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.

Understanding California’s Sunshine Ordinance

In today’s age of information, transparency in government is more than just a buzzword—it’s a fundamental pillar of democracy. Across California, the idea of a “Sunshine Ordinance” has come to symbolize the state’s commitment to keeping government operations open, accountable, and accessible to the public. While there isn’t one single, statewide sunshine ordinance, a mix of state laws and local policies work together to ensure that citizens can keep an eye on those who govern.

What Is a Sunshine Ordinance?

The term “California sunshine ordinance” generally refers to laws and policies that promote transparency. These legal instruments ensure that public records are readily available and that governmental meetings remain open to public scrutiny. Two of the key pieces of legislation in California that embody these principles are:

  • The California Public Records Act (CPRA): Enacted in 1968, this law guarantees the public’s right to access information held by state and local agencies.
  • The Brown Act: This act mandates that meetings of local government bodies are open to the public, allowing citizens to observe and participate in local decision-making processes.

Many local governments build on this foundation by enacting their own ordinances to reinforce transparency and accountability.

San Francisco vs. El Cerrito: A Tale of Two Approaches

San Francisco has set a high bar for government openness by adopting a local ordinance that not only requires public meetings to be accessible but also mandates that these meetings be recorded. This means residents can later review discussions, ensuring every decision is documented and public officials remain accountable.

In contrast, El Cerrito takes a different approach. Although the city is committed to transparency in some ways, the city clerk and council hide behind the Brown Act, refusing to engage the public There’s nothing in the Brown Act prohibiting engagement, this is a city decision. Also, El Cerrito does not record all of its publicly held meetings. This divergence highlights the variety of methods municipalities use to implement open government principles, and it raises an important question: Could El Cerrito take further steps toward transparency?

A Call to Action: Become Transparent El Cerrito

As citizens, we know that transparency is key to building trust and ensuring accountability. That’s why we’re urging the City Council of El Cerrito to step up its commitment to open government by adopting practices similar to those in San Francisco. Imagine a city where every board or committee meeting is recorded, archived, and readily accessible—allowing residents to stay fully informed about the decisions that affect their community.

Imagine more engaging city council meetings

Below are the current El Cerrito City Council members—public servants entrusted with representing our community. We invite them to lead by example and embrace a higher standard of transparency.

Current El Cerrito City Council Members

Mailing Address for the City Council:
El Cerrito City Hall
10890 San Pablo Ave
El Cerrito, CA 94530

Join the Movement for Transparency

Dear Council Members—William Ktsanes, Lisa Motoyama, Gabe Quinto, Rebecca Saltzman, and Carolyn Wysinger—your constituents are calling on you to take decisive steps toward making El Cerrito a beacon of transparency. By recording and archiving all public meetings, you can foster a government that is not only accountable but also truly representative of the people’s voice.

Let’s work together to create a “Transparent El Cerrito” where every resident can confidently follow the decision-making process. The time is now to shine a light on government actions, ensure accountability, and build lasting trust within our community.

Embrace the sunshine and lead the change for a more open and transparent El Cerrito!

If you’re a resident who believes in the power of open government, share this message with your neighbors and let your voice be heard. Transparency starts with us—and with you.

Rethinking El Cerrito’s Library Expansion: A Community Approach

A recent East Bay Times article highlights the undeniable challenges facing El Cerrito’s public library: it’s overcrowded, outdated, and seismically unsafe. No one disputes that the current facility falls short of what the community deserves (see the full article here).

But the article stops short of asking an equally important question—what’s the most responsible and sustainable way to meet this need?

City leaders and advocates have reignited calls for a brand-new, state-of-the-art library, potentially funded through a new parcel tax. But let’s be honest: this isn’t the first time we’ve heard this pitch. Voters have rejected multiple funding attempts in the past, not because they’re afraid to invest in the community—but because they’re demanding common sense and fiscal responsibility.

As former Mayor Greg Lyman put it: “We aren’t afraid to tax ourselves”. What he’s missing:

We are already overtaxed!

