Sign up for historic Piedmont walks!

Vice Mayor McBain describes Council accomplishments.

I’ve had the privilege of serving on the Piedmont City Council for the past four years.These years are marked by significant achievements. I’m seeking reelection to continue to build on the constructive steps that we have taken to improve Piedmont. I believe that my experience and leadership have helped produce strong results for our community. As an incumbent, I’m proud to run on both my record and my commitment to continue to offer open-minded, collegial and productive leadership.

• Since 2012 the Council has taken actions that strengthened City’s finances, controlled costs and addressed long-term liabilities.   For instance, the city will save almost $1 million annually from restructured employee benefits. The CALPERS side-fund–an expensive pension obligation—was refinanced and will ultimately save the City more than $1 million. Further, council adopted the strong advice of the 2007 and 2011 Municipal Tax Review Committees and the 2015 Budget Advisory and Financial Planning Committee that recommended, given volatile real estate-related taxes, the City council must budget conservatively and establish strong reserves. Council has taken those steps and funded facilities maintenance, equipment replacement and long-term pension and health care obligations. And we have taken major steps to address deferred maintenance and our obsolete and unreliable technology. The City’s financial condition has improved materially during the past four years.
• In 2012, citizens were anxious about city projects and the associated unplanned expenses. Council adopted risk management policies to ensure projects are well-planned and fiscally sound.
• In 2012 and early 2013, crime increased significantly. Council responded by bringing in a talented chief, Ricki Goede; we supported her efforts to fully staff, train and equip a responsive and professional public safety organization. In that context Council provided resources to improve technology, such as the highly effective License Plate Readers.  Council supported the Public Safety Committee and the Fire Department in establishing updated community-wide Emergency Preparedness programs.
• Four years ago, no one anticipated that most of the City’s senior staff would retire.  In response, the Council hired experienced, talented professionals to replace retiring City staff. The commitment to provide a high level of professional service continues across the City departments.
• The Council finalized an EPA settlement and restarted the sewer replacement project without increasing sewer taxes. This is a major step environmentally and also puts the City on a fiscally sound and aggressive path to meet it legal obligations.
• Finally, the Council initiated several important community projects; Hampton Field Renovation, Linda/Kingston Triangle, Ramona/Ronada Triangle and refurbished Community Center. These projects all benefit the entire community.

I was liaison to the Planning, Park and Recreation Commissions and Police and Fire Pension Board.  Previously, I was Chairman of the Recreation Commission, member of the Municipal Tax Review Committee, Board member of the Piedmont Education Foundation and held leadership positions in numerous school and youth sports organizations. My wife and I have lived in Piedmont for 27 years and raised three children here. My career in finance and management along with my broad community experience allows me to provide constructive leadership and listen to all viewpoints. I look forward to another four years of service and building on the strong results of the past four years.

Sincerely,

Bob McBain

Vice Mayor, City of Piedmont

Please visit my website for more information and endorsers.  http://www.mcbaincitycouncil.com/

Editors Note:  While welcoming candidate information, the Piedmont Civic Association does not support or oppose candidates for public office. 

The Park Commission heard this request and also heard from adjacent neighbors. Originally in the strip there were American Elm trees planted and residents at 208 Ramona received permission to remove them, but there was significant sucker growth afterwards. The City in managing that created a hedge of elm suckers. Those suckers were damaging properties on Ramona and the City removed the elms and replaced the planting area with low Agapanthus.

In 2012, after review by Commissioners, the end results were that several Commissioners were going to research drought-tolerant shrubs in lieu of planting street trees or possibly a Bay Friendly landscape installation and at that point there was no additional action taken except that the Agapanthus were installed.

Since that time, the fence which residents did not like at the end of Lorita had been replaced and the Agapanthus has been watered by one of the adjacent neighbors. Before the Commission today is a petition to have the City review existing street trees which are Ginkgoes and determine whether they can infill as well as remove the Agapanthus and put street trees in that strip.

