Fwd: FPPC Hearing re. 301 Airport Blvd/Coyote Point

From: Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis
Date: Tue May 09 2000 - 23:44:10 PDT

Next message: Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis: "My take on FPPC action"
Previous message: George Haye: "Re: San Mateo Times SFO article"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

From: Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis
Message-ID: <11.37df16f.264a5f3a@aol.com-DeleteThis>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 02:44:10 EDT
Subject: Fwd: FPPC Hearing re. 301 Airport Blvd/Coyote Point
To: wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis, atomic1@worldnet.att.net-DeleteThis, bob@quake.net-DeleteThis, geohaye@hotmail.com-DeleteThis, Randyboz@aol.com-DeleteThis, karinaoc@yahoo.com-DeleteThis, Robberson.Bill@epamail.epa.gov-DeleteThis, OConnor.Karina@epamail.epa.gov-DeleteThis, harris4life@yahoo.com-DeleteThis, CoyoteSurf@aol.com-DeleteThis, bdow@cisco.com-DeleteThis, TFeldstein@grmslaw.com-DeleteThis, mtischler@mail.arc.nasa.gov-DeleteThis, jrunge@netcom.com-DeleteThis, jmcgrath@portoakland.com-DeleteThis, lstanley@stanleyrose.com-DeleteThis, carlyle@savesfbay.org-DeleteThis, cems1@earthlink.net-DeleteThis, allen.zimmermann@gte.net-DeleteThis, dnelson@hooked.net-DeleteThis, bayrider@ix.netcom.com-DeleteThis, MStokowski@evokesoft.com-DeleteThis, peter@windsurfers.net-DeleteThis, bbauld@dnai.com-DeleteThis, bbauld@dvclips.com-DeleteThis, hunthy@sirius.com-DeleteThis, janhalt@wenet.net-DeleteThis, Leo_Bragagnolo@sfport.com-DeleteThis, wndrider@hooked.net-DeleteThis, windrider@protectourbay.com-DeleteThis
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_11.37df16f.264a5f3a_boundary"

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

According to this news, Burlingame's Vice Mayor, one of five who would vote
if the developer appeals, has asked the Fair Political Practices Commission
to rule on whether he can vote on an appeal by the developer. I tend to think
this means that the developer will appeal although he Vice Mayor may just be
playing it safe. Glenborough realty Trust has until the end of the City
Council meeting next Monday night to appeal.

Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

attached mail follows:

Message-ID: <01BFB9F1.6AC956E0.cathyb@baylock.com-DeleteThis>
From: Cathy Baylock <cathyb@baylock.com-DeleteThis>
Subject: FW: FPPC Hearing on Galligan-re: conflict of interest-Drive-in movie project
Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 20:01:45 -0700
Encoding: 63 TEXT

News Flash! Vice Mayor Joe Galligan has, via the bank he founded, loaned
Glenborough Partners $5 million on the Airport Blvd. Project, but the FPPC
has ruled this is not a "conflict of interest". See below.

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Castle [SMTP:kenski@ix.netcom.com-DeleteThis]
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 3:20 PM
To: joe@baylock.com-DeleteThis; cathyb@baylock.com-DeleteThis; russcohen@earthlink.net-DeleteThis;
swede123@pacbell.net-DeleteThis; macforte@aol.com-DeleteThis; learn2play@aol.com-DeleteThis
Subject: FPPC Hearing on Galligan

To all:
Vice-Mayor Galligan was told by the Fair Political Practices Commission on
Friday that voting on 301 Airport Blvd. would not be a conflict of
interest, even though he is a founding member of the board of Mid Peninsula
Bank, which has a $5 million "bridge" loan with developer Glenborough for
this specific project.
The ruling was on a 3-2 vote with those in favor consisting of Kathleen R.
Makel (an attorney), William H. Deaver (columnist and writer for the
Tehachapi News in Kern County) and Karen Getman, commission chairman and a
special counsel with S.F. law firm, Rogers, Joseph, O'Donnell & Quinn.
Dissenters were commissioners Carol D. Scott (a private lawyer from L.A.)
and Gordana Swanson (director of a non profit human services organization
and former mayor of Rolling Hills City in southern California).
The commission, led by Makel's comments, accepted Galligan's contention
that his voting on the project would not affect the outcome of the bridge
loan between his bank and Glenborough. He persuaded the commission on the
grounds that if the project went forward, the bridge loan to MPB would be
paid off immediately, causing the bank to lose interest since the life of
the loan extends to January, 2001. And, he claimed, even if the project
did not go forward, Glenborough would sell the property and still pay off
the loan ASAP. In this scenario, he argued, the only way the bank benefits
is for Glenborough to keep the loan until its term expires.
The commission staff gathered information directly from Galligan as well as
from Glenborough. The reason it went to the commission was because the
staff felt there were some quirky interpretations of the various conflict
statutes that could go either way and that they wanted the commission to
set precedent on this one. I spoke with commission General Counsel Kathy
Gnekow, one of the three legal staff members who researched the issue and
presented alternatives to the commission.
My comment to her involved the issue of public notice, that people in
Burlingame might have attended the meeting or even given testimony or
statements that could have had a bearing on the vote, but that no one here
had any chance to do so because there was no public notice in our
community. The commission has a staff PR person whose job it is to write
releases and deal with the media. I pointed out that it would have been a
no-brainer to have informed the 3 newspapers that cover Burlingame in
advance, since the item was on the agenda.
She suggested that one or more of us write a letter to the Commission
expressing our concerns about public notice (the commission is in the
process of overhauling the conflict-of-interest regs). You can write
to: The Fair Political Practices Commission, care of Kathy Gnekow,
General Counsel, P.O. Box 807, Sacramento CA 95812-0807.

I asked if this decision was appealable and she said no, since the opinion
was requested by Galligan and only he could appeal it if he received an
unfavorable decision. Public has no recourse on this, it seems.
I have asked for a copy of the tape recorded procedures, and the commission
secretary will send that to me shortly. The hearing on this case lasted
about one hour, and Kathy does not know if Burlingame city attorney Larry
Anderson was present.
Ken Castle

Next message: Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis: "My take on FPPC action"
Previous message: George Haye: "Re: San Mateo Times SFO article"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 27 2002 - 12:24:13 PDT