El Cerrito’s Library Plan: Vague Before the Vote, Decided After

One of the most troubling patterns in El Cerrito’s governance is how little concrete information is shared before voters are asked to approve new taxes — only for detailed plans to surface after the initiative passes, when residents no longer have meaningful leverage. The proposed library tax measure is a prime example.

Parking Details: Selective, Incomplete, and After-the-Fact

Former Mayor Greg Lyman recently referenced parking arrangements for a potential new library — noting that the current library has only 12 parking spaces, including two handicap spaces tucked behind the building. He also mentioned that on nights, weekends, and holidays, school parking lots are made available to library patrons, with street parking filling in the gaps during regular hours.
For the new library proposal, City staff indicated that 160 BART parking spaces would be available for library events on nights, weekends, and holidays. Beyond that, library visitors would again rely primarily on street parking in residential neighborhoods, some of which may be converted to handicap parking and marked for two-hour free use.
What Lyman didn’t say: there is still no parking map, no parking study, no formal analysis, and no site plan that explains how this would actually work day-to-day. The City hasn’t produced any comprehensive parking or circulation plan for voters to review.

Yes, There Was a Survey — But It Was Weaponized, Not Used to Inform

Supporters of the measure claim there’s “no need for detailed information until after the tax passes.” Yet the City commissioned a survey and published the results, making them public. Instead of using the study to engage residents in shaping a transparent, cost-conscious plan, Greg Lyman selectively cited favorable information, cherry-picking data points to support advocacy talking points.

The survey could have been used to surface tradeoffs, explore site options, or identify parking challenges. Instead, voters are being handed soundbites, not substance.

“Trust Us — Details Will Come After You Vote”

Proponents have said, essentially:

“Until the tax measure passes, there is no need for the detailed information you seek.”
Only after the vote, they say, will the City and Contra Costa County Library provide detailed parking and siting information so that elected officials can make a decision on where to build. In other words: approve the tax first, then we’ll tell you what you’re getting.
This is backward. Voters are being asked to approve a permanent property tax without knowing:

  • Where the library will be located
  • How much it will cost to build
  • How much it will cost to operate and maintain
  • What parking or traffic impacts will be
  • Whether alternative sites — like the Old Marshalls Store — could deliver a library more quickly and at a fraction of the cost

A Blank Check for City Hall

The measure doesn’t specify a library location by design. Once it passes, planning begins, and site selection, design, lease negotiations, and operating decisions will be made by the City of El Cerrito and Contra Costa County Library — not the voters paying the bill.
As one concerned resident asked:

“Why would anybody support a taxpayer-funded ballot measure as nebulous as the Citizens Ballot measure when the total cost of building and operating and maintaining a library building isn’t known or where it would be located?”


It’s a fair question. The Old Marshalls Store, for example, already exists, has abundant parking, and could be converted for library use at far lower cost — potentially avoiding new taxes altogether. But practical, cost-conscious alternatives like this aren’t being promoted.

Bottom Line

This isn’t about community-driven planning. It’s about securing a blank check and then moving forward with whatever plan City Hall and the County wanted all along.
Vote NO on this measure — not because you oppose libraries, but because you support transparency, fiscal responsibility, and meaningful public involvement before the tax is approved, not after.

📌 Fact Box: What El Cerrito Isn’t Telling You Up Front

Parking Today

  • Current library has 12 parking spaces, including 2 handicap spaces, behind the building.
  • Additional parking relies on street parking in a residential neighborhood.
  • School lots are only available nights, weekends, and holidays.

Parking Promises for the New Library

  • 160 BART parking spaces may be available for library events nights, weekends, and holidays.
  • Daytime parking will primarily be on-street, with some spaces converted to handicap and others limited to two-hour free parking.
  • No parking map, study, or traffic analysis has been published.

Survey Reality

  • The City did conduct a survey and made the details public.
  • Instead of using it to inform residents, advocates cherry-picked data to support their arguments.
  • No comprehensive analysis of costs, alternatives, or site impacts was shared with voters.

Key Quote from Proponents

“Until the tax measure passes, there is no need for the detailed information you seek.”

What’s Missing Before the Vote

  • 📍 Library location
  • 💰 Total construction cost
  • 🧾 Operating and maintenance costs
  • 🚗 Traffic and parking impacts
  • 🏢 Consideration of lower-cost alternatives like the Old Marshalls Store

Bottom Line:
📝 Voters are being asked to approve a permanent property tax without critical details. Once the measure passes, the City and County make the decisions — not the voters.

This article is based on public information, statements by Greg Lyman, City staff comments, and documentation shared by concerned citizens seeking transparency in El Cerrito’s library planning process.

The People You’re Leaving Behind

(This blog was influenced by a social media post that raised important concerns about how leadership responds to residents.)

Mayor Wysinger,

Your handling of the Richmond Street project reflects a troubling disregard for the people who are most vulnerable in this city — the elderly, the disabled, and multigenerational families — and a pattern of dismissiveness that runs counter to the basic principles of ethical leadership.

A just leader listens most carefully to those who will be most affected by change. When longtime residents raise concerns about access, safety, or being cut off from their homes, that isn’t privilege — that’s lived reality. Dismissing those concerns with terms like “performative activism” or framing them as obstructionist doesn’t make you brave. It makes you careless with other people’s lives.

A truly just vision for the future never treats elders as disposable. It never builds policy on the assumption that walking farther, enduring more pain, or navigating inaccessible infrastructure is just something people should “tough out.” The measure of any community isn’t how sleek its plans are — it’s how it treats those whose bodies, needs, and histories aren’t convenient.

The rhetoric you’ve used — suggesting you “can’t find empathy,” brushing off the loss of curb access as irrelevant, implying that people in houses don’t represent the working class — shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the people you claim to serve. This city is full of homes with three or four generations under one roof. People with mobility impairments, caregivers doing double shifts, elders who raised children on these streets. If they’re not part of your vision, then your vision isn’t one of equity — it’s one of exclusion.

Leadership demands more than passion. It demands restraint, accountability, and the humility to serve those who are not politically useful. You have chosen to moralize instead of empathize — and that choice has consequences.

There is still time to show the residents of this city — all of them — that you are capable of leadership grounded in care, not contempt.

If you share these concerns, reach out to the El Cerrito City Council and make your voice heard:

Funding Priorities: El Cerrito Library and TOD Projects

October 7, 2025 — The City of El Cerrito continues to act as though the proposed library initiative has already passed—even though it hasn’t. On tonight’s City Council agenda, two significant consent calendar items reveal just how far preparatory work has gone behind the scenes. While preparatory work is expected, the scope and timing of these actions make it clear that the City is fully committed to pushing the project forward, regardless of the outcome at the ballot box.

Item F: MOU with BART Police

Item F authorizes the City Manager to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the BART Police Department outlining policing responsibilities for the El Cerrito Plaza BART Station Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Project. This is a proactive move that anticipates development—including the library—moving ahead. It formalizes commitments typically seen once a project has been approved and funded, not while it remains hypothetical.

Item G: $391,000 More for Consulting Services

Item G proposes a $391,000 increase to the Ghirardelli Associates consulting contract for additional construction management services tied to the Del Norte TOD Complete Streets Project. This funding was not previously budgeted. Yet it’s included alongside proclamations and committee appointments in the consent calendar, signaling that this is seen as routine business rather than a significant policy decision.

Quiet Momentum Before Public Approval

Both items highlight the significant groundwork being laid, despite the library initiative’s uncertain status. By the time voters are asked to decide, multiple agreements, consulting contracts, and operational arrangements will already be in place. This approach creates momentum and financial commitments that can influence future decisions, making it challenging to distinguish between preparatory activities and those that effectively advance the project.

Finding Funds When They Want To

Perhaps most striking is the ease with which funding is located for these efforts. The City frequently cites financial constraints when it comes to maintaining infrastructure and services. Yet, when it comes to the Plaza or the library TOD vision, money magically appears. This selective prioritization sends a clear signal: when the City wants something, it finds a way to fund it—whether or not the voters have approved it.

