Oct 30 2015

Consideration of the billing and performance audit of Republic Services. Input from residents is sought by the City.

On Monday, November 2, 2015, the Piedmont City Council will discuss the report on waste services. The meeting will begin at 7:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, CA 94611.

The City’s Collection Services Agreement with Republic Services, Inc. is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2018. As provided for in the Agreement, the City has hired a consulting firm (paid for by Republic Services) to prepare a billing audit and performance review report of the services Republic is currently providing. The purpose of the report is to identify areas of compliance and areas for improvement under the existing Agreement, and to begin to plan for the development of a new Agreement to be in place in 2018.

The report is located on the City’s website at >

http://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/html/govern/staffreports/2015-11-02/republicservices.pdf

You may choose to write your opinion and address your comments to the Piedmont City Council, c/o City Clerk, 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, CA 94611 or send an email to: >  jtulloch@ci.piedmont.ca.us. All comments submitted will become part of the public record and may be posted to the City’s website.

You are encouraged to attend the meeting and express your opinions and ideas. Alternatively, you may wish to watch the City Council meeting on KCOM, cable 27 or by logging on to the city’s website 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 “November 2, 2015” heading, click on the “Video” or “In Progress” link, and start watching!

Oct 30 2015

Important volunteer positions are to be filled. 

Planning and Park Commission applicant interviews will take place in an open meeting at 5:30 p.m. Monday, November 2, in the Council Conference Room, City Hall.

A number of individuals have indicated their interest in becoming commissioners, 9 applicants for the one Planning Commission position and 3 applicants for the one Park Commission position.  The public is welcome to attend the meeting and provide input to the interview process.

Although not required, in the past certain individuals have been encouraged to apply by either the staff, Council members or community members.  The selection process is designed to be open, allowing all applicants qualified to vote in Piedmont elections an opportunity to be appointed to commissions or committees by the City Council. Staff members reporting to the commissions are typically present and can provide input during the selection process.

The interviews will not be broadcast or recorded.

Oct 28 2015

<<<<<< PCA Looking Back <<<<<<

PCA Reported in October, 1988:

  • The View and Tree Preservation Ordinance unanimously approved by the Piedmont City Council at its meeting on September 19, 1988 with a second reading to come October 3;
  • The Main Park Final Plan was previewed;
  • The City Council appointed 11 member Civic Center Parking Committee held its first meeting on September 27 to consider the resident parking complaints, enforcement, needs and costs of finding additional parking;
  • The Capital Improvement Review Committee (CIP) hired California State University at Hayward to conduct a telephone survey of 400 Piedmont homes with copies of the questionnaire available for other residents to complete;
  • Resident Perry Kennan asked the City Council if the City is negotiating to purchase a large lot on Moraga Avenue;
  • PCA held an election forum on the City parcel tax Measure W with panels debating for and against the measure.

 

PCA journalism is the work of volunteers, devoting a few hours a month to provide a service to our neighbors.

Do you have a special interest or concern in Piedmont and a few hours to spend reporting on it? Volunteer your time and talent reporting on a civic issue for PCA. Attend a public meeting and report on it or analyze just one agenda item.
PCA welcomes letters, opinions, articles, etc.
Send your contributions to editors@piedmontcivic.org

The Piedmont Civic Association (PCA) is open to all Piedmont residents. There are no fees or dues. 

Oct 22 2015

PCA readers can return to issues long after initial publication to read continuing discussions, new opinions and comments. 

If you are following a particular issue or item, you can always return to it by using the Search function on the left side of the PCA home page.  When the articles appear, click on the title to see the comments at the end. Once an article is published, it remains on our site where readers often make comments on the article for days, or even weeks.

For example, see the continuing discussions of: Dogs and Dracena Park, Water Use, Parcel Taxes, etc.

Readers are encouraged to provide us with updates, corrections, comments, opinions, or articles.  PCA news, published on the internet, allows corrections to be made after publication.

Comments, updates, and corrections> Submit at the end of each article.