Staff was on site talking with neighbors and held an informal meeting with the owner of 36 Monticello who volunteered to pay for 5 new street trees on the Lorita frontage of his property. Even though the petition did not include this address, since it takes up half of that side of Lorita Avenue, the Commission can consider whether it wants to accept the donation of 5 street trees and install them.

Regarding the existing number of trees, Ms. Kent stated on the east side of the street approximately every home could handle 2 trees which is the existing pattern.

Staff has also received additional correspondence, one from a resident at 28 Lorita Avenue with a pledge to water anything that is planted in the non- irrigated replacement strip. Also in the packet are two resident letters whose rear yard borders on the end of Lorita and they sent comments with concerns that if street trees were planted at the end of the street, it would add shade to their rear yard. They asked that plant materials be installed that would only rise to the height of the fence.

Staff suggested a substitution in the packet and said several residents are present to speak.

Public testimony was received from:.

Maggie Spencer, Devan Joseph, Andrew Coleman, and Patricia Makinen voiced their support for the petition. They stated their belief that the addition of new trees and removal of acacia trees to Lorita Avenue will beautify the street and give it more of a neighborhood feeling.

Councilmembers Wieler and McBain accuse Measure F opponents of misrepresenting the facts and direct voters go to the city website for more information.

We encourage voters to do so as well, and we provide the following references to help voters learn the facts.  We summarize Wieler and McBain’s arguments and hope voters will visit the links to determine what information is accurate.

 ___________

1.    Wieler and McBain claim that the 2007, 2011 Municipal Tax Review Committee (MTRC)and 2015 Budget Advisory and Financial Planning Committee (BAFPC) recommend that the City establish reserves.  True. But MTRC 2007 and 2011 did not advocate for a tax increase like the BAFPC does.  Rather these committees recommend spending controls – 2007 MTRC proposed a trigger mechanism to NOT levy the parcel tax based on property and transfer tax revenues (http://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/mtrc-report.pdf, p.46) and the 2011 MTRC proposed a cap on employee benefit levels (http://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/html/govern/staffreports/09-06-11/mtrc.pdf, p.6).

Rather than propose to raise taxes, these committees saw that the City could budget conservatively and put away reserves when the real estate market was good.  Since 2012, Council has followed this sound advice by transferring $3M to the facility maintenance fund.

 ________

2.    Wieler and McBain claim the recommendations of the 2011 MTRC have been accomplished.  False.  The MTRC recommended a cap of employee benefit levels (pension and health benefits), a “mission critical” analysis of City services and staffing levels and establishment of a facility maintenance fund (http://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/html/govern/staffreports/09-06-11/mtrc.pdf, p. 7, 28, 42). Since 2013, the City has reduced the growth rate of its annual pension payments by requiring that employees share increases in CalPERS rates.   To cap health benefits, the 2015 BAFPC proposes a “cafeteria” benefits plan (http://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/html/govern/staffreports/2015-12-07/parceltaxreport.pdf, p.5). Council has yet to act on that. The facility maintenance fund has been established and $1M has been spent on projects like electrical upgrades and there’s $2M in reserve for leaky roofs  (http://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/html/govern/staffreports/2016-02-16/midyearfiscal.pdf, p.7).  The analysis of City services and staffing levels has not been undertaken.

 ___________

3.    Wieler and McBain claim the cafeteria benefits plan is “irrelevant”.  False.  Adoption of such a plan for City employees is recommended by the 2015 BAFPC (2015 BAFPC, p.5) and the substantial savings that would be achieved are documented in the report. Wieler and McBain claim such savings will help control personnel costs but can’t be used for facility maintenance; this assertion ignores the fungible characteristic of the City budget. Annual savings in employee benefits costs will be available for transfer to facility and equipment reserves – this is in part how the current facility maintenance fund has grown to $2M.  The current contract with city employees expires in June 2017 and now is the time for Council to adopt the cafeteria plan in the next contract.

 _____________

4.    Wieler and McBain claim the Athletic Facilities Maintenance Fund (AFMF) and SchoolMates Fund can’t be used for facility maintenance. False.  The AFMF was used for the resurfacing of Linda Beach Field and just last month $200,000 was allocated from this fund for Hampton Field maintenance (http://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/html/govern/staffreports/2016-04-18/hamptonpark.pdf, p.5).  The SchoolMates Fund has always been used for upkeep of those buildings.

 ___________

5.    Wieler and McBain claim $450K is insufficient for annual facility maintenance. False. This is the average level of facility maintenance spending determined by the 2011 MTRC and 2015 BAFPC.  Costs for long-term deferred maintenance are currently being refined by City staff (2105 BAFPC, p. 24).  When finished, there likely will be a need to allocate more funds for facility maintenance but the extent to which the parcel tax needs to be raised will depend on whether the cost saving recommendations of the MTRC and BAFPC are implemented.

 ___________

6.    Wieler and McBain claim the $11M pension surplus shouldn’t be used for facility maintenance. True, but that’s a claim opponents never made (http://www.piedmontcivic.org/2016/05/15/election-opinion-piedmont-voters-should-not-approve-an-increase-in-the-parcel-tax/).  Opponents said these funds could be used for the increasing CalPERS pension obligation that the City faces.  Instead, Wieler and McBain claim these funds should be used to pay for long-term underfunded retiree health benefits. Either way, upcoming negotiations that cap benefit levels will add to the growing surplus.

 ____________

7.    Beyond our analysis of cost, we have always maintained that City revenues are more than sufficient and enjoy regional upward pressure on a continued robust revenue stream. Wieler and McBain are entirely mute on this important half of the tax equation.  The 2015 BAFPC Report (p.11) uses a 15 year time frame for the Transfer Tax, going from $2,287,982 to $3,901,252 and the Report states a 4.3% compound annual increase.  Proponents then state the erratic nature of the Property Transfer Tax yet ignore the 35 year history of the transfer tax. 1980 – 2015 the compounded annual rise is 6.45% annually.  We estimated the transfer tax in five years at $3.8 Million and we use Proponents conservative $2.8M estimate as a starting point rather than the last five-year $3.3M average.  No one can question the robust nature of the ever growing Property Tax. From 2001 to 2015 the tax grew at a compound rate of 5.1% with no down years. We estimate property tax revenue at $13.9M in five years. Proponents make no comment.

 ____________

8.   Critically, Wieler and McBain fail to mention the $1.3M additional available funds coming online in 2020 when the Pension Side Fund debt ends.

_____________

Wieler and McBain accuse Measure F opponents of inaccuracies and misinformation, but voters can judge for themselves by reading the reports.  These reports call for two basic actions by City Council – the capping of benefit levels and the establishment of facility maintenance reserves.  The extent to which a parcel tax increase is needed will depend on whether the City adopts the cost-saving measures recommended by the MTRC and BAFPC. 

Garrett Keating, Former Piedmont Councilmember 

 Rick Schiller, Piedmont Resident

Editors’ Note: Opinions expressed are those of the authors.  PCA does not support or oppose ballot measures and accepts both pro and con opinions.

New Commissioner urges Recreation Facilities use priority for residents, $55,000 private donation pledged for Hampton Park may show up later or not be needed, Betty C. Howard Award to employee Katrina Morris and volunteer John Morrison –

 On April 20th, 2016, at approximately 7:30 p.m., the Piedmont Recreation Commission called into session its monthly meeting. The Commission works with allocating, regulating, renovating, and creating park properties. According to Director Sara Lillevand, who facilitated the meeting, these tasks actually have a very “large breadth” in the city.

