Jan 31 2021

Monday, February 1, 2021 City Council meeting: Council will consider approval of Reach Codes.  Council and participants will have an opportunity to ask questions on the proposal prior to approval.  See Staff Report and Agenda listed below for information and participation.

Staff Report:

 https://piedmont.ca.gov/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=17376920

Agenda and Participation:

https://piedmont.ca.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_13659739/File/Government/City%20Council/Agenda/council-current-agenda.pdf

Comments may be sent to the Council by clicking >: council@piedmont.ca.gov.

Jan 31 2021

Current Piedmont total allocation is 60 by 2023.

https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2015-2023_rhna_allocations.pdf

The draft proposed 2023 – 2031  Allocations (Piedmont = 587) are “illustrative only” at this point according to the ABAG report:

“These are shown for illustrative purposes only.The ABAG Executive Board and MTC Commission adopted changes to the strategies for the Plan Bay Area 2050 Final Blueprint in September 2020. The changes adopted at that time will affect information about total households in Year 2050 from the Final Blueprint; updated data will be available in December 2020. As this information from the Blueprint is used as the baseline allocation for the proposed RHNA methodology, updates in the Final Blueprint could lead to changes in the ultimate allocations. Data from the Final Blueprint will be integrated into the Draft RHNA Methodology slated for January 2021.ABAG will approve a Final Methodology and issue Draft Allocations in Spring 2021 which will be followed by an appeal period before ABAG issues Final Allocations by the end of 2021. Jurisdiction Housing Elements will be due to HCD by January 2023.”

https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/rhna_methodology_report_2023-2031_finalposting.pdf

AGENDA – Monday, February 1, 2021 – Participation information below:

Comments may be sent to the City Council at: council@piedmont.ca.gov.

Jan 31 2021
To the Editor: The following is a letter I sent to the Piedmont City Council
Dear Council Members:

I am writing to urge you to renew the lease for the Piedmont Center for the Arts. In a community that prides itself on promoting culture and the arts in our school curriculum, it seems inconceivable that the city council might not renew the Center’s lease.

Over the years and with countless numbers of tireless volunteers, the Piedmont Center for the Arts has become a venue for world class musical events.  It has enabled our residents to enjoy outstanding concerts without fighting the traffic and parking we face going into San Francisco and Berkeley.   Celebrated musicians from renowned companies have spoken of the venue’s lovely space, its stellar acoustics, and the magnificent Steinway piano.

The Center has become a jewel in the crown that is Piedmont, and it saddens me to think of this almost sacred space being used as a community center.  Do not let this cultural treasure slip away.  Please renew their lease.

Thank you,

Freddi Robertson, Piedmont Resident
~~~~~

 I am writing in support of your extending the lease and operation of the Piedmont Center for the Arts.

I am an Oakland resident.
My first time there was for the showing of a movie about a horrible situation on the 57 bus in Oakland. (The 57 Bus: A True Story of Two Teenagers and the Crime That Changed Their Lives )
Then I went to the center when they were part of the “Jazz in the neighborhood” program which introduced me to an intimate setting with great musicians. The volunteers had, on top of the music and nice setting, set up a very welcoming atmosphere.
Today, I received a video in commemoration of the liberation of Auschwitz gas chamber camp and was blown away with emotions yet i don’t have a Jewish background.
So, for me, the Piedmont Center for the Arts is a place where i can safely see, hear, feel, a different, not commercial, art experience. It’s invaluable.
Sincerely,
Elisabeth Heidorn, Oakland Resident
~~~~~~
May I add my voice to the chorus of community members who are writing in support of the Piedmont Community Arts Center and the renewal of their lease! The Arts center is one of the most valuable of Piedmont’s many assets. It has become, as currently organized and managed, a wonderful place to hear music, view art and listen to lectures. The entire surrounding community benefits from this jewel of a site and its variety of offerings. Its popularity and ability to attract wonderful performers speaks to the incredible job being done by the current staff of devoted volunteers. As a former Art teacher at Piedmont High School, I only wish it had been available when I was there as it is providing all  students, not just those in a class, a place to pursue and display their art. I “second” Valerie Corvin’s fine letter, printed in the Post on Jan 20, and I implore you to please renew the current lease for the PAC and continue to support the hard working volunteers who take care of the Center and its programs.
Helen Brainerd
Editors Note: Opinions expressed are those of the authors.
Jan 25 2021
In his letter (https://www.piedmontcivic.org/2021/01/10/opinion-a-false-choice-has-been-presented-for-arts-center-lease/) Steve Schiller labeled the current discussion of the 801 Magnolia Avenue building a “false choice” between “an art center and no art center.” I agree and attribute this false choice to a false process.  City staff, and not the City Council, appears to have made the decision to open 801 Magnolia lease negotiations with the Piedmont Center for the Arts (PCA):
.

