Unlike other City meetings when broadcasted videos are produced, home/remote viewers will not be able to observe the City Council and Staff as important policy and program issues are considered at the Saturday Budget Session. Interested persons must be physically present to observe the meeting.

Taxes, fees, policies, programs, and priorities involving the City budget are to be presented by staff and considered by the Council during the important Council Budget Session Saturday, May 21.

On Saturday May 21, 2022, Council Budget Session

9:00 am Emergency Operations Center in the Police Department on Highland Avenue

With transparency, equity, and inclusion touted as goals of the Piedmont City Council, accessibility to certain public meetings, including this Budget Session, continue to be difficult or impossible for many individuals. If you can not physically attend the Budget meeting, you will not be able to observe the proceedings remotely via Zoom, computers, or cable television.

During the height of the COVID pandemic, residents had the “luxury”of being able to remotely watch the Council make decisions without being physically present at a meeting.  Some of the “Zoom” meetings, although broadcast during the time of the meeting, were not preserved as a cost cutting measure.   Presentations and considerations were not preserved reducing transparency, accessibility, and accountability.

The 2022-23 Annual Piedmont Budget Session will once more follow the long -held Piedmont Council tradition and not be broadcast for remote viewing. The Saturday Council Budget Session will be moved from City Hall where cameras are installed and videos are regularly made of the proceedings.  The Budget meeting will take place in the Police Department Emergency Operations Center (EOC) on Highland Avenue where broadcasting is not done leaving home/remote viewers unable to observe the proceedings.

Ironically, during the month of May, in a prior list of  public meetings, there were 12 public City meetings.  See link below. These 12 different City meetings, Regular Council, Commission, and Committee meetings, are stated to be held either “Virtually or Hybrid”, consequently using City broadcast facilities.  Broadcasting meetings allows  interested persons to watch and observe the Council away from the meetings. The Council Budget Session is the only full Council meeting on the list to require observers physical presence.   

Under consideration and discussion at the Budget Session are:

• How should the City Council spend City resources?

• How much should residents be taxed or charged for sewers, municipal services, fees, use of City facilities, priorities,  programs and monetary considerations, such as broadcasting City meetings and preserving public records?

Concerns have been expressed in the past to the City Council regarding broadcasting meetings to encourage greater public access to governance, but the Council’s tradition of not broadcasting meetings remains, thus missing an opportunity to increase access, accountability, transparency, equity, and inclusion.

2022-05 Notice of Regular Meetings – Revised

> City of Piedmont 2022-2023 Budget

Agenda > City Council Agenda 2022-05-21 (Special)

• 1. Overview of the Proposed FY 2022-23 Budget
• 2. Review of Departmental Budgets for FY 2022-23
• a. Police
• b. Public Works
• c. Planning & Building
• d. Recreation
• e. Fire
• f. Administration & KCOM
• g. Non-Departmental and Other Funds Budgets

City notice with links below:

The Piedmont City Council will consider the proposed annual budget for fiscal year 2022-23 at three separate meetings. A Saturday work session will be held on May 21, 2022 at 9:00 am in the EOC at 403 Highland Avenue. Members of the public are invited to participate in this meeting. Public hearings regarding the proposed budget and the levy of the Municipal Services Tax and the Sewer Tax will be held during regularly scheduled City Council meetings on June 6 and June 20, 2022. The public is invited to attend these meetings and speak to the City Council about spending priorities for the city in the coming year. Click to visit the Annual Budgets page, where all sections of the proposed budget as well as approved budgets from previous years are available for download. For questions on contents of the budget, please contact Finance Director Michael Szczech via email at mszczech@piedmont.ca.gov or by phone at (510) 420-3045. If you wish to write to the Council regarding the budget, please send an e-mail to the City Council at citycouncil@piedmont.ca.gov or send a letter via U.S. Mail to Piedmont City Council, c/o City Clerk’s Office, 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, 94611.

