“On Wednesday, June 25, 2014, the Piedmont Unified School District Board of Education unanimously approved the appointment of Mr. Michael Corritone as the new Principal for Egbert W. Beach Elementary School, effective July 1, 2014.

The selection process included input gathering from the Beach Elementary School staff and parent/community members, and an extensive interview with representative stakeholders.

Mr. Corritone’s professional experiences as a school psychologist, assistant principal, and elementary school principal personify the requisite qualities of a principal for Beach Elementary Mr. Corritone holds a Pupil Personnel Services Credential and a Professional Administrative Services Credential. Additionally, Mr. Corritone is a graduate of the University of California, Santa Barbara, with a B.S. in Sociology and a M.S. in Education.

Mr. Corritone’s professional background includes three years as principal at Corte Madera School in the Portola Valley School District and five years as an assistant principal at Windemere Ranch Middle School in the San Ramon Valley Unified School District. He also served as a school psychologist for nine years at elementary and middle school sites in the San Ramon Valley Unified School District.

Mr. Corritone’s position officially begins on July 1, 2014 PUSD is delighted to welcome Mr. Michael Corritone to our community of learners.

Egbert W. Beach Elementary School

The Beach Elementary School community is located in Piedmont, a city of about 10,000 residents nestled in the hills above the San Francisco Bay Area. With approximately 365 students and 30 teachers, Beach has a high academic performance record. The outstanding staff provides a remarkable education and learning environment for all students. The 2013 API was 965, meeting all of its growth targets and APR criteria.

The residents of Piedmont demonstrate a strong sense of community and are committed to maintaining and enhancing educational programs, services and school facilities. Parent participation in school activities is extensive; parents and community members have developed a variety of support organizations that work collaboratively with staff to support the needs of the school system.”

Press Release – Piedmont Unified School District, June 25, 2014

New traffic signals, painted bike lanes, speeding vehicles, poor lighting, additional parking restrictions, and many other matters impacting pedestrians and bikes will be aired at two public hearings. There were 263 individuals who responded to a City Survey.  Read filtered responses from the City Survey and links to the proposed Bike and Pedestrian Plan.

The hearings will be on:

July 2 – 5:30 p.m., Council Chambers – The Piedmont Recreation and Park Commissions Joint Meeting

a) Introduction of Consultant Niko Letunic, Urban Planner & Kate Black, City Planner: Mr. Letunic and Ms. Black will present a brief follow up presentation of the proposed Ped/Bike Plan.

b) Question and Answer Period: Questions for staff and Mr. Letunic regarding Master Plan and the process.

c) Public Testimony: Members of the public will be invited to comment regarding the Master Plan and the process. Speakers will be encouraged to keep their comments to a three minute time limit.

d) Close Public Testimony

e) Commission Deliberations & Comments: Comments will be forwarded to the Planning Commission and City Council.

July 14 – 5 p.m. , Council Chambers – Planning Commission 

Agenda is not yet available, but is expected to be similar to the above agenda.

 Both the hearings can be viewed at home via KCOM Channel 27 or the City website www.ci.piedmont.ca.us. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ City’s Announcement ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“In July, the Piedmont Recreation and Park Commissions (in a joint meeting on July 2 at 5:30pm) and the Planning Commission (on July 14 at 5pm) will hear presentations on recent progress in the planning process for the City’s Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan (PBMP). Both hearings will be located inPiedmont’s City Hall Council Chambers at 120 Vista Avenue.

The purpose of the hearings is for City staff and its project consultant will to present and receive feedback on the “implementation strategy” for the plan—namely the prioritization, funding and phasing of projects and other improvements that will make up the plan.

The implementation strategy is an interim step in the planning process; based on feedback at the hearings, the list of high-priority projects (and other aspects of the strategy) will be refined and presented more broadly to the public as part of the draft Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan, beginning in August.

The prioritization of projects will be based in large part on feedback received from Piedmonters and other stakeholders on ideas presented to the community in recent months. An important opportunity for feedback was through an online survey that ran for four weeks in February and March and received more than 260 responses. The summary of the survey results, as well as the full list of comments received through the survey is available here.

