As of today, February 4, El Cerrito’s City Council Chambers are closed for an Audio-Visual upgrade project that will keep the city’s primary public meeting space unavailable through March 24.
For nearly seven weeks, most City Council, Board, Commission, and Committee meetings will be relocated to Hana Gardens. Residents are being advised to “check the agenda” because locations may change.
That may sound like a routine construction notice. It isn’t.
What residents were not told in the closure announcement is that this project was approved months ago — and at a cost of nearly $350,000.
In fall 2025, City Council authorized the City Manager to execute a contract with Pacific Coast AV for audio-visual upgrades to the Emergency Operations Center and Council Chambers, in an amount not to exceed $348,940. The project is being funded through one-time allocations from the General Fund and the Integrated Waste Management Fund.
This was not a last-minute response to a sudden regulatory crisis. It was a planned, approved capital project.
Yet the recent public notice made no mention of the cost, the funding source, or when the decision was made.
Instead, residents were simply told the room would be unavailable.
City staff have suggested the upgrade is necessary to meet California standards for audibility, accessibility, and remote participation. That may be true. Open meeting laws and accessibility requirements do require that the public be able to hear proceedings and participate meaningfully.
But there is no new state law that suddenly forced this project in 2026.
What exists are long-standing legal expectations that public meetings be accessible. When systems fall behind, cities upgrade to reduce legal and compliance risk. That is responsible management. What is not responsible is failing to communicate clearly with the public about major expenditures and disruptions.
Nearly $350,000 in public funds is not a minor line item. Closing City Hall’s main meeting room for two months is not a small inconvenience. Both deserve more than a brief logistical notice.
Public participation already faces barriers: busy schedules, limited transportation, and competing family and work obligations. Moving meetings offsite and changing locations adds another hurdle. When residents are also left in the dark about why and how decisions were made, trust erodes.
Transparency is not just about posting agendas. It is about providing context.
Residents should know:
What problem was identified.
When it was identified.
What alternatives were considered.
How much it will cost.
And why this solution was chosen.
That information exists. It was discussed in public meetings. It was approved by Council. It should not require detective work to find it.
If the purpose of this upgrade is to improve public access, then openness should be part of the project itself.
Access is not just about microphones and cameras.
It is about respect for the public’s right to understand how their money is being spent.
Nearly $350,000. Two months of disruption. Minimal explanation.
El Cerrito can — and should — do better.
El Cerrito Committee for Responsible Government (ECCRG) 