El Cerrito City Council
January 20, 2026

D. At the City Council’s discretion, revenue from the Special Tax, including penalties and interest thereon, may be used to reimburse the City for the costs of holding an election to seek voter approval of this Chapter and to pay for the costs of administering the Special Tax and for the costs of defending the Special Tax and this Chapter, including attorneys’ fees and operating costs, should its validity be challenged.

4.58.070 – Accountability
In accordance with the requirements of Government Code Sections 50075.1 and 50075.3, the following accountability measures shall apply to the Special Tax:

A. A separate, special account, referred to as the Library Special Tax Fund, shall be created, into which the proceeds of the Special Tax, including penalties and interest earned on such proceeds, must be deposited.

B. The specific purposes of the Special Tax are for the funding of a new library as set forth in Section 4.58.060. The proceeds of the Special Tax shall be applied only to those specific purposes.

C. The Tax Administrator shall annually prepare and submit to the City Council and to a new or existing citizen oversight board a report regarding the Special Tax funds collected and expended, as well as any other information required by Government Code sections 50075.1 and 50075.3.

4.58.080 – Oversight and Annual Audit
Each year, as part of the audit of the City’s financial statements, the City's independent auditors shall complete a report reviewing the collection, management, and expenditure of revenue from the Special Tax. The report shall be reviewed by a new or existing citizen oversight board designated by the City Council as part of its review of the annual audit.

4.58.090 – Interpretation, Administration, and Appeals of Special Tax A. Any taxpayer who feels the amount of the Special Tax assigned to a parcel is in error may file a notice with the Tax Administrator appealing the levy of the Special Tax.

The Administrator then will promptly review the appeal and, if necessary, meet with the applicant. If the Administrator verifies that the Special Tax levied on the applicant's parcel should be modified or changed, the Special Tax levy will be corrected and, if applicable in any case, a credit or refund will be granted. The appeal must be filed not later than one year after having paid the Special Tax that is disputed.

B. The City Council may by resolution interpret this Chapter for purposes of clarifying any vagueness or ambiguity as it relates to the Special Tax rate, the classification of properties, or any definition applicable to the Special Tax.

C. Without City Council approval, the Tax Administrator may make minor, nonsubstantive administrative and technical interpretations of the provisions of this Chapter for purposes of administrative efficiency or convenience or to comply with applicable federal, state, or local law, so long as any interpretation does not materially affect the rate paid by any person or the manner of collection of the Special Tax. The Tax Agenda Packet Page 147 of 235

Administrator may also make determinations regarding whether property is subject to the Special Tax and the applicable tax rate based on the use of the property.

4.58.100 – Amendments
This Chapter may only be amended by a vote of the people of El Cerrito if the amendment would result in the Special Tax being imposed, extended, or increased in a manner that would require a vote of the people under Article XIII C, section 2, of the California Constitution or if the amendment would substantially alter the purpose of the Special Tax. The City Council may enact any other amendments, including but not limited to amendments necessary to implement or administer the Special Tax.

4.58.110 – Term of Special Tax
The collection of the Parcel Tax shall commence on July 1st after the Effective Date and continue for thirty (30) years after the initial issuance of bonds for the planning and construction of a new library.

SECTION 5. Municipal Affair. The voters of the City hereby declare that providing funding for the planning, construction, equipping, and furnishing of a library through a parcel tax for the purposes set forth in this Initiative constitutes a municipal affair. The voters of the City hereby further declare their desire for this Initiative to coexist with any similar tax measures adopted at the city, county, or state levels.

SECTION 6. Effective Date and Implementation.

A. This Initiative shall be effective upon the earliest date legally possible after the elections official certifies the vote on the Initiative by the voters of the City of El Cerrito, pursuant to the Elections Code (the “Effective Date”).

B. Upon the Effective Date of this Initiative, the City is directed to promptly take all appropriate actions needed to implement this Initiative, including and not limited to taking any administrative steps necessary to administer and collect the Special Tax authorized herein and to update any City codes or any other documents maintained by the City so they conform to the legislative policies set forth in this Initiative.

C. The City may reorganize, renumber, and/or reformat the Municipal Code provisions included in Section 4 of this Initiative, provided that the full text is inserted in the Code without alteration, unless amended by an ordinance passed by the City Council under section 4.58.100.

SECTION 7. Adjustment of Appropriations Limit. Pursuant to Article XIII B of the Constitution of the State of California and applicable laws, the appropriations limit for the City is hereby increased by an amount equal to the revenue derived from the Special Tax for the maximum period of time as allowed by law.

SECTION 8. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Approval of this ordinance is not a Project under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Public Resources Code §§ 21000 et seq.) because it is a citizen initiative (14 Cal. Code Reg. § 15378(b)(3)) and because it creates a government funding mechanism that does not involve any commitment to any specific project that may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment (14 Cal. Code Reg. § 15378(b)(4)).

Agenda Packet Page 148 of 235

SECTION 9. Interpretation
A. This Initiative must be broadly construed to achieve the purpose stated above. It is the intent of the voters that the provisions of this Initiative be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that facilitates the purpose set forth in this Initiative.

B. This Initiative and the Special Tax authorized herein are adopted pursuant to the provisions and authority contained in the California Constitution, including Article II, § 11 and Article XI, § 5. The voters of the City declare their intent that this citizen Initiative, if approved by a simple majority of voters pursuant to controlling California law, shall be enacted, and the parcel tax be collected, for the entire uninterrupted period described herein. To the extent that the California Constitution or other applicable state law is amended, either at the same election or any time after this Initiative is adopted by El Cerrito's voters, to create additional or different voting requirements necessary to implement or to continue to implement this Initiative, the people of the City of El Cerrito declare their intent that any such amendments should, to the greatest extent allowed by law, be applied prospectively only and not apply to, or in any way affect, this Initiative.

SECTION 10. Severability.

A. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Initiative is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Initiative. The people of El Cerrito declare that this Initiative, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, part, or portion thereof, would have been adopted or passed irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, part, or portion is found to be invalid. If any provision of this Initiative is held invalid as applied to any person or circumstance, such invalidity does not affect any application of this Initiative that can be given effect without the invalid application.

B. If any portion of this Initiative is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, we the people of the City of El Cerrito indicate our strong desire that: (i) the El Cerrito City Council use its best efforts to sustain and re-enact that portion, and (ii) the City Council implement this Initiative by taking all steps possible to cure any inadequacies or deficiencies identified by the court in a manner consistent with the express and implied intent of this Initiative, including adopting or reenacting any such portion in a manner consistent with this Initiative.

SECTION 11. Conflicting Measures. To ensure that the intent of the voters is not frustrated, this Initiative is presented to the voters as an alternative to, and with the express intent that it will compete with or take precedence over, any and all voter initiatives or Citysponsored measures placed on the same ballot as this Initiative and which, if approved, would adopt a special tax to authorize and/or fund the planning and construction of a library which would frustrate the purpose and intent of this Initiative (each, a “Conflicting Measure”). In the event that this Initiative and one or more Conflicting Measures are adopted by the voters at the same election, then it is the voters' intent that only the measure which receives the greatest number of affirmative votes shall control in its entirety and said other measure or measures shall be rendered void and without any legal effect Agenda Packet Page 149 of 235

with respect to such matters. If this Initiative is prevented from going into effect by a Conflicting Measure approved by the voters at the same election, and such Conflicting Measure is later held invalid, this Initiative shall be self-executing and given full force of law.

Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this Section, in the event that both this Initiative and another measure(s) are adopted by the voters at the same election, but the two measures can be harmonized in a manner that permits this Initiative to be implemented upon its adoption without imposing any inconsistent requirement(s), then it is the voters’ intent that both the other measure and this Initiative shall be given full force and effect regardless of which measure receives the greatest number of affirmative votes.

Agenda Packet Page 150 of 235

AGENDA BILL
Agenda Item No. 8.B.

Date: January 20, 2026
To: El Cerrito City Council
From: Will Provost, Assistant to the City Manager, City Management; Melanie Mintz, Community Development Director, Community Development Department
Subject: El Cerrito Library Facility Update

ACTION PROPOSED
Receive a presentation on the El Cerrito Library, including status and limitations of the current facility and an overview of conceptual scenarios and associated cost ranges for a modern, accessible, full-service library; and provide staff direction if applicable.

BACKGROUND
The El Cerrito Library, located at 6510 Stockton Avenue, was originally constructed in 1948 and expanded in 1960. At approximately 6,500 square feet, the facility has less than half of the space considered adequate for the service population size according to standard library planning practices. As stated in the 2014 El Cerrito Library Needs Assessment, "lack of space and an obsolete physical structure remain the underlying obstacles to meeting El Cerrito residents’ library service needs." The building also lacks modern infrastructure for technology, community meeting spaces, modern HVAC to handle extreme temperatures, and features that make modern libraries serve the multifunctional needs of today and into the future. In its current facility, the El Cerrito Library can offer just a small sampling of the services that residents want, need, and expect from their local library. Moreover, given the facility's known deficiencies, without taking action in the near-term the City risks potential library service disruptions or reductions, continued operating challenges, and escalating costs to ultimately build a library facility that will be able to continue to provide services well into the 21st century.

For more than 20 years, the City has been exploring options to address these deficiencies, including evaluating multiple sites throughout the City to build a new facility. Sites that have been considered include the former Portola Middle School site, the Contra Costa Civic Theater site, the Community Center, purchasing a to-bedetermined site along San Pablo Avenue, as well as the current El Cerrito Library location. Notably, the opportunity to construct a new library as part of the El Cerrito Plaza BART Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) was first initiated in 2016, with the City Council and BART’s authorization of entering into an MOU to study its feasibility.

