May 19 2022

EDITORIAL: Council Needs Greater Transparency, Accountability, Access, Inclusion for Budget Session

Unlike other City meetings when broadcasted videos are produced, home/remote viewers will not be able to observe the City Council and Staff as important policy and program issues are considered at the Saturday Budget Session. Interested persons must be physically present to observe the meeting.

Taxes, fees, policies, programs, and priorities involving the City budget are to be presented by staff and considered by the Council during the important Council Budget Session Saturday, May 21.

On Saturday May 21, 2022, Council Budget Session

9:00 am Emergency Operations Center in the Police Department on Highland Avenue

With transparency, equity, and inclusion touted as goals of the Piedmont City Council, accessibility to certain public meetings, including this Budget Session, continue to be difficult or impossible for many individuals. If you can not physically attend the Budget meeting, you will not be able to observe the proceedings remotely via Zoom, computers, or cable television.

During the height of the COVID pandemic, residents had the “luxury”of being able to remotely watch the Council make decisions without being physically present at a meeting. Some of the “Zoom” meetings, although broadcast during the time of the meeting, were not preserved as a cost cutting measure. Presentations and considerations were not preserved reducing transparency, accessibility, and accountability.

The 2022-23 Annual Piedmont Budget Session will once more follow the long -held Piedmont Council tradition and not be broadcast for remote viewing. The Saturday Council Budget Session will be moved from City Hall where cameras are installed and videos are regularly made of the proceedings. The Budget meeting will take place in the Police Department Emergency Operations Center (EOC) on Highland Avenue where broadcasting is not done leaving home/remote viewers unable to observe the proceedings.

Ironically, during the month of May, in a prior list of public meetings, there were 12 public City meetings. See link below. These 12 different City meetings, Regular Council, Commission, and Committee meetings, are stated to be held either “Virtually or Hybrid”, consequently using City broadcast facilities. Broadcasting meetings allows interested persons to watch and observe the Council away from the meetings. The Council Budget Session is the only full Council meeting on the list to require observers physical presence.

Under consideration and discussion at the Budget Session are:

How should the City Council spend City resources?
How much should residents be taxed or charged for sewers, municipal services, fees, use of City facilities, priorities, programs and monetary considerations, such as broadcasting City meetings and preserving public records?

Concerns have been expressed in the past to the City Council regarding broadcasting meetings to encourage greater public access to governance, but the Council’s tradition of not broadcasting meetings remains, thus missing an opportunity to increase access, accountability, transparency, equity, and inclusion.

2022-05 Notice of Regular Meetings – Revised

> City of Piedmont 2022-2023 Budget

Agenda > City Council Agenda 2022-05-21 (Special)

1. Overview of the Proposed FY 2022-23 Budget
2. Review of Departmental Budgets for FY 2022-23
a. Police
b. Public Works
c. Planning & Building
d. Recreation
e. Fire
f. Administration & KCOM
g. Non-Departmental and Other Funds Budgets

City notice with links below:

BUDGET WORK SESSION THIS SATURDAY

The Piedmont City Council will consider the proposed annual budget for fiscal year 2022-23 at three separate meetings. A Saturday work session will be held on May 21, 2022 at 9:00 am in the EOC at 403 Highland Avenue. Members of the public are invited to participate in this meeting.

Public hearings regarding the proposed budget and the levy of the Municipal Services Tax and the Sewer Tax will be held during regularly scheduled City Council meetings on June 6 and June 20, 2022. The public is invited to attend these meetings and speak to the City Council about spending priorities for the city in the coming year. Click to visit the Annual Budgets page, where all sections of the proposed budget as well as approved budgets from previous years are available for download.

For questions on contents of the budget, please contact Finance Director Michael Szczech via email at mszczech@piedmont.ca.gov or by phone at (510) 420-3045. If you wish to write to the Council regarding the budget, please send an e-mail to the City Council at citycouncil@piedmont.ca.gov or send a letter via U.S. Mail to Piedmont City Council, c/o City Clerk’s Office, 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, 94611.

