PIEDMONT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT NOTICE

School Enrollment for 2015-16 School Year

Enrollment is open for all students from Kindergarten to Twelfth Grade for the 2015-16 School Year. Enrollment is required for any student who did NOT attend school at a PUSD school in the 2014-15 school year. Please enroll as soon as possible to assist in preparation for staffing needs and class assignements.

To enroll your child, you must go in person to the school.

For middle and high school students, please go to the school your child will attend; for elementary students, go to your neighborhood elementary school.

To make an appointment to enroll your student call:

Piedmont High School – Melanie Reed, 594-2646

Piedmont Middle school – Evangeline Walsh, 594-2669

Beach Elementary School – Megan Nakahara, 594-2666

Havens Elementary School – Cheryl Vaughan, 594-2680

Wildwood Elementary School – Christine Peterson, 594-2780

Required Documents:

Please download documents for enrollment by visiting the District website at www.piedmont.k12.ca.us/district-info/enrollment. Please bring paper copies of relevant documentation. Parents are required to bring original birth certificates or passport of children to be registered to show proof of age. Children should not accompany parents for enrollment.

Parents must provide, at the time of enrollment, a grant deed and three additional proofs of residency. Parents renting/leasing must provide, at the time of enrollment, a lease AND a copy of the property owner’s rental permit from the city, and three additional proofs of residency.

For information on acceptable proofs, please go to the District website: http://www.piedmont.k12.ca.us/district-info/enrollment/ and scroll down to “Proofs of Residency.”

Parents should come prepared with documented evidence showing complete dates that children have been adequately immunized. State law requires that children be excluded from school until this information is on record in the school files.

On Saturday my 10 year old daughter Eva and I had the opportunity to watch the Piedmont High women’s basketball team play in Sacramento.  Eva’s on her fifth grade basketball team at Turtle Bay School in Redding.  I graduated from Piedmont High School in 1972.  Eva attended the game wearing her grandfather’s (Art Hecht’s) Piedmont High School rooter jacket. Neither one of us had ever seen anything as magnificent as the beautiful game the Piedmont women played that night.  The athleticism was amazing.  The tenacity to struggle from behind and win decisively was inspirational.  The most impressive feature we observed, that moved us deeply, was that the athletes truly loved each other, worked as a family of sisters, and put forth fabulous effort for each other.  We were both thrilled and proud. Please express our thanks to the team.

And there is no doubt, they did achieve the honorable!

 Since that time the women’s basketball team has ended their brilliant run for this year.  It would have been nice if they had gone to the State Championship game and won it, but it doesn’t matter.  As I later wrote to Superintendent Hubbard, those young women and their coaches have created something very special and beautiful, and they deserve recognition. Their intensity and focus were awe inspiring. The harmonious union they built is wonderful. They are and always will be champions.            Stephen Hecht

The Piedmont Unified School District’s (PUSD) new superintendent will be announced and introduced to the community at the School Board’s upcoming meeting in the City Council Chamber, 120 Vista Avenue.   The Wednesday, March 25, 2015 Board of Education Meeting will begin open session at 6:00 p.m.

A reception for the community to meet the new superintendent will follow at 6:45 p.m., City Hall, 120 Vista Avenue.

All community members are invited and encouraged to attend.

The appointee will assume the position of superintendent on July 1, 2015, succeeding Superintendent Constance Hubbard, who has served the District for more than 12 years.

In the District’s news release preceding the March 25 Board meeting, it states the PUSD Board reached “a unanimous agreement on this appointment.”

On Tuesday, March 24, the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) Board will consider a proposed $1.8 billion budget that EBMUD’s General Manager Alexander Coate will present on Tuesday, March 24, to the Board of Directors. The budget funds critical capital projects, accounts for increased water supply costs because of drought, and balances slimmed down water sales.

Under the first year of this proposal, the average EBMUD household that uses about 7,500 gallons per month would see an increase in their monthly water charge of $3.57, increasing their bill from $48.60 to $52.17 each month. That is about a 7 percent increase to most residential water bills for fiscal year 2016. About two-thirds of EBMUD’s single family residential customers use less than the average amount.

