Council’s Opportunity to Address Unfunded $40 million liability –

A Member of the Piedmont 2011 Municipal Tax Review Committee submits a letter responding to “Piedmontage” in the May 30, 2012 edition of the Piedmont Post:

Contrary to the misleading view expressed in the “Piedmontage” editorial, vital City services need not be reduced as there are sufficient opportunities to reduce cost in a reasonable, fair and orderly fashion particularly in the cost of employee fringe benefits (primarily health benefits for current and retired employees and contributions to employee retirement plans).  > Click to read more…

After closed session involving employee contracts and performance reviews, the School Board will meet on June 13, at 7 p.m. to approve employee contract amendments and the instructional calendar for 2013-14.  Details of the contract proposals will be available for public review as of June 12 on the front page of the district website.  The contract will be subject to County review.

Final adoption of the 2012-13 budget is planned for the following meeting on June 27, 2012.

Piedmont youth soccer players don’t have to lose practice time – 

The following letter was published as a Viewpoint in the Piedmont Post (6/6/12) in response to a letter published on 5/30/12 by Mark Landheer, past president of the Piedmont Youth Soccer Club (PYSC).

Speaking for myself and not for the Friends of Moraga Canyon (FOMC), I offer the following rebuttal in response to Mark Landheer’s letter of May 30, “The Legacy of FOMC.”

1. The number of kids in PYSC will not necessarily be restricted without the large field at Blair Park. Alameda Point with two fields provided only half the required 3-hour practice time per week for the 330 that play competitive soccer. Existing fields in Piedmont provided the other half.  Piedmont Recreation Facilities Organization’s (PRFO)Steve Schiller said (9/28/11) that one new large field at Blair Park would replace the two large fields at Alameda Point by doubling up; that is, two teams would practice simultaneously on one field. That being the case, doubling up on the existing fields in Piedmont would equally well resolve the lack of field space for the 330 youths displaced at Alameda Point, at least temporarily. There would be no need to turn away any youngster. Moreover, I have visited several alternate soccer fields outside of Piedmont. The field at Laney College in particular was unquestionably available. So, in fact, there are other possibilities for the 330 youths. Roughly 20 percent of these players live outside of Piedmont.

2. Blair Park clearly has the potential to be enjoyed not only by dog walkers but also by many other residents of all ages for passive recreation as a complement to Coaches Field and as an attractive gateway to the City. The East Bay Regional Park District has allocated $507,325 of Measure WW bond funds to Piedmont precisely for the purpose of improving this and other city parks. Cost to the City is not a problem.

3. In the November 9, 2011 Piedmont Post, Lance Hanf, then treasurer of the PYSC, calculated air pollution from the round trips needed for soccer practice at Alameda Point. However, Lance miscalculated the number of trips, assumed an excessive driving distance, and omitted the net difference between round trips to Alameda Point and Blair Park. As a result, his numbers for reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, etc., were greatly exaggerated. Be that as it may, the PYSC at any time could have rented a bus to make just three round trips per night during the 11-week practice season instead of the 60 per night by auto, which would have radically reduced the negative impacts associated with travel to fields outside of the city.

4. On safety, Moraga Avenue will continue to be unsafe for pedestrians and bicyclists as long as there are no sidewalks and no bicycle lanes (which PRFO deleted), and as long as the Piedmont Police Department does not enforce the 25-mph speed limit. The Piedmont Public Works Department is vigilant, and we can all be confident that the Monterey pines at Blair Park will not crash on Moraga Avenue.

On another of Landheer’s points, City policy has long been to provide park maintenance. It was the City Council, not the FOMC, that required PRFO to pay for all maintenance costs had Blair been built. Even so, unknown to many, ELS, the Blair Park project architect, defined a “project area” within the site that evidently limited PRFO responsibility to a portion of the park and not the entire 5.6 acres.