Apr 19 2022

OPINION: Inadequate Public Input on 801 Magnolia Avenue Use

In response to public criticism of the lack of transparency into the renewal of the use agreement for the 801 Magnolia Avenue building, several Councilmembers and Piedmont Center for the Arts (PCA*) Board members pushed back, claiming that three meetings over a 15-month period allowed for adequate public input. That sounds transparent but some history and context is needed to see how poorly the process of the past 15 months met community needs.

· The City purchased the 801 Magnolia Avenue property in 2003 at a cost of $735,000. A the time, the City was developing the Civic Center Master Plan, a redevelopment of the Civic Center that called for replacing the 801 building with a modern building and civic plaza. Undergrounding cost overruns and the 2008 economic downturn forestalled proceeding with the master plan at that time.

· In March, 2011, the City received a proposal from the Piedmont Center for the Arts to lease the building. The City conducted a public hearing, “Consideration of the Concept of use of City Property at 801 Magnolia Avenue by the Piedmont Center for the Arts” at which PCA presented its Articles of Incorporation which state “The specific purpose of this corporation is to promote artistic endeavors for youth within the Piedmont community by providing exhibit and performance space and a website to connect the Arts Center with exhibitors and renters.” At the hearing, commenters recommended other uses for the building such as a Maker Center, teen or senior center and public library.

· In April, 2011 PCA signed a 10-year, no-rent lease with the City which stipulated that PCA could rent space to only non-profit sub-tenants. Over the ensuing 10 years, the City modified the Zone B use restrictions so that a for-profit business of a PCA Board member could be operated in the 801 Magnolia Building.

· In November 2021, the City came forward with a 10-year lease renewal with PCA. No public hearings on the use of the 801 Building were held at City Council or city commissions nor did Council discuss the 801 lease renewal in closed session prior to the November meeting.

Failure to engage the public and City Council in discussions of use of the 801 Building prior to the November meeting soured the public process from the start. According to the City Charter, “An ordinance may be introduced by any Councilmember at any regular or special meeting of the City Council.”

At the November 2021 meeting, the previous Mayor publicly stated he was asked by PCA to open negotiations on a new lease and presumably used this ordinance authority to bring forward the new lease (at his last meeting as mayor). But in so doing, he ignored the input of his Council colleagues and the community at large on the use of 801 Magnolia. Other factors contributing to public dissatisfaction with the process were flaws in the lease and the obvious bias to Piedmont Center for the Arts it contained. Read the analysis by Rick Raushenbush to see just how badly the first draft of the agreement represented the City’s interest.

https://www.piedmontcivic.org/2020/11/29/opinion-four-major-flaws-in-proposed-art-center-lease/

Since November 2021, overwhelming public opposition to the first draft of the lease and the process by which it was brought forward resulted in the City taking more control of the building and relying on a facility use agreement that was approved by Council in March, 2022

(http://piedmont.hosted.civiclive.com/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=18384268).

But as with the first draft, no public hearings or closed sessions of City Council on the use of 801 were held in the ensuing 15 months and again, the majority of public comment has been critical of the agreement and the lack of transparency into its development. So three meetings over a 15-month period was not a “robust public process” but a series of reactionary meetings with the public trying to claw back access to this public building.

What’s really confounding is why the City didn’t conduct an open public process on the use of 801 Magnolia? PCA would likely have retained preeminent use of the building with better community access being achieved at the same time. Instead, a lease highly favorable to PCA was always the only topic for comment, sending a strong signal that it was a fait accompli. It should be noted that it was in the City’s interest, as well, to have a limited discussion of 801’s use. Office space is at a premium in City Hall and no doubt staff will make use of the new space in 801 for employees.

There are three spaces in the 801 building – the office space, classroom and performance hall – and a more equitable agreement would be to have assigned the classroom to the community as a senior center. The Recreation Department is doing a better job of providing senior programming, but what seniors really need more is a gathering space and the 801 classroom would be perfect for that.

