Jan 25 2021

OPINION: A False Process for Arts Center Lease

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

City Survey: Republican, Democrat, Various Views of Reach Code Ordinance

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

COVID-19: Dr. Rutherford Talk on YouTube

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

OPINIONS: Support for Arts Center Lease

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

Vaccine Update

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/vaccines. There 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

UK Study Documents Post COVID-19 Syndrome

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

Paul Benoit: As Aquatic Center Project Assistant

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.

Jan 16 2021

Reach Codes: Council, TUESDAY, Jan. 19, 2021

From the City of Piedmont – 

I am writing today to inform you that Piedmont City Council will receive an informational update on public engagement efforts related to the proposed amendments –Reach Codes– to the state’s Building Standards Code on TUESDAY, January 19th. This will include a presentation of the results of a random-sample survey conducted in November and December 2020, which evaluated residents’ opinions about the draft Reach Codes.

TUESDAY, JAN. 19, AGENDA AND PARTICIPATION INFORMATION HERE.

Unless otherwise directed by the Council, staff intends to bring forward the second reading of the Reach Codes at the February 1st City Council meeting.

To learn more about the proposed Reach Codes, see the “background” section below, or follow the link in the “more information” section. The goal of these amendments is to reduce building natural gas use in accordance with Climate Action Plan goals and to create opportunities for residents to save energy and money.

The TUESDAY, January 19, 2021 City Council meeting agenda is posted on the City website at www.piedmont.ca.gov. Members of the public are encouraged to participate by submitting comments and attending the Council meeting. Comments regarding the proposed code amendments may be sent to the City Council via email to: citycouncil@piedmont.ca.gov.

To send comments via U.S. Mail, please use the following address: Piedmont City Council c/o City Clerk, 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, CA 94611. The City Council meeting, including this issue, will be televised on KCOM-TV, Channel 27, and the City’s government access TV station.

If you have questions about the proposed ordinances and policy, please contact Planning & Building Director Kevin Jackson by email at kjackson@piedmont.ca.gov. Any correspondence sent to the City will be considered a public record.

Best regards,

Alyssa Dykman

Sustainability Program Manager

Reach Codes Background:

Piedmont’s Climate Action Plan 2.0 calls for the community to reduce its in-territory emissions 80% between 2005 and 2050; much of this reduction must come from reduced natural gas use in buildings – by insulating homes better, and by switching out gas appliances for electric appliances powered by renewable energy.

Over the past year, City staff has been developing proposed local amendments to the California Building Standards Code—Reach Codes—that will help the community make progress towards these goals, while creating opportunities for residents to save energy and money. City staff has done extensive public outreach, including public outreach meetings, public opinion surveys, and the development of a frequently asked question (FAQ) page, to ensure the developed proposals are best tailored to Piedmont’s needs. The resulting recommended amendments are as follows:

  • Newly constructed low-rise residential buildings, including new detached accessory dwelling units (ADUs), must use all electric building appliances.
  • Projects proposing an entire new upper level on a low-rise residential building, or that increase a low-rise residential building’s total roof area by 30% or more, are required to install solar panels on their roof.
  • A renovation project on a low-rise residential building that costs $25,000 or more, will require the applicant to choose one item from a list of energy efficient insulation or heating system electrification improvements to include in the renovation. A renovation project on a low-rise residential building that costs $100,000 or more will require the applicant to choose two items.
  • An application for an electrical panel upgrade must include capacity in the panel to accommodate future electrification of all appliances in the residence.
  • An application for a kitchen or laundry area renovation must include electrical outlets for future appliance installation.
  • At point of listing for sale of a property, a report from a Home Energy Audit or Home Energy Score (homeowner’s choice) must be provided to potential buyers and submitted to the City – unless the residential building was constructed in the past 10 years.