El Cerrito residents are becoming common-sense voters. We aren’t anti-library. We are actually anti-overtaxing. We are open to solutions—especially ones that don’t require another round of tax increases layered on top of already sky‑high rates. Property taxes, sales taxes, and utility user taxes—El Cerrito ranks among the highest-taxed cities in Contra Costa County. And yet, here we are again, being told a new tax is the only way forward.

But it’s not. Other options deserve equal, if not greater, attention:

  • Build on City‑Owned Land: The city already owns several parcels. Why isn’t the conversation focused on lower‑cost alternatives on land we don’t have to rent ?
  • Partner with the County: Contra Costa County is responsible for library operations. Let’s explore how the County can contribute more meaningfully to the solution, including capital support.
  • Modernize, Don’t Monumentalize: The need is real, but we must distinguish between a functional library and a vanity project. Smart, efficient design can serve the community without breaking the bank.

These practical alternatives are notably absent from the recent coverage. Instead, we’re once again being funneled into a narrative that equates civic pride with unlimited spending—and assumes the only obstacle is voter reluctance.

Here’s the truth: El Cerrito voters have shown time and again that they are willing to invest in the community. But trust and accountability must come first. The city has struggled with budget deficits, pension liabilities, and inconsistent financial transparency. Asking residents to dig deeper without a solid, sustainable plan is shortsighted at best.

Suppose city leaders are serious about delivering a modern library for El Cerrito. In that case, it’s time to have a broader conversation—one that begins with financial realism, incorporates community-driven options, and prioritizes the long-term fiscal health of our city without new taxes.

We can do better. We just have to be willing say no to bad proposals from the City and elect members of the community who will be more responsible.

A History of Broken Promises and Misplaced Priorities

Thank you to the neighbors and community members who continue raising essential questions about how our city spends taxpayer money. It’s not just about one issue—it’s about a decades-long pattern of financial decisions that don’t align with the promises made to voters.

Remember Measure D?

In 2008, El Cerrito voters approved a 30-year bond (Measure D) to resurface city streets. The measure passed with public support because we were told our roads desperately needed repair. But after the measure passed, the 2008 economic crash stalled everything—until federal infrastructure funds arrived through the Obama administration’s stimulus package.

You may remember the bright green signs between 2009–2011 that said:

“These roadway repairs paid for by the Obama admin Congressional appropriation.”

So what happened to the bond money we’ve been paying on every property tax bill since 2008—and will continue to pay through 2038?

It didn’t go to road repairs. That work was federally funded. The bond money was redirected to cover city salaries and operating expenses. Not the purpose promised to voters.

The Same Pattern, Again and Again

In 2018, residents were told we needed Measure V, a new real property transfer tax, to fund essential services. The tax passed and generated millions, yet services were cut. The senior center was permanently closed. El Cerrito remains the only city in the region without one.

Then came Measure G in 2024—pitched as a public safety measure. We were told the tax would ensure funding for critical needs like a new fire engine. The tax passed. The fire engine never came.

Now, It’s the Library

We all appreciate the value of a library. But the current proposal is financially reckless. Here’s what the fine print says:

  • Operating costs are only covered for 10 years.
  • The tax never ends – unless the voters decide to put it on the ballot. No tax has ever been repealed by the voters, so it’s essentially a “forever” tax.
  • After that, taxpayers are on the hook for over $1 million annually.
  • The city already projects deficits for the next 10 years.
  • At the June 2025 council budget meeting, city leaders said they couldn’t even fund a required EMS safety device—let alone a new library with a bigger staff and higher overhead.

So how do they plan to pay for it long-term? More taxes. And more broken promises.

Fool Me Once…Twice…..But Not This Time

There’s a pattern in El Cerrito:

  • Promise a specific outcome.
  • Pass a tax or bond.
  • Redirect the money elsewhere.
  • Come back to voters with a new ask.

It’s not sustainable. It’s not transparent. And it’s not fair.

What You Can Do

El Cerrito residents deserve a city government that honors its commitments. We deserve road repairs when we’re taxed for road repairs. We deserve a senior center, functioning fire equipment, and honest budgeting—not expensive PR campaigns to push new taxes.

Let’s stop the cycle.

