Student wants community to have more information on District Bond activities along with developing good programs for healthy relationships. 

When Sarah Pearson called the Piedmont School Board meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. on Wednesday, March 8th, there were more people sitting behind the dark wooden semi-circular desk than in the audience. The School Board meets to discuss and shape the future of Piedmont Unified School District (PUSD) every other Wednesday evening, unless a special meeting arises or the Wednesday falls over a school break. At this meeting, the three main items on the agenda were updates on the H1 Bond funding measure passed in June of 2016, the Healthy Relationships curriculum at the high school, and suicide prevention measures.

To begin, Max Miller, Millennium High School’s Vice President spoke on behalf of the Piedmont High and Millennium High community, updating the school board on upcoming events. From the annual Falcon fundraising dinner switching the style of catering to the upcoming plays at Piedmont High School (PHS), both campuses were bustling with spring time activities. After Miller spoke, a community member read a speech without telling the audience or school board it’s origins. When he finished the excerpt, he asked everyone if they knew where it was from. Stumping the entire room, he revealed it was written by Pericles over 2,000 years ago, noting it’s parallel to the Gettysburg Address by the 16th President Abraham Lincoln. This non sequitur speech segwayed into the Board updates from all five board members present. Recalling all the meetings they attended, each school-related meeting had anywhere from one to four school board members in attendance. Superintendent Booker talked about the search to find a new PHS principal.

Sam Williamson spoke after the updates about the memorial service for his kindergarten teacher which was held simultaneously in the Veterans Hall. He passed around a picture of himself with his teacher; she will be missed by all her students and the entire Wildwood School community.

The first item on the agenda addressed the budgeting strategy the District will take to build a new building and an update on the lengthy process to find a contractor. Chris Delong spoke on behalf of his firm that was hired by the District to look into the process of getting state funding to help construct the new science building. Delong presented his ideas, hoping to be rehired by the District to continue his work with PUSD. Having worked years in Sacramento, Delong knows first hand the tedious work it takes to tap into the seismic construction fund, and he wants to help Piedmont with that task. The Board unanimously rehired his firm after questions by School Board members Amal Smith and Andrea Swenson.

Michael Brady updated the Board on the successful search for a construction firm. The new firm has outstanding references and consistently showed they can both work with a time limit and budget. However, I think that this H1 funding measure needs more transparency. The Piedmont community deserves more updates about how their money is being spent and what exactly is being done to ensure the building of new science buildings. Whether that’s through the Piedmont Post, or an email, the District should do a better job conveying their progress.

The next item, also presented by Brady, showed the School Board PUSD is following the new laws Governor Brown passed surrounding “Yes means Yes” legislation and Healthy Relationships education. Brady touched on the contents of the law, the Healthy Kids survey to be taken in April throughout middle school and high school, and what work has already been done to address these standards. One facet of the survey that was brought up by both Smith and City Council member Jen Cavanaugh was the decision not to question middle schoolers about their sexual activity. Brady and Booker believed that more thought needed to be put into these questions before throwing them on the survey.

City Council member Cavenaugh took time to speak with me after the meeting about the importance of healthy relationships. She expressed, “I am passionate about creating a community that values healthy relationships.” After the District sent an email out that afternoon reflecting much of what Brady said at the meeting, Cavenaugh sent an email to School Board members that very evening, then brought her notes to the meeting and spoke about the importance of starting the discussion about healthy relationships at a young age. Cavenaugh will continue to work within the Healthy Relationships Committee to ensure Piedmont plays it’s part in educating its students.

I spoke out at this meeting about weaving the healthy relationships discussion into our English classrooms through a diversification of the curriculum.

The next school board meeting will be on March 22nd at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers and is open to the public.

by Danny De Bare, Piedmont High School Senior

Editors Note:  Opinions expressed are those of the author.

    On February 11th, the Planning Commision met in Piedmont’s City Council Chambers at five o’clock. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss variances and design review of building applications within Piedmont.The session began with an approval of minutes from the prior meeting, followed by a public forum.

