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


Posted by xaviervir on April 1, 2011

There was a Wed. night meeting at City Hall concerning the houses in San Pablo that are sliding. The parking lot at City Hall was packed and when Shelby tried to enter the building, she was denied entry.  The San Pablo police stopped her from attending the meeting stating that” only the home owners were invited to this meeting”.   What’s going on here?  Since when are meetings of the City Council not open to all the residents of San Pablo?

The following is a statement from Shelby:

To All:
I arrived promptly at 6 PM for the meeting at City Hall in re the slide properties.  I was met on the steps by Lt. Bays of our police department who informed me the meeting was only for the residents of the affected properties.  There was a list on who was allowed in.
-The parking lot was full. Clearly many more than the residents of four houses were invited.  Who?
-The trucks for Channel 4 and 5 were there. How is it the people of San Pablo are excluded, but the media is invited in?
-Is it legal for the taxpayers to be excluded from a public meeting held on public property?
-There is another meeting tomorrow at 12 noon. The timing will again exclude San Pablo people who work.
-Did they close the meeting because I suggested the possibility that the city should never have allowed building on that ridge? I was not going to bring it up. I will now. Excluding the people from civic affairs is a serious insult to the people.  What are we paying for?


2 Responses to “WED. NIGHT MEETING: MARCH 30”

  1. Matt Rodriguez said

    Dear SPCA:

    I believe you are misleading your readers on your blog. The Wednesday, March 30, 2011 Homeowners Meeting that I scheduled last week was NOT A CITY COUNCIL MEETING subject to the Brown Act. It was a private meeting with the City Manager and the six (6) affected homeowners who were directly impacted by the San Pablo Wyman / Hillcrest Landslide which occurred on March 24, 2011. This was not an open meeting to the members of the public. As City Manager, pursuant to Chapter 2.04 of the SPMC, my scheduled meeting on March 30th (with these affected homeowners) was scheduled under my direct authority as City Manager in discharging my official duties as administrative officer of the City.

    Your comments are only appropriate had there been an actual San Pablo City Council meeting scheduled on March 30th. Therefore, your allegations are incorrect. Furthermore, there was a Special Meeting of the City Council held the next day, Thursday, March 31, 2011, which was noiced and posted as a open, public special City Council meeting to discuss the Emergency Proclamation issued on March 27, 2011 for the landlside and other related actions. City Council Special Meetings are always scheduled, noticed and posted in accordance with the Brown Act. In this case, no member of the public was denied attending an open, public meeting.

    Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please don’t hesitate to contact me at (510) 215-3016 or email:

    – Matt Rodriguez, City Manager

  2. Shelby said

    Re:”not a city council council meeting..was a private meeting..” If you are holding a meeting on public space, bought and paid for by the taxpayers, it is a public meeting. If you want a private meeting, hold it on private space. The fact that you neither informed nor invited the public to a meeting on public space is of questionable legality. Moreover,it does little to enhance your credibility as working in the best interests of the people.

    Re: “six affected homeowners..” No. The parking lot was full. Three TV Channels were invited. There was a list on who could enter per Lt. Bays.You did not just invite the homeowners. You invited many…but not the people of San Pablo who are interested in civic issues and who paid and pay for that space, not to mention your salary and all city people who attended.

    Re: Chapter 2.04 of SPMC: That refers to eligibility requirements of councilman. It has nothing to do with using public property for private meetings.

    Re:March 24th meeting:Clearly working people can not attend a meeting scheduled at 12 noon. This is yet another blatant attempt to exclude the people from civic affairs and a reneging on your agreement to be transparent.
    Insofar as you work in the best interests of the people, I commend your efforts. The city website is, for instance, an improvement though, as you know,it would be greatly improved if you made it interactive so the people could communicate to city officials and each other. But when you work against the interests of the people, I deplore your actions. When will you come to realize taking advantage of the people here -however defenseless they are-is not in your best interest?
    Regards, Shelby

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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: