Annually, the Piedmont Board of Education is required to hold two public hearings on levying the Measure A parcel tax. The March 26 hearing is the first of the two hearings. The second hearing is scheduled for April 9.

The Measure A Subcommittee of the Budget Advisory Committee has recommended to the Board that the maximum amount be levied. Consequently, for fiscal year 2014-15 a 2% increase on the $2,406 parcel tax amount is expected. The public hearing will begin at approximately 8:10 p.m., following the 7 p.m. start of the Board meeting.

Comments on the tax levy can be addressed to all Board Members via aswenson@piedmont.k12.ca.us.  Below is the School District’s announcement.

“At their regular Board meeting of Wednesday, March 26, 2014, the Board of Education will discuss the levying of Measure A to be assessed for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014. In compliance with Government Code Section 6061 and ballot language, the Board will hold a public hearing and take action on the taxes at the Board meeting of April 9, 2014, which will be held in the Council Chambers of the Piedmont City Hall at 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, California. The public is invited to provide comment at either Board meeting or by email at the Board of Education at aswenson@piedmont.k12.ca.us“

Piedmont is entitled to receive approximately $500,000 in East Bay Regional Park District bond funds.  The funds originate from the approval in 2008 of Bond Measure WW.

To date, the Council has made no decision on how to spend the $500,000 available to Piedmont; however, the Council moved toward using the funds to renovate Hampton Field.

In 2011 the City Council expressed an interest in using the WW bond money to add lights to Coaches Field.  With the Coaches Field /Blair Park sports project no longer under Council consideration, the bond funds are being considered for another project.

Some previously mentioned uses for all or part of the $500,000 bond funds are: improvements to the Piedmont pool, a senior center in the Arts Center, Hampton Field renovation, implementation of the Blair Park improvement plan, access to Blair Park, and expansion of Coaches Field.

Hampton Field renovation design moves forward.

The Hampton Field Master Plan was approved by the Council in 2008. Drainage has been a problem at Hampton Field since the original construction in the late 1980’s, causing sand drifts onto the tennis courts and large open cracks in the court surface that present hazardous conditions for players. The grass playfield, used primarily for softball and youth soccer, becomes wet and soggy during rainy weather, requiring the field to be frequently closed to play.  Sod replacement has been an ongoing maintenance expense of approximately $25,000 per year. During heavy rains, sand and gravel are dumped onto a nearby street creating maintenance problems and a safety hazard.

At the March 3, 2014 City Council meeting, the Council voted to spend $135,238 toward construction drawings for implementation of the Master Plan for Hampton Field.  The project had been set aside during the economic downturn and emphasis on the Moraga Avenue/Blair Park sports complex.

Primary to the Hampton Field discussion was the staffs’ position that the project had already been approved and was not a new project. The current budget includes funding for the construction drawings. Public Works Director Chester Nakahara informed the Council that current estimates to complete the project  are approximately $2 million.

Hampton Field tennis courts showing cracks in 2011.

Council member Tim Rood inquired about compliance with the Council’s recently approved Risk Management Policy requiring assessment of proposed projects costing over $300,000.  Staff and some Council members indicated the Policy was not applicable because the project had already been approved. Nakahara indicated the Policy would be applied prior to final approval by the Council.

Rood questioned if the construction design contract had been reviewed by the City Attorney.  Mayor Margaret Fujioka explained that all contracts are and have been reviewed by a City Attorney for indemnification over the last 6 years.

Rood also wanted to know if the construction documents would allow phased implementation based on available funds.  Nakahara stated they would, but discouraged the approach stating the entire project needed to be implemented and a piecemeal approach would cost more and delay needed improvements.

Rood asked about the geo-technical soil testing. Harris indicated the projected depth of construction work to be 3 to 4 feet. Hampton Field was part of the Piedmont Hills Underground Utility District where rock discovered after construction work began cost Piedmonters rather than the District beneficiaries over $2 million.

Vice Mayor Jeff Weiler noted there is $2 million in the City’s General Fund Reserves available to fund the project. Council member Bob McBain emphasized the need to correct the drainage problems in the outfield and the drifting of gravel and sand onto the street.  Council member Teddy King favored the project based on her Recreation Commission experience.

The approved Hampton Field Master Plan calls for the softball field to be constructed with an artificial turf infield and a natural turf outfield. When Rood asked where this hybrid plan might be viewed at an existing park, William Harris of Harris Design stated the previous Recreation Director favored this design, but he did not know where this concept could be viewed. He indicated that changing the plan from a hybrid design to all artificial or all natural turf was a legal question.

Student observer Nick Docter asked if there was a possibility of expanding the grass play area at Hampton to meet identified needs. The staff response was that expansion was not a part of this project.

According to Mayor Fujioka, public hearings will be held on the one time expenditure of the WW bond funds; the cost of the Hampton project is needed at the time of the hearings.  The funds must be expended by 2018.

No mention was made of using the $500,000 for any alternative projects and no plans appear to be available for other projects, except the approved renovation plans for Blair Park.

The vote approving the contract for Hampton Field construction documents was 4 to 1 with Rood voting no.

Planning Commissioner David Hobstetter has resigned creating an additional opening on the Planning Commission, where there are now three vacancies to fill.  Applications for the vacancies on all of the City’s commissions and committees are due at City Hall, 120 Vista Avenue, on or before the deadline of Tuesday, March 25, 2014 at 5pm.

See full list of Piedmont committees and commissions.

Do you have an issue or concern that might be addressed in the current contract negotiations with Piedmont teachers?  Between March 12 and March 26, submission of comments to your elected school board members and staff will be timely for the negotiation process.

Read the current teacher contract here.

The public will have an opportunity to provide input to the Board at public hearings on March 12 and March 26, 2014.  The current contract expires on July 1, 2014.   Feedback is also accepted during the entire sunshine period between the March Board meetings by email, mail or phone messages to the Superintendent at chubbard@piedmont.k12.ca.us or (510) 594- 2614.   

Any person wishing to provide information concerning the articles in the contract to be opened may communicate with members of the Board of Education and the Superintendent via email, phone or in writing. Board member email addresses are listed below:

Rick Raushenbush, Board President, rraushenbush@piedmont.k12.ca.us

Andrea Swenson, Board Vice President, aswenson@piedmont.k12.ca.us

Sarah Pearson, Board Member, spearson@piedmont.k12.ca.us

Amal Smith, Board Member, amalsmith@piedmont.k12.ca.us

Doug Ireland, Board Member, direland@piedmont.k12.ca.us

Constance Hubbard, Superintendent, chubbard@piedmont.k12.ca.us

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The 2011-14 Collective Bargaining Agreement between the District and the
California School Employees Association (CSEA) expires on June 30, 2014. The expiration of a contract means that all articles are open for discussion. The public was given notice at the October 23, 2013 Board meeting of the negotiations timeline. It included an opportunity to provide feedback to the Board as to which articles/topics to discuss as part of the process. In keeping with the Interest Based Bargaining (IBB) process, at the end of a contract period it is in everyone’s interest to condense the number of articles to open for discussion.

The negotiating teams for the District and CSEA met to discuss interests and to identify those articles to open for consideration and those that will remain closed for discussion. The collective bargaining process requires that the Board provide at least two opportunities for a public hearing to allow the community to comment on the issues to be discussed. The period is called “sunshining” of the topics under consideration for negotiations. The information provided by the public during the sunshine period is used by both parties as part of the process. After the completion
of the sunshine period, negotiations become confidential. Upon mutual agreement during negotiations, articles that were not opened can be opened for discussion.

“The District and CSEA have agreed to leave the following articles closed as part of the discussions for the contract to take effect on July 1, 2014:

(The bargaining parties have agreed to not consider the following contract issues.)  

Article 2 Check Off & Organizational Security
Article 3 Organizational Rights
Article 5 Grievance Procedures
Article 6 Allowances
Article 7 Safety Conditions
Article 10 Transfer or Promotion
Article 11 Leaves
Article 13 Longevity
Article 14 Weekend/Holiday Employment
Article 16 Legal and Other Holidays
Article 20 Employer-Employee Relations Committee
Article 21 Retirement
Article 22 Savings Clause

CSEA and the District have mutually agreed to open the following articles: (The following articles are appropriate for public comment.)

Article I – Recognition
The interest is to update classifications, new job titles, and recent legislation
Article 4 – Evaluation
Review and clarify section on public charges
Article 8 – Employee Rights/Personnel Files
Update process
Article 9 – Layoff and Reemployment
Clarify process and update per legislative changes
Article 12 and 19 – Salaries and Health Benefits
Compensation is a priority for the negotiations team. Discussions will include the salary schedule, health and dental benefits, and updating contract language
Article 15 – Workday/Week/Year
Clarify work year provisions, work calendar, and provisions for staff assigned to multiple sites
Article 17 – Part-Time Employees
Clarify the article as it relates to Noon Duty Supervision
Article 18 – Vacation
The interest is to clarify provisions for earned vacation for all unit members,
including employees working less than full-time
Article 23 – Duration of Contract
Update per new agreement

Memoranda of Understanding
Review for ongoing inclusion
Appendix B – Professional Growth
Review and update
Appendix D – Salary Schedule
Update”

Read the full March 12, 2014 Board meeting agenda here. Go to page 13 for the staff report on teacher contract negotiations.

Saturday, April 5, 2014, 11 a.m. to 3 p.m.

Save the date.

The Piedmont Fire Department (PFD) and the Public Safety Committee invite Piedmont citizens of all ages to attend the PFD Open House and Disaster Preparedness Fair on Saturday, April 5, 2014, from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. at 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont.

The PFD will close Vista Avenue to traffic between Highland and Bonita to make room for two jumpy houses, free hot dogs & chips, and the “Sparky” fire and earthquake education trailer. Children will be able to climb on a fire truck and peek inside an ambulance while adults practice using a fire extinguisher and learn about all the programs and services the Fire Department has to offer.

Firefighters will demonstrate their quick response (down the pole!) when called for an emergency. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) will showcase their exhibit on earthquake hazards, and PG&E will have exhibits on electrical and gas emergencies.

Volunteers with the Public Safety Committee will be on hand to help residents sign up for the Piedmont’s emergency alert system, Code Red, and help neighbors get organized to support one another during and after a major disaster. Volunteers from the Recreation Department will have a booth with information of safety for seniors.

Attendees can learn how to create an emergency preparedness kit for the home, car and/or office and see what supplies the PFD has in our City Emergency locker at Havens Elementary School.

This event will be a fun and interactive way for Piedmonters to get a behind-the-scenes look at our Fire Department and get prepared for the next “big one.”

– Now is your chance to get involved and give back to Piedmont. –

Application Deadline: 03/25/14 at 5 p.m.

On Monday, March 10, 2014, the Piedmont Planning Commission will host a reception at 5 p.m. in the City Hall Courtyard, 120 Vista Avenue, in front of City Hall.  The reception honors Piedmont Design Award winners and their architects, engineers, contractors and neighbors.

The Design Awards Ceremony for projects completed in 2013 begins at  5:45 p.m. in the Council Chambers. This year, six Piedmont homeowners, along with their design and construction professionals will be recognized for the excellence in design of their projects.

Thomas W. Reese III  – 21 Pacific Avenue  – Excellent Garage

Bill and Carla Newell – 211 Lafayette – Excellent Garage remodel and Addition

Burr Nash and Lisa Rasmussen – 304 Pala Avenue – Excellent Seamless Expansion

Scott Cauchois and Karen Notsund – 320 Wildwood Avenue – Excellent Bay Friendly Landscape

John Lambert and Helen Potter – 104 Dracena Avenue – Excellent Minor Addition

Rajeev and Shiela Bhatia – 100 St. James Drive –  Excellent Upper Level Addition

“The Planning Commission selects the award recipients from the list of projects that received a final inspection following the completion of construction each year. The Commission typically acknowledges both large and small projects, and often something specific that was done very well, such as an addition that was so seamlessly designed and constructed, that it cannot be distinguished from the original construction. Consequently, the categories change a little each year, and the number of awards also varies.”  Kate Black, Piedmont City Planner

At 6:00 p.m. the regular Planning Commission Session will begin with a discussion and consideration of the February 24 workshop on the Bike and Pedestrian Plan.