🔗 https://keepelcerritosafe.com

Please:

  • Do NOT sign the library tax petition.
  • Do NOT vote for another empty promise.
  • Demand accountability.

From Residential Street to Bike Boulevard — Without Consensus

Richmond Street has quietly become a test case for street redesign, and residents are feeling the consequences. The city moved forward with dramatic changes — including:

  • Reducing on-street parking in multiple blocks, impacting most households for on street parking
  • Installing barriers and diverters that restrict local access
  • Doing all this without a comprehensive community consensus

Despite months of public comment, emails, and neighborhood meetings, residents’ concerns were minimized or ignored. Feedback about senior accessibility, visitor parking, service vehicles, and overall street safety didn’t meaningfully alter the plan. For many, it feels like the outcome was pre-determined.

What This Means for the Rest of El Cerrito

If you live on Norvell, Elm, Navellier, Ashbury, Colusa, or even smaller connector streets — pay close attention.

The City’s adopted Active Transportation Plan includes similar concepts throughout El Cerrito. What happened to Richmond Street could set the stage for:

  • Your block becoming a one-way street
  • Your parking eliminated or drastically reduced
  • Traffic patterns changing with little input or flexibility
  • Increased congestion on nearby streets as drivers reroute

All in the name of “complete streets” — with limited local adaptation or nuance.

The Bigger Issue: Ignoring Public Input

Perhaps the most concerning part of the Richmond Street project wasn’t just the design, but how the decisions were made. Despite vocal, repeated public opposition — including formal letters, petitions, and testimony — the concerns of residents were largely brushed aside.

What’s the point of public engagement if the outcome doesn’t change?

We’ve heard it before: “This isn’t final.” “We’re just piloting.” “It can be adjusted later.” But once infrastructure is poured and policies are adopted, rolling them back is rare. And expensive.

This Affects All of Us

Even if you don’t live on Richmond Street, you should care — because your neighbors do.

If we don’t speak up for each other now, who will speak up when it’s your block next?

What You Can Do:

  • Review the Active Transportation Plan for your area
  • Contact your City Councilmembers to express concerns
  • Attend public meetings and speak out early in the process
  • Share what’s happening with your neighbors

This is about transparency, process, and whether El Cerrito remains a community where residents have a meaningful say in how their streets are shaped.

Because if it happened to Richmond Street — it can happen to yours.

How El Cerrito Selects Its Mayor

Let’s start with the basics.

Residents of El Cerrito vote for City Council members, not for a mayor. Once elected, councilmembers vote among themselves each year to determine who will serve as Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem. The positions typically rotate annually, and the vote is often ceremonial. The mayor has no executive powers that set them apart from their colleagues. They run meetings, sign proclamations, and represent the city at events—but the power lies with the council as a whole.

In other words, El Cerrito has a “weak mayor” form of government, where the mayor serves primarily as the public face of the council—not as a separate, powerful office.

So Why Do We Celebrate Our Mayors So Publicly?

Despite the absence of a citywide vote, we often hear phrases like:

“We elected our first Black woman mayor!” “El Cerrito just made history with its first openly gay mayor!” “We now have an Asian American mayor—representation matters!”

These headlines are well-meaning. They reflect civic pride and a desire to uplift leaders who reflect the diversity of our community. And they’re not wrong to celebrate what those milestones represent.

But here’s the nuance: the public didn’t choose that person to be mayor. They chose them to be a member of a five-person body—and that body rotated the title.

We’re not saying representation isn’t important. It is. In fact, it’s vital. But when the process is misunderstood, we risk over-crediting symbolism and under-valuing the substance of governance.

The Symbol vs. the System

In El Cerrito, the mayor is a symbol, not a separate office with a public mandate. When we celebrate a new “historic” mayor, we should ask:

What policies is the mayor advancing? How do they vote on key issues like budgeting, housing, infrastructure, and public safety? Are we holding all councilmembers equally accountable—regardless of who holds the rotating title?

If we’re not careful, celebrating identity milestones without examining governance records can let underperformance slip through the cracks. Representation without accountability is just good PR.

The Real Choice Happens at the Council Level

El Cerrito voters have the power to shape leadership—but only by voting for councilmembers. That’s the real election. That’s when policies, priorities, and values are supposed to be on the line.

