THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF PIEDMONT INVITES YOU TO AN AFTERNOON WITH THE HONORABLE JEFFREY L. BLEICH, AMBASSADOR TO AUSTRALIA 2009-2013

SUNDAY, MARCH 1, 2015

3:00 – 5:00 pm

PIEDMONT VETERANS HALL

401 HIGHLAND AVENUE, PIEDMONT

The League of Women Voters of Piedmont is proud to present an afternoon with Piedmont’s own Jeff Bleich, former Ambassador to Australia and Special Counsel to President Obama during the first year of the Administration.  Mr. Bleich also served as President of the California State Bar, and clerked for Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist of the U.S. Supreme Court, Judge Abner J. Mikva of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and Judge Howard M. Holtzmann of the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal at The Hague.  In 2013, Jeff received the State Department’s highest award for a non-career ambassador, the Sue Cobb Prize for Exemplary Diplomatic Service.  He is currently a Partner at the law firm of Munger, Tolles & Olson in San Francisco.

This program is a fundraiser to benefit the League of Women Voters of Piedmont, a nonpartisan organization dedicated to engaging citizens in the democratic process and promoting positive solutions to public policy through voter education.  Mr. Bleich will address electronic voting and ways of increasing voter turnout, with audience Q&A to follow.

Tickets are $35 in advance, $40 at the door.  Doors open at 3:00 with refreshments, program commences at 3:30.

To reserve a spot, visit www.lwvpiedmont.org and click the calendar link or contact Tracy Kirkpatrick at megeve@pacbell.net.

 Do not open your door to strangers!

Suspects enter homes on the pretense of a “water main break. ”

The Piedmont Police Department urges residents to be vigilant to a recent scam.

1/27/15 at 1330 hours, 200 block of Highland Avenue – 

The victim described the subject as a Hispanic male adult, 30’s-40’s wearing a white/grey “plumber” shirt that had “CP” on it and he was wearing a red baseball cap.  Introduced himself as “Anthony”.  He told the victim there was a “water main break” and he needed to check the bathrooms. Suspect was followed around the house to each bathroom, no loss, info report.

1/28/15 at 1053 hours, 400 block of Moraga Avenue – 

The victim described the suspect as a male pacific islander 6’3″ 250-275 lbs with a blue “work” shirt which read, “Mora” plumbing on the left side of the shirt, above the front pocket.  The suspect said he was there due to a “water main break”.  Male victim allowed entry to the house but when the female victim confronted the suspect, he left.  Loss was money, presidential coins and jewelry.  Suspect got into front passenger seat of a newer white pickup truck that fled eastbound on Moraga Ave.

As always, be vigilant about any individual that comes to solicit for services and do not let them inside your home.

If you see any similarly described individuals, please immediately contact the Piedmont Police Department.

       420-3000

The following resident letter questions why Piedmont’s garbage rates are 62% higher than some surrounding cities.

Jan. 29, 2015

Piedmont City Council

Re: Feb. 2 2015 Billing & Performance Audit of Republic Service Inc.

Honorable Council,

My sister lives in Alameda and her 3 full size bin weekly service through Alameda County Industries is $108.21 for 3 months or $36.07 monthly. Alameda is not topographically comparable to Piedmont but significant parts of Oakland and Berkeley are similar with narrow, winding and hilly streets. Berkeley 32 gallon 3 can service weekly is $36.93 monthly. The Chronicle reports the 3 can weekly service in Oakland as $36.82 monthly. but a current Oakland bill shows the rate at $22.36 per month.  A friend in the narrow, steep streets of Montclair states their rate at $30.

In Piedmont my last 3 month bill for 3 full size cans is $176.47 or $58.82 monthly.

As part of the City audit of RSI, I ask that a survey be done of surrounding city rates. RSI should provide justification for charging a rate in Piedmont that is minimally 62% higher than surrounding cities.

Generally, I find RSI service reliable and the company responsive.

