Report on the October 3, 2011 City Council Meeting

Closed Session  The meeting began with a closed session for two agenda items.  An undisclosed subject of potential litigation took the full time of the closed session, leaving no time to discuss undergrounding litigation involving City of Piedmont v. Robert Gray Associates and Harris & Associates. > Click to read more…

Piedmont City Council Agenda – Monday, October 3, 2011 – 7:30 p.m. – City Council Chambers, 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, CA

In closed session:

a.  Potential litigation – Undisclosed

b. Litigation in the matter of undergrounding City of Piedmont v. Robert Gray Associates and Harris & Associates > Click to read more…

View Undergrounding Complaint and Answer Documents

The City of Piedmont has filed a lawsuit against 2 engineering firms to recover monies lost in the Piedmont Hills private undergrounding district bailout.  A copy of the  Complaint filed by the City of Piedmont and Answer filed by Robert Gray & Associates (RGA) is shown below. > Click to read more…

Piedmont’s Audit Subcommittee has released a new draft of its preliminary report.  The new version incorporates changes discussed by committee members at its last  Subcommittee meeting on August 23.  (See video below.)  The report and its recommendations will be discussed, and may be approved, at the next meeting of the Subcommittee, which is set for September 22. > Click to read more…

Resident objects to PRFO agreement with City on Blair Park project

Despite the Municipal Tax Review Committee’s warning that Piedmont’s parcel tax will fail at the polls if governance does not become more transparent and inclusive, the city continues to cater to special interests.  In, for example, another attempt to make the gift of Blair Park to private sports clubs appear a gift from them, the City Administrator has signed an agreement with the clubs that makes them responsible for paying > Click to read more…

Tim Rood announces he will run for City Council

Dear Piedmonter,

You’ve heard from me in the past about civic issues facing Piedmont – most notably, the $2.5 million in taxpayer funds that the City spent to cover cost overruns on the Piedmont Hills utility undergrounding project, as well as issues related to safety, recreation, long-term facility planning, and open, transparent government.

I’m writing today to share some exciting news: I’m running for City Council.

Having been an active, involved resident of Piedmont for years, I’ve realized more and more that the expertise I have would be helpful on the City Council to protect and enhance Piedmont as a high quality city. As a professional city planner with decades of experience working with communities all over the country, I understand the importance of sound financial planning and a robust public process.

I believe securing the City’s long-term financial viability is key to sustaining the services and quality we enjoy.

Over the coming months, I’ll be talking with a lot of Piedmonters and visiting with community groups. I look forward to sharing ideas about how to keep Piedmont a great place to live.

Please take a few moments to visit my website, www.TimRood2012.com, where you can learn more about my views on city government and to let me know what’s important to you. I want to hear what your concerns are and what you think is working well. You can also follow me on Facebook and Twitter.

If you find that your views and mine coincide, if you want to keep Piedmont a great place to live, and if you think I have the qualities to make that happen, I’d be honored if you joined my campaign.

There are many ways to get involved, from simply signing up as a supporter, to requesting a yard sign, hosting a meeting, or making a financial contribution. Just go to www.TimRood2012.com and click on “Get Involved” to get started.

And of course, please forward this email to anyone you know who may be interested.

Thanks,

-Tim

Personal Statement – Tim Rood for City Council
After living in Oakland and San Francisco for twelve years, my wife Muffy and I moved our young family to Piedmont in 2002. We were attracted to Piedmont by the high quality public schools, the convenient location, and the attractive, safe and walkable environment. We have found Piedmont to be a great place to raise our family. Our son Henry and daughter Sylvie have participated in baseball, soccer, tennis and the fine music programs at Wildwood and PMS. The fact that they can walk to school or a friend’s house, and that I can bike or take the bus to my office in downtown Oakland, also helps us meet our environmental goals as a one-car family. We enjoy walking our dog Moby in the Piedmont hills, and playing trumpet in the Piedmont Community Band in the Fourth of July parade is one of the highlights of my summer.
Not long after we moved to Piedmont, I was asked to join the board of the Piedmont Swim Club. As an architect and city planner, I was interested in helping with the long-range planning for the pool. Particularly after I was elected president of the board in 2007, the relationships I built with other board members and organizations deepened my desire to be an even more active member of the Piedmont community.  Unfortunately, the Swim Club  was unable to come to a long-term agreement with the Council to continue the public-private partnership. I’m glad we now have a public pool and that it’s more affordable than ever for swimmers, but I want to see the City take the necessary steps to maintain the aging facility and ensure adequate funding into the future.
In my professional work as a city planner, I’ve worked with city staff, boards and commissions and citizens in over 35 communities to tackle tough long-range planning issues. For example, I led the multi-disciplinary consultant team that prepared the downtown revitalization plan that Martinez adopted in 2006. There, we found common ground among Smart Growth advocates, preservationists and neighbors fearful of displacement. In Healdsburg, we’ve found consensus on a vision for a redeveloping industrial area, changes to major streets and freeway ramps, and two new full-sized, thoroughly modeled roundabouts at the entrance to town. The open, transparent processes I’ve led allowed citizens to work through these difficult issues together and create plans in which the whole community can take pride.