📺 Tune In or Attend Tonight

The City Council meeting starts at 6:00 PM tonight, Tuesday, October 7, 2025, at 10890 San Pablo Avenue.
Residents can attend in person or watch live online at www.elcerrito.gov/CouncilMeetingMaterials.

If you care about transparency and fiscal responsibility, tonight’s meeting is worth your attention.

El Cerrito’s Workplace Standards

El Cerrito’s Leadership Crisis: Culture, Costs, and Consequences

El Cerrito is in trouble. Services are declining, costs are rising, and the city’s workplace culture is not productive. This environment doesn’t just erode morale—it drives away top talent and makes recruitment nearly impossible. What’s left is mediocrity at best—and dysfunction at worst.

Residents Deserve Better

El Cerrito residents expect integrity, professionalism, and accountability from their city government. But poor personnel practices and the failure to develop basic workplace standards have enabled misconduct to thrive. Instead of implementing meaningful reform, city leaders continue to use taxpayer dollars to settle claims—repeating the cycle of mismanagement without consequence.

How El Cerrito Fails Its Workforce—and Its Residents

The City’s personnel policies fall far short of ethical standards. Key failures include:

  • Disregard for Laws and Policies: Misconduct is overlooked. Favored employees are shielded while legitimate complaints go ignored.
  • Vague and Inconsistent Standards: Policies are unclear, enabling selective enforcement and leaving employees vulnerable.
  • No Protection for Whistleblowers: Those who speak up face retaliation with no meaningful safeguards.
  • Lack of Leadership Accountability: Supervisors are rarely held responsible for misconduct.
  • Misuse of Public Funds: Rather than fixing systemic problems, the City pours money into preventable legal settlements.

The Financial Toll on Taxpayers

El Cerrito’s failures have cost residents dearly. The city paid $544,000 to settle a single sexual harassment case. This year, it allocated another $60,000 for a new incident—alongside $261,623 shifted to Human Resources and $50,000 set aside for additional “settlements and judgments.” How many more payouts will residents be forced to fund before real change is made?

Unprofessional Conduct at the Top

City leadership sets the tone—and in El Cerrito, that tone is unacceptable. During a public city council meeting, the City Manager was overheard telling the Public Works Director to “shut the f*** up.” This vulgar outburst is more than offensive—it’s emblematic of a culture of disrespect that puts the city at risk of legal and reputational harm.

Mayor Carolyn Wysinger recently dismissed residents’ concerns about losing parking, calling them “privileged” and accusing them of misusing the “language of the oppressed.” In doing so, she played the race card—although Richmond Street is home to some of the city’s less affluent, working-class residents. She implied that because she had faced hardship, others should accept reduced access and convenience as well. But hardship doesn’t justify ignoring others’ needs.

This isn’t about privilege—it’s about reasonable expectations.

Homeowners- who pay more taxes than anyone, especially seniors, handicapped and should be able to park near their homes, carry groceries, and access nearby disabled parking. Ignoring those concerns isn’t leadership—it’s arrogance and an abuse of her power.

Both Mayor Wysinger and Councilmember Gabe Quinto are up for reelection in 2026. Residents deserve leaders who listen—not ones who push ideology at their expense.

We’ve seen this pattern before: rushed plans, questionable spending, and dismissive leadership. El Cerrito can’t afford more of the same, especially with ongoing budget issues.

Ethical Concerns and Election Influence

Just days before the November 2022 election, the City hosted a “Lunch with the Mayor and City Manager.” Mayor Gabe Quinto, whose seat was on the ballot, participated in the event alongside City Manager Karen Pinkos. Many residents questioned the timing and propriety, citing potential violations of the California Political Reform Act and the ICMA Code of Ethics, which emphasize impartiality and avoidance of conflicts of interest.

A Broken Culture: Plums and Pills

There’s a saying: some workplaces are plums—healthy and high-functioning. Others are pills—toxic and dysfunctional. Even the most capable leaders can’t thrive in systems designed to fail. Culture always outweighs strategy. El Cerrito’s culture must be overhauled if it hopes to attract and retain the talent needed to serve its residents.

Take Action: Demand Accountability

El Cerrito residents must stop funding systemic dysfunction. Contact the City Council and demand immediate reforms. Ask that your message be included in the next council meeting packet:

What Needs to Change

To restore trust and protect both employees and taxpayers, El Cerrito must:

➡️ Establish Clear Standards – Define expectations for workplace behavior and enforce them for all employees, including leadership.
➡️ Ensure Consistent Enforcement – Eliminate favoritism and apply rules fairly and uniformly.
➡️ Implement Independent Oversight – Review complaints through an impartial process and publicly report settlement spending.

A city’s credibility is defined by how it responds to misconduct. El Cerrito has failed this test. It’s time for residents to demand better—before more taxpayer dollars are wasted and more harm is done.

El Cerrito Library Proposal: Who Really Benefits?

El Cerrito is moving ahead with plans to build a new library at Fairmount and Liberty, near the Plaza BART station. At first glance, the idea of a modern library sounds appealing—who doesn’t want better facilities for families, students, and lifelong learners? However, upon closer examination, serious disadvantages become apparent.

This isn’t about opposing libraries. It’s about ensuring that taxpayer dollars are used wisely, fairly, and in ways that truly serve the entire community of El Cerrito. Unfortunately, this proposal falls short.

Who Benefits—and Who Doesn’t

El Cerrito is a city of hills and flats, ranging from just 20 feet above sea level to nearly 1,000 feet. That topography shapes everything about how residents access city services.

  • Flatland residents near the Plaza will benefit most. Many can walk, bike, or use the Ohlone Greenway to get there in minutes.
  • Mid-elevation residents may find it manageable but will often need to drive.
  • Hill residents, who already pay some of the highest property taxes in the city, will benefit the least. With steep terrain, poor sidewalks, and limited transit, cars are a necessity. Without dedicated parking at the new library, the trip will be difficult if not prohibitive.

It’s an uncomfortable truth: the people paying the most will be the ones with the least access.

📊 Fact Box: Who Really Benefits?

El Cerrito Elevation Range: 20 – 934 feet
Flatland Residents (near Plaza BART):

  • Walkable & bikeable access
  • Direct Ohlone Greenway connection
  • Benefit most from the location
    Mid-Elevation Residents:
  • About a 5–10 minute drive
  • Limited walkability
  • Impacted but manageable
    Hills Residents (highest taxpayers):
  • Driving is required due to steep terrain, poor sidewalks, and limited transit
  • No dedicated parking at the library site
  • Benefit the least, despite paying the most
    Albany Residents (who will not be taxed for the library):
  • Flat, walkable neighborhoods directly connected by the Ohlone Greenway
  • Easier access than many El Cerrito Hills households

A Library for Albany?

There’s another wrinkle. The Plaza site may actually serve Albany residents better than many in El Cerrito. Albany’s neighborhoods near Solano Avenue are flat, walkable, and directly connected by the Ohlone Greenway. It would be easier for an Albany family to walk or bike to the new library than for many families in El Cerrito Hills to drive there.

Are we about to build a library that Albany residents enjoy more than some of our own taxpayers?

Parking and Accessibility

The plan includes no dedicated parking. For Hills residents, that means:

  • Circling already crowded shopping-center streets for a space.
  • Competing with customers at Lucky’s and other Plaza businesses.
  • Or simply skipping the library altogether.

Flatland residents will hardly notice the difference—they can walk or bike. But the lack of parking cements a two-tier system: easy access for some, and unnecessary obstacles for others.

A Pattern of Overpromising

El Cerrito has a track record of raising taxes while services decline. To move forward with a project that creates inequities in access, while asking residents for yet another financial commitment, is irresponsible. Our city should be leading with transparency, numbers, and fairness—not vague promises and glossy renderings.

Credit Where It’s Due

Much of the research and analysis behind these concerns was first shared by a concerned citizen on social media. Their work underscores what city leaders should have done from the start: engage residents honestly, show the data, and evaluate the plan from the perspective of all neighborhoods, not just those nearest the Plaza.