   I, Brock Settlemier, spoke out on an individual issue that was not on the Planning Commission’s agenda.  There is an absolute lack of motorcycle parking in the City of Piedmont.  An initiative taken by the city was the “Complete Streets Plan”, to balance the transportation system of Piedmont, making it compatible for all cars, pedestrians, bicyclists, and senior citizens.  However, they left out the minority group of motorcyclists in Piedmont.  As a licensed motorcycle driver, owner, and student of Piedmont High School, I strongly voiced my concerns and advocated for the creation of motorcycle parking for the school.  The possible benefits would be a more balanced transportation system, a new way to commute to school for students/faculty, safer roads for motorcyclists, a reduction in greenhouse gasses, and a new modernization for the City of Piedmont.

    The major issue discussed at the meeting was item four of the agenda, 110 Fairview Avenue Variance and Design Review.  The owners, Mike Smith and Anne Beth, wanted to add a second story of 1,278 sq/ft to their home.  They live in a small, one story, Dutch Colonial home.  With their disabled son, grandchildren’s toys, and a lack of a decent socializing space, the applicants wanted to build up by adding the second story.  This proposed second floor would contain a bedroom, bathroom, and closet.  Their most convincing argument was that their addition would be more compatible with the neighborhood, where most of the houses are two stories and 2000 sq/ft or more.  This addition would make 110 Fairview more similar to the other homes in the area.  The architect was commended by Aradhana Jajodia for maintaining the style of the home, building up and saving space in the backyard.

    Mike and Anne were met with heavy resistance from nearby residents about their second story addition.  The owner of 129 Nova Drive, opposite the house, stated that the addition would be an issue of privacy.  He stated that, “A net 17 windows looking onto my back garden and into the house.”  This was one of the major issues of the design plan and was a repeated concern throughout the other neighbors’ statements.  Luckily, the owner was open to future conversation to find an alternative.

    The contractor of the house took the podium next.  He worked on 110 Fairview Ave ten years before, and was in support of the proposed plan.  His argument was clear.  The house would not expand on its small, original footprint.  The plan was underdesigned, and would not meet the maximum square footage that the city allowed.  The second story addition would not be too monumental.

    Down the street, Terry London voiced his concerns against the project.  He stated that the building would block their only view of the Piedmont Hills, completely obstructing the master bedroom’s view and seventy percent of their guest room.  In a later interview with him, he stated that the rules and regulations guiding development in Piedmont, “Don’t always take into account the specifics of particular situation, like height, topography, and the surrounding homes.”  He will remain involved in the future of the project.

   The meeting was a textbook example of how our government works efficiently in the United States.  Opening up the agenda to the public gave all the neighbors the opportunity to voice their opinions to the officials, who thoroughly considered and questioned each individual on their opinions.  Voices from both sides of this argument were effectively dealt with in the Commission’s final decision.

    The Planning Commision made a final deliberation on the issue in front of the audience, but closed to further opinions.  Planning Commissioner Tony Theophilos spoke out first from the Commission by addressing the issue of privacy.  He believed that there should be a reduction of windows, and finding a balance could be feasibly found.

   Next, Commissioner Aradhana Jajodia said the architect did a quality job on the design, except the back of the house was unpleasant looking from the neighbors point of view.

    Commission Chair Eric Behrens believed 108 Fairview Ave was the only house with a significant view of the Piedmont Hills.  He said “it seemed a little too big to me.”  Behrens suggested the applicants build down rather than up, such as a basement.

    Finally, Commissioner Jajodia made a motion to reject the design. It did not comply with the design review view guideline and the design presented a scale and mass violation.  Her perception was that the building should not overpower or dominate any of the surrounding homes.  The item was delayed to another meeting to allow a new plan by the architect.

   The Planning Commission meets once a month for a net four hours at minimum.

By Brock Settlemier, Piedmont High School Senior

Editors Note: Opinions are those of the author.

    On March 8th the Piedmont Unified School District School Board meeting took place in City Hall.  The meeting takes place every month and this particular meeting started off with a run down of all the recent activities and school related topics that the board members felt needed to be addressed.  The Millennium High School representative, Max Miller, addressed recent and upcoming events for both PHS and MHS.  He talked about the plays coming up (The Clearing and Sense and Sensibility), gave an athletics overview for the spring sports teams, and touched on the annual fundraiser that MHS students organize in March.  The MHS community dinner seemed to be a crowd favorite among all the board members and Max Miller mentioned how they are trying a catering service instead of having the students serve the food.  At least four of the board members raved about the recent musical production, Legally Blonde, put on by Amy Moorhead and claimed it was a community builder.  Other than the updates on high school events there was talk of a speaker series, Provocative Talk for Parents, Math and Information Night for ninth graders, and the Proposed Gated Havens meeting.  The Superintendent, Randall Booker was recognized for his great efforts in organizing a lot of events as well as searching for a new principle in replacement of Brent Daniels

    After the board members introduced different topics, they gave the audience a chance to speak about topics that were not on the agenda.  Dimitri Magganas spoke about his support for International Women’s Day that took place on March 8th.  Chris Dewong and Mr. Brady talked about H1 and how Piedmont was one of the first schools to apply for school funding.  Chris Dewong mentioned different construction programs such as the New construction and Modernization program.  The New construction would take place if a new school needed to be built or portables needed to be replaced by a new building.  Modernization is a project to enhance the educational environment of a preexisting facility.  Lastly, Mr.Brady brought up his Healthy Relationships survey.  Mr.Brady’s survey dealt with students and their relations to other people as well as their comfort with issues like STIs, contraceptives, sex, drugs and etc. The survey seemed very useful and helpful for the school board and parents to get a grasp on how advanced the students at PHS/MHS are and if any actions need to take place to spread awareness about safe sex and protection. This topic sparked lots of audience members, including myself to discuss their feelings on the effectiveness of the survey and if PUSD had done a good job in the past promoting healthy relationships.  While I was speaking, I provided Mr. Brady with a suggestion for his survey.  He earlier mentioned how he was having trouble deciding whether not to give the survey to middle school students and that he had mixed feelings from parents on the subject as well.  I thought it would be a good idea to offer the survey to only high school students the first year and on the survey have a question asking the students if they would have felt comfortable answering these questions when they were in middle school.  I thought this would be a good solution because it gives anonymous advice from students that were very recently in the same shoes as the middle schoolers and are more in touch with what steps the middle schoolers are at.

    I interviewed Dimitri Magganas before the School Board Meeting and he stated that he regularly attends the school board meetings and is a huge supporter of H1.  He mentioned that even though he is in favor of H1, he has many concerns regarding the measure.  The measure requires construction and contractors and Dimitri mentioned how expensive contractors are and the skyrocketing prices for east bay construction costs.  He had a very interesting and unique way to look at the H1 proposal and was very insightful.

by Mia Arthur, Piedmont High School Senior

Editors Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.

At their March meeting, the Park Commission discussed the approval of new post mounted signs and path medallion designs for on and off leash areas for dogs at Dracena Park. These new signage designs include post mounted signs which would be aluminum panel signs with a map which identifies the areas where dogs can be on and off leash. While the path medallions would be placed on the pavement or path intersections to indicate areas where dogs are off leash.

The agenda began with background information which was provided by Parks and Project Manager, Nancy Kent, which was then followed by discussion by the Park Commissioners and Piedmont Police Department.

The Commission brought up their opinions on the new signage and medallions being added to Dracena Park in which they are concerned about the scale of the post signage and their impact on the community friendly ambience of the park. It was highly recommended by the Commissioners to try a mock-up to visualize where the signs can be placed to be aesthetically pleasing as well as have an explicit message for park visitors. The Commission unanimously agreed on the addition of the signs but still needed to deliberate on the design, location, size, and material of the signage and medallions.

Afterwards, the Piedmont Police Chief addressed increased presence of animal control in the park and a recent case of a sign being stolen. The Piedmont Police Department has investigated the case and are therefore wary of vandalism and signs being stolen. They are hopeful with the addition of the new signage that more park visitors will be aware of the designated dog leash areas.

