At the Council’s annual sit-down with City staff, Saturday, May 10,  9 a.m., the Council will review the City Administrator’s proposed 2014-15 Budget.  It has been the practice for the Council to hold the Budget Session in the Emergency Operation Center in the Police Department on Highland Avenue. The location provides a “round table” casual atmosphere leading to budget adoption. Nevertheless, these proceedings will not be recorded or broadcast for offsite viewing.

Those interested in hearing and learning first hand discussions and presentations on where City money might be spent, should attend the meeting.  There will be opportunities for the public to speak and ask questions.  In the past, coffee and donuts have been made available to attendees.

This year some of the items likely to be considered by the Council are:

• Hampton Field and tennis court reconstruction
• Roadway pavement, sidewalk and gutter improvements
• Employee benefits and salaries
• Staffing levels
• Piedmont pool maintenance and improvements
• Pedestrian and Bike Plan implementation
• Facility repair and maintenance
• Additional license plate readers
• Use of sewer fund monies and alternatives
• Reserve Funds
• Capital improvements
• Retirement costs
• Blair Park regular maintenance and improvements

Prior to adoption of the FY 2014-15 Budget, there will be two City Council public hearings.

The Draft Piedmont Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan is available for your review. Readers will be interested to learn many changes proposed for Piedmont.  The City and the commissions are continuing to solicit resident input on the plan prior to City Council consideration. Considerable effort and expense have gone into the preparation of the draft plan.  Review it now and provide your ideas to the Recreation and Park commissions at their meeting or send comments addressed to the Commissioners at tulloch@ci.piedmont.ca.us.

The joint meeting will be held Wednesday, May 7, at 5:30 pm in the City Hall Council Chambers, 120 Vista Avenue, in Piedmont.

The Piedmont Park and Recreation Commissions will hold a special joint meeting to hear about and discuss the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan process. This is also another opportunity for the public to find out more about the plan and to voice their opinions.

The meeting will be held Wednesday, May 7, at 5:30 pm in the City Hall Council Chambers, 120 Vista Avenue, in Piedmont. At the meeting, the City’s consultant will describe the planning process to date, outline the remaining steps before the plan is finalized and be available to answer questions from the Commissioners and members of the public.

In particular, the consultant’s presentation will highlight the list of ideas that was presented to the public in February and March for improving conditions for walking and biking in Piedmont. The ideas include three types of improvements: (1) physical on-street projects, (2) programs and activities and, (3) changes to City policies and practices. Some of the ideas are:

• Improvements to particularly busy or challenging crosswalks
• “Road diets” on the four-lane sections of Grand and Highland (removing one lane in each direction to slow down traffic and make room for a bike lanes and a center turn lane)
• Stronger enforcement of traffic laws
• Programs to promote traffic safety and to encourage walking and biking, especially among school kids
• A citywide network of bikeways, with bike lanes, “sharrows” (stencils on the street indicating that cyclists may use the full lane) and signage

Feedback on the ideas from the Park and Recreation Commissions will be added to the feedback received to date from the public and also from the Planning Commission. The feedback will be used to refine the list of ideas into a 10-year “work program” (2015‒2024) for implementing the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan.

“You are encouraged to attend the May 7^th meeting, or you may wish to watch the public hearing on KCOM, cable 27. Alternatively, if you want to watch the meeting live or later after the meeting, you can do so by logging on to the City’s website at www.ci.piedmont.ca.us: on the right hand side of the homepage under the “KCOM” heading, click on the “On-line Video” link, then scroll down under the “Sections on this Page” heading, click on the “Park Commission” link, then on the “May 7, 2014“, click on the “Video” or “In Progress” link and start watching!”

The PBMP (Pedestrian Bicycle Master Plan) is being funded entirely through a grant from the Alameda County Transportation Commission (CTC;www.alamedactc.org) and through the City’s existing funds for pedestrian and bicycle improvements (pass-through Measure B funds), also distributed by the Alameda CTC.

– 50 Year Partnership: Piedmont City Council and the Piedmont Beautification Foundation –

Every Piedmonter is familiar with the colorful Piedmont Beautification Foundation (PBF) brochures soliciting donations that typically arrive in the mail prior to Holiday Tree Lighting and in the Spring. But few residents know the history, purpose, partnership with the City Council or function of the Foundation.

Piedmont Resident and PBF Advisor Cameron Wolfe recalls that the Piedmont City Council and the Piedmont Garden Club jointly established the Foundation to raise funds for projects to “beautify” Piedmont.  From its inception on May 21, 1964, the Foundation, originated by the Piedmont Garden Club, has worked closely with the Park Commission, City staff, and City Council. 

One of the founding PBF members and a prime mover of multiple projects was Jean Brown Wolfe, Cameron Wolfe’s mother. During the 1970’s, she simultaneously served on the Park Commission and as President of both the Piedmont Beautification Foundation and the Piedmont Garden Club.

The Piedmont Garden Club continues to lead the Piedmont Beautification Foundation. The Piedmont Garden Club * is composed of approximately 65 active female members residing in or near Piedmont, who share an interest in gardening. Each member of the Garden Club is personally invited following a member’s proposal and membership review process.  The names of members are private.  The Piedmont Garden Club is part of a large, national organization,  Garden Club of America.   

The Foundation is composed of 8 voting trustees. Five are selected by and from the Garden Club membership and three trustees are selected and appointed by the Piedmont City Council. “Trustees from the City of Piedmont” have typically been Piedmont’s Mayor, Vice Mayor and Chair of the Park Commission. The current City Council appointed trustees are Mayor Margaret Fujioka, Vice Mayor Jeff Wieler and Park Commission Chair John Lenahan.

The Foundation’s officers are selected by and from the Garden Club. Currently the five PBF officers are: President Michelle Winchester, a past Garden Club President; Vice President Patty Siskind, a current Piedmont Park Commissioner; Treasurer, Susan Hill, a former Piedmont Mayor; Recording Secretary, Barbara Thompson; and Corresponding Secretary, Patty Reed.

 In addition to the City Council and Garden Club appointed trustees, City staff members assist PBF as “City Advisors.” Currently, the City Advisors are Chester Nakahara, Public Works Director, Mark Feldkamp, Parks and Project Manager, and Dave Frankel, Public Works Superintendent.  City staff members work with PBF representatives reviewing proposals, making project suggestions, overseeing project construction, and providing input at PBF meetings. 

The Trustees and City Advisors along with numerous advisory members selected and invited by the Garden Club, primarily Garden Club members and/or their spouses, attend the PBF meetings. Advisors may make presentations and express their opinions, but may not vote. The advisors names can usually be found on PBF solicitation brochures.

The meetings of PBF are held “four times a year” in Piedmont homes.  The meetings are not open to the public. PBF meeting minutes, financial records, and by laws are not publicly disseminated.  The 2012 tax filing for PBF, as a non-profit organization, can be found on line. PBF’s mailing address is City Hall, 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, CA 94611. Unless withheld by the donor, donor names are released and published by various media outlets.

Having three PBF trustees appointed by the City Council (two Council members and the Chair of the Park Commission), a PBF representative on the Piedmont Capital Improvement Program Review Committee, and former trustees of PBF on the Park Commission has resulted in ready City Council approval of PBF proposals.  Once approved by the Council, projects receive continuing staff support, funding, and maintenance.

PBF has long been the primary driver of Piedmont civic improvement projects.  PBF initiates project ideas, provides seed money, partially funds projects and guides projects.  Robert Leefeldt, a former advisor to PBF and husband of former Garden Club member Mary Tom Leefeldt, for decades piloted numerous PBF projects.  Leefeldt’s projects included Community Center improvements and Civic Center landscaping, the first Dracena Park play structure, Excedra restoration, improvements in Crocker Park including the Bufano mother and cubs sculpture, the Cemetery Wall replanting, and many others.  His active PBF participation often involved landscape architect Richard Julin in the projects.

Recently, the City Council approved the Eagle Scout bridge project in Dracena Park and the development of the Ramona and Ronada Avenues triangle, both partially funded through PBF.

At the April 7, 2014 meeting, the City Council applauded PBF.

“The Council agreed that the Beautification Foundation has been an integral partner with the City in beautifying all areas of the City over the last several decades, its banner hanging request is consistent with past practice and the City’s 1998 banner policy and the Foundation’s request is appropriate as a means of recognizing the exceptional legacy and importance of this beneficial community organization.”

Special PBF projects, trees, and benches can be designated to pay tribute to individuals.  An endowment fund established to reserve funds for future City needs has reached $500,000 largely due to the support of matching funds provided by the Shapiro family in memory of Betty Shapiro, a past president of both the Piedmont Garden Club and Piedmont Beautification Foundation.

PBF trustees are active politically in ballot measures and civic decisions related to Piedmont.   PBF and the Garden Club are recognized in Piedmont’s General Plan and on the City’s website.

“The Piedmont Beautification Foundation and Piedmont Garden Club also contribute to park maintenance and conduct regular fund-raisers for park and landscape beautification.”

Piedmonters can view the many PBF participation projects signified by signs placed at the sites.

Piedmont Beautification Foundation sign.

City Press Release ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

City Recognizes Piedmont Beautification Foundation for 50 Years of Service 

At the City Council meeting of Monday, April 21, 2014, Mayor Margaret Fujioka issued a proclamation recognizing the 50th Anniversary of the Piedmont Beautification Foundation and its contributions to beautifying Piedmont over the past half century.

“For the past 50 years, the Piedmont Beautification Foundation has greatly contributed to the enhancement of our parks, community facilities, and public spaces,” said Mayor Margaret Fujioka. “I look forward to working together on future civic projects in our city.”

The City and the Piedmont Beautification Foundation have partnered on many projects over the past 50 years, including the Piedmont Park Overlook and Steps, the Ramona/Ronada Triangle, the Tea House Deck, the Hall Fenway, and numerous others.

The proclamation declares April 27, 2014 as Piedmont Beautification Day in recognition of the Foundation’s service to the Piedmont Community.

Whereas, in May, 1964, eight far-sighted individuals, three representatives of the City of Piedmont and five representatives of the Piedmont Garden Club, came together to form an organization to be known as the Piedmont Beautification Foundation; and

Whereas, this non-profit corporation was formed exclusively for aesthetic, artistic, civic and charitable purposes; and

Whereas, the Foundation provides organization and leadership from among the residents of the City of Piedmont for the purpose of raising funds for planting, improving, beautifying and maintaining the parks, community facilities, schools and other future civic projects of the City of Piedmont; and

Whereas, for 50 years the City of Piedmont and the Piedmont Beautification Foundation have enjoyed a constructive public/private partnership that has benefited our residents and created beautiful gathering spaces that foster a strong sense of community; and

Whereas, the City thanks and congratulates the Foundation for 50 years of exemplary work for the benefit of the residents of Piedmont;

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Margaret Fujioka, Mayor of the City of Piedmont, in recognition of its service and dedication to the City, proclaim April 27, 2014 as Piedmont Beautification Foundation Day.

The PBF list of projects in Piedmont contains numerous and wide ranging projects.