Articles and opinions>Submit to editors@piedmontcivic.org

Oct 22 2015

PUSD School Board Meeting of October 14, 2015

by Piedmont High School student Bianna Massullo

    I attended a Piedmont Unified School District (PUSD) Board meeting on October 14, 2015. The Board regularly meets the second and fourth Wednesday of every month at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, City Hall. These meetings are held in order to discuss issues important to the District in an accessible way for all members of the District to participate in and to inform themselves about the different topics within the school District. In addition to helping members of the District understand the decisions made in the District, members of other districts are able to learn about PUSD and learn about their programs in order to implement changes in their own programs. This meeting primarily discussed the success of a preschool program in the District and the ongoing debate about the instructional schedule for the District for next year.

    The preschool program was created two years ago, and it is a public preschool for children with special needs. The District is obligated by the state to give special education to disabled children ages 3-5 that live within the District. This preschool carries out this special education, but it also partners with a private preschool in the area in order to provide the children, those with and without disabilities, exposure to each other and to help them get acclimated to a social climate in which there are differences between students’ learning and social abilities. The preschool program has six Individual Education Plans in the classroom, and they work to provide the children with both individual instructional time and group instructional time, in order to create a collaborative environment in which to help the kids. The preschool program also follows the children into the elementary schools, and it helps to further integrate the programs that they did with the children into the kindergarten classrooms. This program has met a lot of success, and I believe that it is a valuable asset to the District because of the confidence and assistance that it gives children that they can carry throughout their entire school career.

    The next item on the schedule was one more relevant to myself, and one that I had significantly more knowledge about. The schedule of the schools in PUSD has been a topic that many people have been invested and interested in, including myself. The different plans were summarized by Ms. Kashani, a leader of a student forum on the subject. The most pressing issue within the plans was whether to schedule final exams for the middle school and the high school before or after winter break. A large majority of the students, parents, and staff within PUSD were in favor of final exams being before winter break, but the school board was still hesitant to change the schedule this drastically. Even though Ms. Kashani was able to bring the opinion of the teachers in support of the schedule change and myself and Josh Landheer spoke in support of the schedule change, the School Board still seemed hesitant to change the schedule. Additionally, many people within the District dislike the current schedule and system and the stress of the students causes them both physical and emotional harm, but the school isn’t trying anything new to help the students.

    This meeting was very informative and it helped me understand different issues and priorities of the District more clearly. I learned about the statistics of people within the District that are for and against finals being before winter break, and I learned about other priorities that the school District has in addition to those that pertain to the high school. After the meeting, I was able to speak with Sarah Pearson, the Vice President of the School Board about the potential schedule changes, and she provided me with a hope-inspiring piece of insight about the School Board’s views, telling me that “the School Board has heard the overwhelming opinion of the students and parents of an overwhelming percentage favor in completing finals before winter break, and we hope that can be implement for the students.” This sentiment helped me to understand that the PUSD School Board truly has the interests of the students and parents at heart, and helped me to have more faith in the School Board as a whole.