In my opinion the addition of new signage to Dracena Park is advantageous in properly and clearly indicating the areas of where dogs can be on and off leash. In developing new signage ideas, it will further enforce Park regulations which could be incremented in other parks.

I interviewed a member of the commission, Patty Siskind, who closely worked at the college and career center at Piedmont High School, and has a business in landscape design. She stated that she came to the meeting as a part of a designated subcommittee for the new signage proposal. Her concerns were pertaining to the overall atmosphere and scale of new signage in Dracena Park. Siskind stated that the signs were too tall and therefore has an impact on the outlook of the park. She plans on addressing her concerns by further engagement with the Park Commission in addition to working with City Council and staffs who are designing the new signage.

The Park Commission meets once a month to discuss updates on the various parks in Piedmont.

by Nicole Jiang, Piedmont High School Senior

Editors Note:  Opinions expressed are those of the author.

According to former Mayor Alice Creason, the “revision” of Chapter 17 of the City Code includes zoning language and intent contrary to the 1980 voter approved Piedmont City Charter requiring changes of use/classifications and zone sizes to be approved by Piedmont voters. Voter approval for proposed zoning changes is not being sought by the City Council.

On March 17, 2017 Creason submitted a notarized declaration to the City Council and others showing the correct interpretation of the City Charter, as approved by voters.  See detailed explanation below.

Creason a former Piedmont mayor (1982-84), Planning Commissioner (1976-78), liaison to the Planning Commission, participant in the development of the revised City Charter (1977 – 1980), and Council member (1978 -1986) states that the City is not adhering to the intent and actual language of the City Charter which requires Piedmont voter approval for specific zoning changes. The City Council has been or desires to change uses within Zone B (public) and Zone D (commercial) without Piedmont voter approval.

In a cover letter to the Council, Creason states that the City Council can:

1.  Submit the proposed zoning changes to Piedmont voters for approval OR
2.  Revise the City Charter to allow the Council to make the desired changes without voter approval.

The Creason cover letter to the City Council can be read by clicking > img023 .

The Creason Declaration explaining the City Charter intent and required voter approval can be read by clicking > img025.

The opposite interpretation by Piedmont’s new contract attorney can be read by clicking > img026 .

Actual zoning language in the City Charter below:

ARTICLE IX. General Provisions

SECTION 9.01 GENERAL PLAN The City Council shall adopt, and may from time to time, modify a general plan setting forth policies to govern the development of the City. Such plan may cover the entire City and all of its functions and services or may consist of a combination of plans governing specific functions and services or specific geographic areas which together cover the entire City and all of its functions and services. The plan shall also serve as a guide to Council action concerning such City planning matters as land use, development regulations and capital improvements.

SECTION 9.02 ZONING SYSTEM The City of Piedmont is primarily a residential city, and the City Council shall have power to establish a zoning system within the City as may in its judgement be most beneficial. The Council may classify and reclassify the zones established, but no existing zones shall be reduced or enlarged with respect to size or area, and no zones shall be reclassified without submitting the question to a vote at a general or special election. No zone shall be reduced or enlarged and no zones reclassified unless a majority of the voters voting upon the same shall vote in favor thereof; provided that any property which is zoned for uses other than or in addition to a singlefamily dwelling may be voluntarily rezoned by the owners thereof filing a written document executed by all of the owners thereof under penalty of perjury stating that the only use on such property shall be a single-family dwelling, and such rezoning shall not require a vote of the electors as set forth above.

 Read the > City Charter 

An underlying goal of the building code changes (Chapter 17) is to increase housing density in lower Piedmont and provide more affordable housing.

On Monday, March 20, 2017, the Council plans to approve an ordinance that will mean more houses, more apartments, and reduced parking requirements in Piedmont. The City Council on March 6, approved the first reading of the massive rewriting and changes to Chapter 17 of the Piedmont City Code.  The second reading is planned at the March 20 Council meeting.

Council members are convinced that Piedmonters have been informed and engaged in the process.