If we want stronger, more responsive local government, we need to:

Focus on council elections and who’s running. Ask hard questions about performance, not just identity. Hold all councilmembers accountable—not just the one with the ceremonial title.

Why This Matters Now

El Cerrito faces real challenges: a shaky financial future, aging infrastructure, rising pension costs, and critical decisions about how to serve an aging population.

We need councilmembers who are ready to lead—not just take turns with a title. We should care more about how they govern than how they look at a podium.

And if we want a directly elected mayor with a clear mandate from voters? That would require a change to our city charter—a conversation worth having, but one that hasn’t yet been meaningfully pursued.

Final Thoughts

Let’s continue celebrating the diversity of our leaders. Let’s also be honest about the system that puts them in those roles. El Cerrito doesn’t elect mayors. We rotate them. And while that tradition has benefits—shared leadership, low drama, less politicking—it also calls on residents to look deeper.

Don’t let symbolism substitute for scrutiny. Pay attention to who’s on the council, how they vote, and what they stand for—because that’s where real leadership lives.

If you want more transparency in El Cerrito government, demand better. If you want real change, vote with purpose. The title of “mayor” may rotate, but your voice as a resident never should.

El Cerrito Library Campaign v3.1

The Committee for a Plaza Station Library wants your support—and your money. But before you sign their petition or vote to raise your taxes, here’s what you should know.

According to their own campaign filing, the Committee spent $12,125.68 in the last quarter alone. That includes:

$203.89 paid to John Stashik’s Premier Graphics for 500 pin-back buttons Thousands more in printing and professional services—all aimed at persuading you this tax increase is worth it

And who’s behind this?

Greg Lyman’s Record: State Scrutiny and Fiscal Despair

Greg Lyman, former El Cerrito councilmember, is the campaign treasurer and co-chair of the library tax initiative. His name is familiar to anyone who’s tracked El Cerrito’s financial unraveling.

Here’s the reality:

When Lyman was first elected in 2008, El Cerrito had an AA‑ bond rating By the time he left in 2016, the city’s rating had dropped to BBB‑—just above junk status In 2020, the State Auditor listed El Cerrito among the 10 most fiscally distressed cities in California

That’s not a coincidence.

Lyman voted for every major budget, supported tax increases in 2008, 2010, 2014, and 2018, and was at the table when the El Cerrito Senior Center was shuttered.

He also served as treasurer for the Measure G scare campaign, which pushed yet another long-term tax under the guise of fiscal survival.

Now he’s back, pushing a new long-term parcel tax—$300 per year or more, with no firm project budget, no cap, and no sunset clause.

Enter Gary Pokorny—Again

According to an email sent Sunday by the grassroots committee behind the library campaign, El Cerrito’s former City Manager, Gary Pokorny, will supervise fundraising efforts for the proposed library project.

Pokorny also contributed $450 to the campaign last quarter. Like Lyman, he was part of the leadership team that helped drive El Cerrito into state scrutiny and fiscal despair.

And here’s something telling:

Even though Pokorny retired with over 35 years of public service, his LinkedIn profile makes no mention of his time as El Cerrito’s City Manager. It only highlights his work with the City of Walnut Creek and the Contra Costa Mayors Conference.

That omission speaks volumes. If leading El Cerrito had been a professional highlight, don’t you think it would be listed?

It’s Not About Libraries—It’s About Trust

El Cerrito already has a functioning library, run by Contra Costa County, which owns the building and could improve it without new local taxes.

But the current proposal calls for a multimillion-dollar facility on BART property that would:

Eliminate parking at El Cerrito Plaza Push traffic into nearby neighborhoods Duplicate digital services that students already receive through WCCUSD

And the price tag? A perpetual parcel tax with:

No project cost limit No expiration date No enforceable financial oversight

Before You Sign or Vote—Ask:

Why should we trust the same officials who oversaw El Cerrito’s financial collapse? Why is this tax uncapped, unmonitored, and unlimited? Why now—when core services like the senior center remain unfunded?

See for Yourself

You can review the library campaign’s official financial disclosure here.

