New Version Climate Action Plan (CAP 2.0) is available for public review for a 45-day period.

The document can be read HERE.

Should voters decide?

There was no Council call to inexpensively add the short term rental decision to the upcoming November 2018 City ballot, allowing Piedmont voters to decide whether or not short term rentals were appropriate for the City. 

A short term rental (STR) is the rental of a living space, sleeping room, accessory housing unit, apartment, or a house for a period of under 30 days.

In a surprise rejection of the Piedmont Planning Commission and staff recommendations to prohibit short term rentals (STRs), the majority on the City Council decided the commercial use of Piedmont homes for hotel/condominium style short term rentals should be allowed.

Mayor Robert McBain stood alone on the Council in opposing the short term rentals, stating he did not believe the rentals were in keeping with the residential character of the City and agreeing with the Planning Commission and Planning Commissioner Eric Behrens, who detailed the numerous reasons to ban the STRs.

The STR matter had been pending for City Council action since 2014.  The Planning staff informed the Council that the emphasis in Piedmont planning ordinances and the General Plan had been to permit accessory housing units to meet regional demands for housing, not provide for STRs.

Stories of recent police STR problems, changes to neighborhood feel, loss of privacy as renters came and went at all hours, lack of familiarity with Piedmont standards for quiet, further parking demands proved of little concern to the Council majority who wanted to be part of the larger community and offer hotel style short term rental of Piedmont rooms, living spaces and homes.

Those in favor stated:

• Council resignations led to a policy change
• No studies supported resident or Planning Commission concerns
• People should be able to rent their homes as a hotel/resort
• No hotels are available in Piedmont for guests
• Vacationing Piedmonters want someone to occupy their home
• Home buyers need to offset high Piedmont taxes with STR rental revenue
• Piedmonters had already begun to rent their homes/rooms
• Piedmont would be elite and unneighborly if it excludes STRs.
• Neighbors could inform the rental property owner if there were problems caused by renters.
• Few people would want to rent their homes or rooms
• Piedmont is not a tourist destination
• Trying the STR system would determine if problems presented themselves

The Council majority took little heed to those opposing STRs with concerns of:

• Commercialization of Piedmont homes
• Costly City administrative functions to oversee rentals
• Safety and security concerns with ever changing unknown renters
• Prior robbery and illegal activities already on record
• Traffic impacts from those unfamiliar with Piedmont streets
• Loss of privacy and quiet in neighborhoods
• Change to the character of the community
• Inconsistency with residential zoning per the City Charter
• Contrary to the General Plan and zoning ordinances
• Property owner requirement to carry commercial business insurance
• Irregular hours of clients/renters both night and day
• Demand for more parking in many areas
• Disruption of the fabric of the City
• Piedmont, as a residential City, was not designed for commerce and businesses in homes with narrow, curvy streets
• Additional demands for City services
• Changing Piedmont focus from education to commercial activities

One Piedmonter on La Salle Avenue stated she needed the income and had purchased her home with intent to rent space and commercialize the home.  Over 80 people had stayed in her home.

Another resident complained of high taxes and the need for someone to stay in their home when they vacationed in France.

The many pleas to keep STRs out of Piedmont were not persuasive to  the Council majority, nor was the possibility of permitted accessory housing units flipped to STRs of concern.

The Council was in a quandary over what to do, because no ordinance language had been drafted to allow STRs.  City Administrator Paul Benoit stated he was getting an idea of what the Council wanted and Councilmembers could send him items to be included in a draft ordinance permitting STRs.

The Council as a whole did not want the matter to be returned to the opposed Planning Commission for their renewed consideration of draft ordinance proposals.

There was NO call for the public to submit comments or ideas on the matter, only for the Council’s input to Benoit. There was no discussion of a ballot measure to allow Piedmont voters to decide to ban or permit STRs.

Anyone interested in STRs may send a comment directly to the City Council and City Administrator Paul Benoit to the links below:

Comments may be sent directly to City Administrator Paul Benoit by clicking his link >  pbenoit@piedmont.ca.gov

_____________________

_________________

Comments may be sent directly to Councilmembers by clicking on their links below:

Read East Bay Times report HERE.