The agenda also includes 10 planning proposals to be considered by the Commission.

Read the entire agenda.

City Council Report March 2014

by Ann Chandler, Piedmont League of Women Voters Council Observer

As we greet a new City Administrator, a new mayor, and a new Council in March 2014, we should take a moment to look back at two years of important work by the previous City Council. In November 2011, Council member John Chiang created a matrix of suggestions made by the City Council Audit Subcommittee (which had looked at the utilities undergrounding project that had gone $2 million over budget), The League of Women Voters Task Force on Governance (originally formed following the same utilities undergrounding fiasco), and the Municipal Tax Review Committee (which had concluded that the municipal services parcel tax was important but that there were many policy improvements the Council should make before asking voters to renew the parcel tax). Altogether, there were over 30 suggestions in these 3 reports, many of them overlapping.

In February 2012, John Chiang was elected mayor and the next month the City Council appointed a Budget Advisory and Financial Planning Committee (5 residents) to look at the city’s annual budget, its 5-year projections, and its funding for long-term capital projects, equipment replacement, and facilities maintenance/replacement. The committee also reviews any new commitments in excess of $250,000 in one fiscal year, comments on the Finance Director’s Mid-Year report to the Council in January, and meets again April through June each year as the budget is being finalized for the fiscal year starting in July. As approved, the committee will end on June 30, 2015 unless extended.

In April 2012, the Council rescinded its 2011 approval of the Blair Park project, which ended the suit against the City brought by Friends of Moraga Canyon. (The litigation which the City brought against two engineering companies involved in the Piedmont Hills Utilities Undergrounding is still pending.)

One of the strongest themes in the Municipal Tax Review Committee’s suggestions, taken up by the Budget Advisory and Financial Planning Committee, was a need to gain control over personnel costs, particularly the cost of fringe benefits. The first step in that direction occurred in June 2012 when the Council approved a new “Tier 2” of miscellaneous employees hired after August 3, 2012. We now have 3 Tiers of miscellaneous employees, and 3 Tiers of safety employees, meaning 6 different retirement and benefit packages. Control of personnel costs is still a large issue.

In July 2012, an Athletics Facilities Preservation Fund was established. It charges sports clubs (but not school teams) for use of city and school sports facilities. The income from this fund alone is not enough to maintain or replace athletic facilities, but creation of the fund was one step toward addressing the subject of athletic facilities preservation.

In December 2012, the City contracted with Janae Novotny, a lawyer specializing in public employee negotiations, to represent the city in all labor negotiations beginning in January, 2013. A year later the city completed four-year contracts with all bargaining groups. There were raises for the first time in four years, but also increased deductions for benefits.

In January 2013, the city started development of a long-term Facilities Maintenance Program identifying needs, cost estimates, and potential funding sources. In June the document received final approval.

It is a 5-year plan looking at what needs to be done in fiscal years 2013-2017 to sewers, sidewalks, streets, buildings, parks, fields, etc. Although flexible, the plan gives a priority to each project within each facility, and a suggested time table. The exception to this is the Aquatics Facility. Although there is a list of things that need to be done, there are no cost estimates, no potential funding sources, and no timetable, leaving one to wonder what is next for the pool.

It was also in January 2013 that the first draft of a Risk Management Policy for Major Capital Projects came before the Council. The League of Women Voters Task Force on Governance was one of the groups that had recommended this, and the Task Force and League board members made comments and written suggestions on several drafts of this policy during 2013. In January 2014, Piedmont adopted a Risk Management Policy for Major Capital Projects.

