San Pablo Talk Back

San Pablo, California

  • Our Purpose

    This blog is for us, the people of San Pablo and guests, to share information and concerns about our city, our government, our schools, our neighborhoods, our businesses, our religious centers, and any and all issues we deem important. It is also for us to ‘talk back’ to each other and government about the issues and questions that concern us. We commit to be respectful of each other. There is much we can accomplish working together.
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 23 other followers

OTHER HOMES LISTED AS ‘BLIGHTED’

Posted by xaviervir on April 15, 2010

These homes are also in the greatest jeopardy. They should have been listed  with the homes below.

2355 Dover Avenue San Pablo, CA 94806
2307 Dover Avenue San Pablo, CA 94806
2378 Dover Avenue San Pablo, CA 94806
1329 Emeric Avenue San Pablo, CA 94806
1400 Emeric Avenue San Pablo, CA 94806
1483 Emeric Avenue San Pablo, CA 94806
1500 Emeric Avenue San Pablo, CA 94806
2207 Emeric Avenue San Pablo, CA 94806
2213 Emeric Avenue San Pablo, CA 94806
1334 Fillmore Street San Pablo, CA 94806
1343 Fillmore Street San Pablo, CA 94806
1375 Fillmore Street San Pablo, CA 94806
1309 Fillmore Street San Pablo, CA 94806
1321 Fillmore Street San Pablo, CA 94806
1329 Fillmore Street San Pablo, CA 94806
5262 Glenn Street San Pablo, CA 94806
Advertisements

6 Responses to “OTHER HOMES LISTED AS ‘BLIGHTED’”

  1. The Constitution and the recently adopted resolution “Homeowner Protection Agreement” protect all homeowner occupied homes. The Agency is not interested in purchasing any residential units.

    The Agency would like to remind everyone that the area of revitalization efforts are focused on commercial corridors; i.e. San Pablo Avenue, 23rd Street and Rumrill. The current economic climate has reduced the property values in San Pablo. This has resulted in a significant loss of revenue to do projects.

    During the course of the last few years, the Agency has acquired a number of properties through normal market rate transactions. The Agency’s efforts are focused on developing those sites ONLY.

    This loss of revenue has prevented us from numerous well-deserved projects including the expansion and complete renovation of Davis Park and Maple Hall, both are highly utilized by the community.

    The Agency welcomes and encourages any of property owner to call us directly 510-215-3200 or 510-215-3039, or visit us at City Hall, 13831 San Pablo Avenue, building 3 between 7:40 and 5 PM to inquire about the specifics of your property.

    Get your information from the source, not by a third party who does not provide complete information.

  2. nubody1 said

    (1)The Constitution is based on Proposition 99 which the non-partisan Legislative Analyst’s Office says “Proposition 99 would not significantly change current government land acquisition practices.” The City contract is redundant to both Proposition 99 and the Constitution. The people who work for the city (excluding you, though you say you live in the City limits, and the website says you do not), do not live here, pay taxes here and are very well educated. They well understand the people here can not defend themselves in court if the City reneges on their contract.
    (2) “commercial corridors…” See:San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan, maps on page 8,9. This states in print and shows in the maps the City plans on taking everything from San Pablo Avenue to 22nd Street, including my house and all the houses on 22nd and more.
    (3) “significant loss of revenue”…really? How is it the City is hiring more people on the April 19th Agenda when they should be cutting back? Are these going to be San Pablo people that are hired?
    (4)”acquired a number of properties..” The business of a city is not to interfere with the market place by buying properties. We don’t want our tax dollars or casino money or any other resources going to property purchases. We want our money spent on us. For instance, by putting solar on all the houses which would increase income and raise standard of living by at least $1,500/yr.
    (5)”renovate…Maple Hall..” I saw that ten million dollars that was planned for Maple Hall. No San Pablo people work there, but possibly you. Seems these City employees that don’t live here, don’t pay taxes here, have no long term interest in our community, who are surrounded by people in poverty, who occupy the most elegant building in San Pablo just can’t give themselves enough with our money. It’s fascinating how greedy people who have the most are. And if the people want to use Maple Hall they have to pay to rent space. First they pay to build it, then to use it.
    Sonia, I understand since we, the tax payers are paying you over $88,000/yr for..what is it you do? What is your education? You are a ‘redevelopment analyst’ and you don’t know the Plan A, Plan B includes taking houses? Either you do know and you are being deceitful or you don’t know and you are incompetent. Your job requires you to know what’s on those maps. Before you denigrate “third parties”, I suggest you do your homework. Check those maps.

  3. Jackie said

    Excellent letter Nubody1. All people who work for the city of San Pablo should live in the city of San Pablo.

  4. nubody1 said

    Thanks, Jackie. Notice McNeil said at last meeting that it can not be required that city employees live within a city. The city attorney tried that one on me and I looked it up. The constitutional language is “may” not “shall.” Any time you see a “may’ clause in the law, you can do it if you want to. A “shall” clause is mandatory, i.e. you must do it. You think he didn’t know?

    Moreover, I emailed all city council members so they would begin insisting the city manager begin hiring San Pablo people for city jobs over and above the Rec Department jobs, most of which are low paying.(30 jobs out of 190 per email from the city) If people here don’t have the skills, they can set up interning jobs to learn. You don’t have to sit on your fanny for four years to learn a lot of these jobs. In fact, studies show most of what you learn in school is obsolete information by the time you graduate. Apprenticeship is an excellent method of learning.
    So McNeil knew he was saying something that wasn’t so. And the city council knows they must (“shall” in the law)hire our resident laborers for any work done with city contracts. But they continue to approve contracts without jobs for the people. For this and many other reasons, I have completely lost faith in this city council. We pay them, but they do not work for us. Perhaps their thinking is there is no point in giving San Pablo people jobs when they are going to get rid of us, step by step, with eminent domain,higher taxes, etc. And ‘no jobs’ helps push the people into foreclosure. There is such deceit, such a comprehensive strategy to undermine the people that are paying them, it’s obscene. see: leginfo.ca.gov for constitution and all ca laws…..Shelby

  5. Incredibly great post! Honestly..

  6. If I had a nickel for each time I came here… Incredible article!

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: