Blogging Bayport Alameda

July 18, 2022

Buddy buddy, part 2

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:08 am

The nominating party launched in the new year by contacting their good friend, inquiring about their nomination and, of course, stroking William Burg’s ego a little bit. A bit of puffery goes a long way.

Here’s where it starts getting more interesting. See how William Burg eagerly agrees to edit the nominating party’s application for them. I didn’t know this was the responsibility of SHPO staff which is suppose to vet the nominations, I do have a question out about this, we’ll see if I get an answer before the hearing:

The nominating party started sending revised information in the body of the email itself with the agreement from SHPO staff that he would incorporate these changes into the nomination itself even though it had already been submitted.

Here’s a nice creepy bit of correspondence where the nominating party sent to a SHPO staff person a clip of Doug Biggs at a City Council meeting, the google drive link is not publicly shared, but video is here and it’s item 7A. I wonder if the nominating party excluded the part of the presentation which talked about the need of the population that the Wellness Center would serve. Probably.

Then on April 19 a flurry of emails started coming to William Burg, what the question or statement that he had written to the nominating party to set that off, we’ll never know because they decided to redact it which makes it seem more shady then if they had just left it in, because this is not suspicious at all.

At 10:31 AM:

Another one seconds later at 10:31 AM:

At 10:57 AM:

At 12:14 PM the nominating party wanted SHPO’s counsel to review the following ordinances:

At 4:58 PM perhaps William Burg was satisfied with what he had seen, the nominating party started sending off maps of the property they wanted to cover in the historic nomination.

And then later in April:

This last letter was fascinating because while I was just trying to get an electronic agenda packet after a formal request William Burg of SHPO was just sending out opposition letters to the nominating party unsolicited on his own accord. This, of course, is an answer to Good Swimmer’s statement “vUnless you have evidence of the same government officials NOT helping your friends/client/ally or NOT responding to their requests or questions then this is a non issue.” Well, here you go. I asked for an electronic packet prior to the meeting on April 29. I was told that the only packets available would be one printed copy that I could access in their office in Sacramento prior to the meet or at the meeting itself. As I was making this request and being declined access, SHPO staff was sending portions of the packet (namely opposition letters) to the nominating party unsolicited.

And that’s it of new things we haven’t seen yet. There are a few concerns from this PRA. (1) This is not a complete disclosure. There are clearly things we’re missing which is mostly email responses from staff. It does not appear that there is anything that needed to be redacted and, I thought, redactions were supposed to be as minimally made as possible. (2) Staff is WAY too involved in the nomination and application process itself. I don’t know if this is normal or an outlier but it definitely is something that jumped out in the very few staff correspondence we saw.


  1. Wow. Is William Burg accountable to anyone?

    Comment by egelblock — July 18, 2022 @ 6:45 am

    • Sorry, you have not presented any evidence of actual bias, certainly not corruption, but instead just wild extrapolation and conjecture. Your strident claims about Mr. Burg reek of desperation and may actually have already hurt your case.

      Reasonable people want the matter be heard on the merits- famous architect, no other monument to the American Merchant Marine exists in the country, and it’s importance to history versus deteriorating and repurposed buildings.

      Put on your big boy pants and deal with it.

      Comment by Good Swimmer — July 18, 2022 @ 1:16 pm

  2. This is corruption, plain and simple.

    Comment by For what — July 18, 2022 @ 7:16 am

  3. Wow. No wonder William Burg is not responding to anyone. He seems biased and corrupt.

    Comment by Former AAPS Member — July 18, 2022 @ 7:54 am

    • You’re not an AAPS member. And you don’t know what corruption is.

      Comment by Jason is Not AAPS — July 18, 2022 @ 8:18 am

      • Lol. Taking wild shots in the dark, are we? What do you call it when there are very clear laws and procedures in place that should have stopped this nomination several times over, and one person seems to go rogue? Dragging feet on the opposition’s requests while giving documents hand over fist to Carmen Reid seemingly the same day? The job of the SHRC staff should be to ensure legal compliance. And they, or Mr, Burg, are not doing that.

