A concerned citizen emailed us:
After paying what feels like the king’s ransom to live in El Cerrito. Again. And every time I settle my tax bill, We are left asking: what exactly are we getting for it?
For years now, El Cerrito has ranked among the highest-taxed small cities in the Bay Area. While neighboring towns manage to fund city services responsibly and maintain balanced budgets, our community seems to be stuck in a cycle of asking for more and delivering less.
It’s not just the base property tax. Add in multiple special assessments, parcel taxes, sales taxes, and utility user taxes — layer upon layer of charges — and the total burden becomes staggering. Want to remodel your home? That’ll cost you. Want to support local schools? Sure, but brace for yet another tax bump. Want functioning streets, safe parks, and a well-run city? We all do. But shouldn’t we expect basic competence in return for premium pricing?
Our city leadership seems to believe that every budget gap or management misstep can be solved by asking residents to reach deeper into their pockets. Financial mismanagement has become normalized. While other cities build reserves and find creative solutions, El Cerrito continues to lurch from one crisis to another, all while hiding behind the shield of “fiscal emergency.”
Residents deserve better. We deserve transparency, accountability, and a real plan to align services with the taxes we already pay. It’s time to stop expecting residents to keep bailing out City Hall and start expecting City Hall to live within its means.
The king may collect his ransom, but the people are watching — and many of us are tired of being treated like the royal treasury.
————
What are your thoughts? Differing opinions appreciated as well.
El Cerrito Committee for Responsible Government (ECCRG) 
on top of that, the City Manager just had the EPMC reinstated in her contract. She was there when the rest of the coty negotiated this away in 2013 during a fiscal crisis. In short this is the city’s contribution to CalPERS and is calculated as a benefit upon retirement. Every city worker who received this gave it up when Pinkos was on the negotiating team. In simple terms, the city contributes 10% to CalPERS for each employee, and it would increase your pension as it counts as compensation. Recognizing the city’s troubled financial status in 2013, members agreed to give that up and not have it counted as compensation. In the newest contract, Pinkos got it back for only herself to increase her pension by about $30k per year for life. With the city in such dire fiscal emergency, how can the city council agree to this? Simple, it was hidden and downplayed.
LikeLike