Most pedestrians and walkers in Piedmont bemoan the numerous cracks and divots in many of Piedmont’s sidewalks.  The City annually budgets for sidewalk repairs.  Piedmont’s handsome street trees are known for their roots to uplift and crack the sidewalks in a seemingly endless cycle of growth and repair.

Staff report:

Piedmont’s sidewalks are increasingly showing their age. For loss prevention purposes, it is essential to repair sidewalks with significant defects soon after they are reported. Prompt repair of defective sidewalk reduces the risk of accidents and the liability associated with injuries that might result thereafter.

Last fiscal year, sidewalk replacement and repair costs totaled $868,905. Through March of the 2021-2022 fiscal year, the City has spent $870,000. The approved budget for these costs was $900,000, consisting of $600,000 from the Facilities Maintenance Fund and $300,000 from the Gas Tax Fund.

Staff is requesting an additional appropriation of $300,000 from the General Fund in FY 2021-22 to continue to repair and replace sidewalks that are identified as having significant offsets and defects. We expect sidewalk repair costs to continue near the current level and our long-range financial plan will reflect such costs.

Currently, the system for managing sidewalk maintenance is manual and cumbersome. Staff is working towards the implementation of an asset management software program to track service calls and maintenance history. Once implemented, the tools in this software will allow staff to track service calls and develop recommendations to improve not only for the City’s sidewalk replacement program, but for other types of maintenance as well.

READ the full staff report linked below:

sidewalk repairs 522022

.

Agenda and participation information >Planning 2022-05-12 Special Meeting

“City Staff is asking Park Commissioners to provide feedback on the Draft 6th Cycle Piedmont Housing Element as community members and key stakeholders. The Park Commission meeting on May 4 gives the public further opportunities to learn about the Housing Element update process and to give their input and feedback.”

Numerous proposals are in the Draft Housing Element many occurring throughout Piedmont.  Density increases, removal of parking requirements, raised height limits of buildings, end to neighbor input on proposals, zoning changes, Charter change, etc.

 All proposals in the 374 page Draft Housing Element document can be read online for public comment.  See link at the end of this article.

6. Proposed Specific Plan: Page B-12, Appendix B, of the Draft Housing Element proposes to prepare a specific plan (Government Code §65450 et. seq) for the area of the Public Works Corporation Yard to accommodate new housing development, incorporate existing amenities, and modernize current city functions. The portion of the site utilized for park Page 2 of 62 and recreational uses, are intended to remain as an amenity for the proposed specific plan area, with the existing vehicle parking reconfigured, as needed.  See map on linked attachment below.

7. Blair Park: The Draft Housing Element identifies Blair Park, which is located on the south side of Moraga Avenue, as a potential alternate site for housing if the proposed specific plan for the Public Works Corporation Yard fails to yield 122 housing units (page B-13). Blair Park is 3.55 acres, with the potential for 210 units if developed at 60 units per acre.

8. Zoning Amendments: In order to meet the 6th Cycle RHNA target with Piedmont’s limited available land, the Draft Housing Element’s Goal 1, New Housing Construction, proposes to increase the allowed residential density for housing affiliated with religious institutions in Zone A (program 1.D, page (37) and increase allowed residential density in Zone B (program 1.F), Zone C (program 1.G), and Zone D (1.H).

READ the Draft Housing Element May 4 presentation to the Park Commission and Agenda, including participation information below:

> 2022-05-04 Park Agenda

Receipt of the Piedmont Community Pool Design Development Package and Consideration of: 

1) Approval of Design Modifications to the Recreation Pool; and

2) Authorization for Staff and ELS to Advance to Construction Documents Phase

RECOMMENDATION: Receive the 100% Design Development Package and Cost Estimate for the Piedmont Community Pool Project and by a single motion, take the following actions with regard to the project:

1) Approve design modifications to the shallow water recreation pool as recommended by the Community Pool Advisory Committee (PAC):

a) Lap Lanes: increased length of the three lap lanes from 20 to 25 yards with a depth profile that moves side to side from approximately 3.5 feet in the middle of the pool to approximately 5 feet at the western edge of the pool

b) Rotate the stairs 90 degrees such that the stairs enter the open free water area rather than the rectangular lap lane area

2) Approve expansion of the zero-beach entry area in the recreation pool by approximately 300 square feet

3) Authorize Staff and ELS to advance to Construction Documents Phase

FULL STAFF REPORT >Pool Acceptance 522022

council- 522020 agenda

Piedmont is scheduled to adopt a new Housing Element to accommodate 587 new housing units in Piedmont.  You can play a role in deciding how! 