One of the suggestions of the Budget Advisory and Financial Planning Committee was that the city refinance the PERS Side Fund at a lower interest rate. Piedmont’s charter requires a vote of the people to do that. In the February 4, 2014 municipal election, the electorate gave the City Council overwhelming approval (82.6%) to refinance the Side Fund. Final discretion as to whether and when to do such a refinancing rests with the newly elected City Council.

In many ways it seems that an effort has been made to get Piedmont’s fiscal and legal house in order before proceeding with any large, creative new projects. This work has been started but not completed.

Controlling personnel costs is a long-range project, very much influenced by trends in the rest of the Bay Area and the state. But over the past two years, Mayor Chiang and City Administrator Geof Grote, both of whom left their positions in February, took these important steps to put Piedmont on the right path.

Reprinted from the Piedmont League of Women Voters bulletin,“The Voter”, with permission

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

To allow readers to revisit a subject, the Piedmont Civic Association (PCA) website maintains previously published articles, opinions and comments.

If you have an interest in a particular subject, you can research it by going to SEARCH and typing in the subject.  COMMENTS are published at the end of OPINIONS and ARTICLES.  Readers can return at any time to an article and read submitted comments.

Additionally, if readers have corrections or additional information to contribute, they can submit the information at the end of an article in the comment section or send the information directly to the PCA email site at: www.editors@piedmontcivic.org.

Articles, photos, videos, and opinions can also be sent  to www.editors@piedmontcivic.org.

PARTICIPATION IN THE PIEDMONT CIVIC ASSOCIATION:

The Piedmont Civic Association (PCA) is open to all Piedmonters. There is no charge to become a participant or subscriber.  The newsletter, when published, is automatically sent to all email subscribers.

Not receiving timely updates by email?  Found on the left side of the home page under PCA  is the Click here to receive updates by email  link where readers can subscribe or click the above link.  All subscribers names and email addresses are strictly private and are not disseminated. 

Want to volunteer? The PCA newsletter is produced without any advertisements by volunteers. Anyone who is interested in becoming more involved with the activities of PCA is invited to email their interest to www.editors@piedmontcivic.org.

The Piedmont Unified School District (PUSD) has announced a BOARD WORKSHOP on Friday, February 28, 2014  12:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. in the PUSD Administrative Office Board Room, 760 Magnolia Avenue, Piedmont. A majority of the Governing Board must be present in order to establish a quorum allowing the Board to conduct business. Due to the location of the meeting, broadcasting of the meeting is not expected. The first part of the meeting is open to the public.

BOARD ORIENTATION:

Staff will review Board roles and procedures with newly elected and continuing Board members.

CLOSED SESSION:

At  2:00 p.m. the Board will adjourn to  a closed session.

Conference with District Negotiator Constance Hubbard Regarding 2014-15 Negotiations with the Association of Piedmont Teachers (APT) (Government Code Section 54956.6)

Members of the public may speak to all agenda items including the Closed Session item. 

Below is the PUSD notice regarding procedures:

“Please be advised that any communication sent to the Board of Education is subject to the Freedom of Information Act and can be viewed by the public, unless it is of a confidential issue covered under the Brown Act.

Board Agenda Material (in compliance with Senate Bill 343): The entire Board agenda packet may be accessed on the Piedmont Unified School District web site at: www.piedmont.k12.ca.us Click on “Board of Education” Click on “Agendas and Minutes” Supporting agenda documentation of a non-confidential nature that has been distributed to the Board less than 72 hours before a meeting can be viewed in the Superintendent’s Office at the District Administration Building, 760 Magnolia Avenue, Piedmont, CA between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. and at the District web site:  www.piedmont.k12.ca.us;  click on “Board of Education”; click on “Agendas and Minutes”

Public Comment: Individual speakers are asked to limit their comments for any item on the agenda to not  more than three minutes in order to allow everyone who wishes to speak the opportunity to do so.  Groups are asked to limit comments to a total of ten minutes.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Superintendent’s Office at (510) 594-2614.  Notification by Monday noon preceding the meeting will enable the District to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.  The scheduling of time for agenda issues is approximate.”