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.

Running on Empty

An Editorial

El Cerrito’s silence on reserves raises real questions about liquidity, transparency, and long-term stability.

For years now, El Cerrito’s leadership has assured residents that the city is on stable financial footing. They point to a “balanced budget,” downplay concerns about spending, and avoid discussing the one figure that tells the real story: unrestricted reserves.

In most cities, unrestricted reserves are a key indicator of financial health—an emergency cushion, a safeguard against volatility, and a sign of long-term stability. But in El Cerrito, that number is almost never mentioned. When it is, it’s buried under vague language or brushed aside with generic reassurances.

Why the lack of transparency? The answer may be simple: there’s not much left.

A Hidden Liquidity Crisis

It’s not hard to connect the dots. El Cerrito’s budget has grown dramatically over the last decade—outpacing inflation year after year. Yet basic services have been cut, the Senior Center has closed, and the city couldn’t identify funding for a new fire engine during this year’s budget process.

At the same time, the city continues spending freely on consultants, surveys, and PR-style reports. One consultant was paid over $10,000 just to facilitate a meeting. Another was hired to evaluate the city’s swimming pool. A recent survey, which cost taxpayers over $50,000, resulted in a single-page summary.

And then there’s payroll.

El Cerrito’s payroll is significantly higher than that of other California cities of similar size. That’s not just a budget line—it’s a multiplier. Higher salaries lead to much higher pension liabilities, and in El Cerrito’s case, the city’s pension obligations are nearly double those of peer cities. That long-term debt is a massive burden on the budget—and it’s growing.

Behind the scenes, mounting pension obligations—particularly to CalPERS—are putting intense pressure on the city’s finances. It’s increasingly likely that unrestricted reserves are being used to quietly cover these payments. If so, that means the city is spending its last line of defense just to meet recurring costs and is heading woefully toward the minimum amount of general fund unrestricted reserve set by the GFOA.

And they don’t want us to see it.

When You Don’t Report the Number, It Usually Means You Can’t

Cities with strong reserves proudly disclose them. They publish them in budget summaries, audits, and public presentations. El Cerrito doesn’t. That should be a red flag for every taxpayer, homeowner, and voter in the city.

If there were a healthy reserve balance, we’d hear about it.

If there were a plan to restore it, we’d see it.

Instead, all we get is silence—and slide decks designed to distract.

It’s No Longer About Asking Questions—It’s About Changing Leadership

At this point, it’s not enough to ask for clarity. We’ve asked. Financial Advisory Board has asked. Residents have asked. But the silence nothings that matter to us continues.

The election is just over a year away. El Cerrito can’t afford another cycle of budget tricks, hollow reassurances, and unchecked spending.

It’s time to elect people who will hold the City Manager accountable. People who will demand transparency—not just in words, but in budgets and in delivering services to the community. People who understand that a healthy city does not hide its liquidity problems, but one that faces them head-on and plans responsibly for the future.

We don’t need more empty promises. We need to stop running on empty.

El Cerrito Leadership: Delivering on Promises or Just Optics?

With the November 2026 El Cerrito municipal election just over a year away, now is the time for voters to examine whether the city’s leadership is truly delivering on promises—or simply performing for the spotlight.

Since the pandemic, Council member‑turned‑Mayor Wysinger has repeatedly voted to tap into El Cerrito’s unrestricted reserves to plug budget holes. This pattern of drawing on savings has left the city with thinner financial cushions—raising the risk that a downturn could spark cuts to essential services. Instead of rebuilding reserves or reforming expenditure, the city continues a path of short-term fixes—and long-term fragility.

Under Mayor Wysinger’s leadership, the Richmond Street “Complete Streets” redesign is moving forward—touting safety improvements as justification, despite the plan eliminating about two-thirds of street parking. That displacement falls hardest on seniors, disabled residents, and working families who depend on curb access.