Because my professional work involves frequent appearances before Councils, boards and commissions, and because of the time involved in my volunteer work for the Swim Club and school committees, I initially assumed that Piedmont’s government was in the capable hands of knowledgeable and qualified citizens and focused my energies elsewhere. But I got a wake up call in 2009 and 2010. Like many Piedmonters, I was appalled to find that the City had mismanaged a utility undergrounding project so badly that over $2 million in public funds was required to cover cost overruns. I encouraged everyone I knew to speak out about the need for appropriate risk management and more careful stewardship of public funds. I’m concerned that two years later, the Council still hasn’t taken action to address these issues.

Earlier this year, I was approached about running for Council by a group of Piedmont residents with long histories of involvement in civic affairs. After discussing the fiscal and public process issues facing Piedmont, I grew concerned about the work needed to get City finances on a sustainable footing. Without concerted action by the Council, Piedmont is on a course to greater and greater deficits that threaten essential public services, even as the tax burden on families has continued to grow. This concerns me as a taxpayer, a citizen and a parent.

I’m running for Council because I care about Piedmont as a great place to live and raise a family, and I want to protect our community’s future. I care deeply about public involvement, which along with environmental sustainability is the focus of my professional practice. Having led over a hundred community workshops myself, I have seen the difference that an open, inclusive and transparent public process can make. With all the difficult issues facing Piedmont, I believe that I have the skills and energy to be a leader on the Council and help our community protect our future – together.

Tim Rood, Candidate for City Council

(The above announcements were provided by the candidate.  The Piedmont Civic Association does not endorse nor oppose candidates.)

Unanimous report released with additional thoughts from each Committee member

Before adopting their final report on Wednesday, August 31, the Municipal Tax Review Committee (MTRC) members “threw roses” of compliments and praise to their colleagues and City staff for six months of intensive research, analysis, projections and recommendations on Piedmont’s current and future financial condition. 

Many of the rosy plaudits, however, contained thorns intended to prick the City Council into taking actions  to protect the City from falling into debt, cutting essential City services, and losing a two-thirds vote to renew the City’s parcel tax.

The Committee’s  report and extensive recommendations will be presented to the City Council on Tuesday, Sept. 6. > Click to read more…

An August 25, 2011 letter from Kathleen Quenneville, who served on the Task Force on Undergrounding of the League of Women Voters

Dear Council Member Wieler:

I guess you didn’t really mean it when you apologized for your “Piedmont Taliban” article in the Piedmont Post.  That may be inferred from your “Nattering nabobs of negativity” article in the August 24 Piedmont Post.

I thought you recognized that name-calling was not a productive means of encouraging dialogue about the issues on which we disagree.  Apparently that is not the case.  It is shocking that you would unilaterally dismiss those who criticize Piedmont’s governance as “people who are never satisfied and who will show up and complain at every public meeting.”  This illustrates that you do not understand your fiduciary responsibilities and are not fit to serve on the City Council. > Click to read more…

Unanimous Committee Wants Immediate Change – Before Parcel Tax Vote

At its August 17 penultimate meeting, the Municipal Tax Review Committee (MTRC) expressed its “grave concerns” that unless the Council implements recommended steps, “not only will the parcel tax not cover planned expenditures, but also renewal itself is at risk, if the public lacks confidence in the City’s fiscal management.” 

The Committee agreed unanimously (Hollis and Weiner absent) on a final set of strong fiscal reforms to recommend to the City Council.  (A few minor changes will be made in the Committee’s final report for adoption on August 31.)  Four Committee members (Ryan Gilbert, Tam Hege, Eric Lindquist and Steve Weiner) intend to submit a “supplementary statement” (at p. 9) that requires the Council to take specific actions on fiscal reforms before they will recommend voter support of the parcel tax.  Both the unanimous report and supplementary statement propose postponing the parcel tax election from February until June or November 2012 to give the Council time to enact the recommended fiscal reforms.

Below is a summary of highlights of the MTRC’s unanimous report and the supplementary statement, presented at the August 17th meeting.  The full text of both reports has not been released. > Click to read more…

City Administrator Responds to Requests for Additional Information

At the August 1 City Council meeting, a number of questions arose regarding the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) fund balances.  It was unclear to the Council, the CIP Review Committee, and members of the public, how much money was in the CIP fund and available for expenditure in FY 2011-12. The CIP list of projects, (p.3) provided by staff lacked information as to funding,  past  appropriations, or past expenditures for each project.  City Administrator Geoff Grote placed the CIP list on the Council August 1 agenda because the CIP appropriations had not been approved in June for the FY 20111-12 Budget.

Vice Mayor John Chiang requested that staff provide on-going Quarterly Reports on the CIP Fund indicating Fund balances – what money was taken out and what remained.  Council Member Keating noted the CIP items listed as deferred were informational, rather than approved appropriations.  The CIP Committee report noted:

“We found it difficult to follow the flow of dollars allocated to specific CIP projects, in particular the disposition of remaining funds upon completion or decision not to pursue a particular project. We recommend institution of clearer summary reporting by project, and can work with City finance staff to develop standard reports from existing sources to meet this need.” > Click to read more…