“Given PCA’s investment in rehabilitating the City building at 801 Magnolia Avenue and its commitment to developing a viable gathering space, as well as its willingness to embrace changes to improve and expand benefits to the community, Staff believes it is appropriate for Council to consider PCA’s request to continue to operate an arts venue in this City facility”.  Staff Report, November 16, 2020

On its face, that sounds appropriate – staff recommending that City Council consider PCA’s request for a new lease.  However, staff appears to have instigated lease negotiations with PCA without direction from the Council.  I can find no notice of public or closed session meetings where this topic of the lease was agendized by staff to receive direction from the City Council.

This process puts the cart before the horse – the question of whether the 801 Magnolia  lease should be renewed should be addressed by the Council with negotiations proceeding as directed.  Instead, the lease was negotiated over the past months by staff and presented to the Council as a first reading of the lease ordinance, strictly limiting the questions from councilmembers and the public.  As currently drafted, the lease has substantial flaws that weaken the city’s access and use of this public facility.  (Piedmont Civic Association – Piedmont, California » Opinion: Four Major Flaws in Proposed Art Center Lease).

This process would have benefited so much from open public meetings at the Recreation Commission and the City Council.  As it stands, Piedmonters are being told that PCA will close if the lease is not renewed.  That is false and the fate of PCA is really in its own hands – PCA’s lease with the city expires June 3, 2021 with the option to proceed month-to-month after that.  PCA could operate indefinitely under those terms while the community engages in a public discussion of the use of the 801 Magnolia building.

For that to happen, Council needs to step in and give that direction and reject the second reading.   A second reading of the proposed lease is imminent and it is too late to make substantive improvements to the lease at a Council meeting.  Another oddity of this process is that the readings span the seating of a new council member.  Two council members had serious reservations about the process and lease terms at the first reading.  It would be appropriate for the new council member, not on Council at the first reading, to abstain from voting on a second reading and recommend staff hold public meetings at the Recreation Commission.

All council members can be reached by email at:   citycouncil@piedmont.ca.gov.

Garrett Keating, Former Council Member

Editors Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Jan 24 2021

Piedmont’s Proposed Environmental Ordinance, known as  Reach Codes, elicited a “Survey of Voters” by the City of Piedmont.

The Piedmont City Council on January 19, 2021 heard a report on the online survey of 384 Piedmont voters opinions regarding the proposed environmental ordinance referred to as Reach Codes.  The online interviews with Piedmont voters were conducted between November 21 and December 3, 2020 by the Oakland firm FM3.  The respondents to the survey were a convenient sample of Piedmonters.  Their responses are representative of those particular 384 Piedmont voters.

Who Supports the Proposed Reach Codes?

Interestingly, the report showed the more citizens learned about the Reach Codes, the less they supported them.  The survey found that respondents who had only a little awareness or no awareness of the Reach Codes were almost twice as likely to be in “total support” of the proposed codes as those who knew “a great deal” about the proposals. The biggest supporters (82%) are renters with household incomes below $250,000. The report does not tell how many renters with that income ceiling participated in the survey.

Who Participated in the Survey?

The report does not provide the usual breakdown of numbers of participants by age or other demographic attributes represented in the resulting statistics.  Within the survey report, voters were divided according to various characteristics,  including income, gender, years residing in Piedmont, homeowner, renter, political party preferences and age.  Thus, the 384 participants were divided into six age categories, two gender categories, three political party categories, five categories of length of residing in Piedmont, and homeowner vs renter status, with statistical representations of their knowledge and views on Climate Change and the Reach Codes for each subgroup.

How many actual individuals were represented by each percentage offered aged 18 to 29 who, for example, the 77% of voters aged 18 to 29 who consider the Reach Codes as “Extremely or Very Important” The survey report does not provide the number of individuals in each group. 

Prior to acting on the ordinance, did the Council need to know whether Republicans, Democrats, or Independents supported the proposed Reach Codes ?  The answer is unknown.

  Read the Survey Report HERE.