🛑 Don’t Sign the Petition

A library should unite our city, not divide it. Until El Cerrito leaders present a plan that is fair, accessible, and fiscally responsible, we should not move forward.


🛑 Do not sign the petition for this proposal. Withholding your signature sends a clear message: we will not accept another costly project that burdens taxpayers and leaves too many residents behind.

El Cerrito Deserves Better: Why It’s Time to Move On from Gabe Quinto

For more than a decade, Councilmember Gabe Quinto has sat on the El Cerrito City Council. With his visibility at community events and a polished public persona, he’s managed to remain in office. But when you peel back the layers, one fact becomes undeniable: he has done nothing to strengthen this city or to meet residents’ needs.

Instead of leadership, Quinto has given us optics. Instead of solutions, he has given us meaningless soundbites. And now, with another election on the horizon in November 2026, residents must ask themselves: has El Cerrito benefited in any meaningful way from his time on the council?

Deficit Budgets, Year After Year

The financial health of El Cerrito has been a recurring crisis. Our pension liability stands at $83 million. The city has leaned on reserves to cover shortfalls instead of fixing underlying problems.

Who pays the price? Residents. Families paying some of the highest property taxes in the region have watched their services shrink. Parents have fewer library hours for their children. Seniors have lost access to their center. Residents and contractors deal with city offices closed every other Friday.

And yet, through it all, Quinto has consistently voted for deficit budgets. Not once has he challenged the cycle of short-term fixes or pressed for real reform. His approach has been to avoid hard choices, leaving residents to shoulder the consequences.

Headlines Over Substance

If you’ve listened to Quinto in council meetings, you know the pattern. He talks about relationships, community spirit, or personal anecdotes. But when it comes time to address tough issues — from financial sustainability to accountability — his words stop short.

Residents don’t need empty headlines. They need solutions. They need a councilmember who will fight to restore services, reduce waste, and put residents’ needs ahead of political convenience. Instead, Quinto has chosen the easy role of visibility without responsibility.

Zero Impact for the Community

After all these years on the council, what has Quinto actually delivered? The answer is nothing of substance.

For seniors, his leadership allowed the closure of the senior center, stripping away a vital hub for health, social support, and community connection. For families, he’s stood by as library hours were reduced, cutting off access to resources for children, students, and lifelong learners. For small businesses, he’s offered no vision for creating a stable, supportive environment where local shops can thrive instead of struggling against higher tax costs and reduced city services.

He voted to eliminate parking on Richmond Street, impacting our neighbors who have one car garages, are seniors, disabled or have small children.

A true leader would have fought for these residents. Instead, Quinto has offered ceremonial remarks and little else. He has left no mark of meaningful leadership.

Campaign Contributions Without a Clear Agenda

Even outside the council chamber, Quinto’s record raises questions. A significant portion of his campaign contributions are directed toward other campaigns rather than building his own platform or vision for El Cerrito.

This may strengthen his political alliances, but it does nothing for residents who want clarity about his priorities. What is his plan for restoring services? For stabilizing finances? For reducing liabilities? The truth is, he doesn’t have one.

Gabe Quinto’s Record

Budgets: Voted for repeated deficits, deepening financial instability. Services: Library hours reduced, city offices closed biweekly, senior programs eliminated — never restored. Pensions: $89 million liability and growing. Impact on Residents: Seniors lost their center, families lost library access, businesses got no support.

Agenda: No plan of his own; contributions redirected to others’ campaigns.

November 2026: El Cerrito’s Chance for Change

Gabe Quinto’s current term ends in 2026, and he will be up for reelection in the November 2026 election. That election isn’t just about one seat — it’s about the kind of leadership we expect in El Cerrito.

Do we want councilmembers who show up for photo ops but fail to fight for services? Or do we want leaders who care about families, seniors, and businesses — and who will do the hard work of confronting financial realities?

We cannot afford another four years of deficit budgets, service cuts, and no solutions.

NEXT STEPS

In November 2026, El Cerrito residents will have a choice:

❌ Continue with deficit budgets and service cuts.

❌ Continue with leaders who offer visibility but no vision.

❌ Continue with Gabe Quinto.

Or:

✅ Vote for leadership with substance.

✅ Vote for leaders who care about families, seniors, and small businesses.

✅ Vote for accountability, reform, and results.

El Cerrito deserves better. In 2026, let’s make the change and vote Gabe Quinto out. Our city cannot afford another term of empty headlines.

El Cerrito’s Bond Upgrade: Progress, But Claiming Victory Far Too Early

El Cerrito’s leaders are eager to celebrate. Last month, the City announced an upgrade to its bond rating, which highlights its financial strength and responsible management. On the surface, that sounds like a success story—especially for a city that once ranked among the bottom 3% of California municipalities for fiscal health.

But peel the onion. The State Auditor’s office still places El Cerrito in the bottom 20% of over 400 California cities. Coming off the formal High-Risk Watch List does not mean El Cerrito is suddenly healthy—it only means others are in worse shape. Declaring victory now is misleading and premature.

Progress That Doesn’t Tell the Whole Story

Yes, El Cerrito has made progress. The City has strengthened financial reporting and shown slight improvements in reserves. But much of that progress was built on one-time infusions. The $6.2 million in federal American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds temporarily padded the General Fund. Those dollars are now spent, and the City’s own projections show reserves dipping below policy thresholds by FY 26/27. That’s not fiscal discipline—it’s borrowed time.

The State Auditor evaluates liquidity, reserves, pension obligations, and long-term liabilities. On each of these, El Cerrito remains below average. The removal from the “high-risk” designation is a technical reprieve, not a clean bill of health. Residents should understand: being less harmful is not the same as being strong.

A Heavy Pension Burden

At the heart of El Cerrito’s challenge lies its pension liability, which exceeds $80 million. That liability reflects a decades-long pattern of carrying more staff—and more high-cost management positions—than peer cities of similar size.

El Cerrito employs four battalion chiefs in its Fire Department, along with a fire marshal and a Fire Chief. The City Manager’s Office includes a City Manager, an Assistant City Manager, and an Executive Assistant to the City Manager. For a city with just under 26,000 residents, this is an unusually top-heavy structure. Other California cities of comparable population operate leaner organizations with fewer layers of management. Every one of those positions carries salary, benefits, and pension obligations that compound over time.

Residents Pay More, While Services Shrink

Instead of tackling structural costs, El Cerrito has leaned on raising or extending taxes. The Real Property Transfer Tax (RPTT), adopted in 2018, was initially proposed as part of a temporary fix and has since become permanent. Sales tax “add-ons” have been renewed or extended, with discussions to make temporary hikes permanent. Parcel taxes have been proposed as an additional revenue stream.

Residents are shouldering higher taxes, but services haven’t improved. City Hall is closed every other Friday, and operates on a 37.5-hour workweek. Library hours have been reduced while an expensive new library is still being pursued. Street repairs are postponed, leaving potholes unaddressed. Parks and pools lag behind regional standards. Public safety equipment replacements have been delayed. More taxes, fewer services—this is not the hallmark of financial health.

The Bond Rating Spin

The City points to its September 2025 bond upgrade as proof of financial stability. But context matters. In the municipal bond market, most U.S. cities hold ratings in the AA category, with the strongest at AAA. El Cerrito’s A+ rating is a modest improvement but not exceptional. Pair that with the Auditor’s bottom-20% ranking, and the conclusion is clear: the City remains financially vulnerable.

Calling this an achievement worth celebrating is like cheering for moving from an F to a D. Yes, it’s technically progress. However, it’s still far from satisfactory, and it should not lull residents into a false sense of security.

