Is the El Cerrito Library Tax a Community Initiative?

Supporters of a new tax to fund a future library have been quick to call their effort a “citizen initiative.” Legally, that’s correct — 10% of registered voters must sign a petition to qualify a measure for the ballot.

But let’s be honest about what actually happened:

Roughly 1,800 verified signatures — in a city of 18000 voters — does not represent a groundswell of civic engagement.


It represents the bare minimum needed to avoid the more challenging path: a City Council vote requiring at least 4 of 5 council members (66⅔%) to approve placing a special tax on the ballot.

And that’s the point.

This isn’t about citizen empowerment — it’s about political convenience

Greg Lyman — the author of the measure, former councilmember, and long-time Plaza Library promoter — clearly understands the math. He also understands that four City Council votes might not be guaranteed when the stakes involve a permanent tax without clear accountability.

So instead, the initiative route allows:

A simple majority vote of the Council to send it to the ballot
A special tax requiring only a simple majority of voters to pass

All while framing the campaign as “community-led.”
Smart politics? Sure.
Transparent democracy? Not so much.

How Small Is 1,780 Signatures?

El Cerrito has roughly 25,000 residents and 18,000 registered voters.

To qualify this measure, organizers only need about 1,780 valid signatures.

That means:

📌 Only ~7% of residents needed to sign
(1,780 ÷ 17800 ≈ 10%)

Put differently:
90% of the people who will be taxed did not sign the petition.

Yet this small percentage could trigger a forever tax that raises at least $2.7 million every year.

$2.7 Million a Year — Without Saying “Library” Even Once

Supporters call this a library tax. The campaign name includes the library. All messaging promotes the library.

But the initiative language itself:

Does not include the word “library.” Not even once.

Because without naming the purpose, the funding is unrestricted:

  • Pensions
  • Payroll
  • Consultants
  • Routine maintenance
  • Budget holes

The money can be used in any way the city chooses
Even if no new library is ever built.

And the tax:

📌 Has no expiration date

It is forever.

What Residents Are Being Told vs. What’s Actually Written

Here’s the reality in one quick snapshot:

📌 FACT BOX

“Library Initiative” — What the Campaign Says vs. What the Measure Actually Does

Campaign MessagingActual Initiative Language
“This is a library tax.”The word ‘library’ does not appear once.
“Funds will build a new library.”Tax revenue can be spent on anything the City chooses.
“Community-driven initiative.”Only ~10% of residents needed to sign to qualify.
“High level of community support.”“This is about the Plaza Library.”
“This is about a Plaza Library.”No site is required, no project is guaranteed.
“Investing in our future.”Tax lasts forever, even with no library built.
“Urgent need.”City has no project timeline, no cost cap.

Everyone Wants a Library — But We Deserve the Truth

El Cerrito deserves:

🔹 A real project
🔹 A clear location
🔹 Proper cost accountability
🔹 An end date when the purpose is complete
🔹 Funding tied to actual deliverables

Right now, residents are being asked to hand over a permanent revenue stream — with zero guarantees.

We’ve Been Through This Before

El Cerrito has a track record:

  • New taxes are sold for specific community benefits
  • Once passed, revenue sinks into the General Fund
  • Promised improvements never fully materialize

Residents have every reason to approach this measure with eyes wide open.

The Bottom Line

The City didn’t want to risk needing a supermajority of the Council.

So they’re using a technical workaround to create a forever tax — marketed as a library, but not legally required to fund one.

A citizen initiative in legal form? Yes.
A citizen mandate? Absolutely not.

Make Your Voice Heard — This Is Our City

El Cerrito residents are smart. We read the fine print.
And we know when we’re being sold a feel-good story to cover a forever tax.

If the City and political insiders want $2.7 million a year indefinitely,
then they should be honest about what the money is for —
and guarantee it funds a real library.

Until that happens…

📣 Show up and speak up at City Council meetings
📣 Ask direct questions about where the money will actually go
📣 Demand transparency before any tax goes to the ballot
📣 Let leaders know we see through the smoke screen
📣 And if this measure reaches the ballot… Vote NO

Because we all support better services.
We all want a library that serves every part of our community.
But a perpetual blank check is not the way to get it.

El Cerrito deserves real accountability —
not another tax with no guarantees.

6 thoughts on “Is the El Cerrito Library Tax a Community Initiative?

  1. If the tax measure language doesn’t mention the word library once, that’s a big change from what the city and the library tax gang were showing not too long ago, and it’s a big big deal. Where is the language of the measure? I haven’t actually seen it and I can’t find it. Where did you see the language?

    Like

      1. Thanks … but that language is quite clear that the tax revenue is restricted for use on a new library. Is that the same language that you were referring to in this post?

        Like

      2. You are correct

        The language says it’s for a library. However, if you remember the real property transfer tax, the utility tax, the pool tax, or the road tax you realize that the money goes into the general fund once it’s approved. There is no oversight and the city can use the money for whatever they like. The real property transfer taxes that there will be an annual rearview and in the seven years that it’s been enacted. There has not been one review.

        Second, they have not even begun stage. One of the project and the library is stage six. If the tax clears in June property owners will begin paying in July. They will continue to pay whether or not the library ever gets built.

        So we will need to revise our statement.

        Like

      3. We have heard that the language on their website isn’t the language for the proposed legislation. We will keep you posted.

        Like

Leave a reply to Unknown user Cancel reply