But critically, no specific data has been presented to demonstrate Richmond Street is unsafe. Public incident logs show multiple vehicle collisions with injuries—but none involving bicycles, and most at Potrero or side-street intersections, not along the main stretch. Despite the absence of injury claims, the redesign is being implemented in full. Families with young children now face a daily dilemma: unload groceries with no nearby parking, or leave kids unsupervised while retrieving meals. Disabled residents may have to walk long distances from side-street spaces.

In a recent council meeting, Wysinger responded by referencing her own childhood hardship—but countered resident concerns not with data or compromise, but with rhetoric about privilege. Her behavior is her way of getting even with people who have achieved the American dream. But…..It’s not okay to impose hardship on others simply because you’ve experienced hardship, especially when policy impacts our working-class neighbors most.

Mayor Wysinger highlights her significance as El Cerrito’s first out Black lesbian mayor and positions herself as an equity champion. But when her actions—draining reserves and removing parking—negatively impact families, renters, seniors, and people with disabilities, symbolism loses its power against daily challenges.

We should ask: Are policy decisions rooted in empathy and data, or just optics? True equity means resilience for all—not just flashing rainbow banners.

With the 2026 election ahead, El Cerrito residents deserve leadership that lives within its means and meets real needs.

Show the data: where are safety risks on Richmond Street? How often have bicyclists or pedestrians been injured? If the risk isn’t proven, redesigns and sacrifices demand stronger justification.

Policy must integrate input from those most affected. Ideas like one-side parking, permit zones, or accessible side-street drop-offs are scalable if backed by open discussion.

You can make a difference. Attend Council meetings and speak during public comment to bring urgency to real concerns. Demand transparency on reserves—ask how much remains, what’s being planned, and what alternatives exist. Push for Richmond data—request design metrics from Public Works: traffic counts, accidents, and survey results. Start preparing for 2026—endorse candidates, volunteer, or run for office. Bring leaders to the table who match talk with action.

El Cerrito can be inclusive, safe, and financially sensible. But that starts with leaders who govern with accountability, empathy, and data. Carolyn Wysinger’s record of reserve depletion and parking policies serve as a caution—echoes of performative leadership without grounded, community-centered solutions.

This city deserves more than optics. It deserves leadership rooted in evidence, equity, and common sense. Now’s the time to demand it—and vote accordingly.

Gabe Quinto’s Voting Record: Promises vs. Actions

It’s not easy to ask hard questions, especially when public discourse is limited and tightly controlled. However, as the November 2026 election approaches, we must take a clear-eyed, data-driven look at the record of El Cerrito’s longest-serving council member, Gabe Quinto.

Councilmember Quinto often speaks passionately about equity, fiscal responsibility, and public safety. But when you examine his voting record over the past decade, the gaps between his words and his actions become hard to ignore.

A Fan of Chevron, But No Parking for Seniors?

Councilmember Quinto has long been a vocal supporter of Chevron—one of the world’s largest greenhouse gas polluters. Yet this year, he voted to eliminate street parking on Richmond Street, making it harder for elderly and disabled residents to access their own homes. This decision was made over the objections of community members who were directly affected and who offered reasonable alternatives. It’s hard to reconcile his professed values with his vote.

A Record of Spending Increases—Outpacing Inflation

In March 2014, the city’s Finance Director publicly shared that the independent auditor had warned El Cerrito might not be able to continue as a “going concern.” Just months later, Gabe Quinto was elected to the City Council.

In 2013, the General Fund budget was $28.9 million. By 2018, it had grown to $36.6 million—a 26% increase, while inflation (CPI) rose just 16%. That’s a 4.8% annual growth in spending versus a 3% increase in costs. Councilmember Quinto voted for every one of those budgets.

Today, that trend has only accelerated. The FY 2025 General Fund budget is $53.7 million—a 47% increase over seven years. That’s an average of 5.7% growth per year, compared to a CPI increase of just 3.3% per year. And once again, Quinto voted in favor of every one of those budgets.

