The following open letter to the community was sent to the Piedmont Civic Association and the City Council on March 16, 2011 -

Dear Mayor, Vice Mayor and Council Members:

Re: Draft Sewer Asset Management Implementation Plan (AMIP) on City Council’s April 16, 2012 Meeting Agenda

This letter contains my detailed written comments on the City Council Agenda Report and attached AMIP for the Council’s Monday, April 16, 2012 meeting. (City Council Agenda Report from Chester Nakahara, Public Works Director, “Subject: Review an advanced copy of City’s Sewer Asset Management Implementation Plan prepared in response to the EPA [sic] Stipulated Order Compliance Requirement, Section XI, Subsection 73”. (The subject Stipulated Order is not, as incorrectly stated in the agenda report, an “EPA Stipulated Order”, but it is, instead, a Stipulated Order for Preliminary Relief > Click to read more…

 Measure A Opponent Explains its Defeat -

The Measure A Sewer Surcharge Tax failed by the largest margin anyone can recall. Remarkably, no one at the City and not a single Measure A proponent has ever publicly countered the objections that led to the voters’ rejection.

> Click to read more…

Opponent of  Sewer Surcharge  (Measure A) Supports Future Good Governance and Financial Accountability:

I am grateful that Piedmonters voted down Measure A and, in doing so, posted a clear message that any future parcel tax will be a referendum on good governance, financial accountability and honesty. The Piedmont Post chose to attack me personally and disguised its editorial bias as news articles instead of using its widely read community forum to inform voters of both sides of the sewer tax issue. Instead of posting the careful investigation Tom Clark and I undertook, including direct communication with the EPA, our letters and my LWV Forum comments were grossly misstated, and neither of us was directly contacted by the Post.

I am grateful to Tom Clark, with his many years of public sector legal experience, for his invaluable contribution. MTRC member Ryan Gilbert deserves special recognition for critically looking at the complete picture and then opposing Measure A.

Perhaps our City Staff can also benefit from some of the investigation done, both by opponents and the careful piedmontcivic.org investigation into the sewer fund and related issues. Regardless of the failure of this unneeded tax, Piedmonters can be proud of continuing to do the right thing environmentally with our aggressive compliance program, due to be enacted July 15, 2012, both for EPA requirements and residential sewer lateral testing and replacement. By a 1993 EPA order, we were required to replace 48% of our mainline sewer, the leakiest sections, by 2014. By 2010 we had replaced 60%. The often heard “we are in the lead” is a reality other cities wish they could follow.

I am optimistic we can have an honest and transparent dialogue on future issues, especially those that are of financial concern. Using tax dollars judiciously means more resources for us to enjoy in this wonderful city.

Rick Schiller

Editor’s Note:  The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Piedmont Civic Association.

Throughout the history of the Sewer Fund, there has been tension between spending for sewer maintenance versus spending for sewer mains replacement (rehabilitation).  (See sewer history article.)

In 2000 the sewer tax was tripled.  The increase was to comply with a Cease and Desist Order requiring the replacement of 54% of the Piedmont sewer main in 3 phases and, eventually, replace 100% in 4 additional phases if needed.  The EPA required phases I, II, and III were completed as of 2006, representing 54% of the sewer system.  Rehabilitation work then paused for a number of years. (See chart below.)   Phase IV was not completed until 2010. > Click to read more…

Hidden Choices:  Draining the Sewer Fund to Fund General Fund Activities-

Where did the 2000 sewer tax increase go?

Replacement of Piedmont’s sewer mains has been a long-standing goal.  In 2000 the sewer tax was almost tripled to pay for mains replacement.  Where did the money go? > Click to read more…

Planning Commissioner Addresses Negativity in Post Letter -

One aspect of Piedmont that I’ve always felt made it a special place is that even if we disagree with one another, most of us try to do so respectfully.  We’re a small community and see one another all the time.  But that seems to have changed with the current city council race.  Many letters and opinion pieces have been > Click to read more…

Response to EPA Regional Administrator Jared Blumenfeld’s letter in January 25 Piedmont Post - 

Editor’s Note: The following open letter to Piedmont residents was distributed to local news outlets including PCA.  The letter, written by an opponent of Measure A, the Sewer Surcharge, has been edited slightly to comply with PCA guidelines: > Click to read more…

Voters who are puzzled by Measure A, the Sewer Surcharge on their February 7 ballot to approve a 10 year surtax,  can read  on the Piedmont Patch the pros and cons  presented at the Piedmont League of Women Voters Forum on January 12. The statements by Michael Rancer, pro, and Rick Schiller, con, describe issues related to the 50%  tax increase.

> Click to read more…

Residents assert Post’s pool facts are wrong -

The Piedmont Post’s January 11, 2012 article, “Rood’s tenure as final swim club president,” gets almost all key facts regarding the negotiations between the city and the swim club wrong.  From the beginning, the club agreed to pay all pool expenses, including major maintenance and capital improvements, as it had for 46 years.  In return, it simply asked that the terms of the existing lease be continued. > Click to read more…

Residents’ investigation of the Crest Road washout revealed incorrect allocation of funds from the Sewer Fund, resulting in proposed refund to the sewer fund > Click to read more…