 The Foundation is celebrating its 50th anniversary April 27.

~~~~~~~~~~~ OPEN TO THE PUBLIC ~~~~~~~~~~~~

PARTY IN THE PARK WITH PBF!!!!!!!

Celebrate 50 years of community collaboration.

Sunday, April 27, 2014 ~ 11:00 AM – 4:00 PM

 Piedmont Community Center in Piedmont Main Park 

Refreshments, commemorative items, flower show, displays and music. 

Contact the Piedmont Beautification Foundation,  Send correspondence and donations to Piedmont City Hall, 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, CA 94611

*”B. Specific Purpose. The Piedmont Garden Club shall stimulate the knowledge and love of gardening, horticulture, flower arranging, and related photography; encourage and assist in community beautification; and protect and conserve our natural heritage.”

– Piedmonters miss their late afternoon mail pickup. –

For a number of residents of Piedmont, the elimination of the 5 p.m. mail pickup at the drive up mailboxes on Highland Way was a shock on April 15 as they tried to mail their tax returns. The pickup there was 12:30 p.m., 2 p.m. and 5 p.m. on weekdays and 1 p.m. on Saturday. Beginning this month, April, the last pick up is 12 p.m. Monday through Saturday. For all but the Vista Avenue mailbox in front of City Hall, which has a 4 p.m. pickup, there are no mailbox pickups in Piedmont later than 1 p.m., and most Piedmont mailbox pickups are even earlier. Outside Piedmont, the  latest mailbox pickup is at 8:30 p.m. near the West Oakland BART station at 1675 7th West Oakland.

Piedmont mailbox locations:

300  Highland Ave. between Oakland Ave. and the bus stop

370  Highland Way behind Wells Fargo-the only “drive-up” mailboxes

55 Crocker Ave. at one end of the Hall Fenway

39 La Salle Ave. at St. James

104 Monticello Ave. at Ramona

902 Rose Ave. at Linda Ave.

120 Vista Ave. in front of City Hall

How well do the mailboxes in Piedmont serve residents following the elimination of afternoon pickup service at most locations?

1.  How many days per week do you use a Piedmont mailbox?  (1-6)

2.  Do you usually post mail in the afternoon or the morning?

3.  Will the elimination of a 5 p.m. pickup be detrimental to you or your family?

4.  Will the elimination of afternoon pickup at Highland Way be detrimental to you or your family?

5.  Which mailbox do you use more often – the mailbox at Highland Way or at Vista Avenue in front of City Hall ?

6.  Does a 4 p.m. pickup in front of City Hall serve your mailing needs just as well as 5 p.m.?

7.  Would you prefer the last (4 p.m.) Piedmont pickup to be located at the walk-up Vista Avenue mailbox or at the Highland Way mailboxes which include “drive-up” access?

8.  Do you believe there is adequate parking to be able to conveniently use the mailbox at Vista Avenue (which currently does not provide “drive-up” access)?

Let the City Council know if you need US Postal Service adjustments:

Margaret Fujioka, Mayor	mfujioka@ci.piedmont.ca.us	(510) 463-7821
Jeff Wieler, Vice Mayor	jwieler@ci.piedmont.ca.us	(510) 428-1648
Teddy Gray King	tking@ci.piedmont.ca.us	(510) 450-0890
Robert McBain	rmcbain@ci.piedmont.ca.us	(510) 547-0597
Tim Rood	trood@ci.piedmont.ca.us	(510) 239-7663

Blair Park has long been the stepchild among Piedmont parks and public areas, ignoring pedestrians, dogs, and regular maintenance.

Beautification projects are found in most of our parks and street medians, particularly in central Piedmont, but the most visible Piedmont park, seen by thousands of passersby daily, remains in a neglected state. Piedmont public areas are generally regularly maintained and enjoy swept walkways, weed abatement, and regular tree trimming, while Blair Park has received little attention despite its prominence at an entrance to Piedmont on Moraga Avenue.

For decades weeds have grown uncontrollably, with ivy invading native species. Trees, ill-maintained, have been left to fall apart and present potential hazards to park users and passing vehicular traffic. There are no sidewalks within or bordering Blair Park.  Pedestrians or joggers going to and from upper Moraga Avenue are forced to either dodge traffic, stumble over uneven surfaces, or slog through mud within the park during wet weather. Students residing in the area have no sidewalks upon which to walk.

There is no fence between busy Moraga Avenue and the off-leash dog area in the park to keep dogs or children from running into the roadway.  

Piedmont is currently considering a comprehensive bike and pedestrian plan; the proposed plan offers little to increase pedestrian safety in and next to Blair Park.  The Park Commission, when reviewing the recently approved plan for Blair Park, expressed concern over safe access to the park.