Information on the background and history of the City's efforts to build a new library facility can be found on the Library page on the City's website, including needs assessments, site feasibility information, public workshop and presentation materials, and frequently asked questions.

Agenda Packet Page 151 of 235
Agenda Item No. 8.B.

Beyond working to ensure that the City can continue providing a safe and functional Library well into the future, City staff have continued to prioritize development of a new library facility at the El Cerrito Plaza BART TOD project following direction from the City Council and repeated calls from community members to undertake this effort. This direction is reflected in the City’s Strategic Plan 2024-2029, adopted in December 2023 following a robust community engagement process, which articulates a specific strategy in the "Livability and Belonging" goal to "Create a community hub anchored by the Plaza Transit-Oriented Development and a new Library." Most recently, in the 2025 statistically-valid National Community Survey, 70% of El Cerrito residents rated “Building a New Library” as a high or medium priority.

ANALYSIS
This study session will provide the City Council and the public with an update on the existing conditions of the current El Cerrito Library and the facility's limitations, an overview of current best practices for library facilities with a focus on Contra Costa County, as well as five conceptual scenarios and cost ranges for potential paths forward to invest in a safe and modern facility. The presentation and cost analyses were prepared in coordination with City staff by Griffin Structures, the City's Owner's Representative for the Library facility, a team with deep expertise and experience in delivering public libraries and other civic buildings around the Bay Area and northern California. Overall, the information collected demonstrates that the City will need to identify at least $10 million to invest in keeping the existing Library operational without expanding services, with $35 to $48 million needed to deliver a modern, accessible, fullservice library that's responsive to the community's expectations and the County's best practices.

In order to facilitate a community-based process to discuss the various options for the future of the El Cerrito Library, City staff recommends that the City Council appoint a Library Task Force. The Task Force would include a wide variety of residents who are interested in the future of the Library, and could begin work as early as spring 2026.

Concurrently, City staff will continue to work with Griffin Structures to refine options and cost estimates. If funding is identified in 2026, staff will work with the Library Task Force to review building options and return to the City Council to discuss a scenario to pursue for investment in a new or upgraded library facility. If funding is not identified, staff will work with the Task Force to discuss how to address the current facility deficiencies and identify interim investments required to maintain current operations over the coming years. If the City Council agrees, staff will return in February with a resolution outlining the scope of work for the Library Task Force and a timeline for Council to appoint members.

STRATEGIC PLAN CONSIDERATIONS
This action supports the City’s Strategic Plan Goal(s) of:
• High Performing Organization; and
• Community Safety; and
Agenda Packet Page 152 of 235
Agenda Item No. 8.B.
• Livability and Belonging; and
• Infrastructure and Amenities; and
• Environmental Sustainability.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
This section is not applicable to this agenda item.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
There is no action requested by the City Council at this time. If funding is identified for a new library facility, City staff will further refine cost estimates for the City Council and proposed Library Task Force to review.

LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
This section is not applicable to this agenda item.

Reviewed by:

Karen Pinkos, City Manager
Attachments:

1. Presentation
Agenda Packet Page 153 of 235
City of El Cerrito
Library Brief ing
C ity Council Presentation
January 20, 2026
Agenda Packet Page 154 of 235

1. Why the Library Is a Community Priority

2. Existing Conditions & Facility Limitations

3. Best Practices in Contra Costa County Libraries

4. Conceptual Scenarios & Cost Ranges

5. Next Steps
Agenda
Agenda Packet Page 155 of 235
Project Context
Agenda Packet Page 156 of 235

1. Community interest for more than two decades
o Community-driven Needs Assessment completed in
2006, updated in 2014

2. 2025 statistically valid survey – 70% of El Cerrito
residents rated “Building a New Library” as a high
or medium priority

3. Strategic Plan 2024-2029 (adopted Dec. 2023)
o Created with robust community engagement
o Provides direction to prioritize new library
Community Support
& Policy Direction
Agenda Packet Page 157 of 235
• The El Cerrito Library no longer meets the space,
accessibility, or service expectations of today’s
library users.
• Continued reinvestment in the existing building
does not resolve fundamental size and system
limitations.
• Without action, the City risks service reductions
or disruptions, increased operating challenges,
and escalating costs.

Why This Matters Now?
Agenda Packet Page 158 of 235
• First library established in 1913
• Current building constructed in 1949,
expanded/remodeled in 1960
• Existing size: ~6,500 square feet
• Building is significantly undersized with
system and accessibility deficiencies that limit
service delivery
Existing Library
Key Facts
Agenda Packet Page 159 of 235
Contra Costa County & City Partnership

COUNTY CITY
Operations
Staffing
Collections
40 base open hours
Most technology
Facility ownership & upkeep
Utilities & landscaping
Furniture & shelving
Certain technology costs
Extra open hours
Agenda Packet Page 160 of 235
• Numerous accessibility deficiencies under current ADA standards
• Major structural and building system deficiencies
impacting safety, comfort, and reliability
• Does not meet current structural / safety code
requirements
• Inoperable windows and outdated systems
• Temperature limitations restrict operations
• Lack of space negatively affects:
• Collections
• Seating and study areas
• Technology access
• Programs and community services
• Staff support spaces
Facility Condition Assessment
Agenda Packet Page 161 of 235
• Existing library: ~6,500 SF
• Peer libraries serving similar populations:
18,000–25,000 SF
• After ADA upgrades, usable space would decrease
further, not increase, by roughly 10-15 %
• The current footprint cannot support modern
library services, regardless of renovation
The Size Deficit
Agenda Packet Page 162 of 235
Needs Assessment:

Peer Library Metrics

CITY FACILITY SIZE POPULATION
(2020 CENSUS) SF / CAPITA YEAR BUILT
Lafayette 35,000 25,391 1.38 2009
Millbrae 26,200 23,216 1.13 2004
Los Gatos 30,250 33,529 0.90 2012
Bay Point
(in development) 21,000 23,896 0.88 2027*
Hercules 21,500 26,016 0.83 2006
El Cerrito ~20,000 25,962 0.77 Proposed
Belmont 20,000 28,335 0.70 2006
Pleasant Hill 24,000 34,613 0.69 2022
San Pablo 22,000 32,127 0.68 2017
El Cerrito 6,500 25,962 0.25 1949
Agenda Packet Page 163 of 235
• Dedicated adult, children’s and teen spaces
• Flexible community and meeting rooms
• Technology-enabled study and collaboration areas
• Maker / learning spaces
• Quiet retreat and focused study zones
• Full accessibility and flexible layouts
What a Modern Library Provides
Agenda Packet Page 164 of 235
C ontra C osta County Librar ies
Best Practices
Agenda Packet Page 165 of 235
Contra Costa County Libraries
Agenda Packet Page 166 of 235
Contra Costa County Libraries
Agenda Packet Page 167 of 235
Contra Costa County Libraries
Agenda Packet Page 168 of 235
Contra Costa County Libraries
Agenda Packet Page 169 of 235
Contra Costa County Libraries
Agenda Packet Page 170 of 235
Contra Costa County Libraries
Agenda Packet Page 171 of 235
Contra Costa County Libraries
Agenda Packet Page 172 of 235
Contra Costa County Libraries
Agenda Packet Page 173 of 235
Contra Costa County Libraries
Agenda Packet Page 174 of 235
Contra Costa County Libraries
Agenda Packet Page 175 of 235
Contra Costa County Libraries
Agenda Packet Page 176 of 235
What These Libraries
Have in Common
• Purpose-built spaces by age and activity
• Flexibility for evolving programs
• Technology integrated throughout
• Clear separation of quiet and active
zones
• Facilities sized to serve today’s
populations
Agenda Packet Page 177 of 235
C onceptual Scenar ios
Agenda Packet Page 178 of 235
Conceptual Scenarios
Overview

1. Renovate Existing 6,500 Square Foot (SF)
Library

2. Rebuild and Expand Existing Library to
13,000 SF

3. Build 20,000 SF Library In El Cerrito Plaza
Transit-Oriented Development (TOD)

4. Build Standalone 20,000 SF Library on
New Site

5. Renovate an Existing 20,000 SF Building
into Library
Pictured: Pleasant Hill Library
Agenda Packet Page 179 of 235
Scenario 1
Renovate Existing 6,500 SF Library
• Addresses basic code and accessibility
issues only
• Usable space decreases due to ADA
requirements
• Does not address size deficit or service gaps
• Short-term solution focused on keeping
doors open
• Still limited to a maximum of
46 hours of operation due to limitations of
current space
Agenda Packet Page 180 of 235
Scenario 2
Rebuild and Expand Existing
Library to 13,000 SF
• Still below peer library benchmarks
• Conflicts with County preference
for single-story libraries
• Higher operating and staffing costs
• Partial improvement, but limited
long-term value
Pictured: Brentwood Library
Agenda Packet Page 181 of 235
Scenario 3
Build 20,000 SF Library In El Cerrito
Plaza Transit-Oriented
Development (TOD)
• Co-located with transit and other
community amenities
• Assumes long-term 99-year lease
structure (i.e. $1/year)
• Requires development agreement
coordination
• Fully supports modern library
services
Pictured: Walnut Creek Library
Agenda Packet Page 182 of 235
Scenario 4
Build Standalone 20,000 SF Library
on New Site
• Purpose-built facility
• Maximum design flexibility
• Requires property acquisition
• Requires analysis of lost
sales/property tax revenue
• Fully aligns with best practices
Pictured: Lafayette Library & Learning Center
Agenda Packet Page 183 of 235
Scenario 5
• Adaptive reuse opportunity
• Dependent on site availability and
location
• Requires property acquisition
• Requires analysis of lost
sales/property tax revenue
• Comparable service level to new
construction
• Potentially shorter lifespan
Pictured: San Pablo Library
Renovate an Existing 20,000 SF
Building into Library
Agenda Packet Page 184 of 235
Budget Overview
Agenda Packet Page 185 of 235
Conceptual Statement of Probable Cost
Cost Category
SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2 SCENARIO 3 SCENARIO 4 SCENARIO 5