Respectfully,

Rick Schiller, Piedmont resident

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

How should the new Superintendent be evaluated?

The District Superintendent is the Chief Executive of the District reporting to the School Board.  Any school is as good as the quality and dedication of its teachers and principals, and the Superintendent commands these resources, hiring teachers and principals, giving or denying tenure, and making assignments within the constraints set by the California Education Code. The position commands a substantial compensation package.

The hiring and management of the superintendent and the setting of education vision are the prerogative of the Board. The public has every right and responsibility to hold the School Board accountable for hiring specific public employees and producing appropriate results. It is clear that the selection of the new superintendent is the most important decision that the Board has to make: it will have a direct impact on the quality of education for years to come.

The District web site home page publishes a set of score cards under the banner “educational success and student outcomes”. The cards currently cover academic performance, finance, student community service, and student participation in extracurricular activities. We can only encourage the District to expand the set to include adult education, special education, counseling, and any other area where the District delivers services to our community.

In the private sector, it is common for enterprises to assign yearly goals to the corporate score cards and to tie these goals to the parts of the business each executive controls. For example, a Vice President of Engineering in a High Tech company may have reliability, availability, and a measure of customer satisfaction assigned to each new products. He/she typically parcels the score cards and goals to his/her direct reports, and ties their bonuses to them. It is an effective process to ensure accountability. The goals are often overambitious, and failure is viewed as an opportunity to learn and improve. These score cards and goals are public to all employees to ensure that everybody is on the same page.

It is my understanding that district and assistant superintendents are employed at will by the School Board, typically in increments of four years. Why not have the Board assign goals to the score cards so that the community, administrative staff, and teachers are clear on the Board’s impetus and can all pull in the same direction? The superintendent could then parcels these goals among its assistants, ideally all the way down to principals and heads of departments. In addition, the Board could survey School Alumni every year to give a solid basis on its continuous improvement policy. Clearly the implementation of such a system would have to stay within the law, as California public employees have a right to non-public evaluations of their performances.

The superintendent candidates’ interviews could be focused on whether such a system would work in a public education environment and what rewards compatible with the California Education Code should be considered to entice and further motivate staff and teachers.

Thank you for serving our community as Board Members,

Bernard Pech, Piedmont Resident

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

 

The Piedmont School Board has approved extending hours for public use of certain school facilities until 9 pm.  Facilities considered include multipurpose rooms. auditoriums, and gymnasiums.

Non-profit groups are allowed under California law to use school facilities.

“The amended Civic Center Act expands the definition of what constitutes direct costs that a school district may charge to include (a) “The share of the costs of supplies, utilities, janitorial services, services of school district employees, and salaries paid to school district employees directly associated with the administration of this section to operate and maintain school facilities or grounds that is proportional to the entity’s use of the school facilities or grounds” and (b) for non-classroom spaces, “The share of the costs for maintenance, repair, restoration, and refurbishment, proportional to the use of the school facilities or grounds by the entity using the school facilities or grounds.'”*

“Actual Costs and Replacement Cost Assumptions For the purposes of assisting the Board in determining a fee schedule that reflects changes allowed under the Civic Center Act, preliminary calculations combining actual costs plus replacement costs for District buildings (gyms, auditoriums, theater, multi-purpose rooms, grass fields, and synthetic fields) will be provided for consideration. Classrooms (per the Civic Center Act), as well as fees for lights, sound systems, pianos, custodial hours, etc. calculations are excluded in determining hourly amounts for actual costs. It should be noted that not all costs (such as utilities) can be tied precisely to an individual site (like the softball field).

The committee that includes Board Members and staff will review the various options for the calculations to be used for the revised schedule.“* Board Report January 27, 2015 

Political and non-profit organizations supporting or opposing candidates for public office and/or ballot measures through contributions are specifically prohibited from using public facilities – state, county, city, special districts and schools.

