Jun 7 2016

SCHOOLS: New Bonds, Budget, Food Allergies, and Election

On Wednesday, June 8, the Piedmont Unified School District Board, will meet starting at 7 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 120 Vista Avenue, to consider: a  new Bond Measure for the schools, the budget, food allergies, and the November Election of 3 school board members including one open seat.  The meeting is open to the public and will be broadcast live on Cable Channel 27 and the City website under 0n-line videos.  Recordings will be made of the proceedings.

The link to the agenda is here.

Jun 7 2016

Ed Foundation Donates Millions to Piedmont Schools

Piedmont Education Foundation approves $2.47 million grant to Piedmont Unified School District

At its May meeting, the Piedmont Education Foundation Board of Directors approved a grant of $2,474,233 for the 2016 – 2017 school year. The funding represents almost 8% of the District’s 2016-2017 budget, and provides direct support for nearly 12% of Piedmont’s K-12 teachers.

The grant is the first of its kind to be allocated with monies raised entirely by the new PEF organization throughout this past year. By bringing new transparency and more stakeholders to the grant-making process, the donation represents a significant change from past practices.

Read MORE.

Jun 6 2016

Piedmont Ed Foundation Announces Job Openings

The Piedmont Education Foundation (PEF) is reorganizing in order to continue to deliver on the mission of promoting academic excellence, championing innovation, and providing sustained financial support to the Piedmont schools. As of the end of our current fiscal year (June 30, 2016), three existing staff positions are being reconfigured into three new positions (see links below). 

All interested candidates are encouraged to apply by submitting a cover letter and resume to resumes@piedmontedfoundation.org.

The reorganization is in keeping with plans to continue to grow fundraising revenues, including those via the Endowment, all of which in turn will provide necessary financial support to the Piedmont schools.

Communications Manager

Development & Campaign Manager

Finance & Database Coordinator

Deadline for applications:  June 10 or until the position is filled

Estimated start date:  July 2016

Interviews:  To be held in June

Interested candidates:  Email cover letter and resume to resumes@piedmontedfoundation.org.

Jun 1 2016

SCHOOLS: Voters Tested for Support of an Additional School Bond

Learn more about a survey the Piedmont Unified School District commissioned to find out if Piedmont voters would support a new local school bond measure, possibly in November 2016, to improve school facilities.  The survey is called Bond Feasibility Survey. The conclusion from the survey was that 70% of voters in Piedmont would support a new and additional school bond ballot measure.

“Is a bond measure to repair and improve Piedmont schools feasible for the November 2016 ballot?   Yes.”

“Voters have an exceptionally positive opinion of the quality of education provided by the Piedmont Unified School District and they consider maintaining the quality of education in local public schools to be the most important issue facing the community—more important than maintaining local streets and roads, protecting the environment, preventing local tax increases, and other benchmark issues. These sentiments translate into strong natural support (70%) for a $65 million bond to repair and modernize aging classrooms and school facilities including repairing deteriorating roofs, plumbing, heating, ventilation, and electrical systems, improve student safety, campus security, and access for the disabled, and acquire, renovate, construct and equip classrooms, facilities, science labs, and technology to support advanced programs in math, science, engineering, arts and technology.

“The results of this study suggest that, if structured appropriately and combined with an effective public education effort and independent campaign, the proposed school bond measure has a good chance of passage if placed on the November ballot. Having stated that a bond measure is feasible, it is important to note that a recommendation to place a measure on the ballot comes with several qualifications and conditions. Indeed, although the results are promising, all revenue measures must overcome challenges prior to being successful. The proposed measure is no exception.”

Read the complete survey – methodology, questions posed to potential voters, and conclusions  here.

May 30 2016

SCHOOL: Budget Committee Deals with Controversy

Report on Budget Advisory Committee Meeting of May 19th 

Matters became heated at the Piedmont Unified School District’s (PUSD) Budget Advisory Committee meeting on May 19th. The Committee meets approximately once a month in the School District Offices.

The meeting started off with the Piedmont School District Business Services official, Song Chin­-Bendib reviewing the PUSD budget. When asked why she was there, she replied with a friendly, “It’s my job.”

Song was surprised that the tax revenue was less than projected to be in January. She showed her support for California Proposition 30.  She said that some areas of government do not support extending the proposition.