RENOVATE

EXISTING LIBRARY
6,500 SF
REBUILD + EXPAND

EXISTING LIBRARY
13,000 SF
BUILD

LIBRARY IN

EL CERRITO PLAZA
TOD
20,000 SF
BUILD

STANDALONE

LIBRARY ON NEW
SITE
20,000 SF

RENOVATE AN

EXISTING BUILDING

INTO LIBRARY
20,000 SF
Construction Costs (Bldg + Site) $5,239,000 $16,190,000 $24,244,000 $23,744,000 $15,960,000 Escalation (Midpoint of Construction) $1,052,000 $4,583,000 $3,080,000 $5,272,000 $3,296,000 Soft Costs $2,963,000 $6,196,000 $7,664,000 $8,732,000 $6,582,000 Contingencies $1,092,000 $2,387,000 $2,236,000 $3,339,000 $3,217,000 Total Project Budget $10,346,000 $29,356,000 $37,224,000 $41,086,000 $29,055,000 Parking Structure N/A $6,429,000 N/A $4,714,000 N/A
Property Acquisition Costs N/A N/A N/A $2,100,000 $11,549,000 Total Project Budget w/ Adds $10,346,000 $35,785,000 $37,224,000 $47,900,000 $40,604,000 $1,592/SF $2,253/SF $1,861/SF $2,395/SF $2,030/SF
• Figures shown above in red are based on assumptions related to site conditions and market factors and are subject to change as final project specifics are defined. • Note: Cost estimates for Scenarios 4 and 5 exclude potential loss of tax revenue. A 20,000 SF mid-box retailer could generate approximately $220,000 annually in General Fund revenue, primarily from sales and transactions taxes. Revenue impacts would also apply to new site acquisition and would vary Agenda Packet Page 186 of 235
by property.

Investment Needed
• ~$10M: Keeps the existing
library operational, reduces
usable space, does not expand
services
• $35M–$48M: Delivers a
modern, accessible, full-service
library aligned with community
expectations and County best
practices
Pictured: Existing El Cerrito
Library
Agenda Packet Page 187 of 235
Potential Funding Sources
Existing
Reserves &
General Fund
Financing
State and
Federal
Grants
New
Revenue
Agenda Packet Page 188 of 235
Next Steps
Agenda Packet Page 189 of 235
Next Steps

1. Continue refinement of options and cost
estimates w/ Owner’s Rep, Griffin Structures

2. City staff recommends City Council create and
appoint a Library Task Force to begin Spring 2026

3. If funding is identified in 2026:
• Library Task Force will work with staff to
review options and scenarios for
recommendation to City Council

4. If funding is not identified in 2026:
• Library Task Force will discuss interim
investments required to maintain operations
Agenda Packet Page 190 of 235
Learn More:
elcerrito.gov/library
Questions?
Thank you!
Agenda Packet Page 191 of 235
LEGISLATIVE BODY Meeting Schedule
Meeting Location
2025 Appointee
Alternate
2026 Appointee
Alternate
Association of Bay Area Governments
(ABAG), Gen. Ass.

June (Annually)
Bay Area Metro Center Bd Rm, SF
Wysinger
Ktsanes
Wysinger
Ktsanes
Contra Costa Mayors’ Conference
(Delegate)
1st Thursday at 6:30 p.m. (Monthly)
Various Contra Costa County Cities
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
East Bay Wildfire Coalition of
Governments (EBWC)
Varies (Monthly)
City Council Chambers
Motoyama
Saltzman
Motoyama
Saltzman
Green Empowerment Zone (Contra
Costa County)
3rd Friday at 9:30 a.m. (bi-monthly)
1025 Escobar St. Rm 110A/B/C
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
League of California Cities East Bay
Division (Delegate) (Includes League
Annual Conf.)
4th Thurs at 7:00 pm (most months)
Various East Bay Cities
Wysinger
Ktsanes
Wysinger
Ktsanes
Marin Clean Energy Board (Delegate) 3rd Thursday at 6:30 PM San Rafael/Concord
Quinto
Motoyama
Wysinger
Ktsanes
National League of Cities (Delegate) Varies (Monthly)
City Council Chambers
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
Tom Bates Regional Sports Field JPA As Needed
Albany
Motoyama
Wysinger
Motoyama
Wysinger
West Contra Costa Transportation
Advisory Committee (Delegate)
(Makes appointment to CCTA)
4th Friday at 8:00 a.m. (Monthly)
Council Chambers
Saltzman
Wysinger
Saltzman
Wysinger
West County Integrated Waste
Management Authority (Delegate)
RecycleMore
2nd Thursday at 6:15 p.m. (Monthly)
Richmond City Hall
Ktsanes
Wysinger
Ktsanes
Wysinger
West County Mayors’ & Supervisors’
Association
San Pablo (Jan- Jun)
El Cerrito (Jul-Dec)
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
Arts & Culture Commission 4th Monday at 6:00 p.m. (Monthly) Council Chambers Wysinger Motoyama
Committee on Aging 3rd Wednesday at 3:00 p.m. (Monthly) Council Chambers Quinto Quinto
Community Safety Committee 1st Monday at 6:00 p.m. (Monthly) Council Chambers Quinto Ktsanes
Design Review Board 1st Wednesday at 7:00 p.m. (Monthly) Council Chambers Ktsanes Motoyama
Economic Development Committee 3rd Monday at 7:00 p.m. (Monthly) Council Chambers Wysinger Ktsanes
Environmental Quality Committee 2nd Tuesday at 7:00 p.m. (Monthly) Council Chambers Saltzman Wysinger
Financial Advisory Board 4th Tuesday at 6:30 p.m. (Monthly) Council Chambers Motoyama Motoyama
Human Relations Commission 2nd Wednesday at 7:00 p.m. (Monthly) Council Chambers Wysinger Saltzman
Park and Recreation Commission 4th Wednesday at 7:00 p.m. (Monthly) Council Chambers Saltzman Wysinger
Planning Commission 3rd Wednesday at 7:30 p.m. (Monthly) Council Chambers Motoyama Saltzman
Urban Forest Committee 2nd Monday at 7:00 p.m. (Monthly) Council Chambers Ktsanes Ktsanes
Municipal Services Corporation
Chair/Vice Chair (Per bylaws)
As needed
Council Chambers
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
Pension Board Chair
(Meets same as Council)
As needed
Council Chambers
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
2026 CITY COUNCIL LIAISON ASSIGNMENTS
Agenda Item No. 9.A.

Agenda Packet Page 192 of 235
CITY HALL 10890 San Pablo Avenue, El Cerrito, CA 94530
Telephone (510) 215-4305 Fax (510) 215-4379 http://www.el-cerrito.org

SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA MATERIALS

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
January 20, 2026
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING (6:00 PM)
(revised 1/22/2026)
Agenda Item No. 5.A. – Citizens Street Oversight Committee Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2023-2024
Additional Attachment
Agenda Item No. 5.B. – 2025 El Cerrito National Community Survey Presentation Public Comments
Agenda Item No. 8.A. – Accept Certification of Sufficiency of Citizens Initiative Petition for "The El Cerrito Library Initiative" and Consider Options Related to the Election on the Ordinance Proposed by the Initiative Petition

1. Presentation

2. Public Comments
Agenda Item No. 8.B. – El Cerrito Library Facility Update Public Comments
Agenda Packet Page 193 of 235

AGENDA BILL
Agenda Item No. 5.A.

Date: January 20, 2026
To: El Cerrito City Council
From: Kathy Fleming, Citizens Street Oversight Committee Chair; Yvetteh Ortiz, Public Works Director/City Engineer, Public Works Department Subject: Citizens Street Oversight Committee Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2023- 2024

ACTION PROPOSED
Receive and file the Citizens Street Oversight Committee Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2023-2024 to the City Council and Citizens of El Cerrito.

On December 15, 2025, the Citizens Street Oversight Committee met to review expenditures of revenue collected pursuant to Chapter 4.60 of the El Cerrito Municipal Code to determine whether such funds were expended for the purposes specified in the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Expenditure Plan as approved by the City Council of the City of El Cerrito. The expenditures reviewed were reported for Fiscal Year 2023-24 and were summarized in the City’s Annual Financial Comprehensive Report. Further, the Committee reviewed the Agreed Upon Procedures Report issued by the City’s independent auditors, Chavan & Associates, LLP, which indicated that no exceptions were noted related to the City’s compliance with the terms, covenants and conditions of the Master Installment Sale Agreement related to the bond issuance. The Committee also previously reviewed a detailed list of preliminary/unaudited revenues and expenditures and vendors to whom the expenditures were made at their meeting of December 9, 2024.

By a unanimous vote as indicated below, the Committee found that the expenditures were an appropriate use of the Pothole and Local Street Improvement and Maintenance Transactions and Use Tax as approved by the City of El Cerrito City Council. The Committee is hereby reporting their findings to the City Council and the citizens of the City of El Cerrito pursuant to Section 2.04.320 C of the El Cerrito Municipal Code.

Additionally, the Committee acknowledges and fully supports that the City Council, in their resolutions authorizing expenditures of these funds as budget amendments, are confirming that the expenditures are an appropriate use of the Pothole Repair and Local Street Improvement and Maintenance Transactions and Use Tax.