For more information, see:

Jan 13 2021

COVID-19 Vaccine Update

The City has received questions regarding COVID-19 vaccines and their availability. The Alameda County Public Health Department has information about how and when vaccines will be made available, and we encourage you to take a look at their website at https://covid-19.acgov.org/vaccines. There you will find information regarding local and state planning, including the phases of implementation. You may also signup to get notified when it’s your turn for vaccination.

Remember, the Alameda County Public Health Department’s COVID-19 webpage is dedicated to Alameda County specific information regarding the coronavirus. The State of California also has statewide information at https://covid19.ca.gov/. 

City of Piedmont

Editor’s Note: the Alameda County Resident Vaccine Notification Form will provide the County with information and is available at the following site:

https://app.smartsheet.com/b/form/44974350ffd14f288b03b029f2486ba8

Jan 11 2021

OPINION: Arts Center Founder Advocates Lease Changes

The proposed lease for 801 Magnolia – West Wing creates a totally exclusive use of a public building by a private group.

As now President Sue Malick of the Center for the Arts, said to the City Council in March, 2011, “public buildings should be used by the public.”  And such use should never exclude citizens of our Piedmont community.

The proposed new lease contains absolutely no obligations for the Center to share the space with the community or even to spend funds on further capital improvements there.

The original, 2011 lease worked because the original Board of Directors of the Arts Center obligated themselves in that lease with the City to do specified work with private money to make this wasting asset a habitable, useful building and a gathering place for community arts & performances.

Only three of the original Board Members are still serving on the Arts Center Board; the majority of the Board members have a different vision. Since 2018, they have worked to eliminate all community events and to simply operate “an affordable venue rental.”

No-one is saying the Arts Center cannot be in this public building or that they cannot continue to rent it out for talented musical performances enjoyed by all. This is NOT about art; it is about control of a public asset—in this case a big public building!

The Arts Center proposed lease gives the Board the right to exclude anyone they want. There have been many verbal and written representations of what the Board intends to do; however, the actual proposed lease frees them from any and all inclusive community use or, in fact, any obligations whatsoever.

Once the lease is signed, the Center can do what they have been doing for the past two years, i.e. excluding all community use and just operating a rental venue for a profit.

I have struggled to find any reason for a City to completely outsource the running of a public building to a private group.

During the 8 years I was responsible for running this public building, the City of Piedmont conducted zero oversight of the building or our operations. They never checked the operation of the handicap lift installed for the City’s benefit, whether there was, in fact, acceptable handicap access, the smoke and fire alarms (which do not exist) or even if this 1905 building was safe in the event of an earthquake.  The City has attended to earthquake concerns and retrofitting with all of the other City buildings.

It was just as if the City was so happy someone else was running this “tear-down” for them, and “Hey, it’s art!,” so the City doesn’t need to be responsible. Is this negligence and considerable potential liability, now going to be continued for another 10 years?  Is that what this is really about? 

The City does not seem willing to take responsibility for the proper management and care of one of its largest public buildings, especially one they acquired to tear down. The City Council action in December 2020 revealed their intent to outsource control and liability for 801 Magnolia Avenue—and do it under the guise of supporting “the arts.”

Council members perhaps realized that the citizens would not know about the City’s negligence – people love going to arts programming there and the City Council will look great for supporting the arts! However, there is just no justifiable reason to create such exclusive control of a public building in a small town with few publicly-accessible spaces.

Giving the Arts Center Board 450 hours a year of free rental usage in the building at 801 Magnolia under Recreation Department control would certainly be a huge “support for the arts” by the City.

I sincerely hope the 2021 City Council will take time to investigate and publicly report on the safety and soundness of the 801 Magnolia building for public use, and consider alternative proposals for its use which would be inclusive rather than the currently proposed exclusive use.

The same musical performances would all continue for the town to attend and there would still be a “Piedmont Center For The Arts”.

Nancy Lehrkind, Piedmont Resident and Founder of the Piedmont Center for the Arts

Editors’ Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.
« Previous Page | Next Page »