 Council Meeting, Monday, February 1, Final Approval of New Ordinance – Staff Report  > HERE.

~~~~~~

Below is a January 20, 2021 notice written by the Piedmont Planning Department describing the Piedmont City Council meeting of January 19, 2021. The Council was briefed on the Survey of voters and provided the revised Reach Code Ordinance to be considered for a final reading at their Monday, February 1, 2021 Council meeting.
~~~~~~ Planning Staff Notice ~~~~~~
“On January 19, 2021, the City Council received an informational update on public engagement for the proposed Reach Codes. Reach Codes are amendments to California’s Electrical Code and Building Energy Efficiency Standards designed to promote efficient building methods in Piedmont and reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs).
The City commissioned research firm FM3 to conduct a random-sample survey to gauge public opinion about the proposed Reach Codes. Here are some key findings:
  • 66% percent of Piedmonters support the City revising its building codes to reduce natural gas usage in homes, while about 3 in 10 oppose the idea. These findings are nearly unchanged from responses to these questions in June 2020.
  • 7 in 10 respondents said reduced GHGs (70%) and preventing climate change by reducing fossil fuel consumption (69%) are an extremely or very important benefit of establishing Reach Codes.
  • 3 in 4 Piedmonters noted the most convincing reason to support adopting Reach Codes is the impact of reducing the GHGs generated by homes.
  • When presented with messages opposing the Reach Codes, 87% of Piedmonters noted that relying on electric appliances may leave homeowners vulnerable to power outages. About 8 in 10 were concerned that the proposal may be unfair to residents who have already made energy efficiency improvements (81%) and that it may be costly for some homeowners (79%).
After hearing additional feedback from the Community, the City Council will consider the second reading of the Reach Code ordinance on February 1, 2021. Reach Codes are an important tool in Piedmont’s Climate Action Plan and can significantly help reduce GHGs. On February 1, City Council will also consider an ordinance requiring home energy audits in certain circumstances.

To learn more about the reach codes and read some of the FAQ’s, please visit our webpage. To check Council meeting minutes and agendas, please visit our website. ”

Piedmont Planning Department

Communications to the Piedmont City Council may be sent to citycouncil@piedmont.ca.gov.  

Jan 23 2021
Dr. George Rutherford, internationally renowned epidemiologist and Piedmont resident spoke at an online Piedmont League of Women Voters forum on January 13. His presentation, “COVID-19 Update:  Are We Any Closer to the End?”  was very informative and incorporated the latest data. Watchers were able to ask numerous questions.

Dr. Rutherford shared his expertise about Covid-19’s future path, stating that “pretty darn soon”, the vaccination will be available for those ages 65 and over.  Currently in California, only three percent have been vaccinated, but Dr. Rutherford predicted that when 20% are vaccinated, Covid-19 cases will begin to decrease.  He also predicted that proof of vaccination cards is likely to become common and very important in the future.  For example, you could potentially host a wedding in the Fall of 2021, if your guests show their vaccination cards.  He recommended wearing glasses or sunglasses when on an airplane to avoid transmission through your eyes.

Over one hundred people attended the talk on Zoom and Youtube.

You can watch a recording of the talk > here on the LWVP YouTube channel.

LWVP Press Release
Jan 23 2021

Dear Councilmembers:

The Piedmont Center for the Arts is a rare gem at the center of Piedmont offering the community a local venue for top-notch visual and performing arts.  The Center has been a place of discovery- the discovery of the immense local talent within Piedmont and the surrounding Bay Area, as well as a venue for strengthening our sense of community. As a longtime Piedmont resident and former board member and President of CHIME (now part of the Piedmont Arts Fund), I find the Center to be a most worthy and cherished addition to Piedmont’s cultural life and spirit of community.

Born of local dedication, this endeavor to bring an affordable venue for high quality musical, performing, visual and literary arts to the center of Piedmont, accessible to all, has lived up to its mission and should be supported and protected by the Town.

The Center truly enriches the lives of Piedmonters by bringing a broad array of exceptional exhibits and performances to our very doorstep. Tired after a long week and not anxious to travel into San Francisco for a long concert evening? The Center affords you the opportunity to enjoy a short cultural evening at a fraction of the cost of a San Francisco performance. Want to expose your kids to exciting programs that might interest or inspire them, but don’t want to drag them into museums or travel to long performances? The Center is the answer. Stop by on a walk home from school or a Saturday at the park. Exposure to the arts
does not have to be difficult or out of reach financially.

I strongly urge the City Council to renew the lease for this exceptional community-building and well-run venue.