AYES: Chair Kathy Fleming, Vice-Chair Vanessa Hill, and Committee Member Jia Ma NOES: None
ABSENT: None

STRATEGIC PLAN CONSIDERATIONS
Agenda Packet Page 194 of 235
Agenda Item No. 5.A.

This action supports the City’s Strategic Plan Goal(s) of:
• High Performing Organization

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
This section is not applicable to this agenda item.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
This section is not applicable to this agenda item.

LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
This section is not applicable to this agenda item.

Reviewed by:

Karen Pinkos, City Manager
Attachments:

Added 1/20/2026
December 15, 2026 CSOC Meeting Materials
Agenda Packet Page 195 of 235
Allow sender | Block sender
From: Ira Sharenow
To: City Clerk; Holly Charléty
Cc: William Ktsanes; Lisa Motoyama; Rebecca Saltzman; Gabe Quinto Subject: Public Comment Item 5B Survey
Date: Friday, January 16, 2026 5:11:18 AM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Please ask the pollster to release the raw data as the
2025 report is only 38 pages while the 2022 report is 122 pages. https://www.elcerrito.gov/730/Community-Survey
Only about 120 respondents out of about 500 who
received surveys were in the youngest age group, so
their importance had to be magnified. Do those few who
responded really represent their entire age group?
Compared to national benchmarks, 16 ratings were
lower and just 10 were higher. What caused the poor
response? Was it because fewer people responded this
time than the last time?
Of those who responded to the survey, how many
skipped specific questions?
How did young people versus older people respond to
the senior center question? Where are the crosstabs?
Why didn’t the library question include indefinite delays of any possible library, the cost of $37.2 million and the fact that the 17 cents per square foot tax might not be enough to cover all library expenses?
Ira Sharenow
El Cerrito, CA
Agenda Item No. 5.B.

Agenda Packet Page 196 of 235
Citizens Initiative Petition
“The El Cerrito Library Initiative”
City Council Meeting
January 20, 2026
1 Agenda Item No. 8.A.

Agenda Packet Page 197 of 235
Citizen Initiative Process
2 • California Elections Code (EC) 9200 et. seq. provides a process for voters to propose an ordinance to be submitted to the Voters of the City
• Requires signature of 10% registered voters on a petition filed with the City Elections Official (City Clerk)
Citizens Initiative Petition entitled “The El Cerrito Library Initiative” began this process on 5/6/25.

Agenda Packet Page 198 of 235
Citizen Initiative Process
3 • Proponents file Notice of Intent (includes text of proposed ordinance) Filed 5/6/2025 (Revised 6/13/25)
• City Attorney prepares Ballot Title and Summary (w/15 days) 5/21/25 (Revised 6/17/25)
• Proponents publish documents and begin circulation
• Proof of publication filed with City Clerk (w/10 days) Filed 6/2/25 (Revised 6/25/25)
• Signed petitions are filed with City Clerk (w/180 days) Filed 11/20/25
• City Clerk performs a prima facia count (a few days)
Completed 12/1/25
Agenda Packet Page 199 of 235
Citizen Initiative Process
4 • County performs a validation of signatures (30 working days) Completed 1/9/26
• County provides City with certificate of sufficiency
Received 1/9/26
• City Council accepts certificate of sufficiency (at next regular meeting) 1/20/26
• City Council takes action to:

1. Call an Election pursuant to EC 1405 to place the measure on the ballot; or

2. Request an impact report pursuant to EC 9212
• Due within 30 days
Agenda Packet Page 200 of 235
Option 1: Call an Election (EC 9215)
a. Next Regular Election
• Tuesday, November 3, 2026
b. Special Election
• Held not less than 88 days and not more than 103 days from the order of election (EC 1405)
• Held on a Tuesday not the day of, day before, or day after a state holiday
(EC 1100)
5 Agenda Packet Page 201 of 235
Option 2: Request a Report (EC 9212)

1. Refer the proposed measure to the City for a report on impacts of the initiative.
a. Must be presented to the City Council no later than 30 days from certificate of the sufficiency of the petition 2/19/2026

2. Call an election at the same time the report is presented. a. Next Regular Election (November 3, 2026); OR
b. Special Election (subject to EC 1100 & 1405)
6 Agenda Packet Page 202 of 235
Fiscal Impacts
7 • Estimates based on current voter registration 17,814 as of 1/12/2026 • A Special Election consolidated with a Statewide Election or the Regular Election
$3-$4.50 per registered voter
• A Special Election on any other eligible date
$12-$15 per registered voter
Agenda Packet Page 203 of 235
Staff Recommendations
Order a report to provide the City Council and the public information on fiscal and other impacts of the proposed measure
8 *
Schedule a Special City Council meeting on 2/19/2026 to * receive the report and call an election Approve the Resolution to accept the certification of
sufficiency for the Citizens Initiative Petition entitled “The El * Cerrito Library Initiative. Required
Agenda Packet Page 204 of 235
Allow sender | Block sender
From: Gary Prost
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comments: Agenda Items 8A and 8B, El Cerrito Library Date: Monday, January 19, 2026 12:28:47 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Honorable Mayor Quinto and Council:

El Cerrito City Council will receive a library facility update on January 20, 2026 (Agenda Items

8.A and 8.B). The consultant Griffin Structures presented five scenarios for the library, ranging from $10.3 million (renovate existing 6,500 SF facility) to $47.9 million (build standalone library with parking and property acquisition). The Plaza TOD option apparently favored by Council is now estimated at $37.2 million—a 75% increase from the $21.3 million estimate presented to Council in February 2023, and 33% higher than the $28 million cited more recently. Among the Key Points reported by Griffin Structures are:
• The Plaza TOD library (20,000 SF) cost is now estimated at $37.2 million • The 17 cents per square foot parcel tax will likely not be enough to cover all library expenses (construction and operating costs).
• The Plaza library depends on coordination with the TOD development agreement, an agreement that itself depends on securing AHSC grants for both Parcel C East and C West. This will be a years-long process and has no guaranteed outcome. • No construction timeline is provided
Staff recommends ordering an impact report by February 19, 2026, then placing the measure on the June 2, 2026 ballot. Taxpayers would begin paying in December 2026, but construction of a Plaza library depends on a years-long and uncertain series of events.

Disregarding the fact that proponents are trying a novel approach (petition) to passing a new tax with 50% plus 1 rather than the traditional 2/3 vote, this tax places a huge risk on El Cerrito taxpayers.

Livable El Cerrito has a concise summary of many of these points (https://www.livableelcerrito.org/post/new-library-estimates).

Mayor Quinto and Council, you have seen me present to you on behalf of the FireSafe Council and in support of the ECFD and Police. You know I am not rash or impulsive. El Cerrito has struggled for years to get its budget and expenses under control. There is a city pool to refurbish, a senior center is needed, the HNA requires upkeep, roads need paving. I urge you to consider canceling or modifying this tax linked to the Plaza TOD library proposal, and instead renovate the existing library as a sensible alternative.