Board President Sarah Pearson made an announcement at the Piedmont Unified School District Board meeting of Wednesday, January 10, 2018, as follows: 

Some community members have asked the Board for more information about our process and plan to address issues of sexual harassment and intimidation. I wanted the community to know that this topic will be discussed in more detail at the next board meeting, which will take place on Tuesday January 23, 2018, and subsequent meetings. I am grateful to the Superintendent and his staff for their ongoing efforts to address issues and wanted to share a short update.

Regarding review of policies and procedures:

In the Fall of 2017, the District asked its legal counsel to undertake a comprehensive review of all District policies and administrative regulations concerning discrimination, harassment, complaints concerning schools, complaints concerning District employees, Uniform Complaints, and student discipline.  The purpose of the review, which is still underway, is to ensure that the policies are complete, aligned with one another and consistent with current law, and reflect best practices.

District staff will present the recommendations of its counsel at the next Board of Education meeting, on Tuesday, January 23.  This presentation will be the starting point for a broader community conversation about District policies and procedures, and we strongly encourage community members to attend and provide input.

Regarding training and support for teachers and staff:  

In November 2017, all District administrative staff received their annual training to prevent, identify, address, and remedy sexual harassment in both student-to-student and adult-to-student situations.  This spring, teachers and classified staff will receive the same training, which is an online program designed specifically for use in schools.  In the past, teachers and classified staff received the training every two years, but going forward this training will be required every year for teachers and staff as well as administrators.

In January 2018, administrative staff who are in supervisory roles, as well as counselors and Wellness Center staff, will receive more comprehensive sexual harassment training presented by District’s legal counsel.  This training will be tailored for the District and include small-group discussion and analysis.  In the past, this training was presented every other year.  Going forward, this training will be repeated every year.

In addition, the District is researching training programs for members of the Board of Education.

Regarding assessment of student needs and concerns:

The California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) is a statewide survey concerning student health and academic performance, and the District typically administers the survey in odd-number years to 5th, 7th, 9th, and 11th graders.  In addition to using the State’s questions, the District can and usually does customize the survey with its own questions.  Last year, the District decided to administer the CHKS survey every year, so District staff are already preparing survey questions for this February.  The intent is to include questions about harassment, bullying, safety, security, and registering complaints.  The complete list of questions is scheduled be presented to the Board and the community at the Board meeting on Tuesday, February 13.  Community engagement is essential in developing, evaluating, and refining District policies and practices. The Board and District staff encourage students and community members to join in our discussion of these and related issues.  Community members are also most welcome to contact the Superintendent or members of the Board directly. We appreciate questions and suggestions, and we look forward to working together.

School Board President, Sarah Pearson

Sexual Harassment and Intimidation –

Dear Jennifer and Shannon, [Authors of correspondence to School Board]

Thank you for your letter dated January 8.  The District welcomes your questions and comments and what follows is a response to at least some of your concerns.  Please share this with the other signers, and please encourage them to attend the upcoming meetings (outlined below) to discuss these and related issues.  Community engagement is essential in developing, evaluating, and refining District policies and practices. On behalf of the Board of Education and the District staff, we look forward to working with you and other stakeholders on these critical issues concerning student safety and security.

Review of policies and procedures.
In the Fall of 2017, the District asked its legal counsel to undertake a comprehensive review of all District policies and administrative regulations concerning discrimination, harassment, complaints concerning schools, complaints concerning District employees, Uniform Complaints, and student discipline.  The purpose of the review, which is still underway, is to ensure that the policies are complete, aligned with one another and consistent with current law, and reflect best practices.  The District initiated this review following incidents of hate speech among students during the Spring of 2017 and allegations of teacher misconduct in the Fall of 2017, as the process of investigating these incidents and allegations drew staff attention to apparent gaps, ambiguities, and outdated provisions in District policies.

District staff will present the recommendations of its counsel at the Board of Education meeting on Tuesday, January 23.  This presentation will be the starting point for a broader community conversation about District policies and procedures, and we strongly encourage you to attend and provide input.

