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 DiveThe 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.govTo 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.govYou can also visit the Services and Departments page of our website for contact information for all departments.
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
|
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Dec. 2, 2019
Piedmont City Councilc/o John Tullochre: Dec 2 Parcel Tax Agenda ItemDear 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 SchillerPiedmont Resident and Property Owner
“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
The Piedmont City Council in haste is expected at their, Monday, Dec. 2, 2019, 7:30 p.m. meeting to approve the second and final reading of Ord. 746N.S. which will place a renewal of the Municipal Services Special Parcel Tax, effective July 1, 2021, before the voters at a Special Municipal Election consolidated with the upcoming Presidential Primary Election on March 3, 2020.
On November 18, 2019, the City Council approved a first reading of Ord. 746N.S. At that meeting, the Council, according to the staff report, made what is called a “non-substantive” amendment to the language of Section 20B.2.on the first page of the ordinance. Vice Mayor Teddy King objected to changing the existing language of the parcel tax proposal which states how the funds are to be spent. However, the rest of the Council and the City Attorney indicated the new language is not significantly different.
Apparently, the councilmembers and the City Attorney did not realize the language change no longer stipulates required uses of the parcel tax funds. For, the language changes from “including, but not limited to” to “which MAY include, but are not limited to” were viewed by councilmembers as “essentially the same.”
Voter concern has consequently arisen regarding the proposed new parcel tax language pointing to the change as considerable and substantive in stating: “which may include
ing,”rather than the current word “including.”The newly proposed change to the parcel tax language would no longer require the Council to use the parcel tax money for the longstanding list of services and permits the Council to eliminate parcel tax funding for:
- police and fire protection,
- street maintenance,
- building regulations,
- library services,
- recreation,
- parks maintenance,
- planning and public works
- and similar services.
Some have stated the language change gives the Council a “blank check” by allowing the deletion of previously supported parcel tax funding for the named services.
The amended parcel tax language is indicated below in context. Deleted text is in strike through and new text is in italics.
“If in any fiscal year commencing on or after July 1, 2021, the City Council shall determine that municipal services, which may include
ing, but are not limited to, police and fire protection, street maintenance, building regulations, library services, recreation, parks maintenance, planning and public works and similar services, are necessary for the public good, welfare and safety, and that the cost of making available such services will exceed the amount of funds generated through other revenue and income of the City for such services, then it may levy a special tax for such fiscal year on each parcel of real property within the City in a manner provided herein.”
READ the agenda HERE.
READ the three staff reports* on the tax proposal below:
https://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=16243381
https://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=16243385
https://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=16243387
*Editors Note: The newly revised City of Piedmont website has become more difficult for Piedmonters to access information on specific agenda issues. Example, the subjects of the staff report no longer appear in the links. Only a file number is provided.
The Piedmont City Council continues the practice of working on the City Budget without benefit of recordings or broadcast. The public is welcome to come to the meeting and speak to the various issues related to the budget: capital expenditures, revenues, taxation, employee benefits, new projects, roadways, sidewalks, trees, recreation, public safety, Schoolmates, planning, sewers, or any other issue related to City budgetary matters.
Special City Council Budget Meeting
Saturday, May 13, 2017
9:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.
East Wing, 801 Magnolia Avenue (across from Piedmont High School)
Agenda:
1. Overview of the Proposed FY 17-18 Budget by the City Administrator
2. Presentation by the CIP Review Committee of Project Proposals for FY 17-18
3. Review of Departmental Budgets for FY 17-18
a. Police
b. Public Works
c. Recreation
d. Fire
e. Administration
f. Other Funds Budgets
City announcement:
The Piedmont City Council will consider the proposed annual budget for fiscal year 2017-2018 at three separate meetings. A Saturday work session will be held in the East Wing of 801 Magnolia Avenue on May 13, 2017 beginning at 9:30 a.m.
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 5 and June 19, 2017.
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 2017-2018 Proposed Budget page, where all sections of the budget are available for download.
For questions on contents of the budget, please contact Interim Finance Director Jim O’Leary via email at joleary@ci.piedmont.ca.us or by phone at 420-3045 with any questions.
If you wish to write to the Council regarding the budget, please send an e-mail to the City Council at citycouncil@ci.piedmont.ca.us or send a letter via U.S. Mail to Piedmont City Council, c/o City Clerk’s Office, 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, 94611.
Piedmont’s City Council will hold an informal discussion with City staff, Saturday, May 16 at 9 a.m. on the City Administrator’s proposed 2015-16 City Budget. The Budget Session will again be held in the Emergency Operation Center in the Police Department on Highland Avenue. The location provides a “round table” casual atmosphere leading to budget adoption, following two City Council public hearings on June 1 and June 15, 2015.
The Saturday workshop will not be recorded or broadcast for offsite viewing. Those interested in hearing and learning first hand discussions and presentations on where City money might be spent, should attend the meeting. There will be opportunities for the public to speak and ask questions. In the past, coffee and donuts have been made available to attendees.
Content on the PