Library Plan Serves Developers, Not Residents

Across El Cerrito, the agents of the City are holding meetings to promote its so-called “Transit-Oriented Development Library” project. They’re also going door to door promoting this initiative.

On the surface, it sounds like progress—finally replacing the undersized, aging library. But residents should look more closely at what’s being pitched. This is not a true community library project. It’s a “triple cost” scheme where taxpayers pay to build it, pay to rent it, and then keep paying to maintain it—all while developers and the City’s coffers benefit most.

The Reality Behind the Project

The proposed library isn’t a standalone public building. It’s the first floor of a six-story private apartment development. Homeowners would finance the construction of that floor—estimated at $21 million or more, and almost certainly higher—through a secured parcel tax. But here’s the catch: El Cerrito will not even own the space. The City will be a renter, with the Contra Costa County (CCC) Library system leasing the library back from the developer.

And it doesn’t stop there. Beyond paying to build and then paying to rent, taxpayers will also be responsible for ongoing maintenance and operating expenses inside a private development. That means homeowners and renters alike will be subsidizing not only the cost of construction but also the ongoing bills to keep someone else’s property running.

This structure creates serious problems:

Financial burden: With 30 years of interest and financing costs, the true price tag could balloon to $100 million or more. No City ownership: Residents pay to build it, but the City only rents it back—essentially paying twice. Ongoing obligations: Taxpayers will also foot the bill for maintenance, utilities, and operations—expenses that never go away. Minimal library benefit: There are no commitments to more books, better programs, or expanded services—just more square footage and more computers. Developer windfall: The developer gets a publicly funded, revenue-generating tenant built to order, with residents carrying the risk.

And renters shouldn’t think they’re immune. Parcel taxes don’t just hit homeowners—they hit renters too, because landlords pass those costs down in higher rents. This plan means everyone pays more for a library space the City doesn’t even own.

The Wrong Location

Even if El Cerrito needs a new library—and it does—the proposed location is wrong. Libraries should be safe, welcoming, and community-centered. They do not belong on the ground floor of a private apartment complex at a major transit hub, with hundreds of residents coming and going through the same entrance.

Decades ago, City leaders identified the best location for a library: adjacent to the city’s largest and oldest elementary school, where families already gather and children could easily access resources. Instead, the City is pursuing a developer-driven deal at the Plaza station, a site far better suited for affordable housing, not a library.

El Cerrito’s proposed library tax has NO real senior exemption. What’s billed as relief is just a reimbursement program with income limits, paperwork, and annual re-application. Seniors must still pay upfront—and heirs inherit the parcel tax too. Meanwhile, the City still hasn’t created a working application process for past measures. Don’t be fooled.

What We Really Need

Yes, El Cerrito deserves a modern library. But it should be built as a true civic project—funded responsibly, owned by the public, and designed for community use. A parcel tax dedicated to a standalone library would be far more transparent and sustainable.

The Bottom Line

Until then, residents should see these pro-library meetings for what they are: sales pitches for a project that benefits developers and City coffers while putting homeowners and renters on the hook for construction, rent, and never-ending operating expenses. It’s a bad deal that privatizes the gain, socializes the risk, and jeopardizes El Cerrito’s financial future.

Don’t sign the petition for the library. It’s circulating now. Election time vote no!

Fiscal Responsibility Missing from Local Endorsements

Back in 2020, Jennifer Greel stepped up with purpose and clarity. In a thoughtful response to the El Cerrito Committee for Responsible Government’s budget question series, she demonstrated both compassion and a firm understanding of El Cerrito’s financial challenges. With her roots in criminal justice, re-entry work, and community outreach—from San Diego to San Quentin—Greel knew firsthand how limited resources impact public safety and rehabilitation efforts. She acknowledged the city’s deficit and underscored the importance of exploring alternative solutions rather than accepting it as a fate already sealed.

Fast forward to today: nearly five years later, despite such evident early leadership, the Lyman-led Democratic club has yet to endorse a candidate who shares that brand of fiscal responsibility. Where is that kind of vision now?

What Jennifer Showed in 2020

Commitment to Community: Greel’s background—working with parolees, teaching anger management, and advocating for those re-entering society—anchored her public service in empathy and practical reform. Financial Awareness: She clearly recognized El Cerrito’s budget issues and called for proactive, creative responses rather than maintaining the status quo.

Fact Box: El Cerrito’s Ongoing Financial Challenges

Reserves Drained: Millions taken from reserves to cover recurring shortfalls. Structural Deficits: Reliance on temporary fixes instead of long-term planning. Debt Burden: Pension and benefit obligations continue to grow. Spending Priorities: Costly capital projects launched without funding for ongoing operations. Grant Gap: Failure to aggressively pursue state and federal funds.

What’s Missing Today

Endorsement Gap: The Lyman-led Democratic club, charged with uplifting capable leadership, hasn’t stepped forward to back any candidate who has displayed a transparent, responsible approach to budget challenges – Not Jennifer, Not Vanessa, Not William.

The Way Forward

El Cerrito deserves leadership that doesn’t shy away from tough questions—especially when finances, public safety, and justice are on the line. The silence from the club is not just empty. It’s a missed opportunity for real progress. We need more Jennifers, more Vanessas and more Williams.

Now it’s time for new and fresh faces to step forward—leaders who genuinely care about the community and who put fiscal responsibility at the heart of their decisions. El Cerrito’s future depends on it.

A Response to Todays Post: Why I’m a No on the Library Deal

The City may hold the deed, but taxpayers carry the debt

I am a no, plain and simple. But let’s be clear: the City will own the library in fee simple interest and will even hold a grant deed on it. Some claim this means the City is getting a “free” library, since the City itself isn’t borrowing money. But that misses the point—property taxpayers are footing the bill for the principal and interest. In reality, the City is paying nothing; we are.

The City will also become one of two HOA owners and will need to enter into a complicated agreement with the co-owner covering maintenance, security, repairs, and ingress/egress—while at least 100 people will be living above the library, coming and going every day.

There’s no need for this arrangement. The City could keep the library right where it is—a perfectly good location—and avoid tying taxpayers into risky and complex partnerships. Instead, they’re planning to structure the financing exactly like Measure H, the $4.6 million pool bond, except this time the library would be owned as a condo.

This isn’t fiscal responsibility. It’s déjà vu, and taxpayers deserve better.

if you agree, like and share. If you disagree, please tell us why.

10 Reasons Many Residents Do Not Support the 2026 Library Tax

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’s Rising Crime Rates

El Cerrito is facing a growing challenge when it comes to public safety. Recent incidents, such as garage burglaries and catalytic converter thefts, have heightened concerns among residents. Unfortunately, these concerns are supported by the data. El Cerrito’s overall crime rate stands at nearly 50 incidents per 1,000 residents, which is significantly higher than both the national average and the rates in nearby communities. While the city’s violent crime rate is somewhat lower than the national average, property crime remains a persistent and troubling issue.

The comparison with neighboring cities underscores just how far behind El Cerrito has fallen. Albany’s overall crime rate is roughly 31 per 1,000 residents—about 60 percent of what El Cerrito experiences. Kensington fares even better, with an overall rate of just over 20 per 1,000 residents, less than half of El Cerrito’s level. Residents in both communities are far less likely to be victims of burglary, theft, or assault than their neighbors in El Cerrito. These differences are striking, and they suggest that El Cerrito needs a stronger, more proactive approach to public safety if it hopes to reverse these trends.

City leaders often fall back on excuses instead of solutions. One of the most common is that crime rates are higher in El Cerrito because of its proximity to BART stations, particularly El Cerrito Plaza. But that argument does not hold up. What criminal commits a burglary or theft and then lingers to catch a train? The idea that BART is the driving factor behind El Cerrito’s higher crime rate ignores both common sense and the data. Many Bay Area cities with BART stations manage to keep crime lower than El Cerrito.

What makes this even more troubling is the double standard. When it comes to promoting El Cerrito, the city points proudly to its two BART stations as an asset, just as it highlights its designation as the flagship site for the county’s future library. Yet when crime is the subject, those same BART stations suddenly become the scapegoat. This kind of selective reasoning isn’t leadership—it’s spin. Instead of shifting blame depending on the issue, El Cerrito should be focused on doing the hard work of building a safer, more accountable city.

Other communities show what works. Albany has adopted a multi-pronged strategy that combines enforcement with prevention, community engagement, and education. Investments in youth programs and community facilities have created safe spaces for residents, while targeted traffic calming and enforcement strategies have reduced accidents and related crime. Kensington’s success comes from maintaining a strong community presence, with residents actively engaged in neighborhood watch efforts and local law enforcement maintaining consistent visibility. Richmond, once plagued by high levels of violence, developed its Office of Neighborhood Safety, which directly engaged individuals most at risk of committing crimes and provided incentives and support to redirect them toward better choices.

El Cerrito can learn from these examples. A proactive strategy begins with strengthening community spaces and programs that give young people positive alternatives and residents more reasons to feel connected to one another. It also requires targeted investments in infrastructure such as street lighting, traffic calming measures, and surveillance technology in areas where crime is most concentrated. Equally important is cross-sector collaboration, with law enforcement working alongside social services, housing agencies, and nonprofits to address the root causes of crime such as homelessness, addiction, and economic instability.

El Cerrito residents already shoulder one of the highest property tax burdens in the region, alongside a steep cost of living and elevated sales tax rates. With that level of revenue, the city should be delivering more—safer streets, stronger community programs, and a vision that restores confidence in public safety. Instead, residents see rising crime and declining trust. If leadership cannot match the responsibility that comes with these resources, then it is time for voters to make different choices at the ballot box and for a change in city management to bring accountability back to El Cerrito.

El Cerrito Needs Accountability, Not Another Empty Promise

El Cerrito leadership has once again reached for its familiar playbook: making bold claims, downplaying the costs, and hoping residents won’t demand proof. This time, the city is insisting that its library plan is $10 million cheaper than alternatives. But where are the numbers? If such savings existed, they would be prominently featured in public reports, not hidden behind vague talking points.

Why We Can’t Trust This Claim

  • No transparency: Residents have yet to see the cost breakdown that justifies these supposed savings.
  • Leadership track record: Lyman’s history of fiscal irresponsibility and the city’s ongoing pattern of mismanagement should make us all pause.
  • A history of new taxes: Time and again, El Cerrito has turned to tax increases to paper over its mistakes — and services have declined despite the higher bills.

📊 Fact Box: Why Vote NO on the Library Initiative

  • Unfounded Claim: City officials say their plan is $10 million cheaper, but they refuse to show residents the math.
  • Poor Track Record: Lyman’s irresponsibility mirrors the city’s long history of broken promises and bad fiscal habits.

A History of Tax Hikes Since 2008:

  • 2008 – Measure A: 12-year 0.5% sales tax.
  • 2014 – Measure R: Extended and increased sales tax to 1%.
  • 2018 – Measure V: Increased business license taxes.
  • 2020 – Measure U: Extended the 1% sales tax indefinitely (no sunset).
  • 2022 – Measure H: $10 per parcel per year for parks.
  • 2024 – Measure G: Reaffirmed and extended 1% sales tax.
  • Proposed – $300 Parcel Tax: A flat fee on every property, escalating over time, with no sunset clause.

Declining Services Despite Higher Taxes:

  • City services have eroded.
  • Crime has escalated compared to neighboring cities like Hercules.
  • Fiscal accountability remains absent.

Bottom Line: Vote NO on any initiative in favor of the library until El Cerrito proves it can manage money responsibly.

The Library Initiative: Wrong for El Cerrito

The push for a new library follows the same pattern. Glossy promises, no accountability, and a financial burden that ultimately falls on residents. Until the city can demonstrate true fiscal discipline and transparency, no new initiative deserves our support.

What We Should Do Instead

It’s time to mothball this plan and start fresh. Residents deserve honest numbers, independent review, and a city council willing to put fiscal responsibility ahead of flashy projects.

Call to Action

On the ballot, or in any petition drive, remember this: Vote NO on any initiative in favor of the library. Don’t reward a process built on spin, half-truths, and a refusal to be accountable. El Cerrito needs to earn back trust before taking on new commitments.

Bringing BART’s Failures to El Cerrito

Before the election, we warned that this would happen—but voters chose Rebecca Saltzman anyway. Now that she sits on the El Cerrito City Council, the warnings have become reality. She has carried over the same pattern of voting for budget deficits that defined her 12 years as a BART Director. Under her leadership, El Cerrito approved deficit budgets and midyear expense increases that drained city reserves—mirroring the very financial habits that left BART in constant crisis. At BART, this approach left the agency chronically underfunded and increasingly dependent on new taxes and toll hikes just to keep trains running. In El Cerrito, it has already led the city to the reality of higher taxes simply to sustain basic city services. Instead of addressing structural problems, Saltzman’s record shows a reliance on stopgap tax measures that burden residents while failing to solve the underlying issues.