Sincerely,
Diana Meservey, Piedmont Resident

~~~~~

Hello all Piedmont City Council members:

PLEASE RENEW THE LEASE FOR PIEDMONT CENTER FOR THE ARTS!
The Center has been one of the most successful public/private projects that has happened in the city where I have resided for the last 26 years, and over the 40 years our firm has worked in it.  At a time when the arts in general are struggling, it’s even more important that we keep this particular flag flying.
If you were to ask the average Piedmonter whether they would consider eliminating an arts institution they would respond with a resounding “No Way!”
Thanks in advance,
Steve Nicholls, Oakland Resident

~~~~

Please renew the lease of Piedmont Center for the Arts which is a vibrant center that enhances our community. It is lovely that in this downtown area just a couple of blocks there are essential services, the paper, the rec center pool and tennis courts and also the art center, a lovely building. Why isn’t the beautification society involved to make sure the center is with us for some time to come? There are enough bookings requests to last for years. Please do the right thing in the second hearing and give them a lease!
Best,
Tabatha Thomas, Piedmont Resident
Editors’ Note: Opinions expressed are those of the authors.
Jan 20 2021
The City continues to receive questions regarding COVID-19 vaccines and their availability. At this time, the County and State are working to formulate plans to distribute the vaccine.
The best place to keep abreast of evolving vaccine information is the Alameda County Public Health Department website at https://covid-19.acgov.org/vaccinesThere you will find vaccination guidance and resources. You may also sign-up to get notified when it’s your turn for vaccination.
The State of California also has statewide information at https://covid19.ca.gov/vaccines/
City of Piedmont, 1/20/2021
Jan 20 2021

More reasons to avoid COVID-19 by wearing a mask and social distancing –

Post-COVID-19 Syndrome (PCS)

Study by Leicester University Found High Rates of Health Damage Within 5 Months of Initial Recovery –

Objectives The epidemiology of post-COVID-19 syndrome (PCS) is currently undefined. We quantified rates of organ-specific impairment following recovery from COVID-19 hospitalization compared with those in a matched control group, and how the rate ratio (RR) varies by age, sex, and ethnicity.

Design Observational, retrospective, matched cohort study.

Setting NHS hospitals in England.

Participants 47,780 individuals (mean age 65 years, 55% male) in hospital with COVID-19 and discharged alive by 31 August 2020, matched to controls on demographic and clinical characteristics.

Outcome measures Rates of hospital readmission, all-cause mortality, and diagnosis of respiratory, cardiovascular, metabolic, kidney and liver diseases until 30 September 2020.

Results Mean follow-up time was 140 days for COVID-19 cases and 153 days for controls. 766 (95% confidence interval: 753 to 779) readmissions and 320 (312 to 328) deaths per 1,000 person-years were observed in COVID-19 cases, 3.5 (3.4 to 3.6) and 7.7 (7.2 to

8.3) times greater, respectively, than in controls. Rates of respiratory, diabetes and cardiovascular events were also significantly elevated in COVID-19 cases, at 770 (758 to 783), 127 (122 to 132) and 126 (121 to 131) events per 1,000 person-years, respectively. RRs were greater for individuals aged <70 than ≥ 70 years, and in ethnic minority groups than the White population, with the biggest differences observed for respiratory disease: 10.5 [9.7 to 11.4] for <70 years versus 4.6 [4.3 to 4.8] for ≥ 70 years, and 11.4 (9.8 to 13.3) for Non-White versus 5.2 (5.0 to 5.5) for White.

Conclusions Individuals discharged from hospital following COVID-19 face elevated rates of multi-organ dysfunction compared with background levels, and the increase in risk is neither confined to the elderly nor uniform across ethnicities. The diagnosis, treatment and prevention of PCS require integrated rather than organ- or disease-specific approaches. Urgent research is required to establish risk factors for PCS.

Abstract of Article Published by Med RXiv Yale, et al  here

Jan 16 2021

The Piedmont City Council will be asked to approve $106,000 to hire Paul Benoit, former Piedmont City Administrator, to Serve as Special Assistant to current City Administrator Sara Lillevand on Pools Construction.

Measure UU was the first successful capital bond measure in the City’s history. The $19.5 million bond was approved by 68.5% of Piedmont voters on November 3, 2020.  Measure UU bond funds will be used to Pay Benoit the $106,000 maximum annual cost of the proposed employment agreement.

Benoit  served as Piedmont’s City Administrator from 2014-2019 leading the process to develop the Aquatics Master Plan Conceptual Design, which was accepted by the City Council in 2016.  As a California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) beneficiary retiree, he will be subject to certain restrictions in order to avoid putting his retirement pension in jeopardy.  The City must enroll and report the hours worked to CalPERS through the system currently used to report payroll.  His initial tasks will include leading the efforts to hire project management services as well as the architectural design team.

Staff report:  Consideration of the Appointment of Paul Benoit as a Retired Annuitant to Provide Special Assistance to the City Administrator with Measure UU Projects and Approval an Employment Agreement

READ THE AGENDA HERE.