Editors’ Note:  Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Oct 20 2015
On October 19, Council members voted to ask the Budget Advisory and Financial Planning Committee (BAFPC) to not only evaluate the needs for a Municipal Services Parcel Tax, but to consider the term of a tax. Terms discussed ranged from 4 years to a permanent tax.  Council members Rood, King, and McBain indicated their inclination to continue a 4 year term to the tax as an important way to involve the community in City decisions.  Vice Mayor Wieler indicated his preference for a longer term on the tax.  All acknowledged the term and amount of any proposed parcel tax was a decision for the Council, rather than the Committee.
~~~~~~~~
Prior to the October 19th Council meeting, the following letter was sent to the Councilmembers to include in their consideration:
 OPINION:
“I advise you not to direct the BAFPC to provide a recommendation on the duration of the Municipal Services Special Tax as part of its periodic examination of the tax. The tax has always been used to take the pulse of Piedmont on its level of support for municipal services through additional tax dollars and, as the table in the staff report shows, that support can be variable. A survey of the residents every 4 years in the form of a vote is perfectly acceptable and appropriate to both assess public support and provide sufficient long-term planning, given the high level of support for the tax.  A longer period between such endorsements could direct staff and future Council in directions not supported by residents. And with what appears to be the dissolution of the Municipal Tax Committee and the oversight that committee provided, voters may perceive a longer duration of the tax as a reduction in voter oversight.”
“If you do direct the BAFPC to provide a recommendation on this matter,  also direct the Committee to balance the need for that tax with the annual Real Property Transfer Tax receipts which are at historic levels.  It was the recommendation of the Municipal Tax Committee that transfer tax receipts over $3M be considered “one time” windfalls and not be incorporated into annual budgeting analysis for the City.  The reason is so that the City does not get ahead of itself with spending and benefits that it cannot sustain.  Indeed, one year when I was on City Council, we did not levy the parcel tax because the transfer tax receipts were $3M.  If the Committee is to consider lengthening the duration of the Municipal Parcel Tax, then also have it consider self-correcting measures to maintain City spending at sustainable levels.”
Garrett Keating, Former City Council Member
Editors’ Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Oct 20 2015

“Living” IT Plan –

At their October 19th meeting, the City Council discussed at length the proposed IT Plan.  In the end they approved the plan as a “living” plan, recognizing current and future budget limitations and future  technological advances.

PRESS RELEASE:

“After a year long examination of the City’s Information Technology (IT) systems, the City Council approved a five year IT strategic plan at its meeting of October 19, 2015. The plan lays out seventy initiatives designed to bring the City’s aging, and in some cases outdated, information technology infrastructure up to date. These changes will help residents and staff use technology to be more efficient; and will facilitate improved resident communication with city government.

In February of 2015, the City Council engaged the services of ClientFirst Technology Consulting to undertake a review of the City’s Information Technology infrastructure and prepare a five year strategic plan based upon their findings. The consultant’s work included an in-depth review of city-wide systems,, each department’s operations and technology needs, as well as workshops with staff knowledgeable of the technology needs and the technological debt in each department.

The consultant met with the Council appointed IT Task Force, comprised of Piedmont residents Tom Kutter, David Mason, Michael Parks, Poojitha Preena, and Adam Schwartz. Through their analyses and meetings, the consultant developed initiatives to modernize the City’s technological infrastructure. An overarching goal of the various initiatives is to build and invest in a system that serves internal needs and provides residents full access to their City government.

“This IT Strategic Plan will guide us into the 21st century, bringing important technological changes to Piedmont that will promote efficiencies and save taxpayer monies,” said Mayor Margaret Fujioka. “With an initial focus on bringing the City’s network infrastructure to modern standards and providing adequate staffing to support the City’s computing needs, this plan will bring the City up to date. Future projects such as revamping the City website and making WiFi available at City Hall and surrounding public areas will provide residents greater access to City government and services. Thanks to our IT Task Force, Consultant, and City staff for their excellent work on this Plan.”