A Record of Fiscal Mismanagement

At BART, Saltzman consistently supported policies that drove the agency toward financial instability. Fare evasion spiraled out of control under her watch, draining millions in revenue that could have funded operations and safety improvements. Instead of addressing this crisis with effective solutions, Saltzman repeatedly ignored the issue, leaving BART reliant on future tax hikes to survive.

Ignoring Safety, Fare Evasion, and Crime

Fare evasion at BART was more than a financial problem—it became a public safety crisis. News coverage and BART’s own internal reports showed that a large percentage of violent incidents on the system involved individuals who did not pay their fare. By failing to take fare enforcement seriously, Saltzman allowed conditions to worsen for paying riders and frontline workers alike.

The consequences of this inaction were tragic. In one widely reported case, a woman was shoved in front of an oncoming train and killed—her attacker was a fare evader with a history of violent behavior. This was not an isolated event but part of a broader pattern: fare evasion created an environment where crime thrived, making both passengers and staff less safe. Saltzman’s refusal to act demonstrated a disregard for both fiscal responsibility and public safety.

The COVID Vaccine Mandate Controversy

Saltzman was a driving force behind BART’s strict vaccine mandate, requiring every employee to comply or face termination. The policy fell hardest on frontline workers—train operators, maintenance crews, and station staff—who had no choice but to show up in person every day to keep the system running. These were the very employees she was supposed to protect.

Yet while they faced the daily risk of exposure, Saltzman continued to work safely from home. The message was clear: different rules for leadership, harsher consequences for workers.

This double standard not only eroded trust but also led to costly consequences. When six terminated employees challenged the policy in court, a federal jury sided with them, ruling that BART had failed to provide reasonable accommodations. The result was a $7 million payout—money BART did not have to spare, thanks in part to the very financial mismanagement Saltzman helped oversee.

What This Means for El Cerrito

Saltzman’s record at BART was one of deficits, safety failures, and misplaced priorities. On the El Cerrito City Council, the same behavior has already taken hold, with deficit budgets and reserve-draining midyear expenses weakening the city’s financial position.

El Cerrito residents should take note: this is not a question of what might happen in the future—it is already happening. Under Saltzman’s leadership, the city has seen more budget deficits, higher tax pressures, and the same double standards that left BART in disarray.

It was predictable, and the warnings were ignored. But we should not let history repeat itself. El Cerrito cannot afford to be caught unprepared again—we need leaders who will put fiscal stability, safety, and accountability first.

The responsibility to choose more wisely now rests with the voters.

Leadership Without Oversight Is a Risk We No Longer Afford

Editorial

El Cerrito doesn’t exist to generate profit. They exist to serve. But service without stewardship erodes confidence.


Residents are more willing to invest when they see clear outcomes, prudent financial management, and leaders who communicate transparently. Unfortunately, El Cerrito is still stuck in reactive mode—approving budgets, signing off on reports, speculative library funding and rarely challenging assumptions.


In this environment, passive governance becomes an active liability.


Strong governance bodies—whether city councils, oversight boards, or commissions—have the power to:
✅ Ask the hard questions
✅ Align funding with outcomes
✅ Prioritize long-term impact over short-term optics
✅ Earn (and re-earn) public trust
And with each new funding request, that trust is tested again.

What Voters Want (And Deserve)

The public doesn’t expect perfection. But they do expect:
Accountability: Where is the money going? What’s the return?
Clarity: What’s the real cost—and for how long?
Stewardship: Are we solving problems, or simply managing symptoms?
Representation: Are our boards and councils advocating for real needs—or just rubber-stamping staff recommendations?


When the city council models fiscal discipline and strategic thinking, they create space for the community to say yes. But when they punt tough decisions, chase shiny projects, or ask for more without showing impact—they fuel frustration.


As BoardSource notes, “The trust of your stakeholders is your greatest currency. That trust must be earned through sound governance, not just good intentions.”
(BoardSource: Leading with Intent)

This Is a Moment for Leadership

Local government is where policy meets people. And right now, the people are watching.
As leaders, we must build boards and councils that are:
• Service-driven and data-informed
• Transparent and willing to question the status quo
• Financially savvy and equity-focused
• Bold enough to say not yet when an idea isn’t fully baked. Because “put it on the ballot” can’t be our default strategy. Especially when communities are asking for answers, not just taxes.

Strong Governance Is the Antidote to Tax Fatigue

If we want to restore faith in public institutions, we need governance that shows—not just tells—the public that their voices and dollars matter.
That starts with how we select, train, and empower our boards and elected officials.
Because in a time when public trust is fragile and every dollar matters, it’s not just about getting measures passed. It’s about making sure the outcomes are worth the investment.


Let’s raise the bar on how we lead, how we govern, and how we serve.

Sources
• BoardSource: Leading with Intent
• Deloitte: The Evolving Role of Public Sector Boards
• OECD: Trust in Government

A $75+ Million Gamble El Cerrito Can’t Afford

El Cerrito voters are being asked to consider a massive $75 million+ tax measure for a new library. But before agreeing to decades of new taxes, residents deserve to ask a simple question: what guarantee do we have that this library will ever get built?

The city’s current plan relies on the construction of a BART apartment building at El Cerrito Plaza. The library would be tucked into the ground-floor commercial space of that development. In exchange for contributing $21 million in city funds, El Cerrito would secure the lease.

But here’s the problem: $21 million is nowhere near enough to fund the project. Because the city mandated that half of the building be affordable housing, traditional financing options don’t apply. Developers would have to cobble together a fragile mix of grants, tax credits, and loans—funding sources that are increasingly competitive and uncertain.

That approach may have worked in the past when:

Interest rates were low Rentals near San Francisco were in high demand California’s budget was healthy The federal government wasn’t hostile to housing or California El Cerrito taxes were lower

Those conditions no longer exist. The reality is that the library site might not break ground for years—if ever. Even optimistic scenarios suggest construction might begin in 2027. More likely, we’re looking at delays of three, five, or even more years.