As of January 1, 2014 legislation approved October 12, 2013, prohibits campaigning nonprofit organizations from using public resources and facilities.   (CA code Sections 54964.5 and 54964.6)

This bill would prohibit a nonprofit organization or an officer, employee, or agent of a nonprofit organization from using, or permitting another to use public resources received from a local agency for campaign activity, as defined, and not authorized by law. This bill would define, among other terms, “public resources” to mean any property or asset owned by a local agency and funds received by a nonprofit organization which have been generated from any activities related to conduit bond financing by those entities subject to specified conduit financing and transparency and accountability provisions, and “nonprofit organization” to mean an entity incorporated under the Nonprofit Corporation Law or a nonprofit organization that qualifies for exempt status under the federal Internal Revenue Code of 1986, except as specified.  (Legislative Counsel’s digest)

Read a news report on usage.

* Revision made 2/2/2015 to reflect new Civic Center Act allowing additional costs to be charged to users of school facilities.

Following the November 4, 2014 agreement with the Piedmont Unified School District (PUSD),  the new Piedmont Turkey Trot (PTT) corporation began paying the District $30,000 from proceeds of the prior year 2013 Turkey Trot race.  The agreement requires PTT to pay $20,000 to PUSD each January following the annual Thanksgiving Day race through January 15, 2019, the end of the five-year agreement.  In January, 2015 PTT paid PUSD $20,000 to aid the Piedmont High cross-country and track and field programs, the original purpose of the fund-raising race when it was organized by parents and students in 2003.

The City of Piedmont has unreimbursed traffic control and public safety expenses for the Turkey Trot. For two years PTT agreed to pay “excess profits” from the race to the Piedmont Athletic Facilities Fund.

Read a news report  for additional details.

It was an extremely active and productive week in the superintendent search. HYA partners, Bill Levinson and Barbara Young conducted interviews and hosted over 40 meetings with various school and community groups exploring key characteristics for the new superintendent as well as gathering input on the perceived qualities and challenges of the district. Thanks to them and all of you who participated.

There is still time to contribute opinions and suggestions to the consulting team as it was decided to extend the survey period. Originally scheduled to close today, the deadline was extended to this Sunday Jan. 25 in recognition of busy post-holiday schedules and the long Martin Luther King holiday and semester break. Access can be found below or on the district website and the Piedmont Portal.  Click link below to participate in the survey.

www.ecrasurvey.com/piedmont

With Superintendent search surveys and forums a plenty, the question remains – What do Piedmonters expect and want from their schools?

Taxpayers, parents, and empty nesters have trusted that Piedmont schools are doing the best they can with significant homeowners taxes in addition to community donations.

Piedmont schools are excellent by most standards, but they can be even better in meeting ever changing educational needs.  Many readers, associates, community members, teachers, students, and parents may not make it to the scheduled forums or even fill out the still available > survey on the Superintendent search.

Various suggestions for future improvements and changes to the Piedmont Unified School District (PUSD) have arisen during the search process. Some of these are:

–  Increased transparency in policy decisions –

Rather than after the fact, parents, school employees, and the Piedmont community should be brought into decisions early on through open and free expression of ideas. Censorship of speakers, particularly teachers and students, is not appropriate at public PUSD meetings. (See Student report on the 12/10/14 PUSD meeting.)

–  Broadcast of budget processes on the City’s cable station KCOM and Piedmont website –

The Piedmont School District’s pivotal “Budget Advisory Committee” meets without being recorded or broadcast and is largely away from public view.  To be informed on school budget issues, a person should not have to be physically present at a meeting.  Affordable recording and broadcast methods are available.

–  Focus on teaching rather than buildings –

In recent years, there has been a continuous stream of needed school building improvements.  Increased attention on teaching each student according to their needs should be the priority.   Technology should play a roll in teaching along with increasing students’ technological skills. When there are teacher performance problems, the District should be ready to assist teachers.