The hearings will be additional opportunities for the public to find out more about the plan and to voice their opinions. At both hearings, the City’s project consultant and City staff will be available to answer questions from the Commissioners and members of the public.

You are encouraged to attend the July meetings, or you may wish to watch the public hearing on KCOM, cable 27. Alternatively, if you want to watch the meeting live or later after the meeting, you can do so by logging on to the City’s website at www.ci.piedmont.ca.us: on the right hand side of the homepage under the “KCOM” heading, click on the “On-line Video” link, then scroll down under the “Sections on this Page” heading, click on the “Park Commission” or “Planning Commission” link, then on the “July 2, 2014” or “July 14, 2014”, and click on the “Video” or “In Progress” link and start watching!”

Janet Chang, Planning Technician, 510-420-3094 janetchang@ci.piedmont.ca.us Kate Black, City Planner, 510-420-3063 kblack@ci.piedmont.ca.us

Proposals for the $507,000 WW Bond Funds will be the immediate focus of CIP Review Committee in order to meet EBRPD deadlines.  –

At its June 26 meeting, the CIP Review Committee (CIPRC) elected John Cooper as its Chair. Cooper invited the citizens in attendance to present their project ideas.

Former Council member Garrett Keating provided the CIPRC with photo montages illustrating his proposal of a 300 by 150 foot multi-purpose sports field, expanding Coaches Field into the existing parking area. In order to replace lost parking, Keating showed a section of Blair Park converted to a parking lot that could be accessed via a traffic circle with pedestrian operated signal. Keating emphasized the pressing need for more sports fields for the youth.

Long time Piedmont resident, Pat Markovich-Treece said the City had repeatedly focused on sports fields and neglected the members of the population who would use other kinds of recreational parks. She mentioned the shortfall in quality of life for citizens who prefer non-organized sports in their outdoor recreational activities. For example, she called for passive park environments such as Blair Park could become.

Last year, the Council approved a plan for Blair Park improvements and directed the CIPRC to include funding consideration in the Capital Improvement Projects assessment. A Committee member pointed to the Restoration Design Group Blair Park plan on the list (see below) as a passive recreation project.

Despite numerous public statements and information asking for use of the locked and vacant large room in the Piedmont Arts Center as a Senior Center, the Recreation Department did not add this to their wish list.  The prior City administration would not allow the Piedmont Center for the Arts to assume responsibility for the room and instead advocated that the facility be used for childcare.  The result has been no use of the room. 

WW funds are specifically authorized to be used for Senior Centers. Piedmont is unique in the region in not offering a facility for seniors. Some have found it unusual that Piedmont, with the largest percentage of seniors in Alameda County, offers few programs for this group of residents.

Three residents from the Kingston/Linda/Rose neighborhood advocated safety measures for the intersection. Crosswalks from Rose Ave. and Kingston Ave. across Linda Ave. and a stop sign on southeast bound Linda at Rose were suggested to reduce speeding traffic coming from Piedmont Ave. Mark Feldkamp, City staff liaison to the CIPRC, assured residents that there will be a traffic safety study in the Fall and the triangle median he is designing will include lighting to improve safety at night. “It is a great project and we’re pushing it very hard.” In the Spring, the Piedmont Beautification Foundation will raise money to contribute to the cost of constructing the triangle.

However, Cooper pointed out that the Kingston/Linda/Rose triangle does not qualify for WW funds. Feldkamp concurred, saying he had specifically asked about the project and Jeff Rasmussen of the East Bay Regional Park District said the triangle would not qualify.

Although resident William Blackwell was not present at the meeting to present it, his proposal for an expanded sports field in Coaches Field was included in one of the staff lists.

The meeting was designed to urgently emphasize use of WW funds prior to their expiration, yet some of the projects found on the Recreation Department and Park Department lists would not qualify for WW funds.  Which ever project or projects are chosen, stringent requirements including compliance with California’s Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) will be faced.  Given the restricted time line and requirements, some of the proposed projects will be eliminated. 