What happens if the tax passes and nothing gets built?

Residents would still be paying the bill, without any guarantee of seeing a new library. That risk is far too great.

Smarter Alternatives

Instead of gambling $75 million on an uncertain project, the city could take a more pragmatic approach. Why not explore leasing one of the many vacant commercial properties already standing in El Cerrito? Spaces like the former Barnes & Noble or one of the empty big-box stores on San Pablo Avenue could be transformed into a library far sooner, and at a fraction of the cost.

The Bottom Line

El Cerrito cannot afford to throw money at another project with no clear path to completion. Residents should demand accountability, realistic planning, and alternative options before committing to a “forever tax” that may never deliver what’s promised.

Next Edition: We Need a Better City Manager’s Report

With the City Manager’s next monthly newsletter, residents should expect more than another recap of ribbon cuttings, art receptions, and ceremonial acknowledgments. The purpose of these updates is to give the community a window into the city’s priorities, challenges, and direction. Too often, however, they have fallen short of that purpose.

The last newsletter avoided the issues that define El Cerrito’s future: budget instability, deferred infrastructure maintenance, rising pension costs, staff shortages, and controversial tax proposals. These are not minor concerns. They are the realities that shape the city’s ability to provide the services residents rely on every single day.

If the City Manager cannot bring herself to acknowledge these fundamental issues, then at the very least she should be able to talk about something significant happening in El Cerrito—something that demonstrates progress in the services the city provides to its community. Whether it’s a step toward long-term fiscal stability, a plan to address overdue capital projects, or action to improve service delivery in public works, safety, or recreation, residents deserve to hear about progress that matters.

Right now, the newsletter functions as little more than window dressing—celebrating the margins of city life while ignoring the center. A monthly communication that neither speaks honestly about challenges nor highlights meaningful gains has little value. Residents need timely, transparent updates grounded in the city’s responsibility to deliver services, not another glossy write-up that sidesteps the real work of governance.

The choice for the following newsletter is clear. Either acknowledge the troubling realities El Cerrito faces or demonstrate substantial progress on something that improves the services our residents depend on. What the city cannot afford is another month of hollow updates that tell us everything except what truly matters.

Read the City Manager’s August 2025 Report here.

Tell City Hall What You Expect

If you share these expectations, write the City Manager and City Council and ask for a newsletter that is honest about challenges and shows substantial progress on services that affect residents.

City Manager

City Council (write all or your council favorite):

For public comment & official record:

Here’s a draft email:

Subject: Expectations for the City Manager’s Monthly Newsletter

Dear City Manager Pinkos and Members of the City Council,

I am writing to express my expectations for the City Manager’s monthly newsletter. This communication should provide residents with a clear picture of the city’s priorities, challenges, and direction—not just ceremonial highlights.

If the newsletter cannot candidly acknowledge the very real challenges El Cerrito faces—budget instability, deferred infrastructure, pension costs, staff shortages, and controversial tax measures—then it should at least highlight substantial progress on issues that directly affect the services we depend on every day.

Residents deserve a newsletter that is timely, substantive, and transparent, not one that merely functions as window dressing. I urge you to use this communication to be honest about risks, highlight meaningful progress, and show residents that leadership is working toward real solutions.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]
[Your City]

El Cerrito City Hall Works 37.5 Hours a Week While the Rest of Us Work 40+

Most working people know what a standard full-time schedule looks like: 40 hours a week—often more. That’s the reality for residents across El Cerrito who juggle jobs, commutes, family responsibilities, and rising costs of living. Yet when it comes to City Hall, the schedule looks very different.

According to the posted hours, El Cerrito City Hall operates just 37.5 hours a week. Offices close every other Friday, and the remaining weekdays follow reduced schedules compared to what residents work themselves.

Monday, Wednesday, and alternate Fridays: 8:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. Tuesday and Thursday: 8:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m. Closed every other Friday That means City Hall is open fewer hours than the very residents it serves are expected to work.

Why It Matters

This might seem like a small detail, but it speaks volumes about priorities. Residents are asked to shoulder tax increases, weather service cuts, and tolerate deferred maintenance of city facilities. Yet the government providing those services has carved out a work schedule that doesn’t align with the demands placed on the public. It also means that every hour beyond 37 1/2 hours means we pay for overtime and comp time for work that doesn’t benefit the city of El Cerrito.

Reduced access means fewer opportunities for residents to get help in person. It means City services aren’t available at the same pace as the private sector or other local governments that manage to keep full schedules. And it raises the question: Why should taxpayers accept “less” when they’re constantly being asked to give “more”?

To make matters worse, residents who want to participate in city government must show up in person—because El Cerrito does not allow public comment unless you are physically present at the meeting. That creates a barrier for working families, seniors, and others who simply cannot rearrange their lives around City Hall’s limited hours.

Accountability and Service

Just because it’s a government office doesn’t mean shortcuts are acceptable. Residents who work hard every week to support their families and pay taxes should be able to count on a City Hall that’s equally committed.

The city often talks about “community engagement” and “responsiveness,” but real engagement starts with accessibility. Real responsiveness means being there when residents need you—not just when the doors happen to be open.

Moving Forward

El Cerrito faces serious financial and governance challenges. Addressing them requires leadership, transparency, and commitment—not reduced hours and closed doors. A community working 40+ hours a week deserves nothing less than a City Hall that matches that effort.

It’s time for City Hall to align its work ethic with the people it serves—and to stop making participation harder than it needs to be.

#ElCerrito #Accountability #BetterGovernment #PublicService

What a Transparent El Cerrito Looks Like

We first published this piece in January 2021—four and a half years ago. Sadly, little has changed since then. The city continues to struggle with transparency, financial discipline, and meaningful engagement with residents. Looking back, the concerns we raised then remain just as relevant today. As we head into the next election, these issues are more urgent than ever and demand real solutions.

_______

It is a new year and we have a new city council. Paul Fadelli is our new Mayor. Council-People Lisa Motoyama and Tessa Rudnick have been sworn in replacing Greg Lyman and Rochelle-Pardue-Okimoto. Janet Abelson and Gabe Quinto remain on the council and will be up for election in 2022.