 The meeting, specifically broken down into nine agenda items, began with a warm welcome to three new members of the Commission: Glyn Burge, Jeff Dorman, and Vincent Fisher. Each was given an introduction stating their background. After the meeting, Fisher kindly granted an interview in which he stated that he had previous experience in local government in Connecticut, from where he had just moved. He mentioned that his top priority was dealing with “the space issue” which plagues Piedmont parks and making sure that “Piedmont residents get priority” when it comes to park use. After the members were applauded into their new roles, the Commission voted on the next Chair and Vice-Chair, unanimously electing Elizabeth Smegal Andersen and Brian Cain, respectively.

 After a couple of brief formalities, the Commission unanimously approved their minutes and reviewed the Commission’s duties.  Then the Commission began its main point of discussion, the Hampton Field renovation Master Plan. Since the plan had already been approved the previous Monday by the Council, the discussion turned out to be more of a recap of events rather than a discussion of possibilities and details.

 Director Lillevand led the rearticulation, highlighting her personal investment in the project and noting that the Hampton renovation had been about ten years in the making.  She verbalized her appreciation for the many people who worked painstakingly to see the project come to fruition, as well as the private sponsors whose donations made the project feasible.

 Interestingly, Lillevand stated that of the $254,000 pledged for the Hampton project at a January meeting, only $199,000 was actually handed to the Mayor at the Monday meeting.  While this may seem disconcerting, given the members’ lack of reaction, this drop may have been expected, or the remaining $55,000 may show up later or not be needed at all.

 Lillevand concluded by reiterating just how much this development is needed by the community, as Hampton holds league soccer and baseball games, recreational tennis and basketball, as well as summer camps and general park-usage. When asked whether the tennis and basketball courts would be maintained so they do not reach their current level of wear again, she gladly explained that the courts have been placed on a “facility master plan” that has a rotation for resurfacing Piedmont courts.

 After going over how the City planned to deal with the loss of park space during construction time, which will occur this summer, Lillivand stated that opening up Beach Playfield for longer hours on the weekends would be done.

 The commission began discussing the Aquatics Master Plan. Unlike the Hampton situation, no plan is currently in effect, and so the members were able to share ideas on how they felt the aquatics in Piedmont could be enhanced.

 Director Lillevand explained how various stakeholder groups such as competitive swimmers, passholders, and the general public each would get their own meetings in order to express their desires. Additionally, she mentioned some of the current proposals to get more out of the Piedmont Community Pool, which included building new pools, hosting fitness classes, providing adaptive education, and restructuring pools.

 While increasing recreational use is not a bad ideal to have, currently the pools are in such high demand that doing so would restrict access to many groups. As Andersen said, “no groups feel like they have enough water space,” and so the most beneficial change would be to create more pool space. Once more pool space has opened up, then the Recreation Department can focus on providing more activities without having to cut into the already limited time many groups receive. While no voting occurred on the aquatics plan, most members seemed to agree that, in general, Piedmont should revamp its aquatics.

 To conclude the meeting in a most fitting way, the Commission voted unanimously to give the Betty C. Howard Award to Katrina Morris, an employee, and John Morrison, a volunteer. The annual award is bestowed upon citizens who perform superior service, show programming ability, demonstrate loyalty and dedication, and work many hours in service of the Recreation Department and Piedmont community. Once descriptions of the nominees’ work in service were given, and they were officially put into consideration, they were chosen with a simultaneous “Aye.” With that, the meeting was adjourned.

Report by David Monical, Piedmont High School Senior

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

City of Piedmont Recreation Commission Meeting,  April 20, 2016

 The City of Piedmont’s Recreation Commission meets once a month to discuss, dispute and hear from the public on anything related to recreation in the City of Piedmont. The meeting began with a ten minute Public Forum. This public forum allows anyone in the audience to bring up a subject they would like to discuss that is not on the meeting agenda. Given the audience was limited to four other Piedmont High School Civics students, a former member of the Recreation Commission and myself, no one chose to speak during the Public Forum.

 The first item on the agenda was the welcoming of the three new Recreation Commissioners: Glyn Burge, Jeff Dorman and Vincent Fisher. After the meeting, I asked Vincent Fisher why he chose to join the Commission and how long he planned to stay. He had just recently moved to Piedmont and was very active in the City Council of his previous town, so he wanted to get involved. He was appointed to a three year term as a Recreation Commissioner and is very excited for what the future held.