The CIPRC heard the Recreation Department wish list:

Hampton Field renovation, including tennis courts

Renovation of the Recreation Department building, moving registration and main office downstairs

Rehabilitation of Community Hall

New aquatics facility, includes new pools and locker rooms

Repair current pools and also build a new aquatic facility at another location

New draperies for the Community Hall, maybe new painting and wallpaper plan

Deck expansion off the back of the Community Hall

Redo Amphitheater area in Main Park

Replace the bleachers next to Recreation Department and pool

New play structure in Recreation Department tot lot

New play structure in Main Park tot lot

Redo benches around Main Park tot lot damaged by sand and stain

New picnic tables and BBQ pit next to Recreation Department tot lot

Re-surface basketball courts between tennis courts and pool

Recreation Department/Carriage House parking lot re-surface, including removal of pine tree

Removal or repair of large metal storage unit located behind BBQ area next to Recreation Department

Feldkamp provided an additional CIP wish list generated by the Park Department:

Piedmont Park Community Hall Plaza renovation $150,000 to $200,000

Piedmont Main Park Amphitheater renovation $250,000 to $300,000

Rear terrace Community Hall Piedmont Park renovation $300,000 $350,000

Hampton Park improvement (Harris Plan) $1,900,000 to $2,000,000

Linda/Kingston triangle $175,000 to $200,000

Coaches Field improvements (Blackwell Plan) $900,000 to $1,000,000

Dracena new entry at Park Way & Dracena Avenue $300,000 to $350,000

Blair Park improvements (RDG Plan) $800,000 to $900,000

Howard Avenue entrance to Linda-Beach Field $1,500,000 to $2,000,000

Crocker Park renovation $250,000 to $300,000

Piedmont Park Exedra Plaza Phase IV $500,000 to $600,000

Aquatic Center improvements $200,000 to $250,000

Veterans Hall improvements  $150,000 to $200,000

Residents may suggest other ideas on how Piedmont should spend the $575,000 in WW bond funds and help prioritize expenditures for future Capital Improvement Projects.  Send correspondence to:

CIP Review Committee c/o mfeldkamp@ci.piedmont.ca.us

Questions may be addressed to Mark Feldkamp (W) 420-3064

Clear as Mud – 

Strange that we’re in a third year of drought with significant loss of snowpack in the Sierras – and few communities around the Bay Area have instituted mandatory water rationing.

In fact, Governor Brown’s request in January for a voluntary 20 percent cutback in water usage statewide was amended a month later by our East Bay Municipal Utility District, (EBMUD), to a voluntary cutback to 10%,  http://www.berkeleyside.com/2014/02/12/ebmud-asks-east-bay-customers-to-cut-water-use-by-10/  And, most recently, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, (SFPUC), the largest water district in the Bay Area, announced in an article by Paul Rogers in the Oakland Tribune that water-saving goals have been met and there will be no mandatory water rationing this summer:   http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_26019792/bay-areas-largest-water-district-say-no-mandatory

Is that so?  Apparently yes, according to Harlan Kelly, General Manager of the SFPUC, “There’s no doubt that we had a slow start, but I’m happy to report water use in the past several weeks has declined, and we are making up for lost time.”  He went on to say that essentially, the agency had met its goal of 10 percent voluntary conservation from January to May.  Done deal.

But Rogers points out in his article that a good portion of this water “savings” is based on the PUC’s higher estimation for water usage in this time period; thus, providing a 10 percent “reduction.”  In comparing actual water usage, however: this year’s usage compared to last year’s reflects less than 1 percent of water reduction.

Jay Land, Director of the Center for Watershed Sciences at UC Davis, suggests in the article that most water districts in the Bay Area still have “…fairly ample water supplies; it’s not dire for them yet.”  Let’s also remember: water districts are in the business of selling water.

  If we achieve our voluntary 10 percent water reduction figure set by EBMUD, the agency stands to lose 8 million dollars.