Song Chin­-Bendib expressed how important budget reports are. She noticed a trend in her reports where the ending balance is going down. When asked further about the budget, she said that 35% of the budget is paid by the Parent’s Club and Parcel Tax, and that 85% of the budget goes to personnel and staff, and 15% towards utilities.

Within the State budget, there are “rainy day funds”, which could be used to help school districts.  Song closed off her budget statement showing the trend changes the budget projections saying, “A lot of things can happen in 6 months.”

After Song Chin­-Bendib, the Committee transitioned to citizen statements; a Piedmont resident named William Blackwell spoke. He started off talking about the Piedmont school parcel tax, which is a flat tax of approximately $2,600 per year per parcel.   The school parcel tax, called Measure A, was passed three years ago by Piedmont voters.  The tax created no exemptions for Piedmont citizens to not pay the tax except for those on SSI.

Blackwell stated he noticed that 43 parcels in Piedmont were not paying the school tax, which he claimed is not legal. Out of 43 parcels, two are exempt from the tax under SSI.  Out of the remaining 41, 30 are double parcels. A double parcel means that there is one house on two parcels, and the property is taxed for only one parcel.

Blackwell further noted that the shocking thing is that 11 of the 43 are single parcels on individual properties not paying the Piedmont school parcel tax, some owned by religious entities.

“The Piedmont parcel tax issue is an ongoing issue.He was then cut off by a lady on the Committee who asked if he was a tax attorney. She then asked, “What’s keeping Piedmont from getting the money?”  Mr. Blackwell replied, “This issue is not being settled by who it should be settled by.” She did not believe his claim. Mr. Blackwell stated that she is supporting the parcel tax law being broken, which she answered with, “I’m offended you’re accusing me of breaking the law.”

The argument went forth for a couple of more minutes, until it was cut short by Song Chin­-Bendib. The meeting as a whole was then adjourned, but Mr. Blackwell stayed behind to talk a little more, with no interruptions. He said that exempting the church ­owned parcels may be a violation of the Separation of Church and State doctrine, that prohibits local government support for religion.

According to Blackwell, June 30th is the deadline for ending the unlawful exemptions to the school tax, and he is curious to see if there will be a change for next year. Terminating these “illegal exemptions” would add another $326,000 to the budget, which could be very impactful on the long term. When asked about how Mr. Blackwell came across this shocking trend, he said “I’m not a lawyer, but I can read.”

By Landon Campbell, Piedmont High School Senior

Editor’s Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.

May 23 2016

Schools Facilities Master Plan, P.E. Program, Elementary Instructional Design, Teacher Contract: School Board, Wed May 25

                   Piedmont School Board REGULAR MEETING  –     Wednesday, May 25, 2016, 7:00 p.m.
Council Chambers, City Hall 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont Regular Session: 7:00 p.m. Public Meeting – Broadcast live on Cable Channel 27 and on City website under online videos – School Board

>>>AGENDA INCLUDES:
VI.A. Facilities Master Plan Steering Committee – The PUSD Facilities Steering Committee (comprised of community members and staff) will present its recommendation regarding the scope and prioritization of the facilities master plan, as well as the amount the Board should seek in a Facilities Bond for the November 2016 election.

Background on Steering Committee Recommendations
Steering Committee Recommendation
VI.B. Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 6158.1 – Physical Education Independent Study

1. Background PE Independent Study
2. BP 6158.1 Physical Education Independent Study Program
3. AR 6158.1 Physical Education Independent Study Program
VI.C. Elementary Instructional Program Design

The Board is asked to adopt the following contract language and bell schedule change that will enable the development of a new daily instructional schedule for the three elementary schools.

Contract Language
Article VI – Hours and Professional Responsibility
A.3. Professional Day
At the elementary level, a full-time teaching position shall consist of direct instruction based on state mandated instructional levels with an average of 3040 minutes of preparation time per day.

Bell Schedule

Early start (8:00am) for the elementary Instrumental Music Program.
Background on Elementary Program Design
VI.D. Approve Contract Agreement Between the District and the Association of Piedmont Teachers (APT) 2016-17

The Board will review the tentative agreement for the contract between the District and APT from July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017. The community will have an opportunity to comment prior to Board action. It is recommended that Board approve the contract as presented and ratified by APT.