 The second agenda item was the vote for the new Chair and Vice Chair of the Recreation Commission, the Chair going to Betsy Andersen and the Vice Chair going to Brian Cain.

 After a few more short agenda items that seemed to be more due diligence than anything, the meeting arrived at its biggest agenda item, an update on the Hampton Park Master Plan. This update was led greatly by the Recreation Director, Sara Lillevand, with a few clarifying questions asked by members of the Commission and audience members like myself.

 The Hampton Park Plan has been a massive work in progress for about ten years and is just now beginning to come to fruition. My older brother actually attended a meeting six years ago that included discussion about the project for this same assignment. The construction is planned to begin in June of this year and be completed in a single phase. The project is hoped to be wrapped up by mid October but could continue as late as mid February. The Hampton Field Renovation is the result of a massive community push for better field space in Piedmont, and has been funded partially by donations.

 The following agenda item pertained to potential changes to the Beach Playfield usage restrictions.  Starting this summer these changes, if made, would be entirely temporary and solely for the purpose of not displacing the users of Hampton Field while it is under construction.

 Agenda item number seven brought up future changes to Piedmont’s Aquatics. No plans have been drafted as of yet, but the Recreation  Commission recognizes the Piedmont Community Pool is where they need to shift their attention next. This seems to be the start of yet another ten year process just like the Hampton Field Project.

 Although it was not seen at this meeting, there is a lot of public disagreement when plans like the Hampton Field or Piedmont Aquatics are brought up. While it is important for the public to shape their community, in my opinion it would be much better for the public to let the City Council make decisions in a timely manner. This way things would get done much quicker and lead to a better Piedmont.

by Rhys Daniel, Piedmont High School Senior

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

Report on the City Council Meeting of March 7, 2016

    On March 7 2016, the Piedmont City Council came together for its usual bi-monthly meeting in the City Council Chambers. However, this meeting was more rare than most as the Mayor presented the State of the City Address, which only happens once a year. Following the Pledge of Allegiance and the Public Forum, the Mayor spoke of the state in which Piedmont has been in and what changes have been made and what still need to be improved upon.

    The first item on the agenda, the Consent Calendar, was to approve the minutes of the Council meeting on February 16, 2016. All Council members voted unanimously to approve the minutes. Following this was the Public Forum, which is when any member of the audience can raise an issue not on the Agenda. However, Public Forum is allowed only 10 minutes and the time has to be split evenly between all those who wish to speak. There were 7 speakers, including myself and my partner.  Five speakers addressed climate change.

Sustainability

    There were two aspects talked about in the diversion of fossil fuels: morals and financial burden. Two Middle School boys spoke out about their concerns of the drought and pointed out that it was only getting worse, as well as the idea that there was no risk in counter action. An additional two Piedmont residents, both of whom had had children who attended Piedmont schools, spoke out about the unsustainability of relying on fossil fuels.  They explained that Piedmont is able to divest from fossil fuels, as 7 other Bay Area cities have already done. Finally, a woman who had grown up in Piedmont spoke out about how renewable energy was infact cheaper than fossil fuels and it would be a smart idea, financially, to divest.

    The main speaker for fossil fuel divestment, was Piedmont resident Julie Walsh. She was the woman who is spearheading the appeal and has created a petition, with 160 signatures, in order to support her cause. When asked about her presence at the City Council meeting, Walsh said, “I am here to try to talk City Council members into divesting from fossil fuels, which they voted down in May by a small margin and several factors have changed since then.” In addressing her concern about the divesting, Walsh said that, “If they don’t put it on the Agenda, then I will come back and appeal it again. In order for them to put it back on the Agenda, I will only have to persuade one City Council member.”