Gary (and Nancy) Prost, residents
Agenda Packet Page 205 of 235
El Cerrito Library Tax Measure
Comprehensive Review (McDougall)
Version: 2026-01-19
Section 1 — Purpose and scope
My intention is to provide a factual and neutral overview of the proposed library tax measure, highlight what the text clearly does and does not do, and summarize common arguments. At this point I am neutral on the measure. (2,3)
This review is based primarily on the City’s ballot title/summary and the filed measure text, with supporting context from City materials and other publicly available sources listed in the references. (1,2,3,5)
The City has issued a certificate of petition sufficiency, indicating that the petition met signature requirements for placement. (4)
Section 2 — Ballot measure language and key provisions
The measure would authorize the City to levy an annual parcel tax to support acquiring, constructing, equipping, and furnishing a new public library facility, to pay debt service and financing costs for borrowing used for that purpose, and to fund library operations for a limited period after the library is completed. (2,3)
Tax structure
The measure text sets a maximum annual tax rate of $0.17 per building square foot for improved parcels, and $100 per year for vacant parcels. The City Council would set the actual annual tax rate at or below these limits each year. (2,3)
The measure text also allows the maximum rate to be adjusted annually based on a published inflation or personal-income index, and allows the Council to reduce or suspend the tax in a given year if revenue is not needed to meet the measure’s purposes. (3) Duration and start date
The tax is described as commencing on July 1 following voter approval (for a typical November election, this is the following July 1) and continuing until 30 years after the initial issuance of bonds. Practically, that means the tax term is tied to when borrowing is first issued -- not that the borrowing itself must be a 30-year bond. If borrowing is delayed (for example, due to site selection, design, permitting, or financing), taxpayers could pay for some period before construction begins. (2,3)
Senior exemption
The measure text provides a potential exemption for homeowners age 65 and older who apply and demonstrate that they qualify for either the State Controller’s Property Tax Postponement (PTP) program or the State’s Homeowners’ and Renters’ Assistance program. Practically speaking, this equates to a household income threshold of roughly $55,000 per year (see the Agenda Packet Page 206 of 235
reference materials for specifics). The exemption is not automatic -- eligible seniors would need to apply. (3,26,27)
Use restrictions, reporting, and oversight
The measure requires that revenues be deposited in a dedicated fund and used only for purposes defined in the measure text. It requires annual independent financial audits and annual public reports on revenues collected and expenditures, and it establishes a citizen oversight body to review those reports. (3)
Section 3 — Key arguments for the measure (as stated by supporters) • Replace an aging, undersized facility with a modern library that can better support current programming, technology, and accessibility expectations. (5) • Use the El Cerrito Plaza BART transit-oriented development (TOD) effort as an opportunity to co-locate a library with new housing and public space, potentially accelerating delivery and leveraging planning already underway. (6,7)
• Create flexible community space that can support meetings, study, youth programming, and related civic uses; some City materials also describe potential emergency-response functions (e.g., clean air, cooling center, device charging). (6) • Supporters’ campaign materials emphasize both the desirability of a new library and the value of a dedicated, legally restricted funding stream for that purpose. (8) Section 4 — Key arguments against the measure (as stated by opponents or skeptics)
• High local tax load -- adding another long-running special tax can be difficult for households already facing multiple taxes and fee increases from different agencies. (10,11,12) • Reduced fiscal flexibility -- a dedicated (earmarked) revenue stream can increase total taxes while limiting the City’s ability to reallocate funds if priorities change. (3,29,30) • Oversight limited in practice -- the measure requires audits and reporting, but the usefulness of citizen oversight depends heavily on volunteer capacity and the clarity of reporting. (3,19,20)
• Transit-oriented development integration and lease risk -- supporters often point to integrating a library into the El Cerrito Plaza TOD; skeptics argue that this approach could result in the City paying for a space it leases rather than owns, depending on how the project is ultimately structured. (6,8,9)
• Process concerns -- some opponents rely on stakeholder arguments that the measure gives the City flexibility to decide key implementation questions later, while asking voters to approve a long duration revenue stream now. (9)
Agenda Packet Page 207 of 235
Section 5 — Comparisons to other Contra Costa County library projects To put El Cerrito’s proposal in context, it helps to compare it to other recent Contra Costa County library projects. These projects were shaped by local context -- retail and tax base, land availability, county support, and community demographics -- and those differences matter when drawing lessons for El Cerrito. (18,45,46,47,48,49)
Pleasant Hill (2022 library) -- key situational differences vs. El Cerrito Pleasant Hill built a new 23,500 sq. ft. library (opened July 2022; reported roughly $24-$34 million) as part of a broader city improvements program. The primary funding tool was a general half-cent sales tax (Measure K, 2016), not a library-specific tax. The project also benefited from unusually strong county-city cooperation: a land swap allowed the old (county-owned) library site to be sold for housing while the County provided a 5-acre parcel for the new library, reducing land costs (often cited around $10 million). (32,33,34) Why that context differs from El Cerrito:
• Tax base: Pleasant Hill has materially higher local sales tax distributions than El Cerrito, consistent with a larger retail-driven sales tax base.
• Assets/development: Pleasant Hill’s project benefited from a specific “swap and redevelop” land strategy; the measure materials for El Cerrito do not identify an equivalent city/county land-swap contribution of comparable scale.
• County support: Pleasant Hill’s outcome depended on large, concrete county participation (site contribution); similar in-kind county support is not something voters can assume for El Cerrito absent explicit commitments.

Sources: Measure K and project reporting (32,33,34); CDTFA distribution table (44); Census QuickFacts for Pleasant Hill and El Cerrito (45,18).

Lafayette (2009 library) -- key situational differences vs. El Cerrito Lafayette’s library/learning center project illustrates a multi-source approach in a very highincome community. The project received a major state public-library construction grant and substantial local private fundraising. (35,36,37,38)
Why that context differs from El Cerrito:
• Household income and private fundraising capacity: Lafayette’s median household income is substantially higher than El Cerrito’s.
• Funding mix: Lafayette’s capital package leaned on a state grant and philanthropy rather than a dedicated local parcel tax.

Sources: project funding and fundraising (35,36,37,38); Census QuickFacts for Lafayette and El Cerrito (46,18).

Agenda Packet Page 208 of 235
Orinda (2001 library; ongoing parcel tax for services) -- key situational differences vs. El Cerrito
Orinda’s current library building opened in 2001 and was largely enabled by a major Friends-led capital campaign, based on the Friends’ published history. Orinda voters have also used a library parcel tax to support library service levels beyond baseline county funding. (39,40) Why that context differs from El Cerrito:
• Household income and philanthropy: Orinda is substantially more affluent than El Cerrito, which changes what is plausible for private fundraising. • Tax structure: Orinda’s parcel tax is described as funding ongoing services; El Cerrito’s measure combines capital financing support with limited post-construction operations support.

Sources: Orinda campaign history and Measure J analysis (39,40); Census QuickFacts for Orinda and El Cerrito (47,18).

Brentwood (2018 library) -- key situational differences vs. El Cerrito Contra Costa County Library’s annual report notes the opening of the new Brentwood Library (20,400 square feet; two stories, with study and community rooms). (41) Why that context differs from El Cerrito:
• Growth context: Brentwood is a substantially larger, faster-growing city than El Cerrito, which affects capital planning, development-driven revenues, and facility timing.

Sources: Brentwood branch opening (41); Census QuickFacts for Brentwood and El Cerrito (48,18).

Walnut Creek (2010 main library) -- key situational differences vs. El Cerrito Contra Costa County Library describes Walnut Creek’s 2010 main library project as a publicprivate partnership funded with City capital improvement funds and private fundraising by the Walnut Creek Library Foundation. (42,43)
Why that context differs from El Cerrito:
• Scale and fiscal capacity: Walnut Creek is substantially larger than El Cerrito, and CDTFA’s distribution tables show much higher local sales tax distributions for Walnut Creek than for El Cerrito.
• Private fundraising infrastructure: Walnut Creek’s library foundation describes a dedicated capital campaign and fundraising capacity that smaller cities may not have.

Sources: County and foundation descriptions (42,43); CDTFA distribution table (44); Census QuickFacts for Walnut Creek and El Cerrito (49,18).

Agenda Packet Page 209 of 235
Summary: These examples show that recent Contra Costa library projects were financed and delivered under materially different local conditions. For El Cerrito, the most relevant takeaway is not a single “model,” but how local tax base, land, county participation, and community wealth can expand or limit the feasible funding toolkit. (18,44,45,46,47,48,49) Section 6 — Earmarked (restricted) revenues and how this differs from typical bond structures
This measure would create a legally restricted revenue stream: proceeds are placed in a dedicated fund and may only be used for the purposes defined in the measure text (capital costs, financing costs, and limited post-construction operations support). That earmarking is a core design choice: it can increase confidence for voters who want funds locked to a specific purpose, and it can be viewed as a drawback by voters who prefer maximum flexibility for future City budgeting. (3)
Earmarking can also increase accounting and administrative complexity. When a government operates multiple funds with different legal restrictions, shared (“central service”) costs -- finance, payroll, legal, IT, facility management, insurance, etc. -- often need to be allocated across programs and funds using documented allocation methods. This is a standard practice in public-sector accounting, but it is additional work compared with spending from a single unrestricted fund. (29,30,31)
Typical general obligation (GO) bond measures are structured differently: the borrowing is repaid from an ad valorem property-tax levy dedicated to debt service, and those debt-service tax revenues are separate from general property tax collections and are dedicated to bond repayment. By contrast, this measure is a special tax that can be used to pay debt service if the City issues borrowing, but the tax itself is not the same thing as a voter-approved GO bond authorization. (3,28)
Section 7 — Comparative tax burden: El Cerrito vs nearby cities El Cerrito’s baseline local tax rates are high relative to several nearby cities. Two highly visible local taxes that residents feel directly are sales tax and the utility users tax (UUT). (10,11,12) City Sales tax rate UUT (typical
residential utilities)
Notes
El Cerrito 10.25% 8% City sales tax includes
multiple local addons; UUT applies to
utilities
Richmond 9.75% 10% (electric/gas);

9.5% (telecom/cable)
Rates vary by utility
category
San Pablo 9.50% 7% UUT applies to cable,
telephone, electricity,
gas, water
Agenda Packet Page 210 of 235
Sources for table: California sales tax rates (CDTFA) and city UUT pages and/or budgets. (11,12,13,14,15,16,17)
Taxes (recent local tax measures)
Arguments about taxes are ultimately value judgments about affordability, willingness to pay, and the importance of the services being funded. Objectively, El Cerrito voters have approved multiple tax measures in roughly the last eight years, including a real property transfer tax (Measure V -- 2018), a parks special tax extension (Measure H -- 2019), and a sales tax extension (Measure G -- 2024). Other local agencies affecting El Cerrito residents have also passed measures in that period, such as Contra Costa County’s Measure X -- 2020. (21,22,23,24) For example, the East Bay Regional Park District’s Measure FF -- 2018 is a regional parcel tax that also applies to properties in El Cerrito. (25)
Section 8 — Citizen oversight: how strong is it in practice? The measure requires annual independent audits, annual public reporting on revenues and expenditures, and a citizen oversight body to review those reports. These mechanisms create a baseline public record; the strength of oversight in practice depends on volunteer capacity and the clarity of reporting. (3)
Volunteer oversight bodies can experience staffing challenges. El Cerrito is a city of roughly 26,000 residents, and the City’s own vacancy listings show about 50 open seats across advisory bodies. Sustained “oversight” work is hard to staff with unpaid volunteers who have both the time and the temperament to read financial reports carefully and stay engaged over a long horizon. That does not make citizen oversight useless; it means the quality of oversight is an implementation variable that depends on recruitment, continuity, staff support, and the reporting format. (18,19,20)
If the City wants stronger practical accountability (policy choices beyond the measure’s minimum requirements)
• Publish a short, standardized annual financial dashboard (revenues, expenditures, commitments, and next-year forecast) alongside the required audit and narrative report. (3) Pinole 10.25% 8% UUT applies to
electricity, gas,
telephone
Pleasant Hill 9.25% (varies) Shown for sales-tax
comparison
Hercules 9.25% (varies) Shown for sales-tax
comparison
Albany 10.75% 9.5% (electric/gas);