📊 Fact Box: El Cerrito’s Financial Reality

City’s Claim:

  • Bond rating upgraded to A+
  • Off the State Auditor’s formal High-Risk Watch List

Reality Check:

  • Still in the bottom 20% of California cities for fiscal health
  • $80M+ unfunded pension liability weighing down future budgets
  • Reserves projected to fall below policy by FY 26/27
  • Services reduced: shorter library hours, City Hall closed every other Friday, deferred road and park maintenance
  • Residents are paying higher taxes while service quality declines

Claiming Victory Too Early

El Cerrito has made progress, but claiming victory now is far too early. Until leadership addresses structural issues—such as pension obligations, a top-heavy management structure, and the ongoing reliance on one-time dollars and perpetual taxes—the financial position remains precarious. Residents are asked to celebrate, while the fundamentals continue to deteriorate.

Residents Deserve Better

El Cerrito’s residents deserve a City that:

  • Reports honestly, including the Auditor’s risk scores, declining reserves, and pension liabilities.
  • Commits to real fiscal reform, not temporary patches or revenue gimmicks.
  • Restores services: longer library hours, regular street and infrastructure maintenance, upgraded parks and pools, and City Hall open five days a week.
  • Rebalances staffing by eliminating unnecessary, top-heavy positions that drive long-term costs.

Contact Your Leaders

📧 City Manager:
Karen Pinkos – kpinkos@el-cerrito.gov

📧 City Council:

📧 City Clerk (for distribution to all Councilmembers): cityclerk@ci.el-cerrito.ca.us

El Cerrito’s Childcare Dilemma: Safety, Vacancies, and City Priorities

El Cerrito is a city of just four square miles, yet the debate over childcare facilities reveals much about how our leaders balance community needs, safety, and fiscal priorities.

Recently, the El Cerrito Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit to convert a single-family home at 556 Richmond Street (at Lincoln Avenue) into a childcare center for up to 18 children ages 2–5. On the surface, more childcare may seem like a welcome addition. But the reality tells a more troubling story.

Existing Facilities and Vacancies

El Cerrito already has licensed childcare facilities — at least two confirmed through the California Department of Social Services database — with additional providers in operation across the city. Yet multiple providers have acknowledged they have empty seats they cannot fill. If our city cannot support the childcare centers it already has, why are we approving more?

Safety Concerns Ignored

The proposed Richmond and Lincoln site is among the busiest and most dangerous intersections in El Cerrito. Longtime residents have reported frequent car accidents, speeding vehicles heading to El Cerrito High, and ongoing risks for pedestrians. Adding the daily drop-off and pick-up of 18 small children at this corner will only magnify those dangers.

What’s more, the new facility could take away parking spaces used by the existing childcare center at Lincoln and Everett. That center has developed an orderly, safe process for transfers — one that the new plan threatens to unravel. There’s more: the City unilaterally removed parking to “make the street safer,” but we know that their reasoning rarely passes the smell test.

📊 Fact Box: Childcare in El Cerrito

  • 2 licensed facilities confirmed (additional centers operate, but not all licensure verified)
  • Vacancies exist in current childcare centers — providers cannot fill all available seats
  • New proposal: 556 Richmond St. childcare center for up to 18 children ages 2–5
  • High-risk location: Busy, accident-prone intersection near El Cerrito High
  • History of being ignored: Hundreds of residents spoke against the Richmond Street bike plan — Council moved forward anyway

A Pattern of Misplaced Priorities

City leaders claim El Cerrito “needs more childcare.” But with providers already facing vacancies, that argument rings hollow. Once again, it appears that tax revenue is being prioritized over common sense and safety.

For years, residents have observed a consistent pattern: new taxes, declining services, and decisions made without transparency or accountability. Our voices are not being heard. The City Council didn’t listen when hundreds of residents directly impacted by the Richmond Street bike plan came forward to speak, and they are not listening now.

Time for Change

When leaders ignore the facts, dismiss safety concerns, and push forward with plans that prioritize revenue over residents, it’s clear that we cannot continue with business as usual. It’s time to consider new Council leadership and a new City Manager.

That means showing up, speaking out, and refusing to accept decisions that put children and neighborhoods at risk. It means organizing, appealing, voting for new leadership, and holding our leaders accountable.

What Residents Can Do

If you share these concerns, there are ways to make your voice heard:

Influenced by Community Voices

This blog is informed by the perspective of a longtime El Cerrito resident and concerned citizen who has seen firsthand both the vacancies at existing childcare centers and the dangers of the Richmond/Lincoln intersection. Their experiences underscore what is at stake: the safety of our children and the integrity of our community. While this resident raised serious concerns, they did not suggest ousting the current leadership — that conclusion rests with the broader community.

Rising Taxes and Falling Services

El Cerrito residents now pay among the highest tax rates in the region, yet services continue to lag and inefficiencies persist.

Now, as we transition our focus to the captivating concept of Fiscal Responsibility, we unravel the complexities and overlooked ramifications of self-governance gone awry. This edition of our blog sharpens its lens on a critical issue: El Cerrito’s reliance on excessive staffing, consultants, and—above all—new taxes to balance the books. Residents deserve transparency, accountability, and efficiency. Instead, they face the spiral of excessive spending and perpetual taxation.

El Cerrito is paying double the cost of Hercules, more taxes and fewer services:

El Cerrito’s Staffing Problem
Residents are increasingly concerned about how the city is managed, especially when compared to nearby Hercules. Despite being smaller in both area and population, El Cerrito employs more than twice the staff of Hercules. Yet fully staffed departments still lean heavily on costly consultants to perform fundamental tasks—charging residents double for the same service. This disconnect between staffing levels and results raises hard questions: Has El Cerrito ever truly right-sized its workforce? Why are residents paying for both employees and outside contractors while crime increases and services lag?

The Tax Spiral: 2008–Today
Since 2008, El Cerrito has repeatedly returned to voters with tax measures rather than implementing real reform:

  • 2008 – Measure A: A half-cent sales tax increase pitched as “temporary” to stabilize finances.
  • 2010 – Measure R: Another half-cent sales tax added just two years later, doubling the city’s special sales tax burden.
  • 2014 – Measure R (renewal): Extended and expanded the 2010 tax, making what was supposed to be temporary effectively permanent.
  • 2018 – Measure V: Converted the earlier taxes into a “forever” one-cent sales tax, locking El Cerrito into one of the highest combined sales tax rates in the Bay Area.
  • 2020 – Measure S: Extended the city’s utility users tax, adding further burden on residents’ monthly bills for electricity, gas, water, and telecommunications.
  • Proposed – $300 Parcel Tax: A new flat parcel tax on every property owner, escalating over time, with no sunset clause.

We are already overtaxed, yet services have declined. Over the same period, residents have watched as the city closed facilities on alternating Fridays, reduced recreation offerings, cut library and senior services, and failed to maintain basic infrastructure. Crime has escalated as well, with auto burglaries, thefts, and assaults climbing even as residents pay more each year. In short, the community is being asked to pay more for less.

Crime Rates – El Cerrito vs. Hercules

  • El Cerrito: Violent crime ~ 5 per 1,000; property crime ~ 40 per 1,000. That’s a combined rate of ~ 45 per 1,000 residents.
  • Hercules: Violent crime ~ 2 per 1,000; property crime ~ 7 per 1,000. Combined rate of ~ 9 per 1,000 residents.
  • Bottom Line: El Cerrito residents face a crime rate five times higher than Hercules, despite paying higher taxes.

Fully Staffed + Consultants = Inefficiency
Information Technology: Despite having a funded IT department, the city outsources essential functions, including infrastructure management, support, and even basic data security. Strategic planning and network management remain neglected.

Finance: The Finance Department struggles with budget preparation, transparency, and accuracy because the city spent residents’ dollars on a budget system that the city doesn’t utilize.

Outsourced financial analysis hasn’t been meaningfully integrated into city planning. Misrepresentations in reports—such as comparing annual budgets with quarterly figures—suggest either incompetence or an intent to mislead.

A Tale of Two Cities: Hercules vs. El Cerrito
In 2011, Hercules was on the brink of collapse. Through disciplined management, it rebounded—earning a 73.29 score from the State Auditor. El Cerrito, by contrast, languishes at 47.29 and firmly in the red zone. The difference? Governance and accountability.