In a cursory survey of Piedmonters, few had any substantive knowledge of the proposed changes with the exception of changes to Grand Avenue and short term rentals.

On March 6, the Council members decided to remove consideration of short term rentals and commercial property regulations on Grand Avenue pending further input from the public.

The Grand Avenue neighbors have been active and organized in attempting to make new regulations compatible with the neighborhood.

Civic Center Apartments

One citizen, Ted Kinch, referred to the 92% of Piedmonters who responded to the heavily relied upon 2007 Survey, who expressed their preference to keep the small town feeling of Piedmont.  Kinch emphasized the potential problems from adding apartments in the Civic Center – above the Wells Fargo Building and Mulberry’s.  He mentioned that watching children walk to school was refreshing and should not be threatened by increased traffic and parking.

Council approved the proposed building code changes for apartments to be permitted in the Civic Center.  There has been no organized opposition from any neighborhood group, school representative, or emergency service person in regard to traffic, safety, or congestion next to emergency services and schools in the Civic Center.

Inquiry

Only a few of the numerous code revisions received inquiry by the Council members.  The exception was Council member Jen Cavenaugh, liaison to the Planning Commission, who questioned reduced off-street parking requirements for residences and businesses, structures allowed to be built up to the property line, and for profit businesses in public buildings, amongst other issues.

Cavenaugh questioned the likelihood Estates Zone residents would want their neighbors building up to the property line, “Not wanting people to be on top of each other in that way.”

There has been no indication that Piedmont residents in lower Piedmont (Zone A) would accept their neighbors building a structure up to the property line. Planning Director Kevin Jackson claimed the intent was to encourage property owners to build garages and structures at the back of the lot to leave more open space.

Mayor Jeff Wieler was concerned about the reduction in Zone A (residential) lot size from 10,000 square feet to 8,000 square feet.  He stated,  “Our lords and masters in Sacramento… we’re suddenly changing our zoning to satisfy some bureaucrat up in Sacramento. I resent it.”

Council members Teddy King and Tim Rood quickly defended the reduction in parcel size in lower Piedmont as an effort by Piedmont to assist in supplying the area with more housing plus more affordable housing.

King stated, “This is actually a component of the entire revision process (Chapter 17) so that we meet the requirements and spirit of the housing needs in the Bay Area. … To the extent that some of the controversial elements in this proposal have caught the attention of Piedmonters, it is important to explain that many of these changes we didn’t dream up. They are tied to other efforts put in place by State and Federal authorities. We don’t conceive of our own housing and density in a vacuum.”

Parking

Although a lack of adequate off-street parking has been a major issue in numerous Planning Commission applications, King and Rood liked reducing the off street parking requirements to encourage a reduction in automobile usage and an increase in transit ridership. Bedroom additions will no longer necessarily trigger the need to provide off-street parking.

The Planning Commission has been responsible in the past for determining if traffic, parking and safety impact applications, yet traffic and parking studies are not required by the process potentially leaving the matter to subjective opinions.

Short term rentals deferred once more.

A short term rental (under 30 days) prohibition was held for further consideration maintaining the status quo of no City enforcement of ongoing short term rentals. According to Piedmont’s existing Home Occupation Ordinance, all home businesses, including airbnb, require homeowners to obtain a business license and Home Occupation Permit. Short term rentals currently do not qualify for a home occupation permit because the home business owner cannot use a residential property addresse in advertisements or for client access. Organized interest by promoters of short term rentals has been active. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to prohibit short term rentals.  Seeking further input, the Council has not acted on the pending short term rental issue during a three year period.

The Council meeting will be held on Monday, March 20, 2017 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber to act on the ordinance changes.  Viewing is available on Channel 27 and from the City website.

Staff report for Item #7 on the agenda.

Draft minutes of March 6, 2017 Council meeting when zoning issues were previously considered.

Agenda for March 20, 2017 Council meeting

Opportunities to serve Piedmont in important volunteer positions!

Be a part of Piedmont’s decision processes!