I have been highly critical of the council and what I have seen as their inaction as the financial crisis has worsened. I do want to allow the new Mayor and council members an opportunity to do things differently. Tessa Rudnick both Zoom met with representatives from this group and answered our questions. Lisa Motoyama never responded to either request. We hope as a councilperson she decides to represent all of the residents, including the ones who differ in opinion from her. Mayor (then Councilperson Fadelli) has always been fairly accessible though many of us have been disappointed that he has not pushed more on the issues. He has had only one meeting as Mayor and part of what he is implementing is more involvement from the Financial Advisory Board (FAB) which is a great development. The people on FAB are finance experts and they should be utilized as a resource, not as a rubber stamp. I attended and wrote about the last FAB meeting and it was a good opportunity to be heard in public comment and to also have some things explained. I will be adding the FAB meetings to the take action page and hope others attend. As of now, there is an opening on FAB so I encourage people to apply for that position.

What I would like most to see with the new council is a shift in the dynamic between staff/council and the community. While some attempts were made to improve this (Town Meeting Feb 2020) for the most part those of us who have been actively following and advocating on the financial issues have been ignored or told we don’t know anything. It has been exceedingly difficult to get accurate data from the city. Often we are told to dig through hundreds of pages of documents. That is not transparency. Some simple things that could happen to shift this.

  1. Give us the dedicated budget page we were promised at the Town Hall meeting. Albany is a great example. They have the information easily accessible on their website AND they do quarterly breakdowns and detailed reports. Now right now the council has been getting a monthly report (even better) but those need to be posted on the website on their own and not as part of a 200-page packet. Some of this is now being posted on the FAB page but it should all be on one designated budget page. This is just a matter of uploading the monthly reports and is a simple task.
  2. The City Manager’s reports need to have information on economic development and the budget crisis. She writes a very thorough report accented all that is good in EC which is great but the public needs to know the crisis also. Many in El Cerrito still are not aware that we are on the brink of bankruptcy. We have no real local newspaper so the information gets out there only through places like this or Next Door or Facebook. We need the city to be accountable to be reporting on the crisis. We need all the residents to understand what the stakes are here. And once shelter in place is lifted there needs to be another Town Hall meeting where it is not just a show run by the Mayor but the interactive Town Hall we asked for the first time.
  3. I would encourage the Mayor to also create a monthly report or have a written report from the council. Or start having some online Town Hall meetings. I have, in the past, found council members open to a coffee meeting but since that is not plausible we need other ways for the community to interact with the council. 
  4. There needs to be a public process when the state auditor report comes out. This is now shown with a March 2021 estimated completion date. Based on the report I read from Compton (who were ranked slightly better than us) I expect a scathing report. In the past, when the state auditor brought up concerns there appeared to be a lot of minimizing or saying things were not as bad as the state said. I know we cannot go back in time and undo mistakes but I would love to see the city say mistakes were made and have a written plan to make sure such mistakes never happen again. There again should be a Town Hall (online if needed) to discuss the report. 
  5. There needs to be a 5 year budget available on the same page as mentioned above. This needs to be updated (the longer-term years) at least twice a year. 
  6. There needs to be a written plan as to how the city can pay off our 8.5 million dollar loan. We are not building any reserve until that is paid off. How long will it take? If we end the year at the number projected (which I doubt) we would have a 600k surplus. So if we are paying off the TRAN at that rate it would take 16 years to get rid of it. 
  7. There needs to be greater transparency on city salaries. Transparent CA is a great resource for looking at salaries and comparing them to other cities. However, what we have seen is that city staff are always saying they are underpaid or paid at the median. However, there has never been information shared on what cities they compare to. What we suspect is that they throw the entire county in there so it includes much larger cities like Richmond and much richer ones like Walnut Creek. I believe in reasonable compensation for staff but it needs to be centered on the reality of our financial crisis and the size and resources of our city.
  8. On the budget page we also should be able to see our city’s current bond rating. This is something that has dropped in the last few years and we are now at a huge disadvantage as far as being able to borrow money as a city. Either it will cost more or it will not happen as we are considered high-risk. 

I found this report online. This talks about what transparency in a city looks like. Our neighbor San Francisco is doing an excellent job. Here are three guidelines for Transparency 2.0. You can see how our city is under the first category for most things and not the second. I understand many of these changes could take a while to make since it appears the city’s website is antiquated and would need work. However, if the city started with the basics as discussed above it would go a long way.

As many of us have seen with the Federal Government a lack of transparency leads to residents not trusting the government. I know many of my fellow advocates don’t trust our local government at all due to these issues. I hope the new Mayor and council will take steps to right the ship and change the embedded culture of we know all and the residents do not understand things.

Known Expenses Aren’t ‘Surprises’

A concerned citizen wasn’t able to speak at the August 19 El Cerrito City Council meeting because the council does not allow remote public comment. Instead, they put their concerns in writing — a reminder of how the city continues to make it harder for residents to participate in decisions that directly affect our community.

That night, the Financial Advisory Board (FAB) presented practical recommendations to improve long-term planning and budgeting discipline. These were not radical ideas. They were common-sense steps that any responsible city should adopt:

  • Set aside dedicated funds for capital improvements so big projects don’t destabilize the budget.
  • Allocate a set percentage (2%) of the General Fund each year for mid-year expenses, since additional costs always come up after the budget is adopted.

Despite the clear value of these proposals, the city manager opposes this, so the city council refused to vote on them. This rejection wasn’t just disappointing — it signaled once again that thoughtful, community-driven oversight is being dismissed.

The council’s handling of mid-year expenses illustrates the problem. During the meeting, Councilmember Lisa Motoyama repeatedly remarked that the council was “not surprised” by the additional costs. If that’s the case, why weren’t they included in the budget to begin with? Presenting known expenses as unexpected midway through the year erodes public confidence and exposes a pattern of being reactive rather than responsible.

Accountability cannot be optional. The FAB’s recommendations would help El Cerrito prepare for the future, avoid financial shocks, dwindling reserves and rebuild community trust. Ignoring them sends the opposite message — that leaders prefer the pretense of short-term fixes over long-term discipline.

Residents want to engage. We want transparency. We want responsible planning. But for that to happen, the city council must do two things: listen to its advisory board and open the door to remote public comment so all voices can be heard.

The FAB has done its job. It’s time for the council to do theirs.

— A concerned citizen who wasn’t allowed to speak remotely

#ElCerrito #EastBay #EastBayTimes #Berkeleyside #Richmondside #FiscalResponsibility #Transparency #PublicComment

Key Issues Ignored in El Cerrito’s City Report

The City Manager’s monthly report should provide the community with a window into the city’s priorities, challenges, and direction. But the latest installment, released on August 22, falls significantly short.