For development potential, some residents and City staff have suggested,  amongst other areas, the area around the City Corporation Yard on Moraga Avenue.  Undeveloped areas are unlikely to provide housing space for 587 new housing units leading to new units added in single family neighborhoods. 

Once the Housing Element is approved, the City will be prohibited by law from informing neighbors of certain proposed projects, potentially turning garages into housing, subdividing properties, adding new housing units on existing properties, restructuring existing homes as apartment buildings, etc. .

The Housing Element is important to all areas of Piedmont, for after parameters and requirements for housing are approved in the new Housing Element, “ministerial” permits are to be issued by the City Planning Department for all conforming proposals without neighborhood notification or input. 

The Piedmont Planning staff, along with outside consultants, have devised the new DRAFT Housing Element.  Attempts have been made by the City to involve Piedmont residents in the process.  The result is a 374 page DRAFT Housing Element document outlining conditions for approval of housing units. 

Go to the end of this article to learn how you can voice your preferences and read the DRAFT Housing Element.

TIME FOR WRITTEN INPUT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS  ENDING ON MAY 5, 2022.

If you are not able or need assistance with submitting your ideas to the City, contact City Clerk John O. Tulloch at 510-420-3040 or Senior Planner Pierce Macdonald at 510-420-3050.

  The Piedmont City Council has planned a limited comment period based on an earlier State deadline for submittal of Piedmont’s new Housing Element. 

State Housing Element Update Timeline was Extended to May 2023 due to a recent state law requiring additional review and longer comment periods.

• April 8, 2022: Publication of the Draft Housing Element > Draft Piedmont 6th Cycle Housing Element.  (374 pages)

• May 12, 2022: Special Planning Commission public hearing, starting at 5:30 pm to discuss and consider the Draft Housing Element. Approximately one month comment period.
• June 2022: City Council public hearing. Approximately one month comment period.
• May 2023: NEW deadline for adoption of the final draft of the updated Housing Element, date amended due to recent state law requiring additional review and longer comment periods! 

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

The 374-page Draft Housing Element, shown above, includes policies to increase housing access and affordability in Piedmont.

Purple arrows identify the locations of the links to the Draft Housing Element on the homepages of the City website and Piedmontishome.org

Win a $50 gift card to Grand Lake Ace Hardware by submitting your housing plan, email, and comments in the Piedmont Housing Puzzle. Click below to start! START

To view the appointee list:  Click below

2022-04-19 Commission Appointments

• ·     The City purchased the 801 Magnolia Avenue property in 2003 at a cost of $735,000.  A the time, the City was developing the Civic Center Master Plan, a redevelopment of the Civic Center that called for replacing the 801 building with a modern building and civic plaza.  Undergrounding cost overruns and the 2008 economic downturn forestalled proceeding with the master plan at that time.

• ·     In March, 2011, the City received a proposal from the Piedmont Center for the Arts to lease the building.  The City conducted a public hearing, “Consideration of the Concept of use of City Property at 801 Magnolia Avenue by the Piedmont Center for the Arts” at which PCA presented its Articles of Incorporation which state “The specific purpose of this corporation is to promote artistic endeavors for youth within the Piedmont community by providing exhibit and performance space and a website to connect the Arts Center with exhibitors and renters.”  At the hearing, commenters recommended other uses for the building such as a Maker Center, teen or senior center and public library.

• ·     In April, 2011 PCA signed a 10-year, no-rent lease with the City which stipulated that PCA could rent space to only non-profit sub-tenants.  Over the ensuing 10 years, the City modified the Zone B use restrictions so that a for-profit business of a PCA Board member could be operated in the 801 Magnolia Building.