During consideration of a sports complex proposal, many people expressed a love of the natural, open beauty found in the park. Numerous people residing in the Moraga Avenue area requested a well-maintained park with sidewalk access.

Why has Blair Park been neglected for decades?

The answer goes to what propels many park and public projects developed in Piedmont.  Prior to the recently failed proposal to build the imposing sports complex in the park, no organized group had pushed for park maintenance and improvements in Blair Park.  

Many special projects are found throughout Piedmont parks and public spaces that have reaped the benefits of both public and private funding. Friends of Moraga Canyon settled a law suit with Piedmont over Blair Park issues by requiring $15,000 be spent on a plan to maintain and improve the park. In January, 2014, the City Council accepted Phase I of the Blair Park Landscape Improvement Plan by consultant Restoration Design Group and authorized completion of construction documents for solicitation of bids from contractors.  A land survey noting the boundaries of the park is not available. The plan, while approved by the City Council, has yet to be funded.

Do you have an issue or concern that might be addressed in the current contract negotiations with Piedmont teachers?  Between March 12 and March 26, submission of comments to your elected school board members and staff will be timely for the negotiation process.

Read the current teacher contract here.

The public will have an opportunity to provide input to the Board at public hearings on March 12 and March 26, 2014.  The current contract expires on July 1, 2014.   Feedback is also accepted during the entire sunshine period between the March Board meetings by email, mail or phone messages to the Superintendent at chubbard@piedmont.k12.ca.us or (510) 594- 2614.   

Any person wishing to provide information concerning the articles in the contract to be opened may communicate with members of the Board of Education and the Superintendent via email, phone or in writing. Board member email addresses are listed below:

Rick Raushenbush, Board President, rraushenbush@piedmont.k12.ca.us

Andrea Swenson, Board Vice President, aswenson@piedmont.k12.ca.us

Sarah Pearson, Board Member, spearson@piedmont.k12.ca.us

Amal Smith, Board Member, amalsmith@piedmont.k12.ca.us

Doug Ireland, Board Member, direland@piedmont.k12.ca.us

Constance Hubbard, Superintendent, chubbard@piedmont.k12.ca.us

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

The 2011-14 Collective Bargaining Agreement between the District and the
California School Employees Association (CSEA) expires on June 30, 2014. The expiration of a contract means that all articles are open for discussion. The public was given notice at the October 23, 2013 Board meeting of the negotiations timeline. It included an opportunity to provide feedback to the Board as to which articles/topics to discuss as part of the process. In keeping with the Interest Based Bargaining (IBB) process, at the end of a contract period it is in everyone’s interest to condense the number of articles to open for discussion.

The negotiating teams for the District and CSEA met to discuss interests and to identify those articles to open for consideration and those that will remain closed for discussion. The collective bargaining process requires that the Board provide at least two opportunities for a public hearing to allow the community to comment on the issues to be discussed. The period is called “sunshining” of the topics under consideration for negotiations. The information provided by the public during the sunshine period is used by both parties as part of the process. After the completion
of the sunshine period, negotiations become confidential. Upon mutual agreement during negotiations, articles that were not opened can be opened for discussion.

“The District and CSEA have agreed to leave the following articles closed as part of the discussions for the contract to take effect on July 1, 2014:

(The bargaining parties have agreed to not consider the following contract issues.)  

Article 2 Check Off & Organizational Security
Article 3 Organizational Rights
Article 5 Grievance Procedures
Article 6 Allowances
Article 7 Safety Conditions
Article 10 Transfer or Promotion
Article 11 Leaves
Article 13 Longevity
Article 14 Weekend/Holiday Employment
Article 16 Legal and Other Holidays
Article 20 Employer-Employee Relations Committee
Article 21 Retirement
Article 22 Savings Clause

CSEA and the District have mutually agreed to open the following articles: (The following articles are appropriate for public comment.)

Article I – Recognition
The interest is to update classifications, new job titles, and recent legislation