The timing alone is troubling. By the time the report appeared, its headline item—a wildfire preparedness event co-hosted with Assemblymember Buffy Wicks—was already weeks old and widely covered. Instead of offering timely insight into city business, residents received a recap that added little to what they already knew.

The more profound concern, however, is the lack of substance. Aside from a deserved acknowledgment of the Assistant City Manager’s new professional credential, the report reads more like a community bulletin board: an art exhibit announcement, a school traffic safety reminder, and another recap of the wildfire event. While these items may be pleasant, they do not reflect the real work or pressing challenges of city management.

What is left out is far more critical. The report makes no mention of the city’s ongoing budget instability, still propped up with one-time fixes and reserves instead of a credible long-term strategy. Deferred infrastructure maintenance continues to mount, making future repairs more costly. Rising pension and benefit obligations are squeezing the budget, and staff shortages across departments are reducing capacity to deliver the services residents rely on every day. On top of these challenges, controversial “forever taxes” are moving forward with little acknowledgment in official communications—measures that will shape the city’s fiscal future for decades.

These are not side issues; they are the central concerns that determine whether El Cerrito can sustain itself. By ignoring them, the monthly report presents an image of stability and celebration that simply doesn’t match reality.

A City Manager’s report should be more than ceremonial notes. It should be a substantive, timely, and transparent account of what the city is facing, where progress is being made, and where serious risks remain. Residents deserve clear, honest communication—not newsletters that gloss over the most important questions of governance.

Until these reports reflect the full scope of El Cerrito’s challenges, they will continue to fall short of their purpose. Our community deserves more than recaps and recognition; we deserve an accounting that takes our future seriously.

Read the City Manager’s August 2025 Report here.

The False Choice Between Expenses and Services

One of the most overused lines from El Cerrito’s city leadership is: “Cutting expenses means cutting services.” It’s a simplistic and frankly idiotic statement that City Manager Karen Pinkos and Councilmember Lisa Motoyama have repeated so often they seem to believe it themselves.

If that logic were true, the reverse would also be true: adding money to the budget should improve services. Instead, the budget has nearly doubled yet services have declined. Meanwhile, El Cerrito has built one of the most top-heavy administrative structures for a city of 25,000 residents—complete with a City Manager, an Assistant City Manager, an Executive Assistant and four battalion chiefs. More money, more management and yet less value for the community.

A Budget That Keeps Growing

Over the past several years, El Cerrito’s budget has grown dramatically. General Fund expenditures have jumped from about $32 million in FY 2018 to over $60 million in the current cycle. Pension contributions alone have nearly doubled, and salary costs continue to climb – fueling more pension costs. Yet despite this growth, residents experience fewer services, longer wait times, and less responsiveness from City Hall.

Services That Keep Shrinking

Consider a few examples:

  • Swim Center – Rather than maintaining the facility properly, projects are repeatedly deferred until they become multimillion-dollar emergencies. Now residents face long closures, ADA upgrades, and lost program revenue.
  • Senior Services – Programming has been cut even as the city’s senior population grows – now 27% leaving older residents underserved despite expanding budgets.
  • Street Maintenance – Our roads remain in poor condition. Even with more dollars in public works budgets, El Cerrito lags behind neighboring cities in paving and infrastructure improvements.
  • Library – Instead of investing in staffing and programs at the existing library, the city cut library hours. Now the town pushes a $75+ million new tax that isn’t actually tied to building a library.

The Reality of Trade-Offs

The truth is, there are trade-offs. We could renew programming at the senior center if El Cerrito weren’t carrying more administrative overhead, per capita, than peer cities of the same size.

El Cerrito is the only city of about 25,000 residents that employs a City Manager, an Assistant City Manager, and an Executive Assistant—an inflated structure that adds cost without adding corresponding value. On top of that, the city funds four Battalion Chiefs in its fire department—far more than comparable cities. Albany, Piedmont, and Hercules all operate with fewer or none at all.

El Cerrito is also one of the few cities without a senior center.

📊 Fact Box: Staffing in El Cerrito vs. Similar-Sized Cities

Executive Office

El Cerrito (pop. ~25,000) • City Manager • Assistant City Manager • Executive Assistant to City Manager ➝ 3-person executive office

Albany (pop. ~20,000) • City Manager • Administrative staff shared across departments ➝ No Assistant City Manager

Piedmont (pop. ~11,000) • City Administrator • One administrative analyst ➝ No executive assistant

Hercules (pop. ~26,000) • City Manager • Administrative support staff (shared) ➝ No Assistant City Manager

Fire Department Command

El Cerrito (pop. ~25,000) • 4 Battalion Chiefs for a fire department supports the town of Kensington – although the city may not be properly compensated for support costs

Albany (pop. ~20,000) • 0 Battalion Chiefs (fire services contracted through Albany–Berkeley model)

Piedmont (pop. ~11,000) • 0 Battalion Chiefs (one fire station with a captain-led structure)

Hercules (pop. ~26,000) • 1 Battalion Chief (shared within Rodeo–Hercules Fire District)

When leadership builds layers of executive staff and fire command positions beyond what peer cities sustain, that money isn’t available for frontline services. If staffing were right-sized instead of inflated, the surplus could be redirected to where residents feel it most—funding essential programs and addressing long-delayed capital needs.

That’s the real conversation our leaders avoid: not whether cuts automatically reduce services, but whether smarter decisions could deliver better outcomes with the resources we already have.

The Political Comfort of Bad Logic

Equating every dollar spent with service delivered is politically convenient but intellectually bankrupt. It assumes El Cerrito is already operating at 100% efficiency, with no room to improve. It denies the possibility of innovation, better prioritization, operational reform or revenue losses.

And it gives cover to leaders like Karen Pinkos and Lisa Motoyama, who cling to this false choice as a shield against accountability. By repeating the mantra, they can dismiss fiscal discipline as “anti-service” altogether. At the same time, pension costs rise, management gives themselves raises while earning overtime, and residents see less for their money.

It’s the same behaviors that sent us to a negative fund balance, put the City on the state auditors top 10 cities at risk of bankruptcy. It’s also the same behaviors that led to our decline to a BBB- bond rating.