But to be fair, Bay Area communities have reduced water consumption over the years; EBMUD reports an 11 percent decrease in usage last year alone, and, overall, districts purchasing Hetch Hetchy water, which supplies 26 cities and private companies, have coordinated a steady reduction of consumption by 17 percent in the last 10 years. And this reduction has occurred as population in the region increased by 4 percent.  Good news; except, as other parts of the state have experienced severe water shortages and instituted mandatory cutbacks on water,http://mashable.com/2014/05/16/california-drought-residents/ – we in the Bay Area, and specifically in Piedmont, should consider this a wake-up call and take meaningful steps now in reducing water consumption by 10 percent in our city and homes.  EBMUD, in fact, offers different programs in conserving water, as reported by the PCA a few weeks ago:  http://www.piedmontcivic.org/2014/06/12/please-conserve-even-more-water/

But why, some of you still may wondering, should we consider mandatory water rationing when we have reduced consumption and our local water supply is okay?  Because the Sierra snowpack, providing a third of the state’s water – and all of ours, is compromised; down 32 percent from its average and at the lowest level since 1988.

In an excellent article, “From Mountaintop to Water Tap,” in Sunday’s Tribune on June 22, writer Lisa M. Krieger describes how Department of Water Resources engineer, Frank Gehrke, straps on cross country skis and trudges up the thin air on Mount Dana.  At 13,061 feet, it’s one of the highest peaks in the Tuolumne River watershed and it’s here where a tiny sensor records snowfall data. Gehrke checks the sensor and snowpack levels several times a year, but the most important recording is taken on April 1, before part of the pack melts and wends its way some 300 miles to the Bay Area.

This year, the sensor revealed 16.8 inches of snowpack, or just 40 percent of the historic annual average of 42 inches.  And it’s this snowpack, measured on Mt. Dana, that forms the basis for yearly water allocations and “drives the whole economy,” says Gehrke.  Moreover, measurements recording water flow taken miles downstream in Yosemite revealed a flow at just 81 cubic feet per second compared to usual spring flows ripping downstream at 300 to 1,000 cubic feet per second.  And if we still need convincing that our lawns should be reconsidered, Krieger reports that the ice pack on Lyell Glacier, the largest in Yosemite, has decreased by 60 percent since 1900. Discovered by John Muir in 1871, one wonders how long it will be around.

Taking into account these findings and prolonged drought conditions, it’s my intention to feature Piedmonters and city staff in a series of articles who are developing practical and ecologically responsible ways to respond to the very real demands of our changing environment, which include reduced water.

Your comments and input are crucial to the discussion.

Denise Bostrom, Piedmont Resident

On June 24, 2014, at a Special Meeting, the Council voted to direct staff to cease action to place the sewer tax surcharge on the November 2014 ballot.  With a large surge in Real Property Transfer Tax revenue, the windfall of money produces sufficient funds to cover the cost of an expedited rehabilitation of Piedmont’s sanitary sewer system. 

Council members Teddy King, Bob McBain and Tim Rood addressed potential lack of voter support, use of available funds, and advice of the Budget Advisory and Financial Planning Committee.  Mayor Margaret Fujioka joined the majority with her vote. Vice Mayor Jeff Wieler advocated the tax should continue to be pursued to build up City reserves, and he did not support the motion to cease action on the sewer tax surcharge.

Body worn camera protocols for Police Officers – Harvest Festival participation – Format for Public Safety Tips – School liaison activities – Neighborhood Watch meetings – First Quarter Crime Report – Update on license plate reader system  – and Update on Disaster Preparedness Initiatives will be considered at a regular meeting of the Public Safety Committee on Thursday, June 26, at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, 120 Vista Avenue.

The Public Safety Committee (5:30 p.m.) is one of three City meetings to be held on June 26. The other two are the “Town Hall” meeting for the Housing Element of the General Plan (6:30 p.m.) and the CIP meeting (7:30 p.m.) to discuss use of $575,000 of WW bond funds. The Council Chamber houses broadcast equipment, however there has been no notice regarding a public broadcast of the Public Safety Committee meeting.