• ·     In November 2021, the City came forward with a 10-year lease renewal with PCA.  No public hearings on the use of the 801 Building were held at City Council or city commissions nor did Council discuss the 801 lease renewal in closed session prior to the November meeting.

Failure to engage the public and City Council in discussions of use of the 801 Building prior to the November meeting soured the public process from the start.  According to the City Charter, “An ordinance may be introduced by any Councilmember at any regular or special meeting of the City Council.”

At the November 2021 meeting, the previous Mayor publicly stated he was asked by PCA to open negotiations on a new lease and presumably used this ordinance authority to bring forward the new lease (at his last meeting as mayor). But in so doing, he ignored the input of his Council colleagues and the community at large on the use of 801 Magnolia.  Other factors contributing to public dissatisfaction with the process were flaws in the lease and the obvious bias to Piedmont Center for the Arts it contained. Read the analysis by Rick Raushenbush to see just how badly the first draft of the agreement represented the City’s interest.

https://www.piedmontcivic.org/2020/11/29/opinion-four-major-flaws-in-proposed-art-center-lease/

Since November 2021, overwhelming public opposition to the first draft of the lease and the process by which it was brought forward resulted in the City taking more control of the building and relying on a facility use agreement that was approved by Council in March, 2022

(http://piedmont.hosted.civiclive.com/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=18384268). 

But as with the first draft, no public hearings or closed sessions of City Council on the use of 801 were held in the ensuing 15 months and again, the majority of public comment has been critical of the agreement and the lack of transparency into its development.  So three meetings over a 15-month period was not a “robust public process” but a series of reactionary meetings with the public trying to claw back access to this public building.

What’s really confounding is why the City didn’t conduct an open public process on the use of 801 Magnolia?  PCA would likely have retained preeminent use of the building with better community access being achieved at the same time.  Instead, a lease highly favorable to PCA was always the only topic for comment, sending a strong signal that it was a fait accompli.  It should be noted that it was in the City’s interest, as well, to have a limited discussion of 801’s use.  Office space is at a premium in City Hall and no doubt staff will make use of the new space in 801 for employees.

There are three spaces in the 801 building – the office space, classroom and performance hall – and a more equitable agreement would be to have assigned the classroom to the community as a senior center.  The Recreation Department is doing a better job of providing senior programming, but what seniors really need more is a gathering space and the 801 classroom would be perfect for that.

Why all this matters is that 6 years from now the facility use agreement will expire and the community will again go through this process for the 801 building. Several current Councilmembers could be involved again so hopefully a better public process will be followed.  This whole saga reminded me of the scene from Oliver Twist when Oliver approaches the master and asks “Please sir, I want some more”.  Hopefully it won’t be so hard to ask next time.

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

*Since 1986, PCA has been the logo for the Piedmont Civic Association.  In 2011, when the Piedmont Center for the Arts was formed and  began using PCA as an identifying symbol, the Piedmont Civic Association  informed the Arts Center of the potential misunderstanding for two Piedmont organizations to refer to themselves as PCA.   The two PCA organizations are separate and unrelated entities serving Piedmont.  The Piedmont Civic Association has never had a lease or agreement with the City of Piedmont for use of  801 Magnolia Avenue. 

  On Monday, April 4, City Council will be voting on whether the energy system for the new Aquatic Center will be all-electric or continue to rely on natural gas (a fossil fuel) for heating pool water, as in the past. Here are some frequently asked questions about an all-electric pool system, with answers drawn from information presented at the March 21st Council meeting by the City’s Sustainability Program Manager, as well as ELS Architecture and their energy engineer.  

Q: What are Piedmont’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction targets?

A: Our current targets, as outlined in our 2018 Climate Action Plan 2.0 (CAP 2.0), were in line with  State targets at that time – that is, to reduce our in-boundary emissions to 40% below 2005 levels by 2030 and to 8% below 2005 levels by 2050. But State goals have become stronger since then. California now targets achieving 100% emissions-free electricity and carbon neutrality by 2045.