Three years ago, I told the City Council that Blair Park was unsuited for the large field proposed and suggested instead an improved “drive-to” public park with various amenities. My comments fell on deaf ears. Not much has changed from my point of view, but the opportunity still exists to complement Coaches Field with an attractive neighborhood park, accessible to the entire community, across the street at Blair Park.

William Blackwell, Piedmont Resident

The opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Piedmont Civic Association.

Education Group Opposes California Layoff System –

Only California and 10 other states base teacher layoffs on seniority.   Francisco Castillo of StudentsFirst, an education advocacy group, states, “No one wants teacher layoffs to take place, but they are an unfortunate reality this year, and California’s current layoff system makes the situation so much worse.”  He notes a 2012 California Education Policy survey that found 75% of Californians supported ending seniority-based lay-offs.  “Support for such reforms is even greater in the Latino and African American communities. More than 84 percent of Latinos and 83 percent of African Americans favor ending seniority-based layoffs, while only 13 percent and 12 percent, oppose such reforms.”

In late May, StudentsFirst released a report, “Great Teachers for Every Child: A Matter of Social Justice” (GTEC) which analyses the impact of California state policies and budget crisis on schools.  Among the findings in the report is a $15,000 differential in salary for those laid-off and those retained in seniority-based layoff regimes.  When those retained earn the highest salaries, the number of classrooms impacted is maximized.  California’s revised budget proposal could result in more than 8,000 teachers laid off state-wide.  But, if the State changed its layoff policy, it could potentially save up to 2800 of those teachers, according to the GTEC report.  The report further predicts that schools serving minority neighborhoods will lose significantly more teachers since they tend to have teachers with the least seniority.

New second unit and multi-family housing rules in Piedmont without a citywide vote –

On June 11, staff will be presenting a comprehensive set of proposed revisions of the Piedmont Zoning Code to the Piedmont Planning Commission.  One change will require any new development in Zones C and D (multiple density residential and commercial) to be a minimum of 12 units per acre.

The proposed changes follow recent additions to the Housing Element of Piedmont’s General Plan, including commitments to new programs and zoning changes intended to create incentives for high density housing.  These programs were adopted as part of the new Housing Element was approved by the City Council on June 6, 2011 and certified by the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development after protracted negotiations with the State.  The new Housing Element committed to multiple changes in current Piedmont zoning laws.  > Click to read more…

A Piedmont Town Hall meeting will be held on Thursday, June 21st at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at City Hall to solicit ideas from the public regarding the selection of a new Police Chief.

The meeting will be hosted by Mayor John Chiang and Vice Mayor Margaret Fujioka, as well as a recruiter hired by the City, Regan Williams of the firm Bob Murray & Associates.   Residents are invited to share their input about what characteristics, experience, and professional background they would like to see in a new Police Chief.   Also comments regarding any issues present in the community or in the department are welcomed.

“As the hiring of a Police Chief is highly important to the City, I encourage residents to participate by attending this meeting and/or providing written comment,”  stated City Administrator Geoffrey Grote.

Written comments may be sent to City Council, c/o Piedmont City Clerk, 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, CA 94611 or by email to: jtulloch@ci.piedmont.ca.us.  Correspondence received by the City Clerk is considered part of the public record and thus available to the public. For further information contact, City Clerk John O. Tulloch at (510) 420-3040.

Piedmont to Create “Suspected” and “Illegal” List of Second Units-

In case you missed it, last year (2011) the Piedmont City Council adopted a new policy that assumes empty rooms in Piedmont homes represent a public resource, and that it is appropriate to use leverage on Piedmont residents to create more second units in Piedmont homes.

A list of homes with “Illegal” and “Suspected” second units will be created. Staff intends to “work with” Piedmont residents to convert rooms in their homes to legal second units.  If voluntary action is not taken, or proves to be impossible, it was unclear what City action would result.