Attachments:
Background APT contract
May 11 2016

Proposed New Aquatics Center: Neighbors Are On Board

“The city has said that the carriage house, where Dress Best for Less is, behind the pool, the space between the recreation department building and the current pool, as well as the play structure area are all open territory for the new facility to take advantage of.”  

Stakeholder Aquatics Center Meeting – 

Last Wednesday, May 5, 2016, the Piedmont Community Pool managers held an exciting stakeholder’s meeting to discuss a new aquatics facility. Kevin Post and his associate were present from Counsilman-Hunsaker, Associates to hear the needs of the various interest groups present at the meeting. Post is a pool specialists who manages aquatic facilities, as they are all very unique and require more planning than most other facilities.

When I arrived, there were about 10 people sitting around a conference table, in a back room of the Piedmont Center of the Arts building. This meeting was the second of three sessions held that afternoon, each targeted to hear from different pool users.

At around 3 o’clock there were mom’s of high school freshmen, a few lap swimmers, recreation department representatives, and the club swim team coach, Stefan Bill. John Savage, high school water polo coach, and Megan Hernandez, High School athletic director, came in a few minutes later.

The greatest issue that was being discussed was lap lane availability and practice times for the various teams. Bill mentioned that he would love to be able to host competitive meets and events at the new facility, although it is recognized that parking would be a major issue.

The city has said that the carriage house, where Dress Best for Less is, behind the pool, the space between the recreation department building and the current pool, as well as the play structure area are all open territory for the new facility to take advantage of.

One concern that was brought up was the issue of neighbors being unhappy with noise levels. In past years neighbors used to call the pool office angrily to tell Jesus, a past swim team coach, to be quiet and not have the team do cheers in the morning or at night.

Rebecca Sermeno, the aquatics manager, reassured the meeting members that she knows the neighbors all quite well and that they are all on board with a new facility. The issues of the neighbors has been a reoccurring problem that has actually partially prevented previous plans of renovations.

Megan Hernandez, who grew up in Piedmont, said she can remember there always being talk of getting a new facility, and another, more skeptical meeting member, Stacy, said “show me the money and I’ll get excited” because she has seen so many proposed plans that all just fall through for one reason or another.

Sermeno however is much more optimistic and declared that this is the first time the pool has taken as many steps toward actually redoing the facilities.

I, a high school senior who practically lives at the pool, am also slightly skeptical. I remember that even when I was in middle school there was talk of a grand new 50 meter pool that was coming our way, but nothing ever happened. I do, however, have faith in Sermeno to watch this through and make sure it happens, it may just take much more time than predicted.

Things became real interesting when Post brought out his sample models of the different pool scenarios that could be built. One idea was a pool over 50m that had a bulk head, another was a 50mX25yd pool as well as a play pool that had a s0ft depth decline.

The meeting members all became very engaged in trying out different configurations on the printed out map to see what may work the best. Bill commented that he would love for there to be two competitive pools, however there is an obvious need for a more shallow, play and instruction pool. No conclusion was made, but Post was able to understand and hear the needs and wants of the various people present.

I stayed after the meeting ended to talk to Kevin Post a bit more to see his perspective on this plan.

Post told me that his company, Councilman-Hunsaker, has done over 1,000 pool facilities and that their employees are a mix of people with swimming backgrounds, like himself, and engineers that can plan out an effective and efficient aquatics facility.

Post explained that during the meeting they were getting input first, then they would work on getting together a few models and scenario with construction costs, which would then be presented at Council and public meetings.

Finally a decision about the level of funding would be declared which would allow a bid election to take place. Only then would they be able to begin working on deconstructing the current facilities and constructing the new one.

I was very intrigued by this meeting, I knew almost everyone there from my years of being in the pool community so I felt comfortable talking and giving my input. I felt like what I had to say was valuable to the discussion since I gave a unique perspective on the situation compared to all of the adults that were there.

Although the adults are the ones who pay the dues and fees at the club, I still believe that the younger generation’s voices needed to be heard since they make up a large majority of the people who swim at the pool. All in all, it was an exciting meeting to participate in and I am thrilled to see how the plans will actually turn out.