El Cerrito doesn’t need another expensive promise. It requires fiscal discipline, real priorities, and leadership we can trust.

Let’s stop recycling the same decision-makers and expecting better outcomes.

Say no to blank checks—and yes to responsible government.

Note: John Stashik clarified: “Nobody bought the buttons. Premier Graphics printed and gave them away at my request. The library committee is free to use them as they see fit. No one paid for them—understand?”

Local Data Analyst Starts Blog on El Cerrito Finances! 

Ira Sharenow, an El Cerrito–based data analyst who has educated the local community on city finances and other civic issues through Nextdoor, has launched a new blog focused on El Cerrito’s financial health and department performance. 

His first post dives into El Cerrito’s CalPERS Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL), offering clear analysis, charts, and a full report. 

Read the first post here:

🔗 Read the first post here


More posts are planned on fire department performance, budget trends, and demographics. Follow along as Ira continues to bring transparency and data to local government.

Who Really Benefits from El Cerrito’s $75 Million Library Plan?

El Cerrito already owns the land where our current library sits.

Let that sink in.

Under the City’s proposed $75 million library tax plan, we would give up ownership of that land and become renters—yes, renters—for a lease vs property we already own. And not only would we lose ownership, we’d still be responsible for the building’s maintenance—even though it wouldn’t belong to us. We would willingly move from an asset to a long term liability. Let that sink in.

Furthermore, El Cerrito doesn’t operate a library. Our library, like every other branch in the system, is operated and funded by the Contra Costa County Library System. But under this proposal, El Cerrito would become the only city in the County system with two library systems operating within the same space—creating confusion, redundancy, and unnecessary costs.

So who actually benefits from this?

The truth is, most of the money from this proposal wouldn’t even go toward the library. Instead, it would be used to fund a significantly larger City Hall. That means more employees, more spending, and larger pension liabilities reduced services for years to come—all bundled into a “library” tax.

There’s a Smarter, More Accountable Alternative

We could build a modern, architecturally beautiful 12,000 square foot library on the same site where the current library stands.

It’s not just possible—it’s practical.

According to a concerned citizen who consulted one of the Bay Area’s leading contractors specializing in library construction, a high-quality new library could be built on the current site for around $1,000 per square foot—and possibly less. It would be far simpler and more cost-effective than constructing a six-story, 69-unit apartment building on a new site with far more infrastructure needs.

Accessibility and Parking Matter

The existing library offers easy, convenient parking. And with Fairmont Elementary out of session for nearly half the year, there’s even more space for residents.

In contrast, the new proposed site is in a congested area poised to absorb 760 new housing units—with no added parking. That makes it less convenient for families, seniors, and anyone who values easy access. As a result, many residents will likely turn to more accessible alternatives like the Kensington Library.

This Isn’t About the Library—It’s About Power and Control

This is the most egregious display of municipal self-dealing in recent Bay Area history. It shifts us from owners to renters, piles long-term debt onto taxpayers, and diverts funds to projects that expand city bureaucracy—not library services.

El Cerrito doesn’t need this proposal to have a great library.

We already have the land.

We already have the County Library system as a committed operating partner.

We already have a better, faster, and more cost-effective path forward.

This blog was informed by a concerned citizen who asked tough questions, did the homework, and consulted experts. It’s up to us to do the same—and to say no to a plan that enriches City Hall at the expense of El Cerrito residents.

The Real Reason El Cerrito Isn’t Talking About Unrestricted Reserves Part II

Since FY22–23, El Cerrito’s unrestricted General Fund reserves have been in steady decline. And it’s no accident. Behind the scenes, the City has been quietly drawing down those reserves—while hoping the public won’t notice. Why? Because they’re counting on voters to approve the so-called “Forever Tax” to plug the holes.

In 2023, the City Council voted unanimously to transfer $9 million from the General Fund into the Emergency Disaster Relief Fund (EDRF)—a restricted reserve designed to cover disasters and economic downturns. The fund was recommended by the Financial Advisory Board and adopted in 2019 as part of the City’s Comprehensive Financial Policies. At the same time, the Council seeded a Section 115 Pension Trust with $1 million, a step toward managing long-term pension liabilities.