The List is described in the Housing Element as being “confidential.”  > Click to read more…

California Primary Election – 

Piedmont voters who have not already cast  absentee ballots will head to the polls Tuesday, June 5, 2012 to vote in the California Primary Election to determine  who advances to the November General Election, elect a Superior Court Judge, and give thumbs up or down for two state propositions and one local measure.  Polls open at 7:00 am and close at 8:00 pm.

New for June 2012: California’s Top Two Primary System

For the first time, all candidates running for statewide offices are listed on one ballot, regardless of  party affiliation. Under the “Top Two Primary” system approved by California voters in June 2010, the two candidates for each office who receive the most votes will qualify to run in the General Election. A candidate’s party has no impact on who advances to the General Election. Instead, candidates proceed to November based solely on how many votes they receive in the Primary.

The new system applies to US Congressional, State Senate and State Assembly candidates on the ballot. It does not apply to Presidential candidates who are still selected in the Primary by party affiliation or to political party County Central Committees or County Councils.

Three candidates running for Alameda County Superior Court Judge are also on the ballot.

In addition, the ballot includes two statewide Propositions and one Alameda County Measure:

Proposition 28 — Reform Legislative Term Limits 
is designed to make legislators more accountable by reducing their time in office from 14 years to a strict 12 year limit. This is a state constitutional amendment that would allow legislators to serve a total of 12 years entirely in the State Assembly, the State Senate, or a combination of the two. It would affect legislators elected after its passage. Currently, State legislators can serve a maximum of 14 years: 6 years in the Assembly and 8 years in the Senate.

Proposition 29 — The Cigarette Tax for Cancer Research 
imposes an additional five cent tax on each cigarette distributed ($1.00 per pack), and an equivalent tax increase on other tobacco products, to fund cancer research and other specified purposes. It requires tax revenues be deposited into a special fund to finance research and research facilities focused on detecting, preventing, treating, and curing cancer, heart disease, emphysema, and other tobacco-related diseases, and to finance prevention programs.

Measure B, Alameda County: would allocate funds for core academic programs for Peralta Community College District (2/3 Approval Required). The measure would levy $48 per parcel annually for 8 years with citizens’ oversight, no funds for administrators’ salaries, and all funds spent in the Peralta Community College district (College of Alameda, Laney College, Merritt College and Berkeley City College). The funds could not be taken by the state and would support affordable college education including core academic programs and educating students to transfer to university.

For more information, visit the League of Women Voters Smart Voter website: http://www.smartvoter.org/2012/06/05/ca/alm/

An open letter expressing concern over a law dictating that private property landscaping must comply with an external agency’s changeable requirements, plus new City staff monitoring requirements.

Piedmont Landscaping Requirements To Be Controlled By Another Agency – 

I find this proposed ordinance [704] a very unreasonable intrusion by government power on how individuals choose to proceed in doing their own landscaping.  While I am “for” the environment and personally practice many forms of conservation in my own landscaping, I believe that educating people and making conservation easy for them is far preferable to making laws enforced against them.

I truly question the legal source of power in our elected City Council to pass this bill.  This is not “health and safety” or any legitimate City government interest I can find.

In Section 17.18.3 (b), the City is required to apply (whenever they are making an individual homeowner do his landscaping in compliance with this law) whatever is then the most recent version of the Bay-Friendly Landscape Guidelines, Scorecard and Checklist.    This means that our elected representatives are giving up their discretion to pass laws that govern all of us to an outside group (which is STOPWASTE.ORG).   This is absurd.  We elect these Council Members to make decisions about how to use our taxpayer money and how to best run our sweet little town.  We did not elect the people at STOPWASTE.ORG who may have some pretty radical ideas going forward about how we should be landscaping our yards. > Click to read more…

The report and recommendations from the Budget Advisory and Financial Planning Committee (BAFPC) look at the City’s primary financial risks and ways to reduce them.  The report will be presented to the City Council on Monday, June 4.    The nine recommendations, covering the Sewer Fund, Pay, Pensions and Benefits, Capital Transfers and Other Items, can be read below.