Even more startling – Hercules has both a senior center and a state-of-the-art library, while El Cerrito insists the only way toward better services is through increased taxes.

While it’s true that the city’s financial health has improved in recent years, let’s not forget that El Cerrito is still among the highest-risk cities for bankruptcy in the state. More importantly, the city’s decline occurred during the city manager’s tenure as assistant city manager and since 2018 as city manager.

Just Not True
El Cerrito claims physical responsibility because of the new A bond rating. The truth is that El Cerrito remains in the bottom 20% of California cities. That’s still high risk and not good enough. El Cerrito must choose: continue burdening residents with escalating taxes while avoiding tough decisions about staffing and efficiency, or follow Hercules’ lead—embracing transparency, accountability, and right-sizing to deliver services without perpetual tax hikes. The cost of mediocrity is not just higher taxes. It’s poorer services, eroded trust, and a declining quality of life.

Your Voice Matters
What are your experiences with city services in El Cerrito? Have you felt the impact of higher taxes without better results? Share your story. Here’s how you can help: Share this post with other residents. Comment and add your perspective. Speak up at City Council meetings (note: public comment is now restricted to in-person attendees). Attend the Financial Advisory Board meetings in person, as they are no longer recorded. Post on Nextdoor or Reddit El Cerrito. Together, residents can demand a city government that respects both its people and their pocketbooks.

Contact info:

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

Don’t Be Misled

Supporters of the library tax are presenting a rosy picture. However, the details they leave out are significant. Here’s how their claims stack up against the facts:

Their ClaimThe Facts
“The library will have underground parking.”The underground parking is for the housing project—not library visitors. The library footprint will also consume 800 Plaza parking spaces. To control the loss, the City will impose 2-hour limits that hurt seniors, families, and community users.
“The Plaza Station site is the least costly option.”Residents will pay millions in taxes to build a library on land the city doesn’t own. The $1 lease sounds cheap, but it means taxpayers subsidize BART’s housing project while giving up ownership.
“The tax is capped at 17¢ per square foot and ends in 30 years.”That’s about $300 per year for the average household. Renters won’t escape it—landlords will pass it on. The tax covers construction and only the first ten years of operations. After that, another tax is almost certain. The 30-year cap runs long after the building may need major repairs.
“Citizen oversight will ensure accountability.”Oversight boards only see what staff provide. Past “fiscal reviews” didn’t stop the city from draining reserves or ignoring pension debt. The RPTT tax promised oversight too—yet no reports have been produced since 2018. Once voters approve this tax, control is gone.
“This is a limited-time opportunity we can’t miss.”The “now or never” pitch is pressure politics. The library is a political add-on to justify BART’s housing project. Rushing into a 30-year tax isn’t responsible—it’s reckless.

Reserves Inflated

The agent of the city, Greg Lyman, touts $20 million in reserves. However, he is famously known for omitting important details. It’s essential information. What he doesn’t tell you is that much of it is earmarked for significant emergency funding.

Bottom Line
This isn’t about whether El Cerrito deserves a library—it does. The real question is whether this tax measure is fair. With tighter parking, higher costs, no land ownership, and a history of broken oversight, residents deserve the truth—not spin.

Less than $13 million remains for unrestricted general fund reserves. He conveniently doesn’t mention the $83 million and funded pension liability, or that the city has habitually spent more expenses than revenue, and there’s no solution in place for depleting unrestricted reserves.

Off the Watch List, But Still Among the Riskiest Cities in California

The City is no longer on the State Auditor’s formal High-Risk Watch List, but it remains in the bottom 20% of more than 400 cities statewide. That’s nothing to celebrate.

After years of warnings, El Cerrito has improved its standing with the California State Auditor’s Office. Once ranked among the bottom 3% of cities for fiscal health and placed on the Auditor’s High-Risk Watch List, the City has climbed just enough to come off the list. On paper, that appears to be progress.

But let’s be clear: El Cerrito is still among the worst 20% of cities in California for financial health. Being “less bad” is not the same as being financially stable. Residents deserve better than bottom-tier management.

The State Auditor’s risk scores evaluate liquidity, reserves, pension obligations, and long-term liabilities. El Cerrito’s history of weak reserves, rising costs, and structural deficits continues to hold it back. Climbing off the formal watch list does not erase the underlying fragility — it simply means there are other cities in even worse shape.

The City points to reserves as proof of progress, but much of that cushion was built on one-time ARPA dollars. El Cerrito was allocated about $6.2 million in federal aid, quickly absorbed to cover overexpenditures. Now those funds are gone, and reserves are projected to fall below the City’s own policy by FY 26/27. That’s not fiscal stewardship — it’s a temporary patch.

Instead of discipline, the City has leaned on new revenue streams. The Real Property Transfer Tax (RPTT), adopted in 2018, is now a permanent fixture. Sales tax measures have been proposed to make “temporary” hikes permanent, and parcel taxes have been floated to backfill ongoing shortfalls. Residents are paying more while the City sidesteps deeper reform.

And yet, services continue to decline. City Hall is closed every other Friday while staff work a 37.5-hour week. Library hours have been reduced, limiting access while an expensive new library is being pursued. Street repairs are deferred, leaving potholes and uneven pavement. Parks and pools lag behind regional standards, and public safety equipment replacement has been delayed. More taxes, fewer services — this is not the mark of a healthy city.

The September 2025 City Manager’s report touted an upgraded bond rating as proof of fiscal strength. But the State Auditor’s broader assessment tells a different story. Most U.S. cities with S&P ratings sit comfortably in the AA range (AA+, AA, AA-), with fewer than 10% at AAA and only a small share down in the A category. El Cerrito’s A+ rating may sound respectable, but it’s not uncommon. This paired with a bottom-15% Auditor ranking, it signals persistent financial vulnerability.

Bottom 20% Is Not Good Enough

El Cerrito should not accept being “off the watch list” as success. Remaining in the bottom 15% means the City is still at significant risk of insolvency compared with peers across California. Until leadership delivers consistent, sustainable fiscal discipline — without leaning on one-time funds and forever taxes — residents remain at risk.

It’s time for honesty about the City’s condition, not selective storytelling.

Call to Action: Demand Realistic Reporting and a Real Plan

Residents must insist on more than high points. The City needs:

  • Realistic reporting that openly includes the State Auditor’s risk scores, declining reserves, and tax dependence.
  • A real plan for financial sustainability, not short-term patches.
  • Improved service delivery with clear commitments to restore what was cut: longer library hours, regular street maintenance, upgraded parks and pools, reliable public safety equipment, and City Hall open five days a week.

📧 City Manager:

📧 City Council:

📧 City Clerk (for distribution to all Councilmembers): cityclerk@ci.el-cerrito.ca.us

Suggested subject: “We Need Realistic Reporting and a Real Plan for El Cerrito”

Suggested message:
Hello Ms. Pinkos and Members of the City Council,
Residents deserve a complete picture of El Cerrito’s finances — not selective highlights. Please commit to realistic reporting that reflects the State Auditor’s risk rankings, the use of one-time ARPA funds, and reliance on the Real Property Transfer Tax. Just as important, provide a real plan for financial sustainability and improved service delivery. Restore the services that matter most: library hours, street maintenance, parks and pools, public safety equipment, and full City Hall access. Bond ratings are not enough — residents need transparency, accountability, and results.
Thank you.

El Cerrito’s Library and Senior Center Mirage

Behind the promises lies a project built on misrepresentation and political spin.

Greg Lyman has once again reappeared in El Cerrito politics, this time working alongside the City of El Cerrito, the Contra Costa County (CCC) Library system, CCC Supervisor John Gioia, and developer Halladay—the lead partner on the Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) project known as C West. Together, they are selling voters a package built on misrepresentation. And their target audience? Seniors.

It’s beyond cynical. Enticing older residents with false promises of a new “senior center” while glossing over the inconvenient truths about who controls the library, what the City’s actual responsibilities are, and what this project will really deliver. Lyman even had the audacity to make his pitch at the Eskaton Senior Center on San Pablo—armed with slick presentations and plenty of statements he has no authority to make.