Kelsey Fennell, Piedmont High School Senior

Editors’ Note:  Opinions expressed are those of the author. 
May 8 2016

Proposed New School Bond, Wellness Center, Increased Parcel Tax Levy Hearing: School Board Meeting May 10

New School Facilities Bond measure poll results, final Public Hearing on increasing the parcel tax for school operating costs to $2,553.26 per year per parcel, Volunteer of the Year Award, Graduation dates, and Wellness Center report – 

The May 11, 2016 Piedmont Unified School District will meet at 7:00 p.m. Regular Session in the Council Chambers, City Hall 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont.

~~~~~~~~~~~

PUSD Facilities Master Plan Community Polling Presentation and Results  [Potential Parcel Tax Funding]

The Piedmont Education Foundation, the Piedmont Unified School District contracted with True North Research to conduct a community poll that gauges voters’ interest in supporting a local bond measure to fund school facility repairs and improvements.  Dr. McLarney will provide an overview of the polling methodology organization, and results.

~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

PUSD Wellness Center – Student Leadership Programs

PHS Counselor Amanda Carlson and student representatives from the PUSD Wellness Center Leadership Programs will present on the positive impact of the Peer Advisor and Youth Educator programs at PHS, MHS, and PMS will present information of the Wellness Center, which has provided opportunities for students to engage in Peer Education and Leadership programs that significantly enhance overall student health and community.  These include peer mediation, peer advisement, and Youth Educator programs at Piedmont Middle School and Piedmont/Millennium High Schools.

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

The PMS 8th Grade graduation will be held Wednesday, June 8th at 5 p.m. at Witter Field. The Millennium High School graduation will be held on Wednesday, June 8th at 1:00 p.m. at Veterans Hall. The Piedmont High School graduation will be held on June 9th at 5 p.m. at Witter Field.

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

Near the end of the meeting the Board will: Conduct 2nd Public Hearing and “Approve” the Proposed Levy of Current School Support Tax, Measure A, to be Levied in 2016-17

School Parcel tax is to be increased to $2,553.26 per parcel for 2016-17. 

The Board of Education will discuss the option to continue the levy at its current rate or to increase the levy up to the statutory level of $2,553.26 per parcel, which represents a 2% increase from the current rate of $2,503.20 per parcel.

The Board will discuss and receive public input regarding the proposed levy of the school support tax for 2016-17. This is the second and final public hearing. The Board will take action on any levy and increase after the second public hearing.

Read prior article on school parcel tax levy here.

The public is invited to provide comment at the Board meeting or prior to the meeting by email to the Board of Education at aswenson@piedmont.k12.ca.us

The meeting will be broadcast live on Cable Channel 27 and from the City’s website under online videos.  The meeting, open to the public, begins at 7:00 p.m. on May 11, 2016. 

May 11 Agenda < read the full agenda

May 4 2016

Elementary School Redesign Reduces Art, AP Classes Controversy, School Parcel Tax: Report

April 27th School Board Meeting –

At the School Board meeting on April 27th, a variety of topics were discussed. The School Board meets twice a month and they start with a private meeting, before they have the public meeting which starts at 7 p,m. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss, events, changes, and make decisions regarding the elementary schools, middle school, and high schools.

  At the start, a woman who was dealing with finances for the School District stated that she advised that the school put money into the reserve so that the reserve becomes four percent. This was the part of the meeting where the parcel tax was discussed.

Next Mr. Matrix and Ms. Muñoz proposed a new AP Computer Science Class.  They discussed the difference between this class and other classes currently available. One of the most interesting parts of this class was how many more girls are signed up than in past years. About 43% of people signed up for the class are girls. Just a few years ago, it was less than 10% of women signed up. This is a huge change and at the this rate, the proportion will be equal. The board agreed to the class but through discussing the new AP class, a different discussion regarding AP’s and whether or not they should be allowed, limited, and how their presence has affected the student body.

School Board member  Richard Raushenbush was the most concerned about this AP classes, and felt that they needed to be discussed further.  He even mentioned eliminating AP’s or limiting how many a student could take. Although the other board members agreed that it should be up for discussion, they decided to put it on the agenda for their next meeting.

Then Ms. Muñoz went up again along with Carol Wozniak and high school math teacher Bill Marthinsen, who discussed the three new math classes. During that discussion however, Marthinsen also commented on AP classes, even handing out copies of an article he read in the New York Times regarding the topic.