7.5% (telecom/cable)
Alameda County
neighbor
Berkeley 10.25% 7.5% Alameda County
neighbor
Agenda Packet Page 211 of 235
• Hold an annual “open books” public review session focused on the dashboard and audit -- with questions collected in advance and answers published afterward. This can harness the energy of residents who engaged with the ballot measure (both for and against) into a structured review of the financial record. (3,50)
• Pilot a small, clearly bounded participatory budgeting process for a defined subset of nonconstruction spending (for example, furnishings, equipment, or program enhancements), where residents propose and vote on eligible items after feasibility review. This approach has been used by other cities to broaden participation and improve transparency. (51) References

1. City of El Cerrito -- Citizens Initiative Petition "The El Cerrito Library Initiative". https:// www.elcerrito.gov/1753/El-Cerrito-Library-Initiative

2. City of El Cerrito -- Revised City Attorney Ballot Title and Summary (PDF). https:// www.elcerrito.gov/DocumentCenter/View/22918/Revised-Ballot-Title-and-Summary

3. City of El Cerrito -- Revised Measure Text (PDF). https://www.elcerrito.gov/DocumentCenter/ View/22919/Revised-Measure-Text

4. City of El Cerrito -- Certificate of Petition Sufficiency (PDF). https://www.elcerrito.gov/ DocumentCenter/View/22920/Certificate-of-Petition

5. City of El Cerrito -- Library webpage (project context and background). https:// www.elcerrito.gov/93/Library

6. City of El Cerrito -- Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) at El Cerrito Plaza BART Station (project context). https://www.elcerrito.gov/1381/Transit-Oriented-Development-TOD

7. BART -- El Cerrito Plaza TOD (project description). https://www.bart.gov/about/business/tod/ el-cerrito-plaza

8. Committee for A Plaza Station Library (C4PSL) -- proponent campaign site (stakeholder source). https://c4psl.org/

9. No On Another Forever Tax -- opponent campaign site (stakeholder source). https:// www.nomoreforevertax.org/

10. City of El Cerrito -- Sales Tax (current rate and components). https://www.elcerrito.gov/ 1683/Sales-Tax

11. City of El Cerrito -- Utility User Tax (UUT) (current rate and coverage). https:// www.elcerrito.gov/152/Utility-User-Tax

12. California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) -- California City & County Sales & Use Tax Rates (effective Jan 1, 2026). https://cdtfa.ca.gov/taxes-and-fees/rates.aspx

13. City of Pinole -- Utility Users Tax (UUT). https://www.pinole.gov/services/utility-users-taxuut/

14. City of San Pablo -- Taxes (includes UUT rate). https://www.sanpabloca.gov/411/Taxes

15. City of Albany -- FY 2024-25 Adopted Budget (includes UUT rates). https:// www.albanyca.org/home/showpublisheddocument/27653/638588318560470000 Agenda Packet Page 212 of 235

16. Berkeley Municipal Code -- Electricity Users Tax (rate). https://berkeley.municipal.codes/ BMC/7.70.060

17. City of Richmond -- FY 2020-21 Adopted Operating Budget (UUT description and rates). https://ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/54131/Adopted-FY2020-21-Operating-Budget

18. U.S. Census Bureau -- QuickFacts: El Cerrito city, California (population). https:// www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/elcerritocitycalifornia/PST045224

19. City of El Cerrito -- Boards & Commissions (participation and appointment requirements). https://www.elcerrito.gov/170/Boards-Commissions

20. City of El Cerrito -- Current Vacancies (PDF). https://www.elcerrito.gov/DocumentCenter/ View/23142/Current-Vacancies-Updated-12042025

21. City of El Cerrito -- November 2018 Ballot Measure V (real property transfer tax). https:// www.elcerrito.gov/1006/November-2018-Ballot-Measure-V

22. City of El Cerrito -- November 2019 Ballot Measure H (parks special tax extension). https:// www.elcerrito.gov/1004/November-2019-Ballot-Measure-H

23. City of El Cerrito -- November 2024 Ballot Measure G (sales tax extension). https:// www.elcerrito.gov/1593/November-2024-Ballot-Measure-G

24. Contra Costa County -- Measure X (half-cent sales tax). https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/ 7843/Measure-X

25. East Bay Regional Park District -- Measure FF (parcel tax extension). https:// www.ebparks.org/about-us/measure-ff

26. California State Controller -- Property Tax Postponement (PTP) program. https:// www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_prop_tax_postponement.html

27. Sacramento County Assessor -- Tax Assistance FAQs (notes HRA program not funded). https://assessor.saccounty.gov/ResourcesForPropertyOwners/Pages/TaxAssistanceFAQs.aspx

28. California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission (CDIAC) -- Local Agency General Obligation Bonds (primer PDF). https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/cdiac/debtpubs/primer.pdf

29. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations -- 45 CFR § 75.416 (Cost allocation plans and indirect cost proposals). https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/45/75.416

30. MRSC -- Cost Allocation (overview and examples). https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/finance/ accounting/cost-allocation

31. City of Houston -- Cost Allocation (overview and plan links). https://www.houstontx.gov/ finance/cost_allocation.html

32. City of Pleasant Hill -- Measure K (½-cent general sales tax). https://www.phillca.gov/1098/ Measure-K

33. KTVU -- Contra Costa supervisors, city supervisors agree on plans for new Pleasant Hill library (land transfer and project description). https://www.ktvu.com/news/contra-costa-co-supes-citysupervisors-agree-on-plans-for-new-pleasant-hill-library

34. Patch -- Grand Opening for New Pleasant Hill Library set for July 30 (cost, site donation). https://patch.com/california/pleasanthill/grand-opening-new-pleasant-hill-library-set-july-30

35. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) database -- Lafayette Library and Learning Center project (NOD; +/- 25,000 sf description). https://ceqanet.lci.ca.gov/2003082067/2 Agenda Packet Page 213 of 235

35.5. Elevation 66 Brewing Company -- Beer (if you’ve read the citation list this closely, and you live in El Cerrito, I’ll buy you a beer). https://elevation66.com

36. Tradeline -- California Public Library Grant Awards Announced (includes Lafayette grant amount). https://www.tradelineinc.com/news/2004-11/california-public-library-grant-awardsannounced

37. Community Foundation of Lafayette -- 25 Years of Community Impact (notes fundraising for LLLC). https://cflafayette.org/how-we-help/25-years-of-community-impact/

38. Lamorinda Weekly -- Community Foundation Grant Giving Celebration (mentions >$12M raised for LLLC). https://lamorindaweekly.com/archive/issue0806/print/Community-FoundationGrant-Giving-Celebration.html

39. Friends of the Orinda Library -- History (capital campaign and opening date). https:// friendsoftheorindalibrary.org/home/about-us/history/

40. City of Orinda -- City Attorney’s Impartial Analysis of Measure J (PDF). https:// www.cityoforinda.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2097/2018-Library-Parcel-Tax-Impartial-AnalysisMeasure-J

41. Contra Costa County Library -- Annual Report 2018 (PDF) (Brentwood branch opening and size). https://ccclib.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/72/2019/11/2018-AnnualReport.Final_.web_.pdf

42. Contra Costa County Library -- About Walnut Creek Library (includes funding summary). https://ccclib.org/about-walnut-creek-library/

43. Walnut Creek Library Foundation -- About (capital campaign and fundraising). https:// www.wclibrary.org/about/

44. California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) -- Publication 306 Annual Report 2023-24 (includes local tax payments distributed table). https://cdtfa.ca.gov/formspubs/ pub306-2023-24.pdf

45. U.S. Census Bureau -- QuickFacts: Pleasant Hill city, California. https://www.census.gov/ quickfacts/fact/table/pleasanthillcitycalifornia/PST045224

46. U.S. Census Bureau -- QuickFacts: Lafayette city, California. https://www.census.gov/ quickfacts/fact/table/lafayettecitycalifornia/PST045224

47. U.S. Census Bureau -- QuickFacts: Orinda city, California. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/ fact/table/orindacitycalifornia/PST045224

48. U.S. Census Bureau -- QuickFacts: Brentwood city, California. https://www.census.gov/ quickfacts/fact/table/brentwoodcitycalifornia/PST045224

49. U.S. Census Bureau -- QuickFacts: Walnut Creek city, California. https://www.census.gov/ quickfacts/fact/table/walnutcreekcitycalifornia/PST045224

50. Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) -- Public Engagement in the Budget Process (best practice). https://www.gfoa.org/materials/public-engagement-in-the-budget-process Agenda Packet Page 214 of 235

51. City of Vallejo -- Participatory Budgeting (program overview and results). https:// www.vallejo.gov/our_city/departments_divisions/city_manager/participatory_budgeting Agenda Packet Page 215 of 235
From: Pearson Miller
To: City Clerk
Subject: [UNKNOWN SENDER] Council Meeting 1/20/2026, Agenda Item #8 Date: Monday, January 19, 2026 4:35:31 PM
Dear Councilmember:

I am writing to you regarding Agenda Item 8 at tomorrow's (1/20/2025) council meeting. I am a 30+ year resident of El Cerrito and rarely have I heard so much discussion of an issue as I have about the proposed "Library Tax".

I understand that the council's role is two-fold. First, to decide when to place the tax measure on the ballot. And second, to review and approve city staff's plan for spending the money raised.