What Residents Deserve

It’s time to elect leaders who aren’t tied to the status quo and overstaffing. Cutting fat is not the same as cutting muscle. Time and again, El Cerrito has chosen to prioritize salary increases, top heavy staffing and pet capital projects over the services residents rely on every day.

The community deserves leaders who will manage growing budgets responsibly and deliver better outcomes—not ones who cling to inflated and unsustainable staffing structures and hide behind a tired line that collapses under two minutes of honest thought.

The True Cost of the Swim Center Proposals

El Cerrito residents are once again being asked to absorb multimillion-dollar expenses, this time for Swim Center improvements. The numbers presented at the council meeting tell only part of the story. When you read the details, the costs are far higher than what was initially suggested.

Option 2: Partial Scope – $2.3 Million

This option focuses on replastering the pool and making long-deferred parking lot and ADA upgrades.

Total Cost: $2,311,000 Funding Plan: $200,000 from Measure H $500,000 from discretionary General Fund reserves $1.61 million in new, unidentified funding (possibly offset by grants for EV charging)

Even this “partial” option comes with a pool closure of up to 3 months and revenue losses of $150,000. The parking lot improvements would extend the disruption for another five months.

Option 3: Full Scope – $4.36 Million

This option layers in pool deck replacement and interior ADA/egress improvements.

Total Cost: $4,356,000 Funding Plan: $200,000 from Measure H $500,000 from discretionary General Fund reserves $1.61 million in new funding for FY 2025-26 $2.05 million more in FY 2026-27

The pool would close twice, with an estimated $400,000 revenue loss over those shutdowns.

What This Means for Residents

When you add these numbers up, El Cerrito is looking at millions more than residents were first led to believe. These aren’t one-time surprises. They’re known expenses that have been deferred and are now coming due—at a time when the city is already struggling with long-term financial stability and dwindling reserves.

Relying on discretionary reserves and new, unidentified funding sources is not a sustainable strategy. Deferrals and half-measures only compound costs down the road, yet the “full scope” option doubles the financial burden.

Capital Projects and Missed Planning

The Financial Advisory Board (FAB) recommended that the city set aside a portion of its annual budget specifically for capital projects—repairs, renovations, and infrastructure work that everyone knows will come due eventually. Council member Saltzman and members of the public have suggested it many times. However, the council, particularly the City Manager, Mayor and council member Motoyama would prefer to drain reserves rather than considering new approaches to planning for known expenses.

If El Cerrito had followed those recommendations, there would already be reserves dedicated to projects like Swim Center replastering and ADA improvements. Instead, the city is left trying to patch together millions from the General Fund, reserves, and uncertain grants.

Capital projects should never be treated as emergencies. They are predictable, recurring needs that require disciplined savings and long-term planning. By ignoring this, the city has continued avoidable financial strain and forced residents to bear the costs of poor foresight.

Moving Forward

Residents deserve better. Large capital projects should be planned for, with funds set aside year after year, not dropped on the community as a crisis every decade. Known expenses aren’t surprises—they are signs of a city failing to practice the financial discipline it needs.

El Cerrito’s Library Plan: Big Price Tag, Shrinking Foot Traffic

The City of El Cerrito is pushing ahead with plans for a 21,000 square-foot library at a cost of over $75 million—and the price could ultimately reach $100 million. The proposed funding mechanism? A $300 per year parcel tax that residents would be locked into forever with periodic escalation.

At first glance, investing in public infrastructure sounds like progress. But the numbers and priorities raise serious questions.

Declining Use in a Digital Age

Over the last decade, physical library visits have dropped significantly—40% since 2016 here in El Cerrito. In an era when residents increasingly access e-books, audiobooks, research databases, and online learning platforms, a costly, oversized building may not reflect how people actually use library services today.

Who Actually Runs Our Libraries?

It’s important to remember that Contra Costa County runs our library system, not the City of El Cerrito. The County determines staffing levels, programming, and service delivery. Yet the City wants residents to finance a massive new building it won’t directly control—raising questions about whether the return on investment will truly match the price tag.

A Community Getting Older—Without a Senior Center

According to the American Community Survey (2019–2023), 27% of El Cerrito residents are age 60 or older:

  • 60–64: 1,868 people
  • 65–69: 1,516 people
  • 70–74: 1,441 people
  • 75–79: 881 people
  • 80–84: 592 people
  • 85+: 694 people

That’s nearly 7,000 residents in a city of roughly 26,000—more than one in four. And that percentage is growing. Yet the City has shown no real interest in building a dedicated senior center to serve this substantial and growing demographic.

The Real Question

Why is the City prioritizing an expensive, oversized library over investments that would benefit a broader share of the community—especially when the facility’s primary functions have shifted online? Shouldn’t we be weighing all capital projects against current usage patterns, demographic trends, and actual community needs?

What Residents Can Do

The only way to change the outcome is for residents to get involved:

Do not sign the library petition requesting the City to move forward on a citizen vote. If the measure makes it to the ballot, vote NO on the library tax. Let the City know you expect investments that meet the needs of all residents—especially our growing senior population—before committing to decades of debt for an oversized, underused facility.

El Cerrito Library: Public Safety Data Reveals Risks

In August 2019, a consultant hired by the City of El Cerrito flagged several potential issues with building a new library at the Plaza site. Even then, concerns about safety and accessibility were part of the conversation. Fast forward to today, and fresh analysis of police incident data suggests those concerns may have been well-founded.

What Was Flagged in 2019

The consultant’s presentation outlined several risks and limitations with the Plaza location:

  • Not as accessible to El Cerrito residents living in the northern part of the city
  • Potential recurring tenant payments, adding long-term operational costs
  • Many factors outside of the City’s control
  • Homelessness and safety issues within the BART precinct
  • Traffic congestion concerns
  • Risk of the library becoming a regional destination rather than a neighborhood resource
  • Reduced child focus due to transit-oriented development housing nearby

See the original presentation here.

What the Data Shows Now

Using El Cerrito Police Department incident reports from January 1, 2019 through June 30, 2025, a concerned citizen examined public safety patterns near key community landmarks. For consistency, only incidents with verifiable addresses were included, and the data was limited to specific types of incidents.

