Worried about rising taxes? Concerned neighbors on Nextdoor have been cautioning others on the real reasons they will vote NO on this proposed tax increase.
1. The true price tag is far higher than advertised.
While the city touts a $21 million library, taxpayers will end up paying around $75 million to $100 million over 30 years—mostly in interest, not construction.
2. The “$1-per-year lease” narrative is misleading.
The city frames the lease as nearly free, but in practice, taxpayers are essentially prepaying $21 million to support the developer upfront—about $2.5 million a year.
3. It puts a heavy burden on homeowners.
A 17¢-per-square-foot parcel tax translates to roughly $288 the first year for an average homeowner—and about $7,650 over 30 years, and escalates from there.
4. Annual tax increases are built into the proposal.
The measure permits the city council to raise the tax each year to account for inflation—meaning costs won’t stay level.
5. Longtime homeowners and seniors pay disproportionately more.
Because parcel taxes are not based on property value, seniors who’ve lived here for decades could see their tax bills climb by 12% or more.
6. The cost per use is unsustainable.
The combined $75 million tax plus existing operating costs mean the library will cost around $3.3 million a year—that’s about $28.50 for every book checked out, with usage reportedly declining.
7. It functions as a hidden subsidy for the BART housing project.
The city mandates below-market-rate housing units in the Plaza BART development, making the project financially shaky—and the library tax serves as a bailout.
8. It attempts to circumvent higher voter approval thresholds. The city’s representative Greg Lyman has a petition to make this a citizens initiative Rather than a ⅔ supermajority for tax increases, the city labels this measure a “citizens’ initiative,” lowering the requirement to just 50% + 1 vote.
9. Taxpayer dollars are funding the campaign.
The city has already spent about $100,000 on message-testing polls to support this tax—funding that should come from independent PACs, not public coffers.
10. Renters will pay too.
Even if they don’t own homes, renters will bear the cost: landlords are likely to pass on the tax increase via higher rents, making housing less affordable.
These concerns come from Nextdoor threads, community blogs, and citizen watchdog efforts demanding transparency and fiscal prudence.
If you’re skeptical about the city’s financial stewardship—and you don’t want homeowners and renters stuck with this burden—please join your neighbors – don’t sign Lyman’s citizen initiative petition and vote NO on the 2026 library tax.
If you agree, like and share on your social media outlets. If you disagree, please tell us why.
El Cerrito Committee for Responsible Government (ECCRG) 
I am a no hell no but you left out the fact that the City will own the library fee simple interest and have a GRANT DEED on the library in fact the City is getting a free library since the City is not borrowing any money property taxpayers are footing the bill for principal and interest in fact the City is paying nothing the city will be one of the 2 HOA owners and have to enter into a complicated agreement with the co owner covering maintenance, security, repairs, ingress egress (one hundred people will be living above the library coming and going every day) the city can keep the library where it is a perfect location and not involve any other partner the city is going to structure the financing exactly like the Measure H for the pool bond of $4,600,000 except own it as a condo
On Wed, Sep 3, 2025 at 11:28 AM El Cerrito Committee for Responsib
LikeLike