State of the City Address

    After the Public Forum, Mayor Margaret Fujioka, gave the second annual State of the City Address, which covered many events occurring in Piedmont. First, she spoke about the new renovations that were done to the entry of City Hall and thanked the residents of Piedmont for making it possible. She then went on to talk about how this was her final year as Mayor, which then led to her thanking everyone on the Council as well as all of the Department heads, like the Police and Fire Chief.

    Following this, Fujioka spoke about her four main goals as Mayor and how she has reached them. Her first goal, to improve public safety, has been done through the installation of license plate readers on the edge of town and also she mentioned that this year is the third consecutive year where crime rates have been down. Fujioka’s second goal is to maintain health, which has been done through the Fire Department assisting on many fires and through active shooter drills done on campus. Her third goal is to embrace technology, which has been done by working with a tech company called Client First, and starting a 5 year plan. Finally, her last goal is to improve infrastructure, which has taken place as $500,000 was granted to improve Hampton Field beginning this summer. Also, the Piedmont Pool is looking at renovated locker rooms, including new doors, lockers and heating systems.

    After talking about her goals, Mayor Fujioka spoke about all of the positive changes that have happened in Piedmont since the last State of the City Address. She spoke about Piedmont’s clean audit and high marks, guided fiscal prudence and accountability. As well as how the parcel tax, which is proposed to be raised 30%, brings in 1.6 million per year. She also spoke about how Piedmont has been working to become more eco friendly by installing LED lights into the lamp posts to save energy, worked with the Schools to reduce energy output, and began a road diet on Grand Avenue reducing the number of vehicle lanes. The bonds between the City and the School District have been well maintained, and the attempt to reduce traffic at the Middle School in the mornings has been successful. Lastly, Mayor Fujioka encouraged that with the new election approaching, community members continue to speak up and offer ideas to further towards the betterment of Piedmont.

By Hannah Castle, Piedmont High School senior

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

On Wednesday, December 16 the Recreation Commission will receive updates on Recreation Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) and other repair and renovation projects at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chamber.

Following the Commission Chair’s report and the Recreation Director’s report there will be updates on:

CIP Projects

Aquatics Master Plan

Hampton Field Master Plan

Recreation Department building

Other Projects

Aquatics facility Repairs and Renovations

Community Hall Renovations

Future Projects

Read June, 2015 CIP suggestions for projects here.

The meeting is open for public participation and will be broadcast live via Channel 27 KCOM and the city’s website.

Since 2010, 13 top Piedmont administration positions have undergone a turnover.  

The turned over positions are:

City Administrator

Fire Chief

Police Chief

Public Works Director

Finance and Human Resources Director

Recreation Director

City Clerk

Planning Director

Parks and Project Manager, Public Works 

City Attorney (Outside Contract)

City Engineer (Outside Contract)

Recording Secretary (No replacement)

Building Official

Current  > City Directory 

Personnel Changes and a New Position –

Recently announced personnel changes include the retirement of Mark Feldkamp, Parks and Project Manager in the Public Works Department, Kate Black, Planning Director, and Erick Cheung, Finance and Human Resources Director, who was hired March 6, 2013.   Feldkamp, a 20-year employee, will be replaced by Nancy Kent. Black, a 17 year employee, will be replaced on an interim basis by Kevin Jackson, Senior Planner. Cheung’s replacement has not been announced. 

The latest personnel changes come as the City is faced with renewing the Municipal Services Parcel Tax, considering new planning laws, completing Hampton Field improvements, funding employee pension and health care costs, improving IT systems, maintaining facilities, and evaluating recreational needs.

City Administrator Paul Benoit has recommended splitting the position of Finance and Human Resources Director.   A personnel search for Cheung’s replacement has been noted as a priority and is scheduled to be considered on the November  2 Council agenda.