The highest one percent of water using households, those using about 45,000 gallons per month, would see an increase in their monthly water charge of $47.69, increasing their bill from $264.68 to $312.37 each month. That is about an 18 percent increase for those customers in fiscal year 2016.

The wide range in water rate increases in fiscal year 2016 stems from the findings of a cost of service study the district conducted last year. State law requires rates be based on the cost of service. The study recommended adjustments for rates in all customer classes and all tier levels to match customer costs with services received.

An additional 7 percent rate increase for all water customers also is proposed for fiscal year 2017.

New this year to the budget are proposed temporary drought surcharges of up to 25 percent. The drought surcharges of 8, 20 or 25 percent would apply to all customers only during a declared stage 2, 3 or 4 drought and only on the volume of water they use. Drought surcharges primarily would pay for water supplies via EBMUD’s Freeport facility on the Sacramento River.

School Board Member Doug Ireland provided the following update on the selection of a new PUSD Superintendent.

“The board has conducted its schedule of first and second round interviews, HYA has provided background reference materials on all the selected interviewees and we are now in the final stages of concluding our proceedings.  We plan to make a formal announcement at the regularly scheduled March 25 board meeting. We continue to ask for your patience in this final but sensitive period in the process.”

School Board Member Richard Raushenbush reported that three candidates were interviewed on three consecutive nights on March 12, 13, and 14, 2015.

School Board Meeting Report by High School Student Tristan Gardner:

On Wednesday, March 11, I attended a meeting of our esteemed School Board. Their job is to “serve every student,” and keep Piedmont schools in the top tier of all public schools.  These meetings are where motions pass and public opinion is weighed, so I sat in on one to observe and have my own concerns addressed.  The meeting covered some pretty bland topics, the student liaison spoke about the general feel of the high school, the new computer classes were explained, and a representative of a parent group said that they were very encouraged because the accreditation board, WASC, gave us two thumbs up.

One particularly important, though not really debated, item was on the agenda, the new common core curriculum for math.   For those who do not know, the new system will allow students to take more flexible paths by either taking classes that slow, or “expand,” the curriculum, or ones that “compress” it.  This allows students to have multiple opportunities to get into an advanced math class.

In the last system, your fate was decided by a test taken between fifth and sixth grade.  Some concern was raised by Board Member Doug Ireland, and quickly alleviated, regarding the summer school options and teacher readiness.  Assistant Superintendent for Educational Services Randall Booker confidently stated that the teachers will most certainly be ready.

The motion passed unanimously, but to understand it better, I caught up with Mr. Hayden, a Piedmont math teacher and meeting attendant.  He seemed a little anxious and excited about the new system and declared that the board “accepted just about all the terms they hoped for.”

After the initial roundabout of the board, they opened the floor to those who wanted to address any issue.  I took the podium to discuss Piedmont’s policy regarding 18-year-olds and absences.  Currently Piedmont High makes students get a contract signed by their parents allowing them to sign excuses for their absences.  When a student gets this contract, the parents still get notified every time their child leaves school.  If you cannot reach your parents, you cannot leave. California Education Code basically states that if you are 18, you have all the powers a parent of a minor would have.  I came armed with statutes and prepared to defend my case against strong opposition.

When I finished my piece, the board let me know that a discussion or vote could not occur that meeting because it was an off agenda item, but the Superintendent would stay in touch with me. To be honest, I was a little shocked about how receptive they were to an idea that I thought would get a lot of resistance.

Tristan Gardner

Editors’ Note:  The opinions expressed are those of the author.

Meeting of the Planning Commission

on Monday, March 9, 2015

        The Planning Commission meets on the second Monday every month.  The purpose of the Planning Commission is to okay modifications to or construction of buildings and fences in Piedmont.  They also advise the City Council on any planning or building matters.

        Before entering the room tensions were high, everyone was anticipating the crucifixion that comes not only from the board members but from your neighbors who will try to get rid of any improvements to your home, because who likes change?    On the agenda there were at least ten issues, the first subject brought up was the consent calendar with the plans that the commission “Okayed” as is.  Fifteen people got up and smiling ear to ear on hearing that their remodel, construction, or renovation was passed and that they did not have to go down and speak for their plan, and then hear for the next ten minutes from the five commission members rip apart the plans they had spent the past weeks creating and changing to make perfect.