Article 4 – Evaluation
Review and clarify section on public charges
Article 8 – Employee Rights/Personnel Files
Update process
Article 9 – Layoff and Reemployment
Clarify process and update per legislative changes
Article 12 and 19 – Salaries and Health Benefits
Compensation is a priority for the negotiations team. Discussions will include the salary schedule, health and dental benefits, and updating contract language
Article 15 – Workday/Week/Year
Clarify work year provisions, work calendar, and provisions for staff assigned to multiple sites
Article 17 – Part-Time Employees
Clarify the article as it relates to Noon Duty Supervision
Article 18 – Vacation
The interest is to clarify provisions for earned vacation for all unit members,
including employees working less than full-time
Article 23 – Duration of Contract
Update per new agreement

Memoranda of Understanding
Review for ongoing inclusion
Appendix B – Professional Growth
Review and update
Appendix D – Salary Schedule
Update”

Read the full March 12, 2014 Board meeting agenda here. Go to page 13 for the staff report on teacher contract negotiations.

The Board of Education has announced requests for applications to be presented for the Arthur Hecht  2014 Volunteer of the Year Award.

Sixteen years ago, the Board of Education established the “Arthur Hecht Volunteer of the Year Award” in honor of late Piedmont community member Arthur Hecht. This award is presented annually to individuals who have volunteered their efforts over a period of time and made a difference because of their involvement and commitment to Piedmont’s youth.

The following is a listing of past recipients:
1998 Hunter McCreary
1999 Ann Chandler
2000 Ruth Cuming
2001 Lisa Lomenzo
2002 Cathie Glettner / Marion Souyoultzis
2003 Fritz and Mary Wooster
2004 Elizabeth (Betsy) Gentry
2005 Cynthia Gorman
2006 Grier Graff
2007 Julia Burke
2008 Maude Pervere
2009 Anne-Marie Lamarche / Mark Menke
2010 Janiele Maffei Tovani
2011 Andrea Swenson
2012 June Monach
2013 Mary Ireland / Bill Drum

The Piedmont Unified School District is in the process of seeking nominees for this year’s award. Staff, students,and community members are invited to submit an application. A copy of the application is below.   The deadline for submitting a nomination is Monday, March 10 by 4:30 p.m.

The awardee will be announced in late March, and the awardee will appear at the May 14, 2014 Board of Education meeting where their good works will be acknowledged. At the meeting, the awardee will also receive the gift of a work of student art. The student artist will be presented with a monetary gift and commendation from the Board.

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

Application:

PIEDMONT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
2014 Arthur Hecht Volunteer of the Year Award
For Service to Youth of the Piedmont Unified School District

Name of Proposed Recipient:

__________________________________________
Activities and awards engaged in or received by recipient:
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Reasons for recommendation:
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Please attach any additional information that you feel would be helpful in evaluating the individual, including the names of any other individuals who support this recommendation.

Sponsor Name: (please print)

_________________________________

Signature___________________________

Date:_______________________

Nomination forms can be: a) hand-delivered in a sealed envelope, marked “Hecht Award Nomination,” to the Superintendent’s Office, Piedmont Unified School District Administration Office, 760 Magnolia Avenue, Piedmont; or b) emailed to sspiker@piedmont.k12.ca.us. All forms must be received by the deadline of 4:30 p.m. on Monday, March 10, 2014.

Pedestrians, cars, and bikes are part of a developing plan for Piedmont. The plan, as designed, will be implemented over 10 or more years and could cost over $3 million dollars.  The City wants your input on the plan.  Do you think bulb outs at intersections improve safety or create hazards?  Are island medians a good idea?  Are alterations planned for your intersection or street? See the plan.  Take the survey.

Attend the workshop in the Piedmont Community Hall (Piedmont’s Main Park), Monday, February 24, at 7:00 – 9:30 p.m.

– Confusion Continues on Proposed New Property Tax Item of $9.55 Per Year Per Residential Unit for Hazardous Waste –