The meeting is open to the public. 

The Public Safety Committee was formed as a permanent body when the City Council passed Resolution 3-14 on January 6, 2014 with an assignment to develop recommendations for improving public safety in the City of Piedmont. Click here to read the committee’s charge.

Committee Roster*:

Chair: Lyman Shaffer

Scott Fitzgerrell

Michael Gardner

Ryan Gilbert

Garrett Keating

Sue Lin

School District Appointee: Andrea Swenson

Council Liaison: Margaret Fujioka (C) 463-7821

Chief of Police Rikki Goede (W) 420-3010

Fire Chief Bud McLaren (W) 420-3030

The Public Safety Committee meeting was announced in a timely manner without distribution of the Committee’s agenda.

Read the full agenda.

Read prior meeting minutes.

*From the City website.

Transparency once more a question in Piedmont, as meetings are not broadcast and are held in small venues. – 

June 26, Thursday, 7:30 p.m. in the small Council Conference Room in City Hall, a Capital Improvement Projects Review Committee (CIP) meeting will discuss how to spend $507,325 WW Bond money. The meeting is running partially concurrent with a Planning Commission “Town Hall” meeting held in the Police Department Emergency Operations Center (EOC). Both meetings are important to future Piedmont decisions. There will be no broadcast of either meeting. Beginning at 5:30 p.m. the Public Safety Committee will be meeting in the Council Chamber with a long agenda.

The CIP Committee has learned how tight the schedule is to identify, qualify, and complete construction of a project or projects to use Piedmont’s entitlement of $575,000 WW East Bay Regional Park District Ballot measure funds. Piedmont is the only city in the District that has not received its money as no Piedmont project has been put forward. The City staff and CIP Review Committee and City Council are eager to meet the strict deadlines, allowing Piedmont to receive funding without forfeiture of the money.

Projects associated with school uses do not qualify, nor do median strips. “The District requires that the Grantee have authority to use the property for public recreation for at least 25 years of land tenure from the date of Application.”  Read the grant application required documents.

Prior CIP funds have been primarily used for sports facilities – Havens Playground, Coaches Field, Moraga/Blair Park sports complex proposal, and others.  Read the 2011 CIP report.

The City has announced another “regular meeting” of the:

CIP Review Committee

Thursday, June 26, 2014

7:30 p.m.

City Hall Conference Room, 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, CA

The agenda includes:

1. Selection of the Committee Chairperson

2. Discussion of Possible Projects Eligible for Measure WW Funding

Various projects have been mentioned in recent years as ways to spend $575,000 in WW Funds.  Some would not qualify; others might receive approval by the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) Board.

• Improvements to Blair Park per recently approved plans
• Improvements to Hampton Field to correct drainage
• Senior Center, possibly in the 801 Magnolia Ave. – Arts Center extra room
• Expansion of Coaches Field
• Bocci Ball court
• Croquet lawn
• Correction of tennis court problems at Hampton Field
• Correction of drainage issues at Dracena Park’s former quarry area

Those with other projects to suggest should attend the meeting. Read a list of ineligible project categories provided to the Committee at the June 19 meeting.

Years have passed and there remains no resolution to issues surrounding the undergrounding debacle costing Piedmont taxpayers over $2 million. The City has filed law suits against the City’s engineers in an attempt to recover the lost millions. “The Court has ordered the parties to engage in settlement discussions, and a mediation likely will be scheduled this summer.” Attorneys representing the City, Lombardi, Loper and Conant, LLP, “anticipate that the trial date ultimately will be in Spring 2015.“

The following information is from the City:

At an open and broadcast meeting on Wednesday, June 25, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 120 Vista Avenue, the School Board will consider the following items:

• CONDUCT SECOND PUBLIC HEARING to ADOPT 2014-15 DISTRICT GENERAL FUND BUDGET AND ALL BUDGETS OPERATED BY THE DISTRICT; AND ADOPT RESOLUTION 13-2013-14
• “AUTHORIZING YEAR-END BUDGET TRANSFERS”

 Parcel Tax support has been an essential component of the District’s revenue for the maintenance of programs for students. It has grown from being approximately 11% of the District’s total revenue in 1985 to 31% in 2013-14 from Measure A as approved by voters in March, 2013 for eight years (expires June 30, 2021). Since it represents such a substantial portion of the District’s operating expenses, it is recommended that the renewal request to the community is early enough (no later than Spring 2019) to incorporate the outcomes in the multi-year budget projections.

