Council support for Measure Y was not unanimous-

There you go again, Measure Y proponents. Continuing to misinform and mislead Piedmont voters. At the outset, there was the completely false claim in your ballot argument in the Voter Information Pamphlet that, “The City Council unanimously supports renewal of the existing Municipal Services Tax . . . “. Even when the proponents acknowledged their material misstatement, when there was time to correct the submission, they chose not to do so. To let the statement stand is an egregious, misleading act.  > Click to read more…

From a Member of Piedmont League of Women Voters Undergrounding Task Force –

Voting no on Measure Y is not about opposition to taxes or antagonism towards city government, nor is it about ingratitude for all the benefits of living in Piedmont.  I believe it’s about “tough love” — setting limits for the sake of preventing unconstructive, ultimately self- destructive behavior.  It’s sending a clear message of the need for restraint, redirection and problem solving, rather than simply reacting.   The Task Force for the Piedmont Hills Undergrounding District, which I served on, spent many hours researching and identifying the factors that contributed to this project’s $2 million dollar financial fiasco. Among these were inadequate or absent  risk management policies, insufficient oversight, lack of transparency in decision making, and lack of planning and appropriate systemic procedures for dealing with the potential problems associated with major construction projects.  If one reviews the time line of events building to that significant cost to the city and the taxpayers, one sees a sequence of “just this one time” attitudes–  repeated reactivity,  rather than thoughtful problem solving in a devolving situation, a situation which might have been avoided or minimized by planning and anticipation, and by specifying limits clearly.

> Click to read more…

Municipal Tax Review Committee member responds to recent statements by Mayor John Chiang.

The several million dollars wasted by the City of Piedmont on the Piedmont Hills undergrounding debacle and city costs for the “gift” of Blair Park have consumed revenues equal to most of the $6 million collected by Piedmont’s parcel tax in 2009-2013. Yet Mayor John Chiang tells us that renewing the parcel tax (Measure Y on the November ballot) is essential “to maintain the excellent city services which assure the safety of our citizens and keep Piedmont an attractive place to live.”  > Click to read more…

Member of  League of Women Voters Undergrounding Task Force hopes Measure Y defeat will force  sense of urgency-

I believe strongly in the power of government and ungrudgingly accept my tax burden.  So why am I, a 27-year Piedmont resident, opposing Measure Y?  Reluctantly I have concluded that this is the only way for Piedmonters to send a strong message that they want the City Council to make urgently needed reforms.  > Click to read more…

Resident Wants “Transparency and Honesty”-

City Council gave $2.45M of taxpayer money to the Hills undergrounding district. City Council then authorized each other to investigate themselves. Naturally, they found no fault with themselves. City Administrator Grote was the staff for the “audit” and investigated himself. Repeated requests for an independent investigation were responded to with silence.  > Click to read more…

Piedmont resident thinks financial oversight and accountability are still missing –

Yes, I appreciate the high level of city services that Piedmont provides, and I’m willing to pay for them.  And yes, it is a fact that complex public works projects often have unforeseen problems that must be solved.

Clearly, the Undergrounding fiasco showed that the City’s management team failed to solve the problems, which cost Piedmont taxpayers millions.  But, what has been learned from this failure?  > Click to read more…

Letter from Member of the Municipal Tax Review Committee on Measure Y –

The refrain will be heard repeatedly over the coming weeks: It’s a renewal, not a new tax, only $9 per week and necessary to maintain vital services. In truth, the parcel tax is unnecessary, wasteful and has nothing to do with funding essential services.
Despite what is stated in the ballot argument for Measure Y, the proposition does not even have the unanimous support of the City Council.  > Click to read more…

A Letter Points Out the 16 Municipal Tax Review Committee (MTRC) Recommendations to the Piedmont Post –

To the Editor of the Piedmont Post

Dear Sir,

Not having heard from you, I was pleased to see that you not only printed my letter, but took the time to add an editor’s note disputing its accuracy – the first such note I’ve seen in any newspaper in my 46 years.

Since your note indicates that you were unable to find the 16 unanimous MTRC recommendations I referred to by searching the City website, may I direct you to pp. 6-8 of the MTRC report, which can be found on the City website at http://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/html/govern/staffreports/09-06-11/mtrc.pdf.  > Click to read more…

I have read the arguments for and against the extension of the parcel tax, and was struck by the seeming contradiction between some of the City’s recent actions and the arguments in favor of renewing the parcel tax. > Click to read more…

The following commentary was published by The Piedmonter and submitted to the Piedmont Civic Association:

The bad process that led to the Undergrounding debacle was made worse by the sham City “Audit” which included two members of the City Council who voted for the giveaway, then investigated themselves and accepted their own report.  The staff liaison was the City Administrator who bears the ultimate responsibility for the taxpayer loss.

City Hall had little desire for taxpayers to know why two million dollars were used for private benefit. During the Undergrounding an additional $275,000 of taxpayer money was taken for “storm drains” on Crest Road, drains that were never intended to be installed.  Rather than reclaim taxpayer funds or investigate, the City’s solution was to reclassify the theft as “street repaving.”  The City’s response to the Kurtin’s Undergrounding lawsuit was a frivolous defense that ate another $550,000.

The Undergrounding Debacle led both the LWV Task Force and 2011 Municipal Tax Review Committee  to recommend standard practices for any major project in town, including monetary risk assessment, independent construction management and contingency fees.  None of these recommendations were present Dec. 5, 2011 when four Council members voted approval of the Blair Park Project.  What was present was (1) the City Engineer’s report which found the PRFO supplied numbers lacking sufficient detail for a meaningful examination (2) a proponent project manager (3) no recommendation for contingency fees (4) Planning Commission findings that the project was ugly and deficient in all respects, and (5) an unanalyzed traffic plan that included an experimental roundabout.  This was a flawed and biased process.  Apparently as a tactical maneuver, Piedmont Recreation Facilities Organization (PRFO) has withdrawn the project because of the expected success of the Friends of Moraga Canyon (FOMC ) and pending Oakland litigation.  Residents asked that Council rescind the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in hopes of bringing our community back together.  Instead, the Council chose to honor the PRFO intent: “The EIR may be useful if there is any future project developed at Blair Park. ” (blairpark.org)

”The PRFO “Gift” just keeps on giving as taxpayer cost approaches $470,000.   The Feb. 7 dramatic defeat of Measure A should have been a wake-up call to City Hall that the electorate was disgusted by biased City processes and an unneeded tax measure.  But on May 7 the Council had only high praise for PRFO, further deepening the community divide.  The bad process is not a result of ignorance, our populace is too bright.  Piedmont government is by some for themselves and calculated deception is the result.  I am not a recipient of this generosity, yet I pay the same high parcel taxes.  Until we have real community discussion and input, and a City Administrator who serves all residents equally, my only recourse is to vote down City parcel taxes.  I will not waste my money and feed elite special interests.

Rick Schiller, Piedmont resident

Editors Note:  All opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Piedmont Civic Association.