–  Improved communication between school and home –

Numerous nearby and distant school districts have adopted internet communication systems that inform students and parents of assignments, test dates, behavior problems, overdue homework, and academic issues on a daily basis.  In Piedmont, teachers are not required to report their homework assignments on line. Individualized student information is not always available for students or parents. Conferences between teachers and parents are often elective rather than a standard.

–  Schools comparisons made on an equal basis –

Some students leave Piedmont schools. What are they looking for in another school? Is Piedmont keeping up? Although Piedmont is a unified school district, comparisons should be made to other high schools, middle schools, and elementary schools on an individual basis.

Piedmont Resident Bernard Pech noticed the Piedmont Schools statement on the Piedmont Unified School District (PUSD) home page that Piedmont schools rank first in Northern California and fourth in the state, but to him the scores were not the highest if all public schools are considered. Pech explains in his opinion below:

I was pleasantly surprised to see the ranking of PUSD advertised on the District’s home page. It is true that the District is ranked number one in Northern California as a Unified School District among other Unified School Districts, and number four in the State, based on the Academic Performance Index (API) as advertised on the District’s home page. But there are in California twice as many non-unified Districts (Elementary districts and High School districts) as there are unified.

Three types of school districts:

Unified Districts cover grades K-12.

Elementary School Districts cover K-8 or K-6.

High School Districts cover grades 8-12.

There are 5998 elementary schools, 1441 middle schools, and 2493 high schools in the State.

On a school by school basis across all district types, the data shows that, for example, Beach Elementary ranks 37th among Northern California elementary schools and 73 among all elementary schools in the State. The Piedmont High School ranks 19th against all other high schools in Northern California, and 44 against all the high schools in the State, whether in Unified or non-Unified Districts.The fact is that Piedmont High is ranked 44 in the State among other high schools, and 19 in Northern California. Havens Elementary is ranked 203 in the State among elementary schools, and 97 in Northern California.

Given the maximum score is 1000, one could consider that the middle and the elementary schools are ranked number 1, rather than 11, 37, 70, and 97 in the Northern California. But the high school is 10% below the best high school and ranked 19 within Northern California behind: San Francisco Lowell High, Santa Clara Lynbrook High,  Oakland Charter High, Saratoga High, Miramonte High, Owens Gilroy, … and 13 other bay area schools.

The District focuses on marketing itself the best way possible, which is understandable.

	API	State Ranking	Northern Cal Ranking
Beach Elementary	966	73	37
Piedmont Middle	964	17	11
Wildwood Elementary	956	136	70
Havens Elementary	948	203	97
Piedmont High	908	44	19

 2013 Academic Performance Index (API).  A 2014 API report will not be prepared by the State.

PUSD Homepage

< Information from PUSD website

Bernard Pech, Piedmont Resident 

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

Community Forum on Superintendent Selection 

Wednesday, Jan. 21, 7:00 p.m.

Piedmont High School Student Center

All members of the public and school community are invited to attend and participate.

With the HYA survey (open to the public) having opened Monday, January 12, we are happy to share some preliminary numbers with the community. HYA received roughly 350 completed surveys and another hundred are in progress or unfinished. The cross section of contributors includes parents, staff, teachers, students, and broader community members. As would be expected, parents represent more than 200 of the early responders. We are delighted with the participation and encourage more from all parties.

The survey is a critical step to help the consultants formulate a profile of the key characteristics the community is seeking from its new school leadership. In addition to ranking those skills you think most essential, there is room for personal comment and candidate recommendations.

We will have a busy week around the district with Bill and Barbara from HYA Search Associates in town Wednesday, Thursday and Friday. We have arranged meetings across the district to get more direct input from various community constituents. Number one on that list is the community ­wide event at 7:00 at the PHS student center Wednesday night, January 21.  Everyone is invited to participate in this community forum.

For more information, please refer to:  http://www.piedmont.k12.ca.us/board­of­education/search­for­new­superintendent/.

Thank you.

Submitted by Doug Ireland, School Board Member