 Funds raised by Parent/Support Groups to support programs remain an integral part of the District’s budget, representing over $1.55M per year. 

 The Piedmont Educational Foundation Endowment Fund support is provided at $250,000/year.

District enrollment has been increasing slightly.

The District will present a revision to this Adopted Budget (called the Revised Budget) within 45 days that will provide a clearer picture.

 The State has provided Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs) for 2014-15 in the amount of 0.85%. COLAs for 2015-16 (2.19%) and 2016-17 (2.14%) are incorporated as part of the District’s multi-year projections.

• APPROVE SALARY AND BENEFITS FOR ALL UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES OF THE DISTRICT (ASSOCIATION OF PIEDMONT SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS AND SUPERINTENDENT) CONSISTENT WITH COLLECTIVE BARGAINING GROUPS

It is requested that the Board approve the one-time payment for a furlough day in 2013-14; an increase to the salary schedules of 3%; and the increase in the District contribution to medical benefits – as agreed to for APT – for unrepresented employees. The costs associated with the increase have been incorporated into the 2014-15 Adopted Budget as presented this evening.

Pension Costs are projected to rise dramatically.

STRS (State Teachers Retirement System) Employer Rates were proposed from the current 8.25% to 9.50% (in 2014-15), 11.10% (in 2015-16), and 12.70% (in 2016-17), increasing incrementally thereafter to 19.1% by 2020. These rates have been modified somewhat, with employers taking a proposed smaller step in the first year, but continuing to increase until the 19.1% rate is reached in 2020-21. As specified in Assembly Bill 1469, employer contribution rates would be as follows: from 8.25%to 8.88% (in 2014-15) to 10.73% (in 2015-16), and 12.58% (in 2016-17). As of this writing, the rates have not been finalized, so they are not included as part of the 2014-15 Adopted Budget.

The California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) for classified employees is also projected to increase incrementally from 11.7% in 2014-15 to 20.4% by 2020. Before the implementation of LCFF, CalPERS adjustments were made to school district revenue limits. Now any increases in CalPERS contribution rates will have a direct impact on the budget.

The effect of increasing employer contributions for both CalSTRS and CALPERS (without additional State funding to support these increases) will be most profound in the District’s multi-year projections. 

Governor’s Budget: 

The 2014-15 State Budget contains a number of controversial provisions, specifically a requirement that districts “substantiate” the need for an “unassigned or assigned ending fund balance” above the required minimum reserve (beginning with budgets adopted for the 2015-16 fiscal year). At the public hearing for budget adoption or revision (as described above), districts would need to substantiate the reasons for any “excess,” and the Alameda County Office of Education (ACOE) would be required to determine whether the District complied with these requirements.

If the Governor’s “Rainy Day Fund” is approved by voters in November, in the year following a deposit into the Proposition 98 portion of the “Rainy Day Fund,” districts would not be able to have reserves more than twice the minimum required by state regulation, which for the Piedmont Unified School District would amount to 6 percent (twice the 3% minimum). ACOE could provide PUSD an exemption under “extraordinary fiscal circumstances,” but only for up to two consecutive fiscal years within a three-year period; in the third year, or in any year a district does not receive an exemption, a district would need to spend down its reserves to the new maximum or below. The language was amended between its drafting and its adoption to clarify that the reserve cap is only active in the year immediately after a fiscal year in which the state makes a deposit into the Proposition 98 reserve.

The Board packet can be read here.