Recommendation from City Administrator Benoit:

“Change in Responsibilities of the Position To ensure that the City attracts a broad and strong pool of municipal finance professionals, I would propose, with City Council authorization, to redefine the job description of the Finance / Human Resources Director position to eliminate the focus on human resources (HR). As such, I would propose recruiting for the position of Finance Director. At the same time, I would propose creating a new classification to absorb some of the duties currently handled by the Finance/HR Director. The exact title, duties, and reporting structure of this new classification will be determined as the process moves forward and will be brought to the Civil Service Commission for approval. I would assign Stacy Jennings, who currently serves much of the day to day human resources work to the new classification.

“Should the City Council approve this direction, I would suggest that we actively pursue recruitment for a Finance Director and, on a parallel track, make the necessary adjustments to the affected position descriptions. Also, Mr. Cheung and I have been meeting with a retired municipal Finance Director who is interested in and capable of serving the City in an interim role while the recruitment is in process. I will conduct additional background research on the individual and, depending on the results of that research, will propose a professional services contract for Council consideration.”

Read the staff report.

The Council has not yet addressed the long term financial impact of adding an additional administrative position.

Allocation of $500,000 at November 2 Council meeting. – 

In 2009 and 2010 revelations from the staff showed costly overruns for the private underground utility district that became a $2.5 million City expense.  Lawsuits ensued with the City recently receiving a settlement of $500,000 for the engineering work of Robert Gray and Associates. City legal action against the engineering firm Harris and Associates continues.

There has been no mention of returning the $450,000 taken from the PG&E Piedmont 20A undergrounding reserves. (Read PCA articles explaining 20A funds  here and Council candidate positions on the $450,000 taken from the 20A PG&E reserves here. Read all PCA articles on undergrounding here.

“20A Districts: 20A funds are provided by PG&E to the City of Piedmont through a requirement in the Public Utility Code which annually sets aside a portion of PG&E revenue for each utility jurisdiction. 20A funds are restricted in use and intended for undergrounding arterial streets. Primary arterial streets such as Highland Avenue, Grand Avenue, and the Civic Center block of Vista were completed using 20A funds.   In the 1980’s the Piedmont City Council designated all of the City’s 20A funds for undergrounding Grand, Moraga, and Oakland Avenues. The undergrounding of Grand Avenue was completed and paid for using 20A funds.  The undergrounding of Moraga and Oakland Avenues has not yet been accomplished.  After 2002, the City Council changed its policy and began the practice of using 20A funds to assist private undergrounding (20B) projects – specifically, the Piedmont Hills, Central Piedmont, and Sea View Avenue Undergrounding Districts.” PCA article 

Details: July 2, 2007 minutes, at page 3-4; July 7, 2007 staff Report, p. 3. May 7, 2007 staff report, p. 3; May 7, 2007 minutes;

Staff report on $500,00 allocation:

“On July 6, 2015 the City Council executed a settlement agreement with Robert Gray & Associates (RGA) for $500K to settle claims related to the creation and construction of the Piedmont Hills Underground Assessment District. The payment was received by the City in August and credited to the City’s General Fund reserves. In keeping with the Council’s prior decision to allocate one-time excess reserves to address needs, staff is recommending that the funds be transferred to the Facilities Maintenance Fund. This does not appropriate the funds in the Facilities Maintenance Fund to any specific project or use, which the Council can do at a future meeting or during the budget process.”  Read the staff report.

Council – 

Mayor Margaret Fujioka started her service as a council member in 2008 and Vice Mayor Jeff Wieler returned to the Council early in 2010. Newer members of the Council are Teddy King, Bob McBain, and Tim Rood.  At the next municipal election in November of 2016, Fujioka’s seat will become vacant when she will be termed out. McBain can run for re-election in 2016 for another four year term.  Wieler will have two more years remaining in his second term; in 2018 his seat will become vacant.  Rood and King’s terms expire in 2018.  Both can seek re-election.

By City Charter, a regular Council term last four years.  Individuals can serve for two consecutive terms, and may seek re-election to additional terms after retiring for 4 years.

The November 2, 2015, Council meeting begins at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers City Hall. The meeting will be broadcast on Channel 27, KCOM and on the City website.  Agenda.