Q: How close is Piedmont to achieving the GHG emissions reduction goals we set in 2018?

A: Piedmont has made incremental improvements over time but has far to go to meet our CAP 2.0 goals. The majority of our reductions so far can be attributed to forces outside Piedmont, such as increased home appliance efficiency. Since the majority of Piedmont’s emissions come from the residential sector, we can only meet our reduction targets if all residents make a concerted effort to decarbonize both their homes and their transportation. Unfortunately, rather than declining, our use of natural gas, the main source of GHG emissions from Piedmont buildings (municipal, residential, and commercial), has risen by 14% since 2014.

Q: What role must the City play in encouraging residents to decarbonize their homes and transportation?

A: The CAP 2.0 emphasizes that the City must focus on educating residents about emissions reduction opportunities and lead by example. Even though City emissions are only 2-4% of total Piedmont emissions, reducing these emissions will play an outsize role in Piedmont’s success in reducing its emissions overall, due to the demonstration effect the City’s efforts will have in motivating residents to decarbonize their own homes and transportation. Specific municipal or City goals in the CAP 2.0 include committing to Piedmont’s municipal facilities and activities becoming Zero-Carbon by 2050, about 25 years after the opening of the new pool facility.

Q: Will the City be able to meet its municipal carbon emissions reduction targets (as outlined in the CAP 2.0) if pool water in the new Aquatic Facility is heated by natural gas, a fossil fuel?

A: No. Heating the old pool with natural gas generated ~87% of the GHG emissions from municipal buildings and structures. If the new facility, with its increased pool square footage and water volume, were heated with natural gas, it would generate between 55-76% more emissions than the old pool (depending on whether or not some solar is installed). The City would not be able to make up for this increase in emissions by cutting emissions from other sources. In contrast, GHG emissions from operating an all-electric facility that relies on a combination of photovoltaic and thermal solar, electric heat pumps, and green grid electricity would be zero. The City would entirely eliminate the GHG emissions generated by the old facility, achieving a very significant municipal GHG emissions reduction.

Q: Using electric heat pumps to heat commercial-sized pools is a new application of this technology in California, so how can we be certain it will work?

A: ELS Architecture and the engineering firm they are working with are fully confident that electric heat pump technology will work for the new Piedmont Aquatic Center. They have designed an all-electric pool for Mountain View which will soon go out to bid. The reason an all-electric municipal pool seems innovative is that aquatic facilities comprise less than 3% of new public construction statewide. Looking at the public building sector overall,  from State and municipal buildings to buildings in the public education systems, new all-electric facilities are being constructed everywhere, and old buildings are undergoing significant retrofits to become all-electric. We are in the midst of an all-electric movement within both the public and private building sectors. Electric heat pump technology has been around for a long time, and, in states like Florida that are not piped for natural gas, 90% of commercial pools are heated by electric heat pumps. The reason this hasn’t been the case here in the West has been the cheap price of natural gas, a situation that is fast ending.

Q: How do the costs of an all-electric vs. a gas-powered system compare?

A: The upfront costs of an all-electric system will be higher by at least $600,000 (a more exact figure, based on recent facility design changes is forthcoming), but a lifecycle analysis shows that an all-electric facility will result in approximately $1,000,000 more in cost savings over 25 years, as compared to a system that uses natural gas. For more information, see the March 21 Staff Report on ELS’s Energy Use Report.

Q: Might the noise of the heat pumps be problematic for pool and tennis court users, as well as nearby residents?

A:  This will not be a complicated issue to resolve, as solutions are routinely found for much more complex noise issues. ELS will work with an acoustician on measures to dampen any undesirable sound from the array of heat pumps. Most of this work will take place after all the pool equipment is in place and functioning, but some pre-work may be done (for example, insulating certain walls and suspending a roof over the equipment).  Since we’ll have an array of heat pumps, it will be rare for them all to be working at their top (i.e. noisiest) capacity – for example, when the temperature gets below 30 degrees F. In addition, the heat pumps we’re looking at have a low decibel nighttime rating.                       