Application Deadline:

Monday, March 20th – 5PM

The School Board meeting held on March 8, 2017 addressed a variety of issues, including the nomination of a contractor to oversee the H1 Bond measure, a recap of the past and upcoming events at the high school, and a presentation regarding the newly proposed specifications of a healthy relationship and healthy student curriculum in the middle and high schools.

    Chris Delong presented to the School Board recapping the state requirements and allocation specifications for schools to receive state funding. Mr. DeLong noted how the newly passed proposition (Prop 51) has three avenues for schools to receive state funding: new construction  ($3 billion in state budget), modernization ($3 billion), and career, technology, and charter schools ($500 million). Mr. deLong also mentioned that in the H1 Bond measure, the state will grant no more than 60% of the proposed renovations, leaving the school responsible for raising the other 40%.

    The recap of high school related events included the recent plays of “Sense and Sensibility” and “The Clearing,” performed on March 9-12 by Piedmont’s advanced acting class. There was also mention of the school’s March Madness 3v3 Basketball Tournament, PHS’ first ever night rally, and a summary of recent sporting events and accomplishments.

    Finally, Mr. Brady, head of the Wellness Center, gave an informative recap of a proposed curriculum the wellness center is trying to initiate at the High School. The curriculum involves a survey called The Healthy Kids Survey, which is given to all high school students every other year. This survey asks students about their drug and alcohol use, as well as their feelings about the safety and security on campus. Using this information, the Wellness Center was able to craft a customized and modern code for its wishes on the well-being of PHS students.

     Another area of concern for the Wellness Center was addressing healthy relationships at both the High School and Middle School. Seeing the term “relationships” as an ambiguous phrase, the Wellness Center is doing its best to come up with a curriculum that best addressed the ever-changing expectations and norms with teenage “relationships.”

How did you end up working at the wellness center?

    Mr. Brady was kind enough to answer some questions following his presentation, and reflected on his desire to pursue a leadership role in the Wellness Center. “l’ve been in the District since 2003, when l was hired as the Millennium High School principal.  Since then, l have held a number of positions in the District, including the Assistant Superintendent for Business Services until 2014.  I have also been in charge of Adult Education Programs in PUSD for as long as I have been here, and since 2014, my “official” title is Director of Alternative/Adult Education (which includes serving as the Director of the Wellness Center).”

   Brady further stated,  “l have also been recently appointed by the Board of Education to serve as the program coordinator for the measure H1 Bond program.  So, in essence, l will be overseeing all of the newly planned renovations for the Piedmont High School campus.  That is why you saw me introduce our state funding consultant and answer questions about the selection of the District’s architect last night.”

Additionally Brady noted, “When l was the Assistant Superintendent, l coordinated the rebuilding of Havens Elementary, seismic strengthening at Beach, Wildwood, and PHS, and the modernization of our technology infrastructure.  I have always been in contact with the Wellness Center (since its inception in 2006), but it was in my role as the District’s Business Manager.  l worked to secure funding for the Wellness Center through grants and through the amazing support of parents who raise funds each year to sustain our program.  In my early days in education, l was a classroom teacher (high school english), high school counselor, and high school administrator.  I believe in the mission of the Wellness Center, and when former director Ting Hsu Engleman resigned, l was happy to step into the role.”

    Mr. Brady’s role in creating a platform for healthy relationships at the High School was noted by audience member Danny DeBarre, who noted that another great tool for the education of healthy relationships is the consent assembly. As a member of the acting class, Danny has had the privilege of performing in the assembly on numerous occasions, and has seen adaptations annually to address the changes in our society on the matter. Danny noted that these adaptations to the assembly are what makes it powerful each and every year, and sets a wonderful precedent for students to know exactly what it means to be in a happy and consensual relationship.

Sarah Pearson, School Board President, mentioned how much she appreciates student input on matters that the School Board may not have known without that student sacrificing his or her own time for the good of the community.

    In terms of healthy relationships, I totally agree that Piedmont must establish a curriculum to address this issue. With the ubiquitous storyline of rapes and title IX violations across college campuses, Piedmont must stop the issue before it infects the students at our very school. One way we can learn ways to implement a curriculum is through a summit called “That’s not cool” in the Presidio each year. In attendance, there were many great ideas presented illustrating the variety of means schools have used to create healthy relationship awareness in their districts.