Why all this matters is that 6 years from now the facility use agreement will expire and the community will again go through this process for the 801 building. Several current Councilmembers could be involved again so hopefully a better public process will be followed. This whole saga reminded me of the scene from Oliver Twist when Oliver approaches the master and asks “Please sir, I want some more”. Hopefully it won’t be so hard to ask next time.

Garrett Keating, Former Member of the Piedmont City Council

Editors’ Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.

*Since 1986, PCA has been the logo for the Piedmont Civic Association. In 2011, when the Piedmont Center for the Arts was formed and began using PCA as an identifying symbol, the Piedmont Civic Association informed the Arts Center of the potential misunderstanding for two Piedmont organizations to refer to themselves as PCA. The two PCA organizations are separate and unrelated entities serving Piedmont. The Piedmont Civic Association has never had a lease or agreement with the City of Piedmont for use of 801 Magnolia Avenue.

Mar 3 2022

Piedmont Commission and Committee Vacancies 2022

Now is the time !

by March 21, 2022

to volunteer for City of Piedmont Committees and Commissions –

Budget Advisory and Financial Planning Committee, Civil Service Commission, Park Commission, Planning Commission, Public Safety Committee, Recreation Commission, Mosquito Abatement Representative

Information is linked below:

Residents wishing to apply must take one of the following two actions on or before the posted deadline of Monday, March 21, 2022 at 5:00 p.m. Postmarks will not be accepted for paper applications.

1) Apply online OR

2) Complete and return the paper application form A link to the electronic application and a downloadable application for paper submission are available on the city’s website at https://piedmont.ca.gov or from the office of the City Clerk, Piedmont City Hall, 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, or by telephone at (510) 420-3040.

All applicants must be available for an interview with the City Council the evening of Monday, March 28, 2022, at which time appointments may be made.

Read links below:

PCA Commission Application 2022

PCA Commission Description of Duties 2022-02-28

PCA2022-02-28 Volunteers for Commissions-Committees

PCA Notice of Appointive Vacancies 2022

Apr 6 2020

COVID-19 Impacts to Piedmont

April 6, 2020 report to the Piedmont City Council on the COVID-19 impacts to the city.

Report on the Impacts of the COVID 19 Emergency on the City of Piedmont

Mar 15 2020

All City Facilities Closed and Recreation Programs Suspended Through March 29th

CITY CLOSURES

The City of Piedmont is joining State and County efforts to mitigate the spread of COVID-19, following recommendations to limit exposure and slow transmission of the virus by closing all City facilities to the public and suspending all City programs through March 29th. These measures to severely limit possibilities for transmission are to ensure the safety and wellbeing of our community during the rapidly changing COVID-19 health emergency.

City services remain operational, but facilities will be closed to the public for non-essential functions.

City facilities closed to the public include:

• Piedmont City Hall
• Piedmont Police Department
• Piedmont Fire Department
• Piedmont Recreation Department
• Veterans Memorial Building
• Schoolmates Sites
• Kennelly Skatepark
• Piedmont Community Hall
• Lower Level Community Hall
• Piedmont Community Pool
• Piedmont Center for the Arts
• 801 Magnolia East Wing
• Piedmont Playschool at Hampton Park
• Dress Best for Less Marking Room (Carriage House)

All Recreation Programs are postponed/cancelled through March 29 including:

• Minimates
• Schoolmates
• All Preschool Classes and Programs
• All After-School Enrichment Classes and Programming
• Aquatics Programming including all swim lessons, water aerobics, facility rentals, and lap swimming
• Adult Drop-in Sports, including Basketball, Tennis and Pickleball
• Adult and Senior programming, including Yoga and Walking on Wednesdays
• Bunny Blast
• Egg Dive

The goal of these measures is to continue to provide as many services as possible while minimizing in-person contact. City Hall will provide access to the public for essential City meetings, and by appointment only for essential services.