Questions continue to arise regarding the  $9.55 per year  for 10 years charge by the Alameda County Waste Management Authority (ACWMA,) imposed as  a new item on property tax statements.  The tax/ “fee” is be charged to residential properties per residential unit. However, detailed documentation states multiple residential units will only be charged only one unit fee as a single residential property. The justification is that multiple units in one building would generate no more hazardous waste than a single family home. The reasoning conflicts with the plan to tax each condominiums within one building on one parcel with the $9.55 fee.

Can property owners vote against the tax? Not even that is clear. According to the ACWMA, residential property owners may protest the charge by following directions on the protest card sent to all property owners.  Are protests tabulated and does the protest card represent a poll of respondents? 

The rational for the tax/fee is a loss of revenues arising from a reduction in waste going to the landfill and the concurrent weight-based dumping fee. Great efforts toward recycling have been successful, resulting in a major loss of funding from the landfill fees. 

The Alameda County Grand Jury has repeatedly charged the Alameda County Waste Management Authority (ACWMA) with creating an unnecessarily large agency.  Since the entire budget of the ACWMA is involved, information on current allocation of all resources might provide property owners with an informed decision on the necessity of the 10 year $9.55  tax per year fee.

The following information is on the City of Piedmont website:

ACWMA Considers Household Hazardous Waste Fee; Sends Benchmark Report

Piedmont has been informed that the Alameda County Waste Management Authority (ACWMA), will consider adopting a fee of $9.55 per year per residential unit, collected through the property tax roll, at a public hearing on March 26, 2014. Residents may also comment in person at either the February 26 ACWMA Board meeting or at the hearing on March 26. Both meetings will take place at 3:00 p.m. at 1537 Webster St., Oakland.

February 6, 2014

Mr. Gary Wolff, Executive Director

Alameda County

Waste Management Authority

1537 Webster Street

Oakland, CA 94612-3355

       Re: Proposed Household Hazardous Waste Collection and      Disposal Fee

Dear Mr. Wolff:

       As you will recall I spoke to you recently by phone  concerning the above captioned matter. Firstly, there are a couple of housekeeping issues. (1.) I never received a so-called ballot regarding the proposed fee and as reported by several other people. And despite my request, I have not been provided one.  (2.) The phone number listed in the material (1-877-786-7927) continually rings “busy”. It clearly does no good to list an “information” number and never pick it up – a complaint expressed by several other people. (3.) The two different dates, February 26, 2014 and March 26, 2014, is confusing – again, a common complaint by several others.

       The Proposed Fee:  As you will recall, during our conversation I took the position that the Alameda County Waste Management Authority (ACWMA) lacked the required legal authority to either ballot for (conduct an election) or impose any such fee. Your position was and I presume still is, to the contrary. During our conversation you were insistent that the matter and the particular issues were thoroughly reviewed and approved by legal counsel. You also insisted that the proposal is by the authority and under the provisions of particular California State Statutes and applicable laws.

     However, when I asked that you provide copies of the material and documents supporting your position, you blatantly refused. Further, neither the enabling Ordinance, No. 2014, nor the Resolution # WMA 2013-06 (and as amended by Resolution #WMA 2014-02) cite any such legal authority, state statutes, laws, or codes.

     The only codes cited in the material are Government Code, section 6254, dealing with “public records”,  section 6066, concerning “notice publication”, and CEQA Regulations, section 15378(b)(4), and 15308, “project exemption”.

     We therefore take the position that the ACWMA lacks any and all legal authority to either, ballot the Alameda County electorate, residents, citizens, taxpayers, property owners, or otherwise, in order to impose a tax, fee, assessment, charge, or otherwise, or to “impose” (regardless of the outcome of a vote or an election) a fee, tax, assessment, charge, or other remuneration under the guise of a “Household Hazardous Waste Collection and Disposal Fee.”

     Please take notice that this correspondence is a formal complaint and notification that we seek immediate termination of the ACWMA proposal and of our intent to take whatever action deemed necessary in order to adequately protect our interest.

     Your immediate attention to this matter is greatly appreciated.

               David E. Mix