“Overall, we believe the approach and strategic plan provided by ClientFirst was a reasonable and logical plan for upgrading the City’s services and infrastructure, wrote Tom Kutter, Chair of the Information Technology Task Force. “Many of the near term objectives are to simply update the basic network infrastructure and enterprise software. With the infrastructure in place, the City can begin to meet the objectives set forth for improving customer satisfaction with City residents, increasing transparency across departments, and improving the productivity of City staff.”

The staff report and strategic plan are available on the City’s web site at:

http://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/html/govern/staffreports/2015-10-19/it_strategic_plan.pdf

For more information contact:

John O. Tulloch, City Clerk, 420-3040

Oct 20 2015

Report on Saturday, October 3rd an informal “brain storming” session in Upper Dracena Park

by Piedmont High School student Elizabeth Docter

    You wouldn’t think dog poop held so much power. But on October 3rd, 2015, the participants at the public discussion to address restricted dog use of the grassy area at the top of the park, dog use hours, off leash fines, and other concerns hosted by Park Commission and Public Works staff with an Animal Control officer spent two hours discussing just that: Piedmont’s “puppy poo-problem.”  In the months prior, a petition signed by 107 people was brought to the Park Commission presenting the possibility of changing the lawn area off of Dracena Ave. from an on-leash into an off-leash area for dogs.

    Piedmonters from all over town were present: dog-owners; parents; and neighbors alike were gathered because of a common passion for pets, parks, and poop.  Captain Jeremy Bowers and Officer Monica Hueston started off the meeting with friendly statements on the current patrol situation.  There is only one animal control officer on duty at a time, and they are in charge of patrolling more than just Piedmont’s four parks because of their contract with Emeryville.  Because they have so many parks to patrol, they generally rely on phone calls from neighbors who report an issue.  Captain Bowers urged the neighbors at the meeting to continue calling when they saw something, because they depend on those calls to know where to go.  They finished by reminding those in attendance that they do what they do because of public safety, and they will support whatever decision is reached.

    Dr. Elaine Pico, speaking for those in favor of the lawn becoming off-leash, finds that this change wouldn’t be harmful to the area.  She argued that the area isn’t used by children or picnickers of any sort, and this change would give the lawn a second-coming, a rebirth of dog attention.  Others complained that the ravine, currently an off-leash area, is not enough room for owners to throw balls for their dogs without hitting other walkers.  Dogs also seem to prefer grass on their paws, making the lawn a perfect area for running.

    On the other hand, neighbors from all around the park came to the meeting to strongly oppose this prospect. Don Eidam mentioned that he finds dog business left behind in the park on a daily basis, primarily from dogs that wander away from their owners while off-leash.  In response to this, Terri Ashton mentioned that she stepped in some dog poop on her way to her spot on the grass.

    Dogs, who are taken off leash legally in the ravine, are allowed to wander off on their own unsupervised, even wandering across Dracena Avenue into the homes of neighbors across the street.  “We have had many uninvited 4-legged guests in our home and yard over the years.  Last week I found a boxer in my family room slobbering all over the contents of my purse. We even had a dog pee on my living room sofa once. I usually grab them by the collar and walk them down to their owners on the grass below. Sometimes they haven’t even noticed they were missing yet,” explained Tami Becker, a resident whose home overlooks the lawn.

    Over the years, Becker has seen the increase of dog droppings left behind and has begun to worry about having more dogs wander across the street to innocently enter her home.  If the lawn were to become completely off-leash, she fears that more dogs would walk across the street more often, becoming an even bigger hazard to cars on the streets.  Many other neighbors were in agreement; they were worried about the possibility of more dogs wandering around the streets unwatched, because they see it happening often already.

    Because I’ve spent many hours at Dracena Park on my own, I felt prepared to speak on the behalf of those opposed to this possible change.  As a kid, I remember having my lunch eaten and being chased out of the park by unguarded dogs who roamed into the open lawn.  If the upper lawn were to become off-leash, dogs would have more access to a bigger space, which would make it harder for owners to keep track of their beloved pets.

    I found many of the statements and arguments made by those in favor of this change came across as extraneous.  One woman created an unnecessary issue by calling out to a younger neighbor, insisting that they could “work together” if he didn’t push people like herself away.  Another woman slipped in a mention of her profession, working with children who have disabilities, not to add to the argument but to create sympathy.  One neighbor was called a “doomsayer” because of her fear resulting from dogs peeing on the currently green grass.  In each of those cases, I felt uncomfortable and frustrated that people were creating issues out of nothing.