Since the pandemic, El Cerrito has consistently outspent revenue, draining reserves.

So where is the fiscal prudence?

Promises Made to Seniors—Then Broken

In 2018, Quinto asked voters to support a new real property transfer tax, in part to help fund a permanent home for the senior center. The tax passed.

In 2020, the senior center was permanently closed. And now, Quinto claims the city can’t afford a senior center.

What happened?

El Cerrito is one of the oldest and fastest-aging communities in the Bay Area. But instead of protecting services for seniors, Councilmember Quinto has consistently prioritized large capital projects and consultant contracts—while basic needs for our older residents go unmet.

Big Projects, But Not the Basics

In recent years, Quinto has voted to support:

  • A multi-million-dollar aquatics center upgrade,
  • A library project expected to cost over $100 million over 30 years,
  • Several consultant contracts with limited public accountability.

At the same time, the city couldn’t fund a critically needed fire truck or essential public safety equipment in its latest budget cycle.

Councilmember Quinto says he supports public safety—and we appreciate that. But if public safety is truly a priority, why does it keep falling to the bottom of the funding list? Where’s the substance?

The Role of a Councilmember: Public Service, Not Pet Projects

Our elected officials are supposed to serve the public—not special interests, not political allies, and not their personal agendas. Yet time and again, Quinto has supported costly projects and symbolic spending that don’t reflect the priorities of everyday residents.

Seniors, working families, and small business owners have been left behind. Services that support daily life and community well-being have been deprioritized or ignored.

We need people in office who are willing to represent all residents—not just the loudest advocates or the most well-connected insiders.

Where’s the Public Dialogue?

Council meetings are increasingly scripted. There’s little debate. Few questions are answered. And the public is often relegated to the sidelines.

What’s missing is open, honest discussion about how taxpayer dollars are spent—and how those decisions affect our quality of life. We deserve more than ceremonial speeches. We deserve accountability.

Time for New Leadership

After more than a decade on the council, it’s time to ask: Does this leadership still serve El Cerrito? Is it aligned with our values, our needs, and our hopes for the future?

By every measurable standard, city spending has outpaced inflation. Services have been reduced. Promises to seniors have been broken. And transparency has eroded.

The November 2026 election is our opportunity to course correct.

We need new leadership—leadership that:

  • Prioritizes public good over personal legacy,
  • Listens to residents before casting votes,
  • Fights for core services like public safety and senior care,
  • And puts fiscal sustainability ahead of political symbolism.

We need leaders who don’t just speak well—but who vote well.

Let’s vote for someone who will represent all of us—not just pet projects, not just consultants, and not just the politically connected.

Let’s vote for someone who remembers what public service is supposed to be.

The El Cerrito Democratic Machine Is Failing Us

A micro blog

For years, the El Cerrito Democratic Club and its political allies have backed the same cast of characters—Greg Lyman, Gabe Quinto, Carolyn Wysinger, and their revolving-door circle of endorsements. What do they all have in common? A long record of prioritizing their own egos and personal agendas over the real needs of El Cerrito residents.

Let’s not forget: This is the crew that helped drive our city to the brink of insolvency. They’ve rubber-stamped budgets full of gimmicks, ignored clear financial warning signs, and refused to hold the City Manager accountable.

And just recently, Mayor Wysinger used her platform to publicly belittle residents for voicing concerns—residents who’ve never caused her harm but simply dared to speak up.

This isn’t leadership. It’s self gratification. It’s the abuse of power. And it’s a clear sign that the ECDC machine has lost its way.

But there’s hope. William Ktsanes was elected to the City Council without their blessing—proof that it’s possible to win by speaking truth to power and connecting directly with voters. His election was a turning point. It shows that we don’t need to accept the status quo. It shows that candidates who care about fiscal responsibility, community needs, and transparent governance can break through the noise.

