Rebuttal to Supervisor Burgis’ Op-Ed: Setting the Record Straight
- Travis Martin
- Mar 4
- 4 min read
Supervisor Diane Burgis recently published an op-ed that misrepresents the facts regarding the Brentwood Veterans Memorial Building (BVMB) Board and the veterans fighting to protect their land. While she presents a polished narrative about Fire Station 94, she fails to acknowledge the legal, historical, and ethical issues that make this project a violation of public trust and a misuse of land originally dedicated to veterans.
1. Misrepresenting the History of the Veterans' Property
Supervisor Burgis states that the County owns the land and that Contra Costa Fire owns the parcel where the fire station will be built. The veterans do not dispute that the County has always held the title—however, what she fails to mention is that the County holds it in trust for its beneficiaries: the veterans.
The original lot purchased in 1923 for veterans' meeting places and memorials included both:
The land where the Brentwood Veterans Memorial Building has stood for 100 years.
The now-vacant lot slated for Fire Station 94, which is currently owned by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District—the successor to the now-defunct East County Fire Protection District.
This means that both parcels of land were acquired using a special tax under Political Code § 4041f, specifically for veterans' memorials and meeting places. The County does not have the legal right to repurpose this land as they see fit.
The County may have transferred part of the land to the Fire District, but that does not erase the original intent of the property or the laws that protect it. The veterans are not disputing that the County transferred the property to the Fire District in 2015—they are saying that this transfer was illegal and must be rectified.
We have obtained official documentation from the original Board of Supervisors meeting where the special tax was approved, and you can find them on our blog:
2. Ignoring the Legal Restrictions on the Land
Supervisor Burgis completely ignores the Military and Veterans Code § 1266, which explicitly prohibits the County from revoking a veterans' facility dedication unless certain conditions are met—none of which apply here. The County cannot repurpose this land without either:
Providing an equivalent facility elsewhere, or
Obtaining the veterans' consent.
Neither of these conditions have been met, yet the County continues to violate state law.
Additionally, the County’s reliance on the property deed’s wording (“for any and all purposes”) is misleading. This wording does not override the original dedication and legal restrictions placed on the land by the special tax law. A deed cannot erase a legally mandated land use restriction. The County is using a legal loophole to justify taking land they were never authorized to give away.
3. The Fire District Had Other Options
Supervisor Burgis claims that Station 94 is in the best location to serve Brentwood, but fails to explain why:
Alternative locations were discussed in City planning meetings and recommended, yet ignored.
The Fire District originally planned to build elsewhere before abruptly changing course.
The County is forcing the project onto land with legal protections rather than purchasing a proper site for the fire station.
This issue was created by the County’s poor planning—not by veterans raising concerns about their rights.
4. Sunken Cost Fallacy: Wasting Taxpayer Money
Supervisor Burgis argues that moving the station now would waste taxpayer money and cause delays. This is a classic case of the “sunken cost fallacy.” Just because money has already been spent in the wrong direction does not mean we should keep moving forward with a bad decision.
If the County had followed proper legal procedures from the start, this situation could have been avoided. Now, instead of admitting their mistake, they expect Brentwood taxpayers to accept it.
Additionally, Burgis claims that using land Contra Costa Fire already owns will save taxpayers millions. But how did Contra Costa Fire acquire that land? Through an improper transfer of property that was not theirs to give.
5. Disregarding Veterans in Contra Costa County
This is not an isolated incident—it is part of a larger pattern of the County disregarding veterans’ facilities, particularly in less affluent communities:
The Pittsburg Veterans Hall was taken for redevelopment, forcing veterans into a rented office.
The Richmond Veterans Hall was locked up, requiring veterans to schedule limited use in advance.
Now Brentwood’s Veterans Memorial is being chipped away for a fire station.
Yet, when the County tried to give away Lafayette’s Veterans Hall for a library, a single letter from an attorney stopped them. Instead of losing their hall, Lafayette veterans received a brand-new $8 million facility.
Why do some veterans get justice while others are ignored?
The Bottom Line: Do the Right Thing
The veterans are not against building a fire station—they are against building it in a location that violates the law and disrespects the sacrifices of those who served.
The County must correct its mistake, stop misrepresenting the facts, and find a proper location for Fire Station 94 that does not come at the expense of Brentwood’s veterans.
Brentwood residents should not be misled by the County’s narrative. It’s time to hold them accountable and demand that they follow the law.
🔗 For full documentation and historical records, visit:
Comments