        Juan Perez was one of the lucky people already “Okayed” and set to continue.  Juan Perez is a general contractor and working on a project for a woman in Piedmont.  He and the architect and his client all had to come to the meeting prepared to defend their plans.  Luckily their plan passed,  but if it had not been approved, they would have gone through “many rounds of appeals and more commission meetings”.

        At the meeting on March 9th the issues brought forward were all about the improvement and construction of homes.  For every issue brought forward there were neighbors who either voiced their support or opposition for the project.

       The first application was about 38 Monte Avenue.  The owners wanted  to demolish the existing garage and build a new garage on  Monte Avenue requiring a setback variance and also build a cottage.  The family that owns the house, the designer, and the architect all spoke about the plans.

       The main point that they all made was the goal to keep the integrity of the house and discussion with neighbors.  But even with their many meetings with neighbors to keep everyone happy two of the neighbors went up and spoke against the plan.  One of their concerns was a lack of parking that would increase if the garage was moved.

      One Monte Avenue parking space available at this point would be lost if the garage was moved and a wind tunnel could also be a problem.  Another major issue was the new height of the cottage, which could impede sunlight for neighboring homes and privacy.

      After everyone had spoken the board closed it for public discussion and discussed among the five council members.  Commissioner Simpson supported the plan with a change to the garage plan.  At first all the commissioners had a different plan to fix the remodel. Commissioner Simpson made a motion that would make everyone happy, except the family who owns the house.  The construction was not passed, but not denied.  They were sent back to make a new plan that would not have such a large impact on the neighbors.

      The second agenda item brought forward was about a renovation at 333 Scenic Avenue.  First to speak was the couple that owns the house.  This was not their first time at the Planning Commission.

      The plan had changed; at first they had a roof patio and a large room extension, now they just want a smaller room extension.  The neighbors were still unhappy about the increased loss of privacy and the blocking of sunlight.  Not only did the neighbors speak up against the new plan, but also had their other neighbors speak against it on their behalf.

       When everyone from the public finished speaking the commission discussed what could change, and if it should be approved as is.  Commissioner Simpson supported the new plan and believed that they had changed enough from the old plan and provided enough evidence of the true impact of the renovation.  At first, Commissioners Theophilos and Chase were against the new plan, but through further discussion they agreed to approve the plan with the condition that a fence be put up to increase privacy for the neighbors.

        For the Scenic Avenue renovation the family that owned the home had an amazing presentation with a picture slide show.  And proved that the new plan had very little impact on the neighbors, and I agreed with them.   They changed the plan so much from the first plan and sacrificed their plans to compensate for their neighbors concerns that their plan deserved to be approved.

The report above was submitted by Piedmont High School Student Sarah Mooney

Editors’ Note:  The opinions expressed are those of the author. 

Report on the Park Commission Meeting of March 4 by High School student Quinn Burnett:

On Wednesday, March 4, the Piedmont Park Commission held a meeting to discuss various issues concerning local parks and gardens. Due to the fact that Arbor Day is on the horizon, a main topic of discussion was over the various public plans for that particular day of celebration.

After the minutes were approved by the Commission, Chair Sue Herrick opened the floor to the public forum. I spoke first about my concept to go back to having fewer 10 minute parking spaces in the Community Center parking lot, as the reduced parking increases traffic on Highland Avenue and takes away spots from students and creates spots that are rarely used. The Commission agreed that the 10 minute spots allowed an easier means for parents to drop off their children at the nearby preschool and did not seem to desire to make the change that I was hoping for. Following my address to the Commission, Arash Parsa and Parker Phillips spoke about the issues of speeding on Scenic Avenue and the trimming of shrubs on Mesa Avenue, respectively.

After the public forum, the President of the Piedmont Garden Club donated three thousand dollars for Arbor Day and specifically for improvements in Dracena Park for the upcoming event that would be held there on Arbor Day. The check was accepted by the Staff Liaison Mark Feldkamp and he and the President of the Garden Club capitalized on a nice photo opportunity.

Following this donation, the head of publicity on the Park Commission, John Lenahan, took some time to talk about his efforts in the monthly newsletter, as well as additional publicity for the Arbor Day event at Dracena Park. Although there did not seem to be too many pressing matters on the agenda on March 4, Commissioner Nancy Kent, reported on a new plan to further water conservation to combat the ensuing California drought, and her outlook was quite positive as Piedmont seemed to be on top of every requirement for the plan.