We’re little more than a year away from the next City Council election. Let this be a wake-up call: We don’t have to keep electing the same insiders and expecting different results. We can choose new leadership. We can support people who serve the public—not themselves.

Their voting records speak loudly

Let’s make it happen in November 2026.

El Cerrito’s S&P Credit Review Raises More Questions Than Answers

Standard & Poor’s recently included El Cerrito on its U.S. Public Finance Annual Reviews Processed list—a standard part of S&P’s yearly routine for all rated entities. On the surface, this seems uneventful. The notice clearly states that this is not a rating action and only signals the completion of a routine review. So, why does it matter?

Because what’s not being said may be just as important as what is.

If the city were anticipating good news—an upgrade or even a positive outlook—it’s likely we would have already heard about it. Municipalities often move quickly to tout improved ratings as evidence of sound fiscal management. The silence from El Cerrito suggests that no such announcement is coming.

What the Review Means—and Doesn’t Mean

The S&P review does not automatically lead to a change in rating. However, if S&P analysts see red flags in a city’s financials, operations, or economic forecast, they can escalate the case to their credit committee. This process typically takes place 2 to 6 weeks after the initial review and precedes any public change in rating or outlook. The city is usually notified in advance, giving officials time to provide clarifying information or context.

So far, there’s been no word from City Hall. Not a press release, not a mention at council meetings. But what we do see is a rush to add funding to the Section 115 hoping this will ease concerns about the CALPers pension expenses.

Why It Matters

El Cerrito continues to operate under a BBB credit rating—barely above junk. The city’s fiscal challenges are well-documented: repeated operating deficits, mounting pension costs, and a persistent reliance on reserves. If the S&P review results in a downgrade or even a revised outlook to “negative,” the consequences could be significant:

Higher borrowing costs for capital projects Further erosion of public trust in city management Tighter budget constraints that force hard choices on services

Is This Normal?

Yes—being reviewed is normal. But not communicating during a time of scrutiny is not a good look. When other cities receive upgrades or reaffirmations, they usually don’t miss the chance to make it known. El Cerrito’s silence is telling.

What to Watch

Will S&P escalate El Cerrito’s file for credit committee review? Will the city address the review publicly before S&P acts? What steps, if any, is the city taking to mitigate risk and strengthen its financial position?

A Call for Transparency

Residents deserve more than last-minute disclosures. Transparency isn’t just about reporting outcomes—it’s about keeping the public informed when stakes are high. The city should proactively brief the community on the outcome of the review, including any actions being taken to strengthen its financial standing.

Don’t wait for a ratings downgrade to start paying attention. Demand answers now. Ask the city to share what they know and what they’re doing.

👉 Email the council and city manager

👉 Stay informed—your tax dollars and city services are on the line

Demanding Honest Climate Leadership

By a Concerned El Cerrito Citizen

At the July 15 City Council meeting, something fundamental became painfully clear: the real greenhouse-gas giants—the military-industrial complex, Big Oil and refineries, industrial agriculture, and the chronic underfunding of clean, long-range mass transit—are going unchallenged, while working-class residents, seniors, and disabled individuals on Richmond Street are the ones being asked to sacrifice.

Let’s call it what it is: a distraction. A cosmetic fix that sidesteps the real contributors to climate change.

In a functioning democracy, citizens are entitled to informed consent—or dissent. On July 15, that right felt hollow. The Council pushed forward with significant parking reductions, citing “safety” without presenting meaningful data. No bicycle-involved injuries were noted on Richmond Street. The plan may feel good, but it solves nothing and creates many problems to the residents on Richmond Street.

Meanwhile, Liberty Street—less busy, already one-way, and a natural fit for bike lanes—was left out of the conversation. Instead, we were asked to imagine an 80-year-old biking to Monterey Market in Berkeley, then hauling groceries up the hill. This isn’t policy—it’s fantasy.