        Comment by Former AAPS Member — July 18, 2022 @ 1:18 pm

        • I totally agree. William Burg is a fake and a fraud. Even his name is a fraud. It’s a play on Williamsburg, which actually IS historic, and he is using it to make you think he is somehow linked to historic stuff. Nice try, Bill Burg. He’s totally a fake and a fraud. People need to listen to Former AAPS Member, a.k.a. FAPS, which he sure does a lot.

          Comment by Joe Zeppo — July 18, 2022 @ 2:36 pm

  4. in an email Burg says, “post it with the rest of the nomination on our web site.” Is this site available to the public? If so, where?

    Comment by Questioner re nomination web site — July 18, 2022 @ 9:56 am

  5. It is startling this apparent lack of objectivity and independence. Just outright collaboration on a very flawed application. I know that William Burg has blocked Lauren Do on Twitter. To withhold entire emails as part of FOIA requests is startling as well.

    Comment by Reality — July 18, 2022 @ 10:30 am

  6. Lauren, derogatory personal comments about William Burg are not appropriate or helpful to achieve your goal, which I share with you.

    Comment by pro-wellness center — July 18, 2022 @ 10:57 am

    • Which part was personal or derogatory? “[S]troking William Burg’s ego”? Is that not what was being done when a routine staff presentation was declared “impressive” and “inspiring”?

      Comment by Lauren Do — July 18, 2022 @ 11:06 am

  7. This seems like a Sunk Cost Fallacy problem. William Burg apparently spent a great deal of time collaborating with Carmen Reid on her application, and now he’s going full steam ahead in spite of all the contradicting facts coming to light, tunnel vision and all. This is not good for SHPO and their legitimacy. What’s so hard about admitting they goofed and pull the nomination pending review.

    Comment by NIMBYs Gonna NIMBY — July 18, 2022 @ 12:46 pm

    • Seems you have a lot sunk into the Sunk Cost Fallacy, and a lot more sunk into aspersions of corruption an illegitimacy!

      Comment by Harry Balz — July 18, 2022 @ 3:42 pm

  8. I believe someone was spoofing William Burg, I’ve moderated the comment. If it really is William Burg then he can unblock me on Twitter and send me a message to approve the comment.

    Comment by Lauren Do — July 18, 2022 @ 4:15 pm

    • Are you saying he should unblock you on his PERSONAL Twitter account? Are you saying that you’d been inappropriately contacting him there and harassing him?

      Comment by Ida Blocked You — July 18, 2022 @ 4:50 pm

      • Looks like William Burg should be kind of upset at you for pretending to be him, but it seems like folks connected with this nomination like pretending to be other people. Like even a whole organization.

        Comment by Lauren Do — July 18, 2022 @ 5:03 pm


          Comment by ANSWER LAUREN DAMMIT — July 18, 2022 @ 5:43 pm

        • You mean, like creating letterhead as if you were a member/representative of an organization?

          I’m seeing nothing like that here. *eyes flick left and right* Nope, nothing of the sort.

          Comment by Jennie VH — July 21, 2022 @ 4:24 pm

  9. Wow, Alameda’s pseudo-progressive bullies really are bullying and harassing William Burg on Twitter. Wow. Just wow.

    Comment by Bullies Gonna Bully — July 18, 2022 @ 4:34 pm

    • Wow, Alameda NIMBYs are going apeshit making excuses for some guy who refuses to do his job correctly and throwing in with sociopath Carmen Reid.

      Comment by Rod — July 19, 2022 @ 6:41 am

      • Hey @oldcityguardian, guy with dick joke name in Lauren Do comment section thinks you refuse to do your job correctly!

        Comment by Girth Brooks — July 19, 2022 @ 12:55 pm

        • Are you saying the motherfucker who doesn’t care about the facts in this case and has never heard of due diligence also doesn’t care about what people think of him doing an absolute shit job? Yeah, I totally agree with you there!

          Comment by Rod — July 20, 2022 @ 7:23 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Say what you want

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: