El Cerrito’s City Council is pursuing a plan to relocate the public library into a high-density development at the Plaza BART Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) site. They claim it’s about modernizing services. In reality, it’s about propping up their speculative “urban village” vision—an idea that casts the library not as a civic resource, but as an anchor tenant to help their developer partner fill apartments and improve rental absorption rates.
The proposal mimics past financial maneuvers. The Municipal Finance Authority will be used again, and the tax structure follows the parcel tax model in Measure H. But there’s a critical difference this time: the City has no real jurisdiction over library operations. That falls squarely with Contra Costa County.
The Facts:
Contra Costa County is solely responsible for all library staffing, programming, collections, and services. El Cerrito is not a library operator—it is a landlord. Full stop. The only role El Cerrito plays is providing the library facility and funding janitorial, security, and maintenance services. Any “needs assessment” is a pretext for justifying a real estate deal. The City lacks the qualifications, experience, and authority to determine library programmatic needs.
So why is El Cerrito pushing so hard for this move?
The answer is simple: the library relocation isn’t about serving residents—it’s about salvaging a development concept that hasn’t met its economic targets. By inserting the library into the TOD as a commercial amenity, the City hopes to attract tenants and financial partners to an otherwise sluggish project. It’s the civic equivalent of placing a Barnes & Noble at the heart of a shopping center to drive foot traffic.
But what do we give up?
We already have a functioning library site. El Cerrito owns both the building and the land. It’s within walking distance for students at Fairmont Elementary—just 20 yards away. There’s ample parking, year-round access, and strong community familiarity. The existing site could be rebuilt into a new 12,000 sq. ft., architecturally significant, two-story civic landmark for the same cost per square foot as the TOD plan—around $1,000 per sq. ft.
This option:
Avoids the construction risks, security concerns, and parking headaches of embedding the library in a six-story apartment complex. Preserves taxpayer dollars by eliminating the need to sell, lease, or finance yet another site. Ensures access and visibility for students and families who rely on the current location for learning and literacy. Retains a civic anchor in a known and respected space without politicizing it as part of a speculative redevelopment.
The truth buried in the ballot materials—Special Tax documents, Measures A and H, and the official financial statements—confirms the City is following a familiar pattern: framing public needs to serve private ambitions.
Let’s start a movement: Leave the Library Where It Belongs.
Rebuild and reimagine the El Cerrito Library as a standalone civic asset—not a bargaining chip in the City’s real estate strategy. Our community deserves transparency, stewardship, and a library that serves residents—not developers.
Additional Resources:
🔗 Measure H Template – Official Statement
🔗 [June 2025-26 Contra Costa County Library Budget]
🔗 [Library Lease Terms – El Cerrito Branch] (reference internal lease language re: city responsibilities)
El Cerrito Committee for Responsible Government (ECCRG) 
The library has always been about the city manager’s resume and how it will look to her ICMA cohort; the same organization to whom the city manager awards contracts, provides kickbacks, and travels the world with. This is an ego driven peoject. It’s much like stereo manufactures supporting the cassette tape when CDs arrived. Nobody wants it in El Cerrito and the polling says as much which is why the city will not release the polling information. Ego is in the way of a successful city and driving decisions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
follow up
1) the Citizen Initiative ballot information (attached) is misleading voters by claiming the parcel tax would have a “senior exemption”. Not true. An exemption means the parcel tax is removed from the parcel’s secured property tax roll. That is not the case. The parcel tax will remain on the tax roll permanently exactly as Measure H is still contributing $600,000 per year to the City’s revenue even though the $4,700,000 bond was retired in 2009 but “forever” on the parcel tax roll. The law that is described as a senior exemption is an “assistance” program for seniors who must pay the tax and be reimbursed if the senior qualifies based on income. As part of the application for assistance the senior must submit a SS Benefit Letter and if the applicant is receiving more than 250% of the Federal Government 2012 poverty line income per month ($2,300) will not qualify. This is an annual application process.
2) the City has no plan to redevelop the current library site if it is relocated and has no financial resources to repurpose the library if the City wanted to. The unspoken plan is to abandon the site and due to laws regulating abandoned government owned buildings will claim it is forced to sell the site and put the proceeds in the General Fund.
3) In spite of the Measure H bonds being retired, the City is still receiving the $600,000 annual tax from the County Tax Collector and is responsible for senior “assistance” programs since the City of El Cerrito Municipal Financing Authority Trustee is not involved in the bond repayment. But the City at this time still has no application form! It’s clearly not a priority because of the possibility of losing tax revenue desperately needed for the City pool maintenance and other uses under the Measure A initiative.
On Sat, Jun 7, 2025 at 1:37â¯PM El Cerrito Committee for Responsib
LikeLike