An Open Letter Submitted by the Piedmont Education Foundation and the Associated Parents Clubs of Piedmont

With spring upon us here in Piedmont, chilly gray images of picketing demonstrators in front of the Wisconsin capitol look particularly bleak.  Public unions, governments and taxpayers are warring over budget shortfalls and engaged in pitched battles.  Not so here.  While Piedmont’s education funding gap was not unique in this economic crisis, the capacity of our stakeholders to work together to find solutions is quite otherwise. > Click to read more…

Piedmont Community Church Forum on “Piedmont Goes Green,” co-sponsored by PCC’s newly forming Green Team and Piedmont CONNECT.  Sunday March 13, 5:00-6:30 p.m., in the Chapel at PCC’s Christian Education Building (400 Highland Avenue, across Highland Way from Valero and up the steps).  CONNECT members will be presenting on topics that include: The Culture of Re-use, Planning for Zero-Waste Events, Sustainable Gardening, and our Electricity Monitoring Project. Interfaith Power and Light will also give a  presentation at the forum.

“Now’s the Time! Local Resources to Improve Your Home Energy Efficiency,” co-sponsored by the City of Piedmont, Piedmont CONNECT, and the League of Women Voters of Piedmont.  Tuesday March 29 at 7 p.m. at the Piedmont Veterans Hall – 401 Highland Avenue.  Could you use help acting on your intentions to lower your household’s energy use?  Come find out about three local resources that offer concrete ways to get started:  Energy Upgrade California in Alameda County (rebates, incentives and other resources for home energy efficiency improvements), California Youth Energy Services (simple energy audits and help switching out light bulbs and other basic steps), and Piedmont CONNECT’s electricity monitoring project (community members joining together to become more knowledgeable about our electricity use, collectively reducing our greenhouse gas emissions).

Survey Results and Video from the February 16 Forum on Public Education Funding:

On Wednesday, February 16 the Piedmont League of Voters, the Piedmont Educational Foundation, and the Piedmont Civic Association co-sponsored an educational funding forum, “Make Resources Count.”

A panel composed of Oakland School Superintendent Tony Smith, Piedmont Education Board Members Ray Gadbois and June Monach, together with Pedro Rosado from State Senator Loni Hancock’s Oakland office discussed the topic of public school funding and how to make resources count in the current budget crisis.  (Since Senator Hancock was delayed in a State budget hearing in Sacramento, her district representative, Pedro Rosado, took her place on the panel.)

The Forum addressed the potential impacts of the Governor’s budget proposal and a possible tax ballot measure on the Oakland and Piedmont school districts funding.   > Click to read more…

Over $450,000 of City funds prioritized for undergrounding Moraga and Oakland Avenues have been loaned to, but not repaid by, private undergrounding district homeowners.  The history of how this occurred goes back many years.

The Public Utility Commission requires that PG&E set aside money it receives from utility users in a special 20A fund reserved for public undergrounding projects*.  This is in contrast to 20B and 20C districts which rely on private funding:

• 20A Projects use 20A funds to pay for public undergrounding projects. In Piedmont, Moraga, Oakland and Grand Avenues, major corridors, were prioritized for the City’s 20A funds after a comprehensive study conducted by staff. (See Resolution 85-85, p. 1, p. 2, p. 3.)  Grand Avenue undergrounding was completed using 20A funds.

• 20B Projects use money from property owners self-selecting themselves. City Council approval of the district allows a special assessment district to be formed and bonds issued; construction is performed under the management of the City.  Current 20B agreements between the City and homeowners open the City General Fund to invasion for costs not originally a part of the City’s agreements with property owners who desired the undergrounding project.  The City may bear the risk of cost overruns beyond contingency funds and Acts of God. (Chiang report, p. 6 and 13.)

• 20C Projects use money solely from property owners self-selecting themselves who work directly with PG&E to manage the undergrounding project.  The property owners pay all expenses incurred and the City plays no management role in these projects.  There is no risk to the City.

Using 20A public funds for the benefit of private districts

Undergrounding proponents have urged the City to make 20A public funding available to 20B private district as seed money since 2003.  (See p. 5-7 and Source Materials below).  At a 2-3-03 City Council meeting the City Administrator advised there were too few 20A monies to fund the undergrounding of any properties except those owned by the City and School District.  (p. 4)  However, the Council supported their use, “agreeing that the likelihood the City will ever use Rule 20A funds to finance utility undergrounding along Oakland Avenue is remote.”  (5-5-03, p. 7.)