    The School Board is responsible for collecting community input on the District, managing the budget, and overseeing all academic related events in the dDistrict. The School Board meets on the second and fourth Wednesday of every month at 7 pm in the Council Chambers at City Hall.

by Jordan Marcus, Piedmont High School Senior

Editors Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.

Proposed changes to the future waste collection contract include: variable optional charge for backyard pickup (except for disabled customers), trash collection to start at 6 am,  Large Item Collection pickups for multi-family dwelling residents, hazardous waste collection events at an additional fee.  Citizens are invited to comment on the RFP by March 31, before it is distributed on April 11. [Read RFP Here.)

Announcement:

The City of Piedmont is seeking comment on the Draft Request for Proposals (RFP) and Draft Franchise Agreement (FA) for solid waste collection services from members of the community. This opportunity to comment is extended to better inform the City of the community’s needs and desires for solid waste collection services prior to the issuance of the RFP.

Please note that these documents are still under review by the City Attorney and City staff. Staff will make changes to the documents and address comments as they are submitted, leading up to the City Council meeting scheduled for Monday, April 3rd. At that meeting, the City Council will be asked to consider approval of the RFP package, which, if approved, will be released on Monday, April 10th.

What Is Included in the RFP Package?

• RFP Document describing the solid waste collection services sought for the City of Piedmont;
• Draft Franchise Agreement for solid waste collection services in the City of Piedmont; and
• Other RFP Attachments, including specified forms bidders must fill out and submit with their proposal, in addition to informational documents bidders are to review.

Potential Changes Under Consideration

• Curbside vs backyard solid waste collection service offerings (RFP, Section 3.2);

  • Curbside collection will be the new standard method of service;
  • Backyard collection will remain a service option for customers who wish to “opt-in;”
  • The additional cost for backyard collection will be a function of cart elevation (change in grade level) and distance from the curb to cover the cost of additional labor related to providing such service;

• Additional recycling and organics carts to be provided at an additional cost (RFP, Section 3.2);

• Disabled customers unable to place carts at the curb for collection will receive backyard service and pay the standard curbside rate. Proof of disability must be provided (RFP, Section 3.2);

• Cell phones and CFL bulbs may be placed on top of carts along with batteries for collection (these items must be enclosed in a transparent plastic bag) (RFP, Section 3.2);

• On-call, door-to-door household hazardous waste pickup service or periodic household hazardous waste collection events may be proposed, if companies wish. Such services will be proposed at an additional fee not included in the rates proposed (RFP, Section 3.6);

• Multi-family dwelling residents will now receive Large Item Collection pickups (RFP, Section 3.3); and

• Collection start time to be earlier, beginning at 6am rather than 7am, to alleviate traffic concerns (RFP, Section 3.9).

  • DRAFT Request For Proposals Dated March 13, 2017
  • Attachment A – DRAFT Collection Services Agreement
  • Attachment B – DRAFT RFP Proposal Forms A-L
  • Attachment C – DRAFT RFP Proposal Forms K
  • Attachment D – Example RRI Calculator
  • Attachment E – Existing Contract with Richmond Sanitary Service
  • Attachment F – Alameda County Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for Waste Management
  • Attachment G – Alameda County Integrated Waste Management Plan
  • Attachment H – ACWMA Ordinance Prohibiting the Disposal of Certain Items in Alameda County Landfills
  • Attachment I – ACWMA Mandatory Recycling Ordinance
  • Attachment J – Chapter 9 of the Piedmont City Code

  How to Submit Your Comments

  Please submit your comments no later than March 31st regarding the potential changes to solid waste collection services to the City Clerk’s Office at cityclerk@ci.piedmont.ca.us or via US Mail to City Clerk’s Office, 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, CA 94611.

  Residents with questions are encouraged to contact Associate Planner Jennifer Gavin at jgavin@ci.piedmont.ca.us or via phone at (510) 420-3050.