A number of citizens appeared before the Piedmont City Council on April 18 to endorse the idea of having an arts center in Piedmont.  The Council was swept up in the new proposal and eager to turn over city property for $1 per year to a new group,  The Piedmont Center for the Arts, which is likely to acquire nonprofit status before the end of 2011.

On April 23 all homes in Piedmont received a letter from the group announcing itself and requesting that tax-deductible contributions be sent to its Center at 801 Magnolia Avenue.  A mailing processor was paid to manage the mailing on its permit and standard bulk rate mailing rates were paid.  Once certified as a nonprofit corporation, the arts group can acquire nonprofit mailing permit, saving money for equipment, art shows, children programs, possibly book reviews, community meetings, etc.

What will the program for the arts center be?  It would be nice to invite all Piedmont citizens to contribute ideas for arts activities and other uses for the publicly owned property. To inform citizens about the building, a public walk through might be included on some of the days City Staff provides access to the new group.  Plans for the “newer” portion of the building (the Sunday school rooms not part of the Arts lease) could be opened for community discussion as part of this process.

Is the enthusiasm for an arts center causing the City to skip over normal steps?  Since Zone B section 17.6.1 requires use of the building only by governmental or nonprofit entities  compatible with their surroundings, why not wait until a certified nonprofit organization has had the benefit of wide citizen input and put together a comprehensive proposal of use, fees, and time allocations to school and recreation programs known to benefit the community as a whole?  The arts center would be even more welcome after the community has been consulted and feels ownership of the idea.  Shall we slow down in order to have a better planned arts center and other uses for all portions of the City-owned property at 801 Magnolia Ave?

The terms of the lease require careful thought. Improvements will be accomplished through community donations and/or community fees, while the lease requires the City to pay the group for costs not amortized at termination.  Water, sewer, garbage, landscape and sidewalk maintenance will be provided by the City.

A long-term lease was required by the Swim Club in order to operate on a public/private basis, but it was a known program that had been developed and operated for almost 50 years.  In the case of the Arts Center, a long-term lease is proposed without knowing the particulars. What Arts Administration expertise and credentials does the group have to run it in a professional manner, a past prerequisite for City owned public benefit property?  While everyone anticipates the facility will enhance our community in many ways, it seems prudent to ensure the Council retains ultimate control over fees and use.

If the arts program is as successful as all hope and anticipate, it could generate significant revenues. These revenues would appropriately be shared with the community by keeping fees as low as possible for residents and providing free use to certain community groups, as the pool did.

In speaking before the Piedmont City Council on April 18, one Art Center Board member and founder confirmed:  “We want this to be used. Our pricing structure for using it is geared toward being always used.” Although this represents a strong commitment to maximizing use, the lease is missing any provisions to keep fees as low as possible, revenue-share with the City, or ensure ongoing reporting and oversight by the City Council of this newest public-private partnership in our town.

Undergrounding problems, the costs of the pool takeover, and the recent League of Women Task Force Report have made citizens more aware and attentive to the potential costs and risks presented from insufficient information and incomplete processes.  The City needs lease provisions which enable appropriate oversight of use, revenue-sharing, fees, and maintenance, while relying on this dedicated volunteer group of arts supporters to manage the facility at great cost savings to the community.

Detail:  Zone B (government zone) requirements per City Code: 17.6.1: Intent.  Zone B is established to regulate and control development of public facilities which are compatible with the character of existing and proposed surrounding uses. (Ord. No. 488 N.S., 10/87)  City Building, Veterans’ Building, or other public agency building, and accessory structures located on the same lot of parcel, for use by governmental entities or other nonprofit entities as allowed by the City.”  (Emphasis added.)

The Council is scheduled at the May 2 Council meeting to take final action on the ordinance approving a lease.

On Monday, April 18th, the Piedmont City Council reaffirmed its desire to make a contribution of $350,471 to the City of Oakland general fund for the year 2009-10 and the City Administrator issued a check payable to the City of Oakland the next day.  The monies will not increase the Oakland Library budget.  At the request of the City Council, the City Administrator Geoff Grote reviewed the library services issue.  > Click to read more…

A letter urging the Council to return the PRFO’s proposal to the Planning Commission after approval

On Feb. 24, 2011,  the Piedmont Planning Commission found the Blair Park proposal did not meet basic design or aesthetic elements normally required in Piedmont.  On Wednesday, March 2, the Piedmont Post published the first salvo of what was to become the Piedmont Recreational Facilities Organization (PRFO) campaign to nullify the Planning Commission.  > Click to read more…

The Chronicle Editorial of March 30, 2011 ignores a number of inconvenient truths when discussing Piedmont payments for Oakland Library services:

1.         Piedmont payments do not benefit the Oakland libraries because Oakland funnels the money into its General Fund.