For service at City Hall, please phone or email one of the contacts listed below.

• Public Works: 510-420-3050 or cnakahara@piedmont.ca.gov
• Planning & Building: 510-420-3050 or kjackson@piedmont.ca.gov
• City Clerk’s Office: 510-420-3040 or largue@piedmont.ca.gov

To schedule an appointment with a Planning & Building staff member, please contact Mark Enea at 510-420-3051 or menea@piedmont.ca.gov

For questions or assistance at City facilities, please contact the following:
• Recreation Department: 510-420-3070 or prd@piedmont.ca.gov
• Veterans Hall: John Wilk 510-420-3089 or jwilk@piedmont.ca.gov
• Community Hall: John Wilk 510-420-3089 or jwilk@piedmont.ca.gov
• 801 Magnolia East Wing: John Wilk 510-420-3089 or jwilk@piedmont.ca.gov
• Piedmont Community Pool: Jackson Stearns 510-420-3075 or jstearns@piedmont.ca.gov or Zoe Clavere at zclavere@piedmont.ca.gov

You can also visit the Services and Departments page of our website for contact information for all departments.

Feb 20 2020

OPINION: Time to Renew the Parcel Tax in Piedmont

Newcomers may not know it, but when Prop 13 wiped out the local tax base years ago, Piedmont and other cities voted in parcel taxes, based on lot size, to make up the difference. The parcel tax raises $2.2M, about 10% of the annual budget. Technically it’s called the Municipal Services Special Tax and the ballot measure stipulates that it shall be used for these services:

police and fire protection,
street maintenance,
building regulations,
library services,
recreation,
parks maintenance,
planning and public works

So, don’t tune out the March Primary election waiting for anybody in November.

Vote for Measure T.

Garrett Keating, Former Piedmont City Council Member

Jan 30 2020

Piedmont Parcel Tax Basis Questioned As Free Ride for Single Family Parcels with More than One Household

State laws ending single-family zoning have a great impact on Piedmont’s parcel tax system and method of supporting city services.

Piedmont, one of California’s most heavily taxed cities, proposes and taxes three housing units on single-family parcels as though there was just one household – with no commensurate parcel tax to cover the public service needs (parks, recreation, library services, police, fire) of the additional families.

On March 3, 2020, Piedmonters have a renewal of the City parcel tax on their ballot, Measure T, found at the end of Piedmont ballots. As written, Measure T does not distinguish between a one family dwelling unit on a single-family parcel and a parcel that has two or three dwelling units on a single-family parcel.

New State laws impacting “Single-family” residential parcels are intended by the State of California to result in many new dwelling units in former single-family zoned housing by adding one or two units – up to three residential units – on a single parcel. The March 3rd parcel tax, Measure T, does not reflect this new reality as parcels will be taxed on the basis of one residence on a parcel in the “Single-family” category.

Piedmont is financially impacted by the new housing requirements made at the state level increasing densification. Piedmont’s system of supporting itself has for decades been based on taxing single-family properties in Piedmont containing one single-family residence/household on a parcel.

Many California cities have increased their sales taxes to gain needed revenue. Piedmont, zoned primarily for “single-family” residences, has relatively little commercial property and thus very little opportunity for increased sales tax revenue. Voter approved parcel taxes in Piedmont, property transfer taxes, and increased property valuations have allowed Piedmont to prosper.

Those parcels with the newly allowable 3 housing units on their property will pay no more for the densification of their properties despite windfall income without additional taxes for the service needs of additional families.

READ the Measure T Tax Tables for Piedmont Basic Municipal Service>HERE.

Increasing the number of households in Piedmont will require additional services – street safety, parking, fire protection, public schools, city administration, public open spaces, police services, etc. – without commensurate increases in revenue.

Push for more affordable housing in California.

In 2019, the population outflow from the State of California was more than 200,000 citizens relocating to other states. The figure reported by the US Census Bureau is 203,414. While California is expected to lose a Congressional Representative after 2020, Texas may gain three Congress persons due to dramatic population increase.

