Clarity Needed on El Cerrito’s Pool Spending Influenced by a concerned resident of El Cerrito

Influenced by a concerned resident of El Cerrito

As the City Council prepares to review Item 9D during the June 17th meeting, questions continue to surface about the scope and cost of planned Swim Center improvements. A concerned citizen has raised several key issues that deserve clear, jargon-free explanations accessible to all members of the public.

In recent meetings, the public was presented with two potential approaches to addressing the aging Emery G. Weed, III Lap Pool: a minimal “replaster-only” option costing under $400,000, or a full rehabilitation projected at $3.5 million. Residents could reasonably expect a clear decision and a path forward based on those options.

Now, we suddenly see a projected cost of $970,000 for design-related services and preliminary work, more than double the amount discussed for the basic repair. According to the staff report for Item 9D, the City proposes awarding a $220,000 contract to Rogers Stringer & McClelland, Inc. (RSM) for design services. Still, the initial phase of work is estimated at nearly $1 million when including accessibility upgrades, electric vehicle infrastructure, and other elements.

This shift in cost raises several concerns:

• How did the project escalate from $400,000 to $970,000 for preliminary work alone?
• Has the City provided a clear explanation of the work included in each cost estimate?
• Is the full cost of pool repairs and upgrades now included in long-term budget forecasts, or will it emerge later as another “unanticipated” expenditure?
• Have any future pool costs been projected over the next ten years and integrated into financial planning?

It’s true that the pool produces revenue through classes, recreation programs, and rentals. However, despite multiple public requests, the City has repeatedly declined to provide a detailed cost analysis that compares revenue with actual expenses. Without transparency around variable costs—like lifeguards, chemicals, utilities, and maintenance—residents have no way to assess whether the facility operates sustainably or continues to drain general fund resources.

This lack of disclosure is especially troubling given that the Swim Center is a known cost center. While it serves a valued role, it also competes for funding with other vital needs: a functioning Senior Center, basic infrastructure repairs, and improvements to public spaces like the Ohlone Greenway.

Where is the community discussion about priorities? Where is the data that allows residents to make informed trade-offs?

In short, residents are simply asking for clarity, accountability, and accessible communication. When this item is discussed, we urge City leaders to:

• Speak plainly and into the microphone (especially since the city’s audiovisual system continues to underperform).
• Provide a transparent breakdown of pool revenues and expenses.
• Clearly identify what is included in each cost estimate and what additional phases are expected.
• Share how this project fits into the City’s larger financial strategy.

If El Cerrito hopes to restore trust in its financial governance, it starts with transparency and thoughtful public discourse. Let’s begin tomorrow.

essing the aging Emery G. Weed, III Lap Pool: a minimal “replaster-only” option costing under $400,000, or a full rehabilitation projected at $3.5 million. Residents could reasonably expect a clear decision and a path forward based on those options.

Now, suddenly, we see a $970,000 projected cost just for design-related services and preliminary work—more than double the amount discussed for the basic repair. According to the staff report for Item 9D, the City proposes awarding a $220,000 contract to Rogers Stringer & McClelland, Inc. (RSM) for design services. Still, the initial phase of work is estimated to be nearly $1 million, including accessibility upgrades, electric vehicle infrastructure, and other elements.

This shift in cost raises several concerns:

• How did the project escalate from $400,000 or $3.5 million to $970,000 for preliminary work alone?
• Has the City provided a clear explanation of the work included in each cost estimate?
• Is the full cost of pool repairs and upgrades now included in long-term budget forecasts, or will it emerge later as another “unanticipated” expenditure?
• Have any future pool costs been projected over the next ten years and integrated into financial planning?

It’s true that the pool produces revenue through classes, recreation programs, and rentals. However, despite multiple public requests, the City has repeatedly declined to provide a detailed cost analysis that compares revenue with actual expenses. Without transparency around variable costs—like lifeguards, chemicals, utilities, and maintenance—residents have no way to assess whether the facility operates sustainably or continues to drain general fund resources.

This lack of disclosure is especially troubling given that the Swim Center is a known cost center. While it serves a valued role, it also competes for funding with other vital needs, such as a functioning Senior Center, basic infrastructure repairs, and improvements to public spaces like the Ohlone Greenway.

Where is the community discussion about priorities? Where is the data that allows residents to make informed trade-offs?

In short, residents are simply asking for clarity, accountability, and accessible relevant information. When this item is discussed, we urge City leaders to:

• Speak plainly and into the microphone (especially since the city’s audiovisual system continues to underperform).
• Provide a transparent breakdown of pool revenues and expenses.
• Clearly identify what is included in each cost estimate and what additional phases are expected.
• Share how this project fits into the City’s larger financial strategy.

If El Cerrito hopes to restore trust in its financial governance, it starts with transparency and thoughtful public discourse. Let’s begin with Tuesday.