No Piedmont payments to the City of Oakland go into the Oakland Library budget according to the Oakland Associate Library Director Gerry Garzon.  The Library budget will not increase if a payment is made; the Library budget will not decrease if a payment is not made.  Piedmont dollars are unable to impact on the Oakland library budget.  (Oakland Library Budget Details) > Click to read more…

A letter submitted by a Piedmont resident asks for a detailed analysis of costs, as well as parking/traffic:

I’m very disappointed that City Council’s resolution on March 21st did not specifically ask that a detailed cost analysis be provided immediately for the Blair Park project along with a condition that all funds must be ‘banked’ before  any demolition/construction begins in Blair Park.  I am also concerned that the direction given for further traffic study > Click to read more…

A letter from a resident on the history of Moraga road accidents and traffic safety decisions

Having lived in Piedmont for 57 years, I am a first hand witness to the social, political and environmental facts that exist in our little Mayberry-USA.  The latest good deed is a scheme that involves the brilliant discovery of unknown land at Blair Park on Moraga Avenue.

Since the 1950’s, endless land developers have proposed free “gift” projects for this too-narrow strip of green open park space. The original Rockridge Payless Drug Store wanted to build there in the 60’s.  There have been many, many well intentioned proposals for condos, homes, townhouses, senior housing, strip mall stores, etc. at the Blair Park site. > Click to read more…

Correspondence from Timothy Rood, Piedmont Swim Club President, to the Piedmont Post

Re:  No record of pool decision or consultant hire

Dear Sir,

Your March 23 article, “Recreation Commission tests water on pool transition,” includes two incorrect statements. First, there is no record of a decision by the City Council on February 7, or any other date, to not renew the city’s lease with the Piedmont Swim Club. According to Article 2.07(c) of the City Charter, Council decisions require a majority vote, and no vote on the pool transition was publicly noticed or taken. Second, your article goes on to state that “Municipal Aquatics Consultant” Jeff Eorio “was hired by the city to facilitate the transition.” In fact, there is no public record of any aquatics consultant contract, and the Council did not allocate any funding for aquatics in the current fiscal year budget. According to Piedmont’s fundamental law, the Charter, “the City” can only make decisions or hire consultants by majority vote of the City Council. Our Council, City Administrator and City Attorney are surely aware of these Charter provisions, but routinely choose to ignore them.

Sincerely,

Timothy Rood
Piedmont resident

(This letter expresses the personal opinions of the author. All statements made are the opinion of the writer and not necessarily those of the Piedmont Civic Association.)

An opponent of the Blair Park development provides the following 10 minute video clip of excerpts from the Planning Commission hearing of February 24 on Blair Park/Moraga Canyon sports facilities

Video Clip: Planning Commission Hearing Excerpts

Editors’ Note: The following is the email sent with the above video clip.

As you may remember, my neighbors and I have been involved in a long battle with the city over the conversion of Blair Park to a soccer facility. I am aware that some Piedmonters and Oaklanders view the claims of the neighbors as biased. I am, therefore, providing this link to a You Tube video of the Planning Commission reaction registered at last week’s meeting. The Commission unanimously rejected the plan but the City Council appears poised to move ahead with the project at its March 21st meeting.I hope you might take about 10 minutes to watch the video and perhaps pass the link along to any friends who might be interested in the controversy.

Ralph Catalano

Editors Note: The complete video of the February 24, 2011 Planning Commission meeting may be viewed on the City website.

(This letter expresses the personal opinions of the author. All statements made are the opinion of the writer and not necessarily those of the Piedmont Civic Association.)

A Letter Identifying Issues Common to Undergrounding and Blair Park Construction Administration

Dear Council Members,

City staff and the Council have failed to exercise proper due diligence in allowing a private group to control the planning process for the use of public land. The project proponents have sold the citizens of Piedmont a bill of goods, claiming their project is a “gift” and repeatedly claiming it will be built and maintained “at no cost to taxpayers,” yet public records clearly show the City has already spent hundreds of thousands toward the environmental review, > Click to read more…

An Open Letter Submitted by the Piedmont Education Foundation and the Associated Parents Clubs of Piedmont

With spring upon us here in Piedmont, chilly gray images of picketing demonstrators in front of the Wisconsin capitol look particularly bleak.  Public unions, governments and taxpayers are warring over budget shortfalls and engaged in pitched battles.  Not so here.  While Piedmont’s education funding gap was not unique in this economic crisis, the capacity of our stakeholders to work together to find solutions is quite otherwise. > Click to read more…