“In the 1970’s citizen activists [in CA] created urban growth boundaries and land trusts to preserve open space and delicate coastal habitats.” Following Prop 13, “Cash hungry cities opted to zone for commercial uses, which would generate sales taxes, instead of affordable housing.” (New York Times 12/1/19)

With the press of political demands for more housing, the State of California has taken a dramatic step to remove restrictions on Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). When ADUs are added to single-family zoned parcels, many requirements have been eliminated: setbacks, floor area ratios, view protections, parking, owner occupancy, public participation, notification, and other factors.

School taxes.

In November 2019, Piedmonters voted overwhelmingly by over 82% to tax individual parcels. Every parcel has the same tax basis of approximately $2,700. An additional tax based on square footage of living space is also added to individual parcel taxes. The taxation needs for the school parcel tax were based on expected student populations.

READ the approved 2019 Piedmont School Parcel Tax Measure HERE.

Unlike San Mateo, the Piedmont City Council accepted the new State laws and has shown no effort to enforce the City Charter which gives Piedmont voters the right to have a say in what happens to Piedmont’s zoning. Further, the Piedmont City Council took no action or policy position on the various housing initiatives put forth in Sacramento that take away local laws even though the legislation was contrary to Piedmont’s City Charter.

Piedmont’s Charter was written to guarantee Piedmont voters the right to control many aspects of the City including elections, finances, budgets, police and fire departments, public schools, public borrowing, zoning, etc.

Charter cities in California have lost significant local authority over land use and public participation in decisions.

The recent court decision in a San Mateo County Court to uphold and acknowledge San Mateo’s City Charter regarding a housing project could eventually impact Piedmont. The San Mateo Court decision does indicate a judicial act protecting Charter City rights.

The Piedmont City Council per the City Charter has the responsibility of enforcing the City Charter and putting before Piedmont voters recommended changes to zoning – single-family, multi-family, commercial, and public zones, yet nothing has been placed before the voters. Other City Charter changes and amendments were on a recent ballot and approved by Piedmont voters.

Piedmonters for over a century held control over land use decisions, police and fire services, public schools, parks, etc. through the City Charter.

Affordable housing in Piedmont

In Piedmont, the abandoned PG&E property on Linda Avenue next to the Oakland Avenue Bridge, was noted in Piedmont’s General Plan, as an optimal location for affordable housing – close to schools, transportation, stores and parks. Disregarding Piedmont’s General Plan and Piedmont’s City Charter, the City Council permitted a number of market-rate townhouses to be built on the former PG&E site without including any affordable housing and illegally rezoning the property from public usage to the multi-family zone without a citizen vote on the rezoning, as required by Piedmont’s City Charter.

Dec 2 2019

Council Reverts Back to Original City Parcel Tax Language

Council relents and removes the language change in the proposed Special Municipal Parcel Tax Ordinance to be voted on at the March 3, 2020, Primary Election.

On December 2, 2019, Piedmont’s contract City Attorney, Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, continued to maintain her opinion that the proposed language change was not substantive. Her opinion was disagreed with by many in Piedmont.

Vice Mayor Teddy King noted her concern over changing the language if the result was the same, for it added voter confusion. She stated many residents had stated the change from INCLUDING to MAY INCLUDE was substantive.

Speakers Hedi Gerken, Kathleen Quenneville, and Liane Campodonico agreed with King, that the language should not be changed, while voicing it would be a substantive change allowing services to be dropped by the Council. The Council had also received opposition to the language change by emails, letters, and comments.

Council member Betsy Andersen, an attorney, stated she had proposed the change to clarify language, but withdrew her proposal upon believing flexible options would be available, and there would be no guarantee of funding for the named services.