There isn’t a foregone outcome in this argument now, and there won’t be for quite awhile; the Park Commission isn’t planning on voting for at least a month.  They do, however, urge  those interested and impassioned by the issue to step forward and present their voice.  If this is you, stop by City Hall for a Park Commission meeting — maybe I’ll see you there!

Editors Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Oct 20 2015

Report on the School Board Meeting – October 14, 2015

 by Piedmont High School student Maret Sotkiewicz

On the 14th of October, 2015, I attended a School Board meeting at City Hall.  These board meetings are held so that its members can discuss different issues and situations related to the Piedmont Unified School District.  There are five permanent members of the Board plus a student representative, Cerina Smit, who is Vice President of Associated Student Body (ASB) at Millennium High School (MHS).  Citizens of the community are welcome to attend the meeting and provide input on various issues, or simply share opinions related to the agenda, or bring up new points all together.  Mainly, this board serves as a forum for citizens and officials of Piedmont to come together and have a discussion on ways to make the District better.  The School Board meets on average one to two times a month, always at seven o’clock on Wednesdays at City Hall located  in the center of Piedmont.

There was one major issue presented at this meeting, and a supplementary presentation, with a few audience member appearances.  The main topic of the meeting was the Piedmont Unified School District (PUSD) instructional calendar, and the various four circulating versions. The argument was presented by Piedmont High School (PHS) teacher, Gaby Kashani, who wanted to clarify the various calendar options.   Additionally, Pam Gelman and Carrie Rodriguez presented a slideshow on the preschool held at Piedmont Community Church that is geared towards both developmentally and mentally disabled kids.  They did not have an issue to discuss, but were brought to the meeting by Superintendent Randall Booker who wanted them to present information on the program.  The other topics brought up included a lack of parking at Witter Field, a desire to help out at the preschool, a plea for Finals to be held before Winter Break, and a thank you to the Piedmont education system from former PHS student, TJ Korotzer.

For the calendar issue, Ms. Kashani clarified the different options, alongside a slideshow from Mr. Booker with statistics from a recent District wide survey of parents, teachers and students regarding the different calendars. For example, Calendar B has the school year start in early August, which would allow Finals to be held before Winter Break.  Calendar C provided a start time mid-August (how it is now), with Finals also before Winter Break – except that this option would limit the number of breaks in the Fall Semester.  Calendar D provided a start in late August, yet this calendar was created mostly because the teacher contract said there needed to be four different calendars presented.

Board members Sarah Pearson and Amal Smith stressed how important it seemed to students to have Finals before Winter Break, and promised to do as much as they could to make it happen.  Student Gianna Massullo also spoke from the audience on this issue, and declared she was losing time with family, friends and pets over Winter Break because she spent so much time studying for the looming Finals.  This is an opinion held by many students, as backed up by the 82% of responding students from both PHS and MHS on the calendar survey.  I agree with this, especially because I often travel for Winter Break and having finals in two weeks really detracts from the “break”.  I would much rather start earlier in August, as Calendar B presented, and have finals before break, rather than to continue with the normal schedule.  However, this issue will not affect me because I will be in college next year.  I hope a new calendar is implemented for the upcoming classes of students.

Piedmont High School student Drew Collins inquired about the lack of parking at Witter Field in the early evening. Superintendent Mr. Booker said that the change was due to the safety of community members on PE Hill at all hours.

I interviewed the preschool teacher Pam Gelman, who was pleased to discuss her job and her reasons for being at the meeting.  Unlike many who attend the meeting, Ms. Gelman had been asked by the Superintendent to attend the meeting, after he had “sat in on a class and was very impressed.”  She wanted to spread the word about the preschool program for developmentally and mentally disabled kids and all the incredible aspects of the Inclusion Program, as it has existed in Piedmont for three years without any publicity.  They are eager to have volunteers and support from the Board members.