The number of incidents within 500 feet of each landmark is revealing:

  • Proposed New Library Location (Plaza) – 1,547 incidents
  • Current El Cerrito Library – 292 incidents
  • El Cerrito High School – 265 incidents
  • Del Norte BART – 214 incidents
  • El Cerrito Community Center – 213 incidents
  • Harding Elementary School – 211 incidents
  • El Cerrito Plaza BART – 179 incidents
  • Korematsu Middle School – 120 incidents
  • Castro Park Pickleball Courts – 114 incidents
  • Madera Elementary – 55 incidents

These counts reflect the number of reported and recorded incidents by the El Cerrito Police Department. While the data does not distinguish between severity levels, the sheer difference in volume raises serious questions about whether the Plaza site is the safest choice for a community library—especially one expected to serve families, children, and seniors.

Why This Matters Even More

El Cerrito is a small community—just 26,000 residents in about four square miles. When a single site accounts for more than five times the number of reported incidents as the current library location, it’s not something that can be brushed aside as just “part of city life.” The potential safety risks could have an outsized impact on the people who live, work, and go to school here.

Moreover, the most recent data available was in 2019, but crime hasn’t decreased in El Cerrito. If it had increased, it would have been on the front page of the monthly newsletter.

Moving Forward

The data adds weight to earlier warnings about safety and operational challenges at the Plaza site. Any decision about the library’s location should consider not just cost, but also accessibility, long-term operational impact, and the safety of its patrons. El Cerrito residents deserve a library that is not only functional and welcoming, but also located in a place where public safety risks are minimized.

El Cerrito’s Pool Repair Plans: Where Will the Money Come From?

El Cerrito has a long history of launching expensive projects before securing the funding—often counting on future taxes or one-time windfalls to fill the gaps. This approach has left the city with dwindling reserves, higher debt, and residents facing repeated tax proposals. The upcoming pool repair discussion fits that same troubling pattern.

On Tuesday, the El Cerrito City Council will discuss four costly options for repairing the city’s swimming pool—ranging from $970,000 for a basic replaster to nearly $4.8 million for a full-scope renovation.

Pool Repair Options at a Glance

OptionScopeCostPool ClosureRevenue LossAdditional Work Duration
1Replaster Only (Partial Scope)$970,000Up to 3 months (Jan–Mar 2026)Up to $150,000N/A
2Replaster + Parking Lot ADA & Related Improvements (Partial Scope)$2,311,000Up to 3 months (Jan–Mar 2026)Up to $150,000Parking lot projects through May 2026
3Replaster + Parking Lot ADA in FY 2025-26, Pool Deck & Interior ADA in FY 2026-27 (Full Scope)$4,356,000TBD per phaseTBDTwo fiscal years
4Full Scope + Hybrid Deck in FY 2026-27$4,752,000TBDTBDOne fiscal year

Even the least expensive option comes with a 3-month closure and an estimated $150,000 revenue loss. Higher-cost options extend the timeline and disruption.

But the big question remains: Where will the money come from?

El Cerrito has already drained considerable reserves in recent years, relying on one-time funds to plug recurring deficits. The city is not known for aggressively pursuing grants—even when outside funding could reduce taxpayer burden.

Perhaps this is why the city’s former leaders and city attorney have been pushing so hard for the proposed $75 million “forever tax” for a library—a project that might never be built as promised, or could arrive only after the city has already taken in money to plug budget gaps.

If the pool project moves forward at the higher price points, it could consume much of the city’s financial breathing room—assuming there’s any left. That leaves residents with a familiar concern: Will this council commit to real fiscal planning, or will they continue to push for new taxes to cover the gap?

The choice isn’t just about the pool—it’s about whether El Cerrito can manage its finances without repeatedly reaching into residents’ pockets.

El Cerrito’s Senior Center: A Promise the City Has Chosen to Forget

In March 2016, the El Cerrito City Council made a clear and unanimous commitment to its residents. Under then-Mayor Greg Lyman, the council voted for the Portola site as the location for a new library and explicitly rejected the “library-only” plan. Instead, they approved Proposal 1b, which included adequate space for a new senior center—a recognition that our older residents deserve a dedicated facility for programs, services, and social connection.

Public Support Was Strong from the Start

The decision wasn’t made in isolation. Community voices were united in their support:

Rochelle Pardue-Okimoto (then a private citizen) spoke passionately for Proposal 1b, emphasizing the importance of meeting seniors’ needs. Paul Fadelli (also a citizen at the time) supported the combined library and senior center. Gary Pokorny (citizen and former city manager) voiced support for the combined plan, while warning that some residents felt excluded from the process.

The council’s vote reflected the will of the community. It was a promise—not a suggestion—that the senior center would be built alongside the new library.

The Timeline of Inaction

After that unanimous 2016 vote, momentum stalled:

2016–2017 – Initial discussions occurred, but no concrete plans or timelines for the senior center were developed.

2018–2021 – The city shifted priorities, focusing almost entirely on the library project. Public discussions about the senior center vanished.

2022–2023 – No updates on the senior center’s status. It was effectively erased from the public agenda.

2024–2025 – Over a year has passed without a single public meeting or council discussion about the senior center. The city remains silent.

The Silence Speaks Volumes

El Cerrito has just 26,000 residents in four square miles. This is not a city where commitments can get “lost” in the bureaucracy. It is a city where every promise—and every broken one—is noticed.

The senior center was not a secondary idea. It was part of an approved plan, supported by the community, and justified by the real and growing needs of our seniors. These residents contribute to our city’s vibrancy, volunteer in our programs, and have spent decades investing in this community. They deserve better than to see their needs quietly shelved.

If El Cerrito can find funding for new projects and prioritize costly initiatives, it can—and should—fulfill its promise to build a senior center. Anything less is not just a missed opportunity; it’s a breach of trust.

If you believe El Cerrito should honor its 2016 promise and finally move forward on the senior center, tell your City Council directly. Urge them to put the senior center back on the public agenda and commit to a timeline for action.

📧 Mayor Carolyn Wysinger – cwysinger@ci.el-cerrito.ca.us

📧 Mayor Pro Tem Gabe Quinto – gquinto@ci.el-cerrito.ca.us

📧 Councilmember Lisa Motoyama – lmotoyama@ci.el-cerrito.ca.us

📧 Councilmember Rebecca Saltzman – rsaltzman@ci.el-cerrito.ca.us

📧 Councilmember William Ktsanes – wktsanes@ci.el-cerrito.ca.us

Let them know the community is watching—and that a promise to seniors is a promise worth keeping.