Before the meeting began, I had the opportunity to speak with one of very few attending audience members, Patty Reed. Reed’s main concern was a plan that began almost a year ago called the Linda Kingston Triangle. The triangle will ideally be located on Linda Avenue, a block from Beach Elementary School and will cost almost $200,000. She told me that this project will be funded by the Piedmont Garden Club, private neighborhood partisans, and publicly by the CIP [Capital Improvement Projects]. Reed also shared with me that there had been an extensive traffic study, which concluded that traffic would be significantly reduced and safety increased, and this aspect resonated well with the Commission, which favored the project heavily in general as well.

Personally, I agreed with the motive of the Linda Kingston Triangle project, to promote safety, and I am glad to see a positive plan gain momentum as I feel that often projects like these are generally stifled by neigh-saying residents, as was the case for the infamous Blair Park project.

Finally, one representative, whose specific position I did not identify, gave a report on the general condition of the parks and streets. His summary was very positive, exuding the impression that, generally, “things are good!” He also mentioned that roughly one hundred trees were pruned this month and that if anyone wanted their street to be swept, all they would have to do is call and the street sweepers would be happy to come.

Summarily, I viewed the Commission as an efficient and positively run government body.  I also acknowledge the great amount of effort and attention to detail it takes to run such an organization successfully.

Quinn Burnett

Editors’ Note:  The opinions expressed are those of the author.

On Monday, March 16, 2015, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, the City Council will consider regulations governing short term rentals in Piedmont.  Numbers of Piedmonters have noted problems with the rentals and asked for prohibition. Read the  > agenda.

According to information sent to PCA, the Council can expect non-residents to be present at the meeting pleading to allow short term rentals.  The meeting is open to public participation.

The meeting can be viewed at home on KCOM Cable Channel 27 and on the City website by logging on at www.ci.piedmont.ca.us: on the right hand side of the homepage under the “City Council” heading, click on the “Online Video” link, then click on the “March 16, 2015″ heading, click on the “Video” or “In Progress” link, and start watching!

Click for > Staff report 

Click for > Prior PCA Articles

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 September 6, 2014 PCA article

 September 8, 2014 PCA article

 March 3, 2015 PCA article

School Board Member Rick Rausenbush informed PCA that the School Board is currently interviewing three candidates for School Superintendent.  The three candidates will  have met individually with the Board at evening meetings.

There was a partial notice of a Special Meeting on March 12 held over the dinner hour at 131 La Salle Avenue, a Board member’s residence. The same time and location was announced for the following evening, March 13, for interviewing “the candidate.”  On March 14 a third meeting will be held at the same time and location to interview “the candidate.”

Special Meeting Agenda <

Saturday, March 14, 2015 

5:55 p.m.- 9:01 p.m.

131 LaSalle Avenue, Piedmont

(private residence of Board member)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Special Meeting Agenda <

Sunday, March 15, 2015

9 a.m. to 12 noon

Piedmont School District Offices

760 Magnolia Avenue, Piedmont

Under California’s Brown Act, Special Meetings require only 24 hour notice of the agenda, time, and location of the meeting. The Piedmont Unified School District has typically made Special Meeting announcements 24 hours in advance of the meetings.

In general, all public entity meetings, including those of the Piedmont Unified School District Board, are to be held within the boundaries of the juridiction.  Under specific conditions, meetings may be held outside of the jurisdiction.

The Piedmont Unified School District has recently held two interviewing sessions with candidates outside of the District’s jurisdictional boundaries.  These meetings were held in Oakland and publicly noticed.

All of the interview sessions are closed to the public, however the public has a right at the beginning of each meeting, as noted on the agendas, to speak to the Superintendent recruitment.  The public’s right to speak to the Board at the meetings includes those held in private residences and those outside of the District. It is unknown at this time if any members of the public have addressed the Board at the recent meetings.

The Brown Act affords candidates the right to privacy, protecting their current and future positions.

Each recent Special Meeting agenda of the Board has included the wording “no action anticipated.” When action has been finalized by the Board in Closed Session, public reporting of the action is required by California law.