I spoke to the Preschool Program.  I walked up to the podium and inquired if it could potentially be a possibility to TA or intern at the preschool on late start Fridays or with a morning free period (as classes are only 8:30-1 at the preschool).  I was nervous attending the meeting with the added weight of speaking, but the board was incredibly enthusiastic about this idea and Mr. Booker said he would immediately follow up with counselors at the High School about making this a TA opportunity.  Ms. Gelman and Ms. Rodriguez were also ecstatic about the idea, and said that the kids always love volunteers, and that it would be a great opportunity for all those involved.  In the end, I was very pleased with how my point came across and the ongoing action that will be taken to make it a possibility.

Editors’ Note:  Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Oct 19 2015

Piedmont Recreation Commission

  PUBLIC HEARING > Hampton Field Master Plan and Expenditure of City Funds

Wednesday, October 21, 2015  – 7:30 pm

City Council Chambers, 120 Vista Avenue 

a. Presentation from Consultant William Harris

b. Public Testimony

c. Consideration of Recommendation to the City Council to Proceed with Construction of the Hampton Field Master Plan in a Single Phase

  Staff Report Consider recommending to the City Council to proceed with construction of the Master Plan for Hampton Park/Field in a single phase.

BACKGROUND: This project has been under consideration by the City of Piedmont since 2005. Public Hearings were held in October 2006 and January 2007. Joint Recreation and Park Commission meetings were held in June and July 2007 and again in April 2008.

Council approved the Master Plan on June 2, 2008. The project was then sidelined due to budgetary constraints. In March 2014, Council awarded a contract to Harris Design Architecture to complete construction documents.

From June through August 2014, the Capital Improvement Project Review Committee (CIP) considered possible projects for Measure WW funds.

On September 15, 2014, Council directed staff to proceed with the implementation of the Hampton Park Improvements, with primary focus on the refurbishment of all of the hardscape areas related to the tennis, basketball & handball courts and associated drainage improvements for these areas (Phase I) with the intent that this project be submitted for Measure WW Local Grant Funds; and resolved further, that staff be encouraged to pursue private fundraising to complete the Hampton Park Improvement Plan in its entirety.

On June 15, 2015, the City received notification from the East Bay Regional Park District that our Measure WW Grant application for Hampton Park Improvements had been approved in the amount of $507,325.

The total cost of Phase I is estimated at $732,685 with the difference between $507,325 and $732,685  payed for by the City.

Currently, this project is slated to be completed in two phases. Phase I includes the hardscape areas described above and will be funded by the Measure WW grant. Phase II includes the grassy field, adjacent areas and associated drainage. Phase II currently is not funded. In order to minimize impact on Recreation Department and Piedmont Sports Club programming; to reduce overall project costs; and to shorten overall project duration; Staff recommends investigation into possible funding sources to allow the Hampton Field Master Plan to be completed in a single phase.

The total cost for Phase I and II has been estimated at approximately $1.5 million. 

“Piedmont Sports Field Master Plan Renovation Mr. Bill Harris of Harris Landscape Design, displayed colored renderings of the proposed Master Plan renovation of Hampton Park/Piedmont Sports Field. It was noted that this proposed Master Plan renovation was extensively reviewed by both the Park and Recreation Commissions beginning in 2006 and on July 11, 2007, both Commissions recommended Council approval of the proposed plan. The proposed renovation is estimated to cost between $1.3 and $1.5 Million and involves comprehensive improvements to the park’s drainage system, playfield surface, tennis and basketball courts, landscaping, pathways and entrances and PlaySchool play area.

Council approved the Master Plan under Resolution 46-08 on June 2, 2008. The project was then sidelined due to budgetary constraints. In March of 2014, Council awarded a contract to Harris Design Architecture to complete construction documents.

No substantive changes have been made to the Master Plan approved in 2008. Architect, Bill Harris of Harris Design Architecture will present the 100% complete plan at this meeting.

~~~~~~~~~~~

Public testimony is invited. Written comments should be directed to the Recreation Director at    slillevand@ci.piedmont.ca.us  For further information, contact Recreation Director Sara Lillevand at 420-3073.

If recommended to the Council by the Recreation Commission, consideration and approval by the Council is required.  Budgetary demands, resident concerns, and timing are relevant to the final Council decision.

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

The Recreation Commission meeting will be available for remote viewing via Piedmont’s KCOM Channel 27 cable or the City’s website.