What about families with two cars and short driveways? What about those with mobility challenges? What about families with small children? Do you take groceries home while leaving them unattended in the car? Or do they leave those littles at home while they trek to the car to get the groceries? Those practical concerns were dismissed by those living in an alternate reality where symbolism is mistaken for substance.

Here’s the truth: this isn’t about reducing emissions. It’s about performative politics. If the City were serious about addressing GHG emissions, they’d push for regional transit solutions, not gut neighborhood parking.

And let’s not forget: Councilmember Gabe Quinto voted for the Richmond Street bike lane—despite having spent his entire elected career championing Chevron, one of the world’s biggest polluters. The contradiction is stunning. You can’t prop up fossil fuel interests for years and then pretend bike lanes make up for it.

Residents who question this narrative risk being labeled reactionary, even MAGA, which is laughable. It’s the oldest trick in the political playbook: label and dismiss anyone who deviates from the script. But many of us are simply tired of the same two-party shell game, where both sides enable the status quo.

I applaud Councilmember William Ktsanes. He may not share every view I’ve expressed here, but he stands on his own convictions. That takes courage.

This resident has lived in El Cerrito since 1976. They have seen the decline—not just in climate, but in political integrity. I’m not running for office. I prefer to speak freely, without the burden of party politics or performative alliances.

We deserve better leadership. We deserve vision:

Investment in real mass transit, not just trendy striping on streets. A peace dividend, redirecting military excess to infrastructure. Genuine policies that respect and include the elderly, disabled, and working class

Until we demand it, we’ll continue to receive distractions like this one—and the people who have benefited from the current system will continue to pretend it’s progress.

The election is just over a year away.

Thank You to El Cerrito Daily News

At a time when too many residents feel unheard and overlooked, The El Cerrito Daily News has become a powerful force for civic awareness and engagement. We extend deep thanks to the founding members who stepped forward to shine light on our city’s decisions, priorities, and gaps. You’ve created a much-needed platform where truth can be told plainly, and residents can speak openly.

Among the issues you’ve helped elevate is one of the most egregious: El Cerrito is the only city along the San Pablo Avenue corridor that no longer has a dedicated senior center.

Let that sink in.

Every neighboring city—from Oakland to Hercules—has committed space, resources, and programming to serve their growing older adult populations. El Cerrito, by contrast, shuttered its Midtown Activity Center during the pandemic and never reopened it. A misleading “Senior Center” sign still hangs over an empty room near City Hall, but the real heart of senior services is gone.

The data is clear. El Cerrito’s population is aging—nearly 27% of residents are over 60, far higher than the state average. And yet, city leadership has allowed senior services to wither, scattering a few programs across church basements and multi-use rooms.

Senior centers save lives. They reduce isolation, provide access to critical services, and foster connection, dignity, and joy. Before it was closed, El Cerrito’s center offered everything from exercise classes to tax help, tech support, meals, and legal advice.

We’re grateful that The El Cerrito Daily News has helped document this decline. And we’re equally grateful for the volunteers behind the El Cerrito Senior Center Action Committee, who are working to change it. Their effort to partner with Contra Costa County Supervisor John Gioia to restore the Veterans Memorial Building on Stockton Avenue is a step in the right direction—but they shouldn’t have to do it alone.

Thank you again to the founding members of The El Cerrito Daily News. Your work is helping us tell the full story—including the one our city would rather leave out.

Now it’s time to act.

El Cerrito’s Budget: Eight Years of Red Flags, Backed by Data

El Cerrito’s budget problems are no secret—but too often, they’re discussed in the abstract. This post provides clear, verifiable evidence that over the past eight years, the City has been living beyond its means. The numbers are drawn directly from official city documents and CalPERS reports. The analysis is nonpartisan and was created to inform—not alarm—residents and policymakers alike.

Rising Pension Debt: The Classic Safety UAL

The unfunded liability (UAL) for the City’s Classic Safety pension plan has grown from 38 million dollars in 2014 to nearly 89 million dollars in 2023.

