density and the need for pedestrian and transit friendliness. The recent decision by council members Mary Janney, Mike Coffey and Joe Galligan to replace 12-year commissioner Jerry Deal with local realtor Tim Auran shows that not only is there a rift but it is of Grand Canyon proportions.
One could ask, 'What did Deal do wrong?' There is a long history of planning commissioners serving for decades in Burlingame - until they wished to step down after 20 years or more. After Deal's loss to the Janney-Coffey slate by nine votes in the last city council election, his fate appeared sealed. Deal has gone out in a blaze of glory by telling the local newspapers that Galligan 'distorted' the details of a private interview about Deal's possible reappointment.
Several council members talked about having more 'diversity' on the commission. One might ask, 'What does that mean?' Or one could ask whether 'diversity' is a good thing when the job of planning commissioner is as technical and demanding of local experience as any appointed position in the city.
What diversity will Tim Auran bring to the job in the way of technical expertise or beliefs about how the job should be done? It is difficult to tell since he consistently offered 'no comment' to all questions from the three local newspapers. If by 'diversity' the council members mean having some commissioners who are willing to go on the record about their positions and some who are not, then we certainly have more 'diversity' now. Knowing all this, one could also ask, 'Why was Auran chosen over the 10 other residents who applied?'
Much was made of Deal's perceived conflict of interest stemming from his occupation as a local building designer. With Deal, anyone could easily know when he was involved in a project since his name was always on the blueprints. Will it be so easy with Auran? Will Auran be alerting the public to all of his clientele, real estate holdings, ventures and partnerships?
Right off the bat, at his very first planning commission meeting, the newly seated Auran recused himself from the Safeway hearing due to - you guessed it - a possible conflict of interest. He will be asking the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) in Sacramento for its opinion. Will Auran be able to vote on any Burlingame Avenue projects?
Speaking of interests, Galligan, a CPA, has accounting clients in town and Councilman Coffey deals in commercial real estate. One cannot expect them to divulge every client. So how does the public know if there are any conflicts of interest with either of them? What conflict-of-interest standards do they apply when voting for a planning commissioner? (For more on conflict issues, visit The Voice's web site at www.burlingamevoice.com and reread Vol. 1, Issue 3.)
Looking into next year, commissioners Ann Keighran and Stan Vistica are due up next for reappointment. Will they be taking a message from Deal's removal? Will the pressure on them to 'approve, approve, approve' go up? One could still ask, 'What did Deal do wrong?'
Recent Comments