On the surface, these appeared to be fiscally responsible decisions. The City reported that General Fund Reserves, including the EDRF, totaled over 28% of the city’s expenditures. However, in the months that followed, $2 million had already been withdrawn from the EDRF, and the City is now planning to use the Section 115 Trust to make regular payments to CalPERS—contrary to its original purpose.

Meanwhile, El Cerrito continues to spend more than it brings in, running annual deficits of roughly $2 million. This isn’t a short-term cash flow problem—it’s a long-term structural imbalance. At this pace, the City will exhaust all reserves within three to four years and may be forced to operate with a negative fund balance.

That’s why there’s suddenly so much talk about a library tax—and so little talk about unrestricted reserves. The truth is, the proposed “Forever Tax” isn’t really about building a library. It’s about keeping the City afloat. And they’re hoping you won’t connect the dots before the election.

We need to be honest with ourselves and each other: This tax is a lifeline for a broken budget. If it passes, it will allow the City to delay difficult decisions. If it fails, it may ultimately force leaders to face the reality that expenses must be reduced.

It’s time to stop pretending we can tax our way out of structural mismanagement. The City must reduce expenses, align staffing levels with service demands, and benchmark itself against fiscally responsible peers, such as Hercules and Albany. It’s the only sustainable path forward.

Before you vote for a library or sign a petition ask yourself: Do you want to fund a bail out a budget?

🚨 El Cerrito’s Pension Time Bomb: Nearly $90 Million in Unfunded Liability—and No Real Plan

As CalPERS, the nation’s largest public pension fund, faces scrutiny over its growing investments in private equity, the City of El Cerrito is sitting on a fiscal time bomb: nearly $90 million in unfunded pension liability—and climbing. This burden, driven by a bloated payroll and decades of financial mismanagement, poses a threat to the city’s long-term solvency. And yet, El Cerrito has no serious or detailed plan to reverse course.

CalPERS is doubling down on private equity to meet its aggressive 6.8% return target. But that bet comes with high risk—especially now. Private equity valuations are often murky and rely heavily on internal estimates rather than market data. Liquidity is limited, meaning if the market turns, CalPERS—and by extension, its member cities—could be left exposed. Even Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik has raised red flags, pointing to inflated valuations in large institutional portfolios like Harvard’s endowment, funds managed by the same firms CalPERS increasingly uses. Retirees and watchdog groups are sounding the alarm over how these bets could backfire, especially for cities already on shaky ground.

El Cerrito owes nearly $90 million in unfunded pension liability, with no clear plan to pay it down. That number is expected to grow. Why? The city continues to overextend itself on payroll, paying salaries and benefits well above regional norms. Every raise today becomes tomorrow’s pension obligation—and those costs are compounding faster than the city’s revenues. Despite promises to rein in spending, El Cerrito keeps adding programs and staff it can’t afford.

Yes, the city has made gestures: a $1 million contribution to a Section 115 trust (a drop in the bucket). Monthly financial reports (more form than function). Occasional discussions about debt restructuring or cost containment (rarely implemented). But none of this addresses the central issue: El Cerrito is living beyond its means. Without a structural reset, the city is simply kicking the can—and placing blind trust in CalPERS’ high-stakes investment bets to bail it out.

The math doesn’t lie. A $90 million unfunded liability in a city of under 26,000 people equates to more than $3,400 per resident. That number will climb if CalPERS misses its return targets or if El Cerrito continues inflating its payroll. Residents are being asked to approve new taxes—like the proposed library bond—while the city refuses to face its core financial crisis.

El Cerrito needs to freeze or reduce payroll until pension costs are under control. Redirect surplus revenue into pension stabilization—not new programs. Disclose the true costs of pensions in all public-facing materials. Develop a long-term funding strategy tied to realistic return assumptions—not CalPERS’ rosy projections.

Call to Action: Ask your city leaders one question—how do they plan to pay off nearly $90 million in pension debt? If they can’t give you a clear, credible answer, don’t trust them with more of your money. Demand transparency. Demand a real plan. And if they won’t act, vote accordingly.