The reality is that the City of El Cerrito does not operate the library. That authority lies entirely with the Contra Costa County Library system, which staffs, funds, and manages 26 branches across the county. Each branch is guaranteed 40 staffed hours per week, financed by the countywide ad valorem secured property tax. The City’s role is limited to providing a building and maintaining it. Full stop.

Here are the facts. Contra Costa County Library operates 26 branches, guarantees 40 staffed hours per branch funded by county property taxes, selects and manages all book collections, does not accept local donations of money or books, and controls staffing, operations, and policy. The City of El Cerrito provides the building, maintains the facility, and may choose to fund extra operating hours—nothing more.

The CCC library system is intentionally egalitarian. Wealthier communities like Lafayette or Orinda cannot pour in donations of money or books, because that would create inequities across the system. Collections are curated by county library specialists, catalogued, and shared across all branches. Any talk of local fundraising or in-kind donations for the El Cerrito branch is misleading and simply not how the system works.

The only financial contribution the City can make is to pay for additional hours of operation. Anything beyond the guaranteed 40 hours must come from El Cerrito’s already overextended general fund. That fact alone should temper the City’s ambitious promises, but instead the narrative keeps growing bolder.

Then there’s the building question. The current El Cerrito branch occupies 6,400 square feet leased from the City. The C West project proposes a 20,000 square-foot library space, but no one has explained whether CCC will lease all of it, part of it, or the same square footage it leases today. If CCC takes the full 20,000 square feet, then the “senior center” so heavily marketed to older residents vanishes, because the space would be controlled by the County Library and open only during library hours. If CCC leases only part of the space, who pays for the rest? The unanswered questions pile up.

Even if the City tried to carve out space for senior or community programs, the logistics are daunting. A functioning community center requires separate entrances and exits from both the library and the 100-plus residents who will live in the affordable housing units above it. That means added design costs, security needs, and operational expenses that the City has never publicly accounted for.

And yet, Greg Lyman continues to make sweeping statements as if he speaks with authority. He doesn’t. Every serious presentation about the C West project and the so-called new library or senior center should include people who actually hold decision-making power: a City Council member, the County Librarian, CCC Supervisor John Gioia, and Halladay, the developer and future condominium co-owner. Anything less is political theater designed to mislead. And given Lyman’s track record of half-truths and omissions—most notably during the city’s past financial crises—residents should ask the obvious question: why should we trust Greg Lyman now?

The bottom line is that the Contra Costa County Library system is not for sale, not for manipulation, and not a political tool for the City of El Cerrito. Seniors deserve honesty, not empty promises. Voters deserve transparency, not bait-and-switch tactics. If El Cerrito truly wants to provide a senior center, it should be upfront about the costs, the location, and the operations—not hide behind a developer-led project and a former mayor’s political gamesmanship.

Behind the promises lies a project built on misrepresentation and political spin.

Don’t trust Lyman with your future. Vote no on the new library initiative. Meanwhile, don’t sign his petition, it’s misleading and just plain wrong.

Bond Ratings Up, But Paid For With Your Taxes and One-Time Funds

Federal relief dollars, new taxes, and emergency fund raids aren’t financial stewardship — they’re passing the buck.

In the September 2025 City Manager’s report, El Cerrito highlighted what it framed as good news: S&P Global Ratings raised the City’s bond ratings to A+ and A-, with a positive outlook for future upgrades. This was presented as a validation of stronger financial policies and fiscal sustainability.

However, while the headlines sound promising, the report omits critical details.

A Surplus Built on Federal Aid and New Taxes

The reported $1.6 million “surplus” is not the result of careful stewardship—it came after the City reduced the emergency fund to cover overexpenditures, using money meant for true crises to plug holes in the operating budget.

What’s more, much of the reserves the City points to came from one-time ARPA funds. El Cerrito was allocated about $6.2 million in federal relief, with the first tranche—roughly $3.1 million—received in FY 2020-21. Those dollars were meant to stabilize during the pandemic, but here they’ve been used to cover ongoing overspending.

On top of that, the City’s financial coffers were bolstered by yet another tax—the real property transfer tax—which began in 2018. Rather than demonstrating financial savvy, this is simply passing the buck to taxpayers to solve the City’s own mismanagement.

So essentially ALL of the unrestricted general fund balance was achieved, not by financial discipline but on the backs of others. Looking ahead, Uncle Joe won’t bail us out, and the RPTT isn’t likely to increase revenue soon. It’s time for the city council to walk the talk and become financially healthy by reducing expenses and not relying on taxpayers to bail them out -again.

Reserves Already Projected to Slip Below Policy

The September 2025 report also notes that the City’s reserves, celebrated as healthy today, are expected to fall below the City’s own minimum policy threshold by FY 26/27. That means the financial cushion they keep pointing to is shrinking fast, and future budgets will start from a weaker position.

Kicking Bills Into the Next Year

Adding to the concern, the City Manager has already acknowledged that expenses not paid last year will need to be addressed this year. That means the “surplus” story is even thinner—the City is deferring costs while claiming progress.

A House of Cards Budget

Taken together, this approach begins to resemble a house of cards: propping up today’s numbers with one-time federal dollars, deferred expenses, and new taxes, while presenting a picture of financial health that doesn’t match reality.

Even the bond rating itself reflects data from months ago—before the most recent financial moves. Since then, the City has drawn on funds that weaken the very financial cushion that made those ratings possible. Celebrating outdated metrics without acknowledging today’s reality risks misleading the public about the City’s actual fiscal condition.

What’s Missing: Services for Residents

Even more troubling, the September 2025 report says little about how these supposed “fiscal wins” translate into services that matter: safer streets, better parks, senior programs, or a library residents can count on. Metrics are important, but they don’t improve lives on their own.

_________________________________________________

Tell the City to Share the Whole Story

El Cerrito residents deserve the whole picture — not just the high points. A bond rating upgrade may look good on paper, but it doesn’t erase the reality of emergency-fund use, deferred expenses, and reliance on one-time federal dollars and new taxes.

It’s time for transparency. Write to the City Manager and demand that future reports tell the full story — not just the highlights. Ask her to explain clearly:

  • How much of the “surplus” came from one-time funds (e.g., ARPA).
  • Why was the emergency fund used to cover overexpenditures?
  • What services residents can actually expect in return for the taxes they pay.

And don’t stop there. Share your concerns with the City Council — they are accountable to you.

📧 City Manager Karen Pinkos (direct): kpinkos@el-cerrito.gov
📧 City Manager’s Office (general): citymanager@el-cerrito.gov
📧 City Council (via City Clerk for distribution): cityclerk@ci.el-cerrito.ca.us

Suggested subject: “Please report the full fiscal picture — not just bond ratings”

Suggested message:


Hello Ms. Pinkos and City Council,


Thank you for the September 2025 report. Please provide residents with a complete and current fiscal picture, including:


• how much of the FY surplus came from one-time funds (e.g., ARPA),
• any use of the emergency fund to cover over-expenditures,
• deferred expenses being carried into this year, and
• how these choices will affect services residents rely on (streets, parks, seniors, library).

Bond ratings matter, but residents need transparency about today’s numbers and service impacts.

Thank you.

The Mindset Behind El Cerrito’s Finances

Stanford psychologist Carol Dweck, in her landmark book Mindset: The New Psychology of Success, explains why some people and organizations adapt and thrive while others stagnate. Her research on fixed vs. growth mindsets offers a powerful lens for understanding El Cerrito’s current leadership.

A fixed mindset avoids mistakes, resists accountability, and clings to appearances. That’s exactly how El Cerrito’s City Manager and most of the Council approach fiscal responsibility. Faced with ballooning pension liabilities, service cuts that have never been restored, and overreliance on one-time reserves, they look away. Instead of confronting the hard truths, they highlight scripted “successes” while avoiding transparency about trade-offs and sustainability.