Q: Will relying on the clean electricity grid be more expensive than natural gas over the next 20 years?

A: The era of cheap natural gas is ending. Already, natural gas prices have gone up 200% since 2018, and every indication is that they will continue to rise. PG&E is proposing a 40% increase in natural gas prices over the next four years, as they add transportation and distribution costs for natural gas that aren’t on our current bills. In addition, the California Public Utilities Commission is moving cost rates for natural gas infrastructure solely onto the developer (vs. sharing with rate payers). Moreover, within the next 5-10 years we’ll be seeing carbon pricing or carbon taxes adding to the cost of natural gas.

Q. Will the electricity grid be able to reliably supply us with the clean electricity an all-electric Aquatic Facility will need?

A: Yes. While upgrading California’s electricity transmission systems to accommodate the level of clean electricity the state aims to generate by 2045 is undoubtedly a challenge, there is no reason to worry that there won’t be enough electricity available. Our local clean electricity provider, East Bay Community Energy (EBCE), is supporting various projects to generate clean electricity locally and is continuously increasing the percentage of electricity from renewable sources in its power mix. Thanks to a 2018 City Council decision, the City is enrolled in EBCEs Renewable 100 plan, whereby the electricity EBCE purchases on our behalf comes only from renewable sources (wind, solar, and small-scale hydroelectric). Approximately 95% of Piedmont residents are also enrolled in Renewable 100.

Q: Isn’t it risky to rely on electricity during Planned Power Outages during fire season?

A: There’s no advantage to having a natural gas system to heat pool water during a power outage, since all natural gas boilers sold in California have electric power starts. They no longer have standing pilots that allow you to have gas service during an electric outage. The pumping system for keeping water circulating is the same between a natural gas and an all-electric system, so natural gas has no advantage here either. Currently, battery storage technology to use for emergency backup is not available, but advances are being made in solar battery storage.

Q: Could we start with a natural gas heated pool and pivot to an all-electric system later?

A: It would be hard and prohibitively expensive to retrofit for electricity later. Even if we included the pre-conduits and other infrastructure for electrification in a system that initially relied on natural gas, this would also push up costs. In either case, we would be paying for the cost of two different energy systems and abandoning the natural gas system before the end of the pool’s lifetime.

Q: Was the concept and cost of an all-electric facility factored into Measure UU?

A: No. When the conceptual master plan was initially developed in 2016, all-electric pool heating was not considered, and the baseline assumption was for natural gas, although some “green features” were proposed (solar and thermal tubes). But the details of the energy system were not specified, in the same way that most of the other details being fleshed out now (pool size, building and public space design, etc.) were not. Similarly, the 2016 conceptual plan did not do a GHG emissions analysis or consider how this municipal construction project would comply with Piedmont’s 2010 Climate Action Plan then in place. Since 2016, not only was Piedmont’s 2018 CAP 2.0 adopted, but the transition off natural gas and towards full electrification of public and private buildings and facilities across the state began in earnest, and other municipalities began to consider or actually design all-electric pools. After the passage of UU, Piedmont Connect and residents focused on how to reduce the carbon footprint of the new pool complex. Connect researched and modeled the possibility of designing an all-electric facility that would emit zero GHG emissions in its operation and help the City meet its CAP 2.0 goals. Connect’s calculations showed that it would be both economically and technologically feasible, the same conclusion that the project architects and engineers have now drawn. (A report Connect prepared in 2021 can be viewed here.) City staff and Council have made public commitments several times to support the “greenest” pool possible. When hired, ELS was directed by the City to conduct an energy analysis of the pool, and it stated publicly that it would design for an all-electric option. Since the City chose to wait until the design phase of the project to conduct this energy feasibility assessment and to decide on the facility’s energy system, it may appear that an all-electric facility is an afterthought. But, in reality, this discussion has been going on for some time.

Submitted by Margaret Ovenden, Piedmont Resident

Agenda and Participation Information HERE.

Staff Report HERE