I followed the campaign by the Committee for a Plaza Library, as they gathered signatures by telling people it is for a library at EC Plaza that would save $10 million over alternatives, and cost only $21 million. Now that the signatures are gathered and certified, I see that the backers have abandoned these 2 core issues of location and cost. Most of my friends and neighbors who signed the petition knew only the cost and location, and none of the many issues involved. If they had been told there was no location yet chosen for the library, and that it might cost $35-$47 million dollars, and it might not be completed for many years to come, I do not think they would have signed. It reminds me of a previous library tax that was defeated for a similar reason:

Pass and collect the tax and we will figure out the "details" later. So in your role I would like you to represent those people who feel they were 'duped' (however unintentionally). Proceed slowly and with many public discussions that weigh the pros and cons and are clear eyed about the potential downsides.

Regarding the way the city staff may request approval to spend the tax, I urge you to not allow consultants to drive the narrative. Every report regarding the library refers to the 2014 El Cerrito Library Needs Assessment. That was 11 years ago. The city, the world, is a different place. Citizens have continued to use and enjoy our current library for those 11 years without incident. Do not be so quick to dismiss it as a viable option. The city has so many pressing needs. The city has a library. The city does not have money for long term capital projects, or fire engine replacements, or pool repairs, or community center repairs, or repairs to sports fields and clubhouses, or paying for unfunded pension liabilities. By dipping into our reserves each year to balance the budget we are sliding back into a financial crisis. We will need new taxes to pay for all of these things since the city already can't live on its current budget.

Passing this tax lessens the chance that a tax, to stay solvent and address our many needs, would pass in the future. These are not questions for consultants, but questions for you, the city council, to decide on priorities and how best to preserve financial stability for the future.

This issue is dividing the city. The flip-flop by the library committee, and the city's hand in glove approach to hire expensive consulting to figure this out using money from the tax, has infuriated many people I know. There is a deep lack of trust about Agenda Packet Page 216 of 235
how money is allocated in the city, and I believe that if the city continues business as usual, deeper and longer lasting divisions will arise.

I urge you to delay putting the measure on the ballot, and then spend the time to get all of the facts and options out to the public in order to rebuild trust and to get the entire city behind a well made decision about if, when and how much to spend upgrading or replacing the library.

Thank you.

Pearson Miller
--
Pearson Miller
Agenda Packet Page 217 of 235
Allow sender | Block sender
From: l w
To: City Clerk
Subject: City Council Mtg. 1/20 Public Comment
Date: Monday, January 19, 2026 7:56:08 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Please enter my comment into the record for Public Comments for the 1/20 meeting. "It is fiscally irresponsible to saddle citizens with a tax for a 'potential' library that is fluid, uncertain and grandiose. Maybe even impossible.

As usual, the City made a sham of a real dialogue about what citizens actually want. This plan was railroaded. And now it is blowing up.

Put the horse before the cart!
Give residents the opportunity for input and legitimate decision making for what we truly want . Let us decide if we want any change regarding a library, or not." Lynn Watkins
EC. 94530
Agenda Packet Page 218 of 235
Allow sender | Block sender
From: Jon Bradshaw
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comments Agenda Item #8
Date: Monday, January 19, 2026 9:33:39 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Dear El Cerrito City Council,
I am writing to express my concerns regarding the proposed tax for a new library in El Cerrito.

Previous reporting suggested that building the library at the Plaza was the lowest-cost option.

However, new estimates from Griffin Structures indicate that renovating the existing library would be $27 million cheaper ($10 million versus $37 million). Furthermore, these estimates appear to exclude interest costs on financing, which suggests the total cost could be even higher.

As a resident who brings my student from Harding Elementary to the library several times a month, I have consistently found the current space and parking to be sufficient. Given this experience, I believe a renovation may be a viable and more cost-effective solution.

While I support the idea of a new library at the Plaza, I am concerned about the high cost now that cheaper alternatives have been identified. I respectfully request that the city spend more time studying these alternatives before moving forward with a parcel tax on the ballot.

Sincerely,
Jon Bradshaw
Behrens St, El Cerrito
Agenda Packet Page 219 of 235
Allow sender | Block sender
From: Shannon Lee-Rutherford
To: City Clerk
Subject: PUBLIC COMMENTS: Council Meeting
Date: Monday, January 19, 2026 10:14:58 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

TL;DR: don't put the Library Tax on the ballot; work with the residents to come up with an affordable plan for our existing library.

Hi there,
As an El Cerrito resident for over a decade, this is my first time writing in. I am motivated by the Library Tax that y'all are threatening to put on the ballot, except it's not what you told all of us signers. It's completely different - now it's super expensive and there's no plan in place to actually build a library.

This feels a lot like a total bait and switch, and considering the 10+ years of poor financial management of the city, it seems like a runaround to get more funds for the general operating budget... Especially since you've now done this with a special committee so it only needs 50%+1 votes to pass. All with no actual building plans, yet.

This feels really icky. Borderline corrupt.

The last time you tried to put the Library Tax on the budget with a "pay now, we'll figure this out later" justification, you lost. You've got a real chance do this differently - how about update our current library, which we can actually afford to do! If special funds are needed, create a special fund/account that is untouchable for general operating and can only be used for the library. That would go a long way toward building trust.

Please don't put this on the ballot. Please work on an affordable solution to modernize the current library, with the residents of the City, not overpriced consultants.

Shannon Lee-Rutherford
Yahoo Mail: Search, Organize, Conquer
Agenda Packet Page 220 of 235
From: Carole Wells-Desin
To: City Clerk
Subject: [UNKNOWN SENDER] Library tax
Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 8:59:39 AM
I am a retired high school librarian who fully believes in libraries as important to culture and society for many reasons I don't need to list. I actually signed the petitions to get to the ballot, but did not fully comprehend the financials or even the concept.

I am strongly opposed to the measure and will vote against it. It is TOO COSTLY, and it isn't planned for moving standards of what El Cerrito needs.

In the meantime I use the Albany (County) Library, the Berkeley Library and Richmond Library as well as the current El Cerrito Library.

Do not give your support to this measure, please. It will be all wrapped in cozy pictures that do not reflect reality of cost and structure.

Respectfully,
Carole Well-Desin
El Cerrito 94530
Agenda Packet Page 221 of 235
From: rose stamm
To: City Clerk
Subject: [UNKNOWN SENDER] Public Comment Agenda Items 8 A and 8 B El Cerrito library Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 9:18:35 AM
I oppose the library tax proposal!
Walter S Linsley
Agenda Packet Page 222 of 235
Allow sender | Block sender
From: Rebecca Benassini
To: City Clerk; William Ktsanes; Lisa Motoyama; Gabe Quinto; Rebecca Saltzman; Carolyn Wysinger Subject: Library agenda item, item 8A
Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 9:43:32 AM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Good morning Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, City Council Members, and City Clerk, I am sorry I am unable to attend the City Council meeting this evening. I write in support of staff's recommendation to continue to move the library measure forward tonight.

I am a 20+ year resident of El Cerrito and participated in previous library reconstruction efforts. What I have learned through these and other experiences is the importance of recognizing opportunities to move forward. As you know, the last vote related to the library replacement was 2016; 10-years seems to be a reasonable amount of time between efforts, as each effort requires such an incredible amount of volunteer work!
Over the last decades, the City has explored multiple locations for a new library, but none were as tangible and viable as the one currently being evaluated. This is the first time we have a real, actionable option that can meet the needs of our community. We should take this opportunity to put this option before the voters and let them decide.

Thank you for your leadership and commitment to improving our City. I urge you to keep this measure moving forward; City staff's recommendation seems to me to help provide information for the public and to still place the initiative on the ballot using one of the least cost options.

Sincerely,
Rebecca Benassini
Agenda Packet Page 223 of 235
From: Kevin OBrien
To: City Clerk
Subject: [UNKNOWN SENDER] Public Comments: Agenda Items 8A and 8B, El Cerrito Library Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 9:51:15 AM
Regular City Council Meeting, Tuesday Jan. 20, 2026 Public Comments: Agenda Items 8A and 8B, El Cerrito Library Honorable Mayor Quinto and Council:

El Cerrito City Council will receive a library facility update on January 20, 2026 (Agenda Items 8.A and 8.B). The consultant Griffin Structures presented five scenarios for the library, ranging from $10.3 million (renovate existing 6,500 SF facility) to $47.9 million (build standalone 20,000 sq. ft. library with parking and property acquisition). The Plaza TOD option apparently favored by Council is now estimated at $37.2 million—a 75% increase from the $21.3 million estimate presented to Council in February 2023, and 33% higher than the $28 million cited more recently. Among the Key Points reported by Griffin Structures are: • The Plaza TOD library (20,000 SF) cost is now estimated at $37.2 million • The 17 cents per square foot parcel tax will likely not be enough to cover all library expenses (construction and operating costs). • The Plaza library depends on coordination with the TOD development agreement, an agreement that itself depends on securing AHSC grants for both Parcel C East and C West. This will be a years-long process and has no guaranteed outcome. • No construction timeline is provided Staff recommends ordering an impact report by February 19, 2026, then placing the measure on the June 2, 2026 ballot. Taxpayers would begin paying in December 2026, but construction of a Plaza library depends on a years-long and uncertain series of events. Disregarding the fact that proponents are trying a novel approach (petition) to passing a new tax with 50% plus 1 rather than the traditional 2/3 vote, this tax places a huge risk on El Cerrito taxpayers. Livable El Cerrito has a concise summary of many of these points (https://www.livableelcerrito.org/post/new-libraryestimates). El Cerrito has struggled for years to get its budget and expenses under control. There is a city pool to refurbish, a senior center is needed, the HNA requires upkeep, roads need paving. I urge you to consider canceling or modifying this tax linked to the Plaza TOD library proposal, and instead renovate the existing library as a sensible alternative.