A growth mindset, by contrast, acknowledges problems, learns from them, and adapts. That’s the example Councilmember William Ktsanes has set—asking difficult questions, pressing for fiscal clarity, and refusing to accept business as usual. It’s not about blame; it’s about building a stronger future.

If El Cerrito is going to move forward, we need more leaders with a growth mindset. Leaders willing to admit mistakes, learn from them, and commit to long-term solutions. Until then, we will remain stuck in the same cycle of denial and deficit. The city’s future depends on choosing growth over fixed thinking—starting with who we elect to lead us.

⚠️ Reality Check: Credit Rating Up, Services Down

$89 million in unfunded pension liabilities. Essential services cut: senior center closed, library hours reduced, city offices shuttered every other Friday Higher staffing per capita than many neighboring cities—yet service delivery still falls short. The bond rating improved, but residents see fewer services, not more General fund reserves diverted to cover deficits instead of protecting public services

That’s the cost of fixed-mindset leadership.

🚢 El Cerrito’s Library Tax: Boarding the Titanic Again

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.

Who’s Really Behind This?

This campaign may feature Greg Lyman and a few “concerned citizens,” but make no mistake—El Cerrito’s leadership is pulling the strings. City Hall knows it cannot legally promote a political initiative, so it hides behind Lyman, using his name as cover while staying just out of sight.

Mayor Carolyn Wysinger, Mayor Pro Tem Gabe Quinto, Councilmember Lisa Motoyama, and Councilmember Rebecca Saltzman have all thrown their weight behind the library tax. Instead of taking ownership, they’ve let Lyman act as the face of the campaign to keep the city’s fingerprints off the petition drive.

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.

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 by the grassroots committee behind the library campaign, former City Manager Gary Pokorny will supervise fundraising efforts. He 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.

Even though Pokorny retired with over 35 years of public service, his LinkedIn profile omits his tenure in El Cerrito—a telling omission. If leading El Cerrito had been a professional highlight, wouldn’t it be listed?

Wysinger, Quinto, Motoyama, and Saltzman: The Current Crew at the Helm

Mayor Carolyn Wysinger, Mayor Pro Tem Gabe Quinto, Councilmember Lisa Motoyama, and Councilmember Rebecca Saltzman have all lined up behind the Plaza Station Library campaign. Instead of confronting the city’s ballooning pension liabilities, depleted reserves, and history of overspending, they’ve embraced the same tax-and-spend mindset that nearly bankrupted the city.

Saltzman’s record goes beyond El Cerrito. As a BART Board member, she backed budgets and policies that drove the transit agency to the edge of a financial cliff—with plunging ridership, structural deficits, and a growing dependence on taxpayer bailouts. Now she’s applying the same approach to El Cerrito, pushing another blank-check tax without accountability.

This isn’t just déjà vu—it’s a dangerous parallel. Following Saltzman’s lead means repeating BART’s collapse at the city level. The iceberg is already visible, yet the council insists residents climb aboard anyway.

This council has:

Balanced budgets with one-time fixes, draining reserves instead of reforming spending Ignored repeated warnings from the Financial Advisory Board and State Auditor Spent more than $100,000 on polling to test new tax measures, rather than investing in core services Continued pushing new taxes while essentials like the Senior Center remain shuttered

Backing this leadership isn’t just misplaced trust—it’s climbing back on the Titanic with the same crew that already hit the iceberg.

City Attorney Sky Woodruff’s Misleading Drafting

The lack of transparency extends to City Attorney Sky Woodruff, who drafted the official summary of the proposed library tax. That summary was supposed to neutrally inform voters—but it was riddled with misleading claims, including:

Inflated statements about library use, Promises of emergency shelter use with no requirements, Assertions that funds couldn’t be used for salaries—when they can

Only after a pre-litigation demand letter was issued were seven false and misleading statements removed from the summary. Residents shouldn’t have to fight their own city for basic honesty. This was another warning flare—and yet the same leadership asks you to sail along with them.

It’s Not About Libraries—It’s About Survival

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

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.

Greg Lyman, acting as the city’s agent, touts El Cerrito’s $20 million in reserves. What he leaves out is just as important as what he says. Most of those funds are already committed—set aside for emergency needs and the Section 115 trust. In reality, less than $10 million is available to cover the city’s ongoing deficit spending. He also fails to acknowledge the city’s growing pension obligations, including a staggering $90 million in unfunded liabilities.

This isn’t just about trust—it’s about survival. Supporting this initiative is like climbing aboard a sinking ship and handing the same crew a blank check to steer again.

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 essential services remain unfunded?

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

Don’t board the Titanic. Say no to blank checks—and yes to responsible government.

El Cerrito Needs An Overhaul—Not Cosmetic Fixes

El Cerrito’s problems run far deeper than budget shortfalls and service delays. They are systemic—rooted in a culture of poor financial stewardship, opaque decision-making, and an entrenched unwillingness to hold leadership accountable. These challenges cannot be resolved by tinkering at the margins or by trusting the same people who created them to suddenly reverse course.


For years, the city has relied on unsustainable financial practices—draining reserves, deferring maintenance, and avoiding the structural changes needed for cost containment to achieve stability. Operating costs continue to rise without a clear long-term funding plan. Capital projects like pool upgrades are launched with no credible strategy to pay for ongoing expenses. The city’s financial “fixes” have been little more than short-term plugs that leave us weaker in the long run.

The bond rating is up but that’s based on FY24-25 reserves which have been reduced by 20% since then.

Operational inefficiencies are baked into the system. Departments often work in silos, duplicating efforts rather than coordinating for maximum impact. The city clerk ignores transparency and decides which records people receive. Critical services limp along without adequate planning or performance tracking. While residents face service cuts and tax hikes, the city’s process for setting priorities remains disconnected from actual community needs.


Transparency is equally lacking. Public input is often sought only after decisions are effectively made. Council meetings meet the minimum legal notice requirements, but the spirit of open government—genuine dialogue and early engagement—is absent. Too often, important issues are buried in lengthy agendas or framed in ways that obscure their true implications.
Accountability is virtually nonexistent. When mistakes are made—whether in financial projections, project management, or policy execution—there are no meaningful consequences. The same leadership remains in place, recycling the same talking points and hoping residents will accept “we’re working on it” as a plan.


This cycle will not break on its own. The same councilmembers and city manager who presided over these failures cannot credibly be tasked with fixing them.

What We Need Going Forward:

  • Financial reform that prioritizes sustainable budgeting, realistic projections, and disciplined reserve policies.
  • Operational overhaul to eliminate inefficiency, measure results, and tie resources directly to outcomes that matter to residents.
  • True transparency where information is shared early, completely, and in plain language—not just to check a legal box.
  • Real accountability where leaders are held responsible for their actions, and change follows when performance continually fails. These changes require a new City Council and a new City Manager—leaders with the independence, skill, and will to rebuild trust from the ground up. El Cerrito’s future depends on more than promises and patchwork fixes. It demands a clean break from the past and the courage to start fresh.

BOTTOM LINE: The city’s systemic problems cannot be solved by the same council members and city manager who created them. Many residents considered a recall, but the city can get three new council members in November 2026 when we vote. New leadership is essential to restore fiscal health, operational efficiency, and public trust.

Libraries are good. This plan isn’t.

El Cerrito deserves a great library—but not at the wrong price. The City’s plan locks residents into $75M+ in new taxes for a ground-floor space in a BART housing project that the City won’t even own.

We need a better plan—one that gives El Cerrito a true library, not just another forever tax.

👉 If you share these concerns, please review the petition, add your signature, and show your support: No On Another Forever Tax

Note:

This post taken directly from social media as it succinctly states our position.

Grasping at Straws

Proponents of the massive and costly library are grasping at straws.

Some community members and leaders in El Cerrito argue that our city’s library is underused because it is “too old.” The implication is that if only we spent $75 million or more on a massive and costly new facility, people would suddenly flock back in. But the facts tell a very different story.

The National Trend: Declining Library Usage

This is not an El Cerrito issue—it’s a U.S. issue. Over the past decade, library visits nationwide have dropped by nearly half (49.1%) according to data reported in Publishers Weekly. That decline spans across every type of community, from large cities to smaller towns.