Training and support for teachers and staff.
In November 2017, all District administrative staff received their annual training to prevent, identify, address, and remedy sexual harassment in both student-to-student and adult-to-student situations.  This spring, teachers and classified staff will receive the same training, which is an on-line program designed specifically for use in schools.  In the past, teachers and classified staff received the training every two years, but going forward this training will be required every year for teachers and staff as well as administrators.

In January 2018, administrative staff who are in supervisory roles, as well as counselors and Wellness Center staff, will receive more comprehensive sexual harassment training presented by District’s legal counsel.  This training will be tailored for the District and include small-group discussion and analysis.  In the past, this training was presented every other year.  Going forward, this training will be repeated every year.

In addition, the District is researching training programs for members of the Board of Education.

Assessment of student needs and concerns.
The California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) is a statewide survey concerning student health and academic performance, and the District typically administers the survey in odd-number years to 5th, 7th, 9th, and 11th graders.  In addition to using the State’s questions, the District can and usually does customize the survey with its own questions.  Last year, the District decided to administer the CHKS every year, so District staff are already preparing survey questions for this February.  The intent is to include questions about harassment, bullying, safety, security, and registering complaints.  The complete list of questions is scheduled be presented to the Board and the community at the Board meeting on Tuesday, February 13.

Review of Board training and decision-making.
On Tuesday, January 30, the Board of Education will hold a workshop on effective governance that will include self-evaluation and reflection.  The workshop, facilitated by a representative of the California School Board Association, will be from 8:30 am to 3:00 pm in the Piedmont Police Department conference room.  All are welcome to attend.  

Please feel free to contact either of us directly if you have further questions. We hope this information is useful and provides some foundation for more in-depth community discussions. On behalf of the Board, we appreciate your thoughtful suggestions and look forward to working with you.

Sincerely,

Sarah & Randy

Sarah Pearson, Board President

Randall Booker, Superintendent 

          January 10, 2018

Planning for the Linda Beach Playground will be discussed with the community 5:30 – 7:30 p.m. on Thursday, January 18 in the Piedmont Community Center, in Piedmont Main Park , 711 Highland Avenue.

All interested community members are encouraged to attend and participate.

Read the announcement by clicking below.

LBMP Community Meeting 2 Announcement

Following years of deferment, Piedmont City Council to tackle short-term rentals.

“At its regular meeting on Tuesday, January 16, 2018 at 7:30 p.m., the City Council will consider the prohibition of short-term rentals. Given the recommendations of the Planning Commission, the fact that short-term rentals would have a detrimental effect on the City’s ability to supply long-term housing in conformance with the Housing Element of the City’s General Plan and the Regional Housing Needs Allocation, and based upon recommended findings, staff is recommending the City Council adopt an ordinance prohibiting all short-term rentals.”

The Piedmont City Council has had pending consideration of short-term rentals, such as AirBNB since 2014.  

Cities throughout the nation have prohibited or allowed short term rentals; some have placed huge business taxes on legal short-term rentals to offset municipal administrative costs.  A number of cities have adopted a compromise approach, limiting the total short term rental days at each address to no more than 30 days per year.  Piedmont proposes no rentals under 30 days of length.

While numbers of Piedmonters have complained about short-term rentals impacting their residential property with unknown individuals coming and going late at night, disruption of the quiet neighborhood feel, strangers making unexpected and inappropriate noise in their neighborhood and safety concerns, nothing to date had been done by the City Council.  There was one widely publicized instance of robbers using a Piedmont short term rental address and then attempting an escape through a neighbors property.

Some Piedmont residents seek short term rentals as a business opportunity to offset mortgages, increase their income, provide occupancy during their short term vacancies, or reduce costs for their Piedmont home.

At one public hearing a contingency of organized supporters from outside of Piedmont asked that short term rentals be allowed.

In certain instances, neighbors have found it is better to have short term rental use next to them, rather than a permanent rental of secondary residential units.

The uses of residences in Piedmont for business purposes, such as AirBNB, have long been prohibited under Piedmont’s Home Occupation Ordinance, which does not allow the use of a home for business purposes without a permit.  The ordinance states no business invitees can visit the premises. Some scofflaws have enriched themselves while not being compliant with City laws.