Agenda Packet Page 224 of 235
From: No Reply
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment Submission
Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 11:09:42 AM
This sender is trusted.

Submitted by: Ruth Robinson
Email Address:

Commented on event: https://elcerritoca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/601/overview If you are having trouble viewing the URL above, cut and paste the string into your browser window.

User comment: To El Cerrito Leadership: The plan to improve and build a new library is both worthy and timely. However, the presented plan to build on property not owned by El Cerrito, in a location with no parking and way too large is not a good use of time or resources. I would gladly support a bond issue to build on the existing site, make it a two story building, and I think our community would be strongly behind that. I have not seen in any of the literature about the plaza scheme who would pay for the required additional library staff and the certainly on-site required security personnel. I volunteer in a number of libraries from Oakland to El Sobrante, and can tell you that depending upon the location, on site security is a necessity. Thank you.

Agenda Packet Page 225 of 235
From: No Reply
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment Submission
Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 12:06:11 PM
This sender is trusted.

Submitted by: Verónica Medina-Ross
Email Address:

Commented on event: https://elcerritoca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/601/overview If you are having trouble viewing the URL above, cut and paste the string into your browser window.

User comment: We desperately need a new and/or improved library in our city! One that provides better study areas, spaces for community events and workshops, and the capacity to store more physical books and materials plus more accessibility to electronic materials.

Agenda Packet Page 226 of 235
From: No Reply
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment Submission
Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 12:09:32 PM
This sender is trusted.

Submitted by: Marlene Keller
Email Address:

Commented on event: https://elcerritoca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/601/overview If you are having trouble viewing the URL above, cut and paste the string into your browser window.

User comment: I fully support a new library for El Cerrito—and the Transit Oriented Development Plan at the El Cerrito BART station makes the most sense. This plan would enrich the lives of everyone in El Cerrito by providing a modern library and community gathering place. Importantly, a modern library would increase property values, provide a city center feel to El Cerrito, and strengthen literacy, education and socializing. As your data shows, we have fallen behind other communities in the county for a modern library/community space. This plan would remedy that deficiency, create a welcoming location for all El Cerrito residents, and is the best, single investment for our community’s future.

Agenda Packet Page 227 of 235
Allow sender | Block sender
From: nick zamorano
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment Agenda Item 8A
Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 12:15:05 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

I am writing in support of approval for the resolution to accept certification of the library petition thereby designating a regular/special election to be held before or on November 3, 2026.

Nick Zamorano
El Cerrito
Agenda Packet Page 228 of 235
From: Akasha Nicole Kaufmann
To: City Clerk
Subject: [UNKNOWN SENDER] No to library tax
Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 1:01:15 PM
This is ludicrous. Richmond has a big library just blocks up the road. Seems like a huge scam on your constituents. I and my neighbors are vehemently opposed.

I am optimistic this grift will be stopped.

Thanks so much for adding my NAY.

Agenda Packet Page 229 of 235
From: Mary Milton
To: City Clerk
Subject: [UNKNOWN SENDER] Public comments on agenda items 8A and 8B El Cerrito Library Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 1:42:27 PM
As an El Cerrito voter I support renovating existing library and do not support the Plaza TOD proposed library. Put the tax measure on the ballot without any more information gathering polls and let voters decide.

Agenda Packet Page 230 of 235
From: Lisa Martinengo
To: City Clerk
Subject: [UNKNOWN SENDER] Library tax proposal
Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 12:50:19 PM
Hello Holly and EC Council and staff,
I am opposed to El Cerrito adding a new tax (ostensibly for a library) when there are many details still unknown.

Please aim to represent the overall population of EC residents as your top priority, rather than forcing through a potentially bad financing decision.

Lisa Martinengo
EC Resident for 16 years
Agenda Packet Page 231 of 235
From: No Reply
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment Submission
Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 4:02:33 PM
This sender is trusted.

Submitted by: Sapana Sakya
Email Address:

Commented on event: https://elcerritoca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/601/overview If you are having trouble viewing the URL above, cut and paste the string into your browser window.

User comment: El Cerrito needs an updated resourced public library that can meet the needs of your population - youth all the way to the elderly! Please support the El Cerrito library measure!! Thank you for your continued work. With regards, Sapana Sakya Agenda Packet Page 232 of 235
Allow sender | Block sender
From: Justin Chang
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comments: Agenda Items 8A and 8B, El Cerrito Library Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 9:08:51 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Regular City Council Meeting, Tuesday Jan. 20, 2026
Public Comments: Agenda Items 8A and 8B, El Cerrito Library Honorable Mayor Quinto and Council:

El Cerrito City Council will receive a library facility update on January 20, 2026 (Agenda Items 8.A and 8.B). The consultant Griffin Structures presented five scenarios for the library, ranging from $10.3 million (renovate existing 6,500 SF facility) to $47.9 million (build standalone 20,000 sq. ft. library with parking and property acquisition). The Plaza TOD option apparently favored by Council is now estimated at $37.2 million—a 75% increase from the $21.3 million estimate
presented to Council in February 2023, and 33% higher than the $28 million cited more recently. Among the Key Points reported by Griffin Structures are:
• The Plaza TOD library (20,000 SF) cost is now estimated at $37.2 million • The 17 cents per square foot parcel tax will likely not be enough to cover all library expenses (construction and operating costs).
• The Plaza library depends on coordination with the TOD development agreement, an agreement that itself depends on securing AHSC grants for both Parcel C East and C West.

This will be a years-long process and has no guaranteed outcome. • No construction timeline is provided
Staff recommends ordering an impact report by February 19, 2026, then placing the measure on the June 2, 2026 ballot. Taxpayers would begin paying in December 2026, but construction of a Plaza library depends on a years-long and uncertain series of events.

Disregarding the fact that proponents are trying a novel approach (petition) to passing a new tax with 50% plus 1 rather than the traditional 2/3 vote, this tax places a huge risk on El Cerrito taxpayers.

Livable El Cerrito has a concise summary of many of these points (https://www.livableelcerrito.org/post/new-library-estimates).

El Cerrito has struggled for years to get its budget and expenses under control. There is a city pool to refurbish, a senior center is needed, the HNA requires upkeep, roads need paving. I urge you to consider canceling or modifying this tax linked to the Plaza TOD library proposal, and instead renovate the existing library as a sensible alternative.

Library use is decreasing, if we need a gathering place for other events use the community center. We don't need a 20,000 sf library just because others have it.

Signed ___Justin Chang_____
Resident of El Cerrito
Agenda Packet Page 233 of 235
Allow sender | Block sender
From: STEVEN PRICE
To: City Clerk
Subject: Why every community needs a library
Date: Wednesday, January 21, 2026 3:47:06 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

I wrote the following to read during public comments on January 20, but changed my message at the last second. Here is what I originally intended to say:

Dear El Cerrito City Council,
Benjamin Franklin started the first public library in America in 1731. He said that the value of libraries is that they make yeoman farmers better educated than aristocrats. He felt that, beyond schooling, learning should be a life-long activity of citizens, essential to a functioning society.

I’ve heard people say that the internet makes libraries obsolete. But there are many differences between libraries and the internet. Libraries are where people check out books to read, to delve into subjects for hours and even days during the time it takes to read them. In contrast the internet delivers short hors d'oeuvres of information with websites warning you in advance how many minutes it will take to read.

New bigger libraries now-days feature community rooms where people can hear talks or engage in face-toface discussions. By comparison, a discussion on the internet, eratically attended, might take days without the inhibiting benefit of nearby people to keep it civil.

Libraries bring down the cost of self-directed learning. The cost of periodicals has risen a lot in recent years:
over $10 to $15 for a single issue of Time Magazine, National Geographic, or Scientific American. Some think people should get a magazine subscription where the cost per issue is cheaper, but libraries allow you to browse for free a variety of periodicals for a broad range of information and opinion. Shall we restrict the reading public to those who can afford it?
Walter Cronkite said, “Whatever the cost of our libraries, the price is cheap compared to that of an ignorant nation.” There are many things essential for the functioning of a local community that cost money that most of us don’t dispute — roads, sewers, fire and crime protection, schools. You could argue that a computer at home eliminates the need for libraries for children. Yet it’s becoming more and more apparent that encouraging kids to spend more time at home in front of computers isn’t good for their mental health. We saw how devastating to children’s attention relying on online computer instruction was during the COVID pandemic. Children need places outside of the home for learning.

Can a community really function without social infrastructure that brings people physically together in the community — schools, meeting halls, coffee shops, parks, and libraries — where learning, social interaction, and conversation is celebrated? For the health of our community, and our democracy, a new bigger library is worth it.

Sincerely,
Steve Price
El Cerrito
Agenda Packet Page 234 of 235
Allow sender | Block sender
From: Ira Sharenow
To: City Clerk; Holly Charléty
Cc: William Ktsanes; Lisa Motoyama; Rebecca Saltzman; Gabe Quinto Subject: Public Comment Item 8B Library Study
Date: Friday, January 16, 2026 5:11:49 AM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

The city government should stop wasting taxpayer
money and give up on the library proposal.

How much money is the library tax expected to bring in? Is it about $2.7 million per year?
All five proposals seem to be infeasible. Building a new library would lead to a bond sale that would cost well
over $2 million per year. Operating costs would run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. The city
management is against the current location.

Also for the cost estimate for the Plaza, what are the
assumptions regarding the financing and construction of Parcel C West? Currently, there is no money to build
Parcel C West, so there cannot be a library there.

Ira Sharenow
El Cerrito, CA
Agenda Item No. 8.B.

Agenda Packet Page 235 of 235