City Council supporters and library-initiative advocates have repeatedly said there is no handout to the developer—that the developer would simply add parking or housing to the El Cerrito Plaza project.
If that’s true, an obvious question follows:
Why is the library initiative structured as a parcel tax that allows the City to deliver roughly $30 million upfront—before a single library plan is finalized?
If the developer truly didn’t need city funding, the City would not need to front-load public money through a 30-year parcel tax. Fully financed projects come with clear plans, defined alternatives, and transparent tradeoffs. That is not what residents are seeing here.
A Plan With This Much Public Money Should Already Exist
If this were simply a choice between adding parking or housing, residents would already have seen at least two fully developed scenarios.
A plan with the library on the ground floor.
A plan without the library, showing how housing or parking would be delivered instead.
Instead, voters are being asked to approve a long-term tax before any of those options are clearly defined, priced, or compared.
That sequence matters.
When public funding is truly supplemental, plans come first and funding follows. Here, funding is being requested before the plan exists, raising a legitimate concern that the tax itself is what makes the project financially workable.
Fact Box: How Upfront Bond Financing Works
When a city needs a large amount of money immediately, it does not wait 30 years to collect taxes.
First, voters approve a parcel tax. The tax creates a guaranteed revenue stream that lasts for decades.
Next, the City issues bonds right away. Using that future tax revenue, the City borrows a large lump sum—often tens of millions of dollars upfront.
Bond investors are repaid over time. Property owners pay the parcel tax every year, which goes toward repaying the borrowed principal and paying interest, which can equal or exceed the original amount borrowed over 30 years.
The money is available before a final plan exists. Bond proceeds can be spent immediately on design and engineering, site preparation, construction, and other project-related costs.
Why this matters: Upfront bond financing shifts financial risk from the developer to taxpayers. If costs rise, plans change, or the project underdelivers, the tax obligation remains.
Once bonds are issued, the parcel tax is no longer theoretical. It becomes a legally binding, long-term debt.
If the Project Penciled Out, This Wouldn’t Be Necessary
Supporters argue the developer would add parking or housing anyway. But if that were true, there would be no need for the City to step in with early-stage financing.
Projects that are financially viable on their own do not require taxpayers to assume risk before plans are finalized.
Whether labeled a handout or not, the effect is the same: public dollars stabilizing a private development.
The Plaza Was Always the Preferred Site—So Why the New Scenarios Now?
The City’s long-range planning documents have long identified the Plaza as the preferred library location.
What has changed is not the site. It’s the questions residents are asking.
Only after cost concerns and financing risks were raised did new scenarios emerge. If alternative sites or configurations were truly viable, they would have been evaluated before tying voters to a 30-year tax.
The timing suggests reaction, not planning.
The Question Voters Should Be Asking
This is not about whether El Cerrito deserves a modern library. Many residents agree that it does.
The real question is simpler:
If there is no developer subsidy, why does this project require a parcel tax that delivers tens of millions of dollars upfront—before plans are finalized, before alternatives are evaluated, and before residents know what they’re paying for?
Until that question is answered clearly, skepticism isn’t opposition. It’s responsible oversight.
El Cerrito Committee for Responsible Government (ECCRG) 