Questions were raised as to whether or not the 9 listed service items would be funded, if funds were available. The answer appeared unclear. Some had assumed that the parcel tax funds were delineated as a funding source for specific services; however, it has been Council practice during their May budget sessions to pool funds rather than specifically assigning the parcel taxes to specific services. During the budget sessions, the Council makes a determination on whether or not the parcel tax needs to be levied to support city services.

Services named in the ordinance are:

police and fire protection,

street maintenance,

building regulations,

library services,

recreation,

parks maintenance,

planning and public works

and similar services.

The Special Election for the parcel tax will held on March 3, 2020. Mayor Bob McBain and Council member Jennifer Cavenaugh will write the supporting arguments in the “Voter Information Guide.”

Opposition arguments for the “Voter Information Guide” are due to the City Clerk on December 13, 2019, with rebuttals due on December 20, 2019. For specific information contact the City Clerk, John Tulloch at 510/420-3040.

Click > Notice of Election – 2020 Special Municipal – Measure for official ballot language and election protocols.

Dec 2 2019

OPINION: Parcel Tax Should Be Limited to Essential Services

Dec. 2, 2019

Piedmont City Council

c/o John Tulloch

re: Dec 2 Parcel Tax Agenda Item

Dear Mayor McBain and Council,

The Parcel Tax is commonly understood and accepted by Piedmont taxpayers to be for essential City services as follows: police, fire, street maintenance, building regulations, library, recreation, parks maintenance, planning, and public works. Your proposed language change allows the parcel tax to be used for any purpose and not limited to the traditional nine essential City services. I object to this and ask that the original tax language passed by voters in 2016 be continued.

The reality is that virtually all Piedmont residents will not read the full text of the tax and then compare it to the 75 word ballot question for discrepancies. Residents mostly rely on the ballot question and Proponent material. If the Council elects to retain the altered wording that allows the parcel tax to be not limited to essential City Services, the ballot question must clearly state that the parcel tax is no longer limited to essential City services as is commonly understood.

Sincerely,

Rick Schiller

Piedmont Resident and Property Owner

Dec 1 2019

OPINION: Council Proposed Changes to City Parcel Tax Allow Removal of City Services

“Agenda Insight” to be presented before December 2, 2019 City Council meeting:

Item 3, the first item on tonight’s regular agenda, is the second reading of Ordinance 746 N.S. to renew the Municipal Services special Tax for 4 years effective July 1, 2021, and to place this before voters in a special election on March 3,2020, consolidated with the California Presidential Primary on that date….

Although most aspects of this renewal reflect no change, there is a word change that appears to have an impact. The wording of the present parcel tax says, “If in any fiscal year the City Council shall determine that municipal services INCLUDING but not limited to…” and then it names 9 services which must be included in general fund expenditures, with support from the parcel tax if other city income isn’t sufficient to cover them.

At the first reading of this ordinance, last meeting, that language was changed to, “municipal services which MAY INCLUDE but are not limited to..” and then lists the same 9 services. The staff report calls this a non-substantive change, but many people read it as a very substantive change because it gives Council the flexibility to remove any service from this list. The 9 services are police, fire, street maintenance, building regulations, library, recreation, parks maintenance, planning, and public works.

If the Council wants to put this on the March ballot, they must pass the second reading tonight because they are up against a deadline for submitting the final ballot language to the Registrar of Voters…..

Item 4 is consideration of a resolution approving procedural details for the Special Election of March 3… Of particular interest to voters, this item also sets the 75 word ballot question to read, “Shall Ordinance 746 N.S. which maintains essential police, fire, and paramedic services, prevents the reduction in maintenance of City parks, greenspaces and other public areas, and prevents the loss of recreational and other public services, by renewing the City of Piedmont’s expiring parcel tax for four years… be adopted?”

….Interestingly enough, this ballot language is almost the same language we voted on in 2016, so all 9 services were not mentioned last time around either. However, in both 2016 and 2020, it is the language of the resolution we are voting on, not the 75-word summary, and the language of the resolution has changed.

Ann Chandler, Piedmont Resident

Current Topics

Local Events