East Palo Alto Council’s decision to strip councilmember of regional appointments draws strong objections
- Henrietta J Burroughs
- Sep 23
- 2 min read
Updated: Sep 24
The East Palo Alto City Council's September 10 special meeting has drawn sharp criticism and formal complaints after Councilmember Carlos Romero was stripped of all his regional board appointments in a 3-2 vote. The decision, which came during what some consider a "rushed" meeting, is being challenged by one East Palo Alto city resident for potential Brown Act violations and by an East Palo Alto City Councilmember for a lack of transparency.
East Palo Alto resident Ravneel Chaudhary filed a formal complaint stating that the September 10 special council meeting was conducted in a way that violated the Ralph M. Brown Act, which ensures public participation in government proceedings.
During that special council meeting, Mayor Martha Barragan proposed a motion to reprimand Councilmember Romero with sanctions for using derogatory language to tell Councilmember Webster Lincoln, during a previous council meeting, that he might be “deaf and dumb."
Chaudhary’s complaint,* claims that the meeting was scheduled immediately before another meeting, creating a hard stop at 7:00 p.m. and "severely limiting public comment" on what Chaudhary called a "significant agenda item." Public comment was reportedly limited to 20 minutes. The complaint also suggested that at least three councilmembers had predetermined their votes before the meeting began.
Councilmember Ruben Abrica, who voted with Romero against the measure to sanction Romero, also challenged the stripping of Romero’s regional duties. In a letter released on September 22, Abrica requested a copy of the "prepared document" that Mayor Barragan read, which he claimed was not provided to other council members, the public or even to Romero.
Abrica also questioned the Mayor's claim that a warning had been issued to Romero after a first offense. The lack of a formal motion, a second and a vote on the procedures used to conduct the hearing were also reasons Abrica gave for concern.
In his letter Abrica wrote, “City Government is a public entity, not a private club for the Mayor and Vice Mayor.”
Both Chaudhary and Abrica's letters call for increased transparency and accountability and they demand that the city address and correct the alleged violations that occurred at the September 10 meeting in which Romero was sanctioned. They maintain that such new actions by the city council would ensure respect for the public process.
******************
Please click on the box below and make a donation. Whatever amount you give will enable us to "Keep Community Media Alive!"