New York: Visits down 47% since 2012 Los Angeles: Visits down 74% San Francisco: Visits down 65% Chicago: Visits down 66% Miami: Visits down 52% Philadelphia: Visits down 72%

These numbers make clear: declining foot traffic is not about the age of a building. It’s a broader shift in how people access information, entertainment, and services.

Shrinking Print Collections

The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) also reports a steady decline in print collections. In 2022, U.S. libraries held 162 million fewer print books than they did in 2010—a drop of nearly 20%. Libraries are shifting to digital, streaming, and community services, not expanding shelves of physical books.

Why the “Old Library” Argument Fails

Proponents of the massive and costly El Cerrito library want residents to believe that usage is declining because our building is outdated. The evidence shows otherwise. A shiny new facility won’t reverse a national, decade-long decline in library visits.

What it will do is commit taxpayers to a forever tax of $300+ per parcel per year—at a time when many residents, especially seniors, are already struggling with housing and living costs.

A Smarter Approach

Instead of sinking $75 million (and likely much more) into a massive and costly project that won’t solve the real problem, El Cerrito should focus on:

Expanding digital resources that meet residents where they are, offering community programs tailored to today’s needs, ensuring libraries are accessible and functional, not oversized monuments.

The Bottom Line

El Cerrito’s declining library usage is not a reflection of its age. It’s part of a nationwide trend. Proponents of a massive and costly new library are grasping at straws, trying to justify a project that would burden residents for decades without addressing the real issue: how people actually use libraries in the 21st century.

Rebecca Saltzman Should Recuse Herself from the Plaza BART TOD

El Cerrito is facing one of the most consequential projects in its history: the redevelopment of the El Cerrito Plaza BART station. The plan calls for six new buildings, nearly 750 homes (many of them affordable), retail space, and a public plaza that could eventually include a library. It will reshape traffic, parking, and community life for decades.

For a project this significant, residents deserve a fair, transparent process. Yet fairness is in doubt, because Councilmember Rebecca Saltzman continues to participate in—and vote on—the very project she helped launch as a member of the BART Board.

A History Too Close to Ignore

Saltzman served on the BART Board for more than a decade, including two terms as Board President. In November 2020, during her tenure, BART selected the development team for El Cerrito Plaza TOD. She remained on the BART Board until 2024, drawing compensation from the very agency advancing this project.

She didn’t run for BART BOD, citing outside commitments to family and work.

Only months later, Saltzman was sworn in as an El Cerrito City Councilmember.

And in May 2025, she cast her first vote in support of the Plaza TOD—publicly celebrating her role in moving the project forward. That moment underscores the conflict: Saltzman is no longer simply weighing a project before the City as a neutral Councilmember. She is continuing work she began as a BART Director, effectively sitting on both sides of the table.

When an elected official helps launch a project in one role and then votes on its implementation in another, the line between impartial judgment and personal legacy becomes blurred. This is exactly the type of situation recusal rules are meant to prevent, because even if no law is technically broken, the appearance of bias erodes public trust.

This isn’t just a coincidence of timing. It is a direct continuation of her past work at BART, now carried into her new seat on City Council.

Council’s Role in TOD

Supporters sometimes argue that the City has little say under state law and BART’s control. But that’s not true. Even after AB 2923 streamlined zoning, the City still makes critical decisions:

Parking and Traffic: The project will reduce hundreds of surface parking spaces, replacing them with a paid garage and new on-street parking management run by the City.

Affordable Housing: In March 2023, the Council approved the first 70-unit affordable building. More decisions will shape how affordability is prioritized in later phases. Infrastructure and Amenities: The City is weighing its role in funding improvements, including whether a new library is integrated into the TOD site. Public Process: Planning Commission and Design Review Board meetings throughout 2023–24 examined building height, circulation, and design—issues that feed directly into Council oversight. Saltzman’s votes and voice influence all of these matters.

The Ethical Problem

California’s Political Reform Act says officials must recuse themselves if they’ve received more than $500 in income from an involved party in the last 12 months. Saltzman’s BART compensation in 2024 fits squarely within that rule.

But this is bigger than compliance. It’s about what’s right. Saltzman is trying to finish something she started on another board. That’s not impartial decision-making—it’s carrying BART’s agenda into El Cerrito’s council chambers.

Even if every decision she makes were technically legal, the appearance of bias is unavoidable. And once residents believe the process is rigged, public trust is gone.

What the Community Should Do

Residents should insist on integrity. Here are practical steps to take:

Email the Council — Tell them Saltzman must recuse herself from all Plaza TOD items and that the rest of the Council should uphold that standard.

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

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

Rebecca Saltzman — rsaltzman@ci.el-cerrito.ca.us

City Clerk (for the official record) — cityclerk@ci.el-cerrito.ca.us Subject line suggestion: “Please ensure recusal on El Cerrito Plaza BART TOD items.”

Key points to include: Saltzman launched the Plaza TOD at BART and is now voting on it as a Councilmember. Recusal protects public trust—she should leave the dais and abstain from all TOD discussions and votes. The Council must affirm on the record that TOD decisions will proceed without conflicted participation. Request a written acknowledgment of recusal — Ask the City Clerk to document Saltzman’s recusal in meeting agendas and minutes when Plaza TOD items appear.

Submit public comments — Whether in person or by email, let the Council know before TOD items are discussed. Written comments sent to the Clerk are included in the public record.

The El Cerrito Plaza TOD will help define our city’s future – good or bad. But it should be decided by leaders who come to the table without recent entanglements, not by someone finishing a project she began at BART.

For the sake of transparency, accountability, and public trust, Councilmember Rebecca Saltzman must recuse herself from all TOD-related discussions and decisions.

And the community must make its voice heard—directly to City Hall—so the integrity of this process is protected.

El Cerrito: Services Down

El Cerrito’s leaders are celebrating a credit rating upgrade to A-, the same level the city held back in 2019. On paper, this looks like progress. But behind the headlines, residents should ask a harder question: how is the city really managing the money entrusted to it?

Over the years, El Cerrito has consistently taken revenues intended for public services and instead funneled them into the general fund to patch deficits and build reserves.

Promises Made, Promises Broken

When the Real Property Transfer Tax was put before voters, it was pitched as a way to fund essential services like the senior center. But after the tax began generating far more than the projected $2.7 million annually, city leaders permanently closed the senior center. The money never went where it was promised.

Similarly, the city received $6.1 million in federal ARPA relief—funds meant to help residents and small businesses survive the pandemic. Instead, the city used that money for employee compensation.

Rising Revenues, Declining Services

Tax revenues have soared in recent years. Millions more flow into city coffers every year through property and sales taxes. Yet residents have seen services cut back:

City employees now work 37.5 hours a week instead of 40, and city offices are closed every other Friday. Library hours have been cut, reducing community access. The senior center was permanently closed, despite earlier promises. The city has no plan to pay down the $89 million CalPERS pension liability. No plan for a fire station, EMS equipment, or a swimming pool. No funding to restore the Ohlone Greenway or reverse the decline in the city’s pavement index (down from 85 to 68). And despite having one of the highest staffing levels per capita in the region, the city still fails to deliver the basic services residents expect.

In other words, the numbers look strong for Wall Street, but the reality is falling apart for El Cerrito residents.

A Question of Priorities

While services wither, senior management received raises worth well over $1 million in present value. The city manager’s contract was extended for five years, with council members lining up to praise her as tax hikes and service cuts continued.

Community Services

Senior center permanently closed Library hours reduced City offices closed every other Friday Shorter work week for city employees Pavement index declined from 85 to 68 No funding plan for pensions, fire station, EMS, or pool High staffing levels per capita but poor service delivery

El Cerrito doesn’t just need a better bond rating. It needs leadership that puts residents first. We need a City Council and city manager who care about restoring libraries- without tax hikes, senior services, and community infrastructure—not just building reserves and rewarding executives.