Finally, a committee of elementary school teachers and principals presented the elementary school redesign, which features a different format for the elementary schools. One major and controversial change that would come along with this change is the fact that Art class would be cut, but would be “integrated” into the regular classroom through projects. Many parents are upset with this change, considering that art class is one of the few places where young students can relax and unwind.  High school math teacher and elementary school parent, Auban Willats, went to the board meeting wearing two hats; one as a math teachers supporting the adoption of 3 new math classes, and the other as an elementary school parent, considering the redesign. Although Willats understands the concepts, she worries about the cut down on art, because even if art is integrated into the academics, it still doesn’t give children the downtime art class may provide some students. Willats also pointed out a parent who questioned why tech still gets the same amount of time, but art gets cut down?

I agree with this statement, although technology class is important, most children these days are extensively exposed to technology. So why is it that tech is being somewhat more important than art? It’s unlikely that any of these children will be working in Silicon Valley anytime soon, so why can’t they equally be exposed to both technology class and art class and from there they can decide what they enjoy more or is more important to them. At this young age, it should be about exposing children to different classes and by limiting some, especially something so important like art or music class, where students get a chance to fully express themselves beyond academics.

Willats said that she plans on individually contacting each Board Member to discuss these potential changes, as well as communicate with other parents about the “lack of transparency” on the issue of elementary school redesign. Many parents at the meeting agreed with Willats in the same sense that they are upset with the inequity of many of the classes.

Unknowingly at the time, what Claire Reichle and I spoke about at the meeting somewhat went with the theme of redesigning curriculum, because we brought up the fact that there should be more emotional learning within all the schools, but specifically implemented for the young in elementary school. We based much of our information on the movie The Mask You Live In which discusses the pressure boys face to be masculine and how it affects their relationships.

Claire and I also brought up the fact that we are Peer Advisors so we go into High School Classrooms where we talk about different topics such as, stress, drugs/alcohol, and relationships. From our experience being Peer Advisors, we feel that by implementing emotional learning at a younger age, by the time those kids get to high school, rather than learn how to get in touch with their emotions or be mindful, they will already know how and it will become a part of who they are. Although the School Board didn’t make any particular comments, their body language seemed rather receptive to our ideas, or at least they understood our ideas.

Overall, the meeting covered a variety of topics, but the next meeting should be even more interesting considering they will have a full discussion on AP classes as well as continue with plans for the elementary school redesign.

Report by Emilia Rivera, Piedmont High School Senior

Editors’ Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Apr 24 2016

School Parcel Tax Raise to $2,553.26 Considered Wednesday, April 27

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON AMOUNT OF SCHOOL TAX LEVY

The Board of Education will discuss the option to continue the levy at its current rate or to increase the levy up to the statutory level of $2,553.26 per parcel, which represents a 2% increase from the current rate of $2,503.20 per parcel.

 The first of two public hearings is on April 27.

In compliance with Government Code Section 6061 and ballot language, the Board of Education will hold a public hearing and take action on the levy of Measure A for the 2016-17 fiscal year at the Board meeting of April 27, 2016 starting at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Piedmont City Hall, 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, California. The public is invited to provide comment at the Board meeting or by email to the Board of Education at aswenson@piedmont.k12.ca.us.

Randall Booker, Superintendent

The Board will discuss and receive public input regarding the proposed levy of the school support tax for 2016-17. 

The Board will take action on any levy after the second public hearing.

The required second Public Hearing on the parcel tax levy will take place on May 11, 2016 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. 

The public is invited to provide comments at the Board meetings or to the Board by email addressed to the Board at aswenson@piedmont.k12.ca.us and received prior to the second public hearing on May 11.  All information sent to the Board becomes public information.

Background information provided by the District:

 VII_A_1BackgroundPublicHearingOnParcelTax

VII_A_2SupportTaxSubcommitteeReportToBoard

 VII_A_3ExhibitAMeasureATaxLevy

VII_A_4ExhibitBMeasureATaxLevy

VII_A_5ExhibitCMeasureA SubcommitteeTableOfReserveProjections_

The meeting and hearing will be broadcast live

April 27, 2016 starting at 7:00 p.m

 on Cable Channel 27 and via the City website under videos. 

« Previous Page | Next Page »