Piedmont’s Home Occupation Ordinance states:

“b. The occupational use shall not generate pedestrian or vehicular traffic or parking needs beyond that normal to the district or neighborhood in which it is located.  No business invitees shall be permitted to visit the premises; provided however that direct sales may occur from a cottage food operation. “ Piedmont Home Occupation Ordinance

Publicity and advertisements of Home Occupation businesses in Piedmont are limited.

“7. No advertising using address. There may be no advertising, notices, publications or other written or oral means used to connect the occupation with the premises, and in particular there may be no use of the address in any way connected with the occupation. This restriction does not prohibit: (a) the use of business cards, stationery or invoices with the address of the premises; or (b) the normal advertising or the posting of signs related to the rental or sale of the property, as otherwise permitted by this code. “ Piedmont  Home Occupation Ordinance

The Council > staff report of 74 pages describes the history and proposed regulations for short-term rentals that Council will be considering at this meeting. It includes correspondence and information on other nearby cities actions in regard to short-term rentals.

Here is the > agenda for the City Council meeting of January 16, 2018. 

More information, including staff reports, and minutes of the Planning Commission and City Council can be found on the City’s website at:

http://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/council-to-consider-prohibition-of-short-term-rentals/

Written comments may be submitted to the City Council via email at citycouncil@ci.piedmont.ca.us or via US Mail addressed to City Clerk John Tulloch at 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, CA 94611.

Sincerely,

Kevin Jackson, AICP

Planning Director

City of Piedmont

120 Vista Avenue

Piedmont, CA 94611

Tel: (510) 420-3039

Fax: (510) 658-3167

Jan 12, 2018

Piedmont City Council
c/o John Tulloch

Jan. 16, 2018 2^nd Reading Refuse Contract Handicapped Exemption

Dear Mayor McBain and Council,
Annual renewal of the handicapped backyard service exemption is not an annual requirement elsewhere. I ask Council to reconsider this burdensome and unnecessary annual requirement.

Mill Valley Refuse Service (“MVRS”) serves nine Marin County Cities and does not require an annual renewal for the backyard exemption as confirmed by MVRS co-owner Jim Iavarone: “You do not have to renew your backyard exemption for disability.”

Berkeley’s refuse ordinance 12.34.040 does not require an annual renewal. Berkeley goes further by only requiring a statement from those requesting the backyard service. Piedmont need not be so onerous as to the requirements placed on the disabled.

I continue to question Piedmont’s lack of compassion for fixed income seniors wishing to age in place in the City they love. The backyard exemption for seniors at age 62 to 70 is common elsewhere. None of the 14,000 customers that MVRS serves has challenged Jim Iavarone’s characterization of the “spare change” cost of the MVRS age 70 backyard exemption. Berkeley has an age 62 backyard exemption which continues unquestioned by the 121,000 residents of Berkeley.

In contrast Piedmont seniors receive no backyard exemption and pay for School District and City garbage service. Why must Piedmont be so burdensome to its disabled and senior residents?

Respectfully,

Rick Schiller

Cc: Kevin Jackson
Chris Yeager

The final adoption of a Solid Waste Agreement with Richmond Sanitary Services will be up for a vote on Tuesday, January 16, 2018  at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. The Council approved the first reading of the ordinance granting the franchise on December 4^th.

The City of Piedmont, with the assistance of R3 Consulting Group (R3), administered a competitive proposal process to provide residential and commercial garbage, recyclable material and organic collection services in the City of Piedmont. On July 17, 2017, the City Council received a report from R3 regarding the results of proposals submitted, and directed City staff to accept Richmond Sanitary Service’s proposal (the only proposal submitted) and proceed with negotiations. Extensive negotiations between the City and RSSservices have concluded and a final solid waste services agreement will be brought to Council for approval on December 4, 2017.

READ the staff report and information HERE.

Monday, January, 16th – 7:30 p.m.
City Council Chamber

– New Contract to Start July 1, 2017 –