In October, 2003 the Council considered and authorized $25,000 to Central Piedmont when proponents ran short of funds.  > Click to read more…

Piedmont Civic Association Commentary on Undergrounding Reports from the Audit Subcommittee and the League of Women Voters

To date, the efforts of the Audit SubCommittee and the League of Women Voters have emphasized contract administration analysis.  Information and analysis of undergrounding concerns provides a valuable shared knowledge base to the Council and residents in their upcoming efforts to undertake substantial revisions to City undergrounding policy.  It is hoped both the Audit Subcommittee and LWV will continue their much appreciated efforts, providing analysis and recommendations to the Council and the community on:

• The use of public funding to facilitate the creation of  private undergrounding districts
• The loss of 20A public funds
  
• The City’s financial stake in approving Districts
• The potential or perceived impact of a financial stake on the decision-making process
• The magnitude of 20B projects in comparison to City revenues and reserves
  
• Other  undergrounding options:  20C Districts and city-wide undergrounding
  
• Chiang analysis:  Does the City become the  “ultimate insurer” of every 20B undergrounding project?
• Will immediate knowledge and reporting of cost overruns improve the City’s options?
• Shifting cost risk from the City to private districts
• Preventing misunderstandings by Staff and/or Council of the nature of City contracts
  
• The extent and appropriate use of informal meetings, without formal public notice, between homeowners and city staff
• Review of additional aspects of past experience
• Optimum threshold level of support – review, comparison and a specific recommendation
• Grounding the report upon the Piedmont City Charter
  

The use of public funding to facilitate the creation of  private undergrounding districts

Current undergrounding policy prohibits the use of “general funds” for pre-formation expenses.  However, this policy has been interpreted to refer only to the City’s General Fund, and to allow the use of 20A public funds (a separate account containing monies received from PG&E for undergrounding major arterial streets) for the benefit private 20B districts.  Use of these public funds has been authorized as follows:

• $25,000 for Central Piedmont (due to seed money shortage – see p. 15)
• $128,000 for Central Piedmont (to satisfy remaining district debt when it failed to be approved)
• $150,000 for Piedmont Hills
• $150,000 for Hampton Sea-View (p. 5) > Click to read more…

The following are recommendations and highlights from individual draft reports prepared by Mayor Dean Barbieri, Vice Mayor John Chiang and Judge Ken Kawaichi, the three members of Piedmont’s City Council Audit Subcommittee.  Their separate drafts are scheduled to come together in a final report to the Piedmont City Council which examines  the Piedmont Hills Underground Assessment District problems and provides recommendations for policy changes to preventing future similar problems.  Public input is requested by the Subcommittee prior to its next hearing on March 15.  Email dbarbieri@ci.piedmont.ca.us, jchiang@ci.piedmont.ca.us, kkawaichi@ci.piedmont.ca.us. > Click to read more…

A letter from a Piedmont resident providing history and analysis on storm water runoff:

Are Mountain View Cemetery’s 3 Earthen Dams Safe?

A.  Before obtaining a building permit for construction of the Blair Park (BP) project, PRFO (Piedmont Recreational Facilities Organization) and the City of Piedmont has to meet the RWQCB C-3 provisions and obtain a NDPES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permit from the RWQCB (Regional Water Quality Control Board). The NDPES permit entails how all storm water runoff and discharge from the BP project will be handled into the existing storm culvert water infrastructure system, eventually reaching Lake Merritt (LM). The Piedmont Blair Park-Coaches Field projects will need specialized solutions to meet C-3 requirements to properly discharge their storm water > Click to read more…

Piedmonters view story poles

On a beautiful Saturday afternoon a large group of Piedmont and Oakland residents gathered to rally under the flowering trees along Moraga Avenue in Moraga Canyon and view the proposed location of the proposed sports complex called Blair Park.  Those present found themselves in the midst of an area where no houses are visible because of screening by numerous mature trees.  Many present at the rally chanted and waved signs at passing cars, while others viewed the recently installed story poles. > Click to read more…

A Letter from Tim Rood, President of the Piedmont Swim Club, concerning a Piedmont Post article on Swim Club lease negotiations.

Your February 9 article’s suggestions that the City staff didn’t know about the renovation in the 1990’s that removed the pool gutters and that the language the City was seeking in the new lease was needed to prevent a similar occurrence was wrong on both counts. First, both the Club’s and City’s lease proposals required the City’s prior approval of projects over $25,000. Second, the City approved the renovation plans that removed the gutters in the 1990s – the renovation plans stamped “Approved – City of Piedmont” are on file at City Hall. > Click to read more…

Commentary on the history and future of KCOM:

As heated public meetings concerning Blair Park/Moraga Canyon continue, and diverse cultural activities, such as the Lunar Year Celebration occur around town – not to mention the revving-up of various City committees, the vitality and commitment within our local television station, KCOM, in covering these events remains the same: plodding and non-committal.  In fact, while there is a dedicated core group of viewers who do watch KCOM’s coverage of select City and school events, many Piedmonters eschew the station’s limited programming – and some have no idea a local television station even exists.  And yet the stated purpose of KCOM, on its website, indicates a far broader goal of the station:

“KCOM-TV, Channel 27, is a government/education access station located in City Hall. Our purpose is to educate and inform the residents of Piedmont about their local government and its services and to > Click to read more…