This chart, based on CalPERS actuarial valuations, shows the year-by-year rise:

These numbers matter. Every dollar spent servicing pension debt is a dollar that can’t be spent on fire protection, police, or infrastructure.

The Unassigned Fund Balance: A Warning Sign

For four consecutive years, El Cerrito’s unassigned General Fund balance was negative—a sign the City lacked even the most basic fiscal cushion.

A Broader Pattern of Unsustainable Spending

Additional analysis (available in the full report) reveals the following:

  • – General Fund expenditures have grown much faster than inflation, particularly in the core Fire department.
    – Revenues have not kept pace, leading to repeated operating shortfalls.
    – The City’s Pavement Condition Index (PCI) has hovered at dangerously low levels.
    – El Cerrito’s credit rating was downgraded multiple times over the past decade—signaling investor concern over the City’s financial management.

These trends are presented in an interactive dashboard, along with downloadable data and documentation:

🔗 View Dashboard on Tableau Public: https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/ira.sharenow

🔗 See Full GitHub Project with Code and Data: https://github.com/IraSharenow100/el-cerrito-budget-project

What Needs to Happen

The City Council and management need to:

  • – Be transparent about the structural imbalance between revenue and expenses.
    – Avoid new capital obligations (like a library that may cost over $100 million over the next 30 years) until pension liabilities are better controlled.
    – Consider modest new revenue sources, such as a temporary parcel tax to fund pension stabilization.
    – Set policies for managing one-time surpluses and long-term capital needs.

This isn’t about blame. It’s about clarity.

The longer hard decisions are delayed, the fewer options the City will have. The data is there. The time to act is now.

Displacement Disguised as Progress

It’s hard to believe what the mayor said during the recent debate over the Richmond Street bike lane project. In an effort to justify a deeply flawed ordinance, she accused longtime residents of “appropriating the language of the oppressed.” Somehow, homeowners—many of them retired, working-class, or first-time buyers—were cast as the oppressor class.

This isn’t equity. It’s a power play.

Richmond Street is one of the most affordable neighborhoods in El Cerrito. One resident who lived on nearby Liberty Street for seven years before moving up the hill remembers it well. The people there aren’t privileged elites—they’re carpenters, teachers, postal workers, and bus drivers. Many scraped together what they could to buy their first (and often only) home. Now, they’re being told they’re standing in the way of progress.

Let’s be honest: this ordinance harms them. That’s the con. And the “pro”? A self-congratulatory narrative where the City Council gets to claim it’s saving the environment, and residents up the hill get to signal virtue by saying they live in a progressive, climate-conscious city.

But the mayor didn’t stop there. Her actions were more than condescending—they were colonial in nature. She used her political power to impose a plan on a working-class neighborhood without meaningful input, then cloaked that harm in moral language. That’s not leadership. That’s the behavior of a colonizer—using authority to displace and disrupt others, then justifying it as the greater good.

It’s especially galling when there are plenty of alternative bike routes already in use. The Ohlone Greenway is a safe, car-free corridor. Cyclists have navigated El Cerrito safely for years. And yet, the city chose to remove parking in a dense residential neighborhood—knowing full well it would hit the elderly, the disabled, and low-income residents the hardest.

Some bike lane advocates would gladly eliminate cars entirely—not because of climate concerns, but because they don’t own one. That aloofness—the disdain for anyone who doesn’t fit their lifestyle—is actually the language of the oppressor.

Meanwhile, investment firms are watching closely. Medium- and high-density developments are coming, and policies like these make it easier to force them through—especially when the people in the way are cast as obstacles instead of neighbors.

This isn’t about bikes. It’s about who gets to live here—and who doesn’t.

So no, this isn’t justice. And it’s certainly not equity. It’s displacement, disguised as progress.

#ElCerrito #ElCerritoPolitics #RichmondStreet #ElCerritoCityCouncil #ElCerritoResidents #DisplacementDisguisedAsProgress #EquityOrErasure #PowerAndParking #WorkingClassVoices #UrbanColonialism #FalseProgress #BikeLaneDebate #TransitJustice #StreetEquity #MobilityForAll #CommunityVoices #LocalGovernmentMatters #AccountabilityNow #WeDeserveBetter

El Cerrito Moves Forward with Richmond Street Bike Plan—Without Richmond Street residents on Board

On July 15, 2025, the El Cerrito City Council voted to proceed with a controversial redesign of Richmond Street, which eliminates nearly two-thirds of on-street parking. Despite passionate opposition from many residents, the revised plan is moving forward with little interest in compromise from city leadership.

Residents who live on Richmond Street say they had little opportunity for meaningful input—only to learn, after the fact, that a major change was coming. Some pleaded with the council to consider a less extreme approach, such as removing parking on only one side of the street to preserve at least half the spaces. They also pointed to safety data: just one injury accident has been reported on this eight-block stretch in the past decade—none involving bicycles.

Others raised serious concerns about accessibility. The revised plan shifts disabled parking to side streets, an unnecessary hardship for seniors and residents with mobility challenges.

Proponents Cite Sustainability, Critics See Overreach

Bike lane supporters argue that El Cerrito must invest in infrastructure to reduce car use and support more cycling. They envision a network that makes biking safer and more appealing, especially for faster-moving e-bikes, which they say aren’t suitable for the nearby Ohlone Greenway.

But opponents ask: why push such an aggressive plan where there is no demonstrated safety issue—especially when the tradeoff means losing neighborhood access, inconveniencing seniors, and reducing quality of life?

Ktsanes Offers a Compromise—The Council Refuses

In an effort to find middle ground, Councilmember William Ktsanes offered a motion to have staff explore reasonable alternatives, including:

Options that minimize parking loss. A version that preserves at least 50% of the parking. An East Side Bicycle Boulevard alternative is already included in the city’s own transportation plan. A public hearing to discuss all options side-by-side

It was a practical proposal that acknowledged the complexity of the issue and the concerns of both sides.

Not one council member seconded it.

Mayor Dismisses Resident Concerns as “Privilege”

The conversation veered away from listening to a dismissive and personal tone. Councilmember Lisa Motoyama dismissed the city’s own 2016 plan, arguing instead that current “best practices” should take precedence. She claimed that if a better idea existed, the public works director would have taken it into account. This statement elicited audible coughs and chuckles from the crowd.

Mayor Carolyn Wysinger went further—attacking residents who voiced concerns about losing parking. She labeled them “privileged” and accused them of “appropriating the language of the oppressed.” Her remarks suggested that because she had experienced hardship, others should endure the loss of convenience and accessibility. But the rest of us know that it’s not okay to inflict harm on others simply because she has endured hardship.

Let’s be clear: This isn’t about privilege. It’s about reasonable expectations. Residents, particularly long-standing elderly homeowners, should be able to carry groceries from their cars, park near their homes, and access safe, nearby disabled parking. Dismissing those concerns outright is not leadership—it’s arrogance.

The Clock Is Ticking—and So Is the Public’s Patience

The mayor’s term doesn’t end until 2026, but the decisions made now will shape El Cerrito’s future for decades. Gabe Quinto is also up for reelection next year. The residents of this city deserve leaders who respect their voices—not just follow a checklist of ideological goals.

We’ve seen this before: plans that don’t consider those most negatively impacted, questionable spending, and leadership unwilling to listen. El Cerrito can’t afford more decisions like this—especially with budget challenges still looming.

📣 It’s time to pay attention, get engaged, and prepare to vote.

If this council won’t listen now, we must be ready to elect people who will. Start asking tough questions. Show up to meetings. And come November 2026, vote for leadership that values public input, fiscal discipline, and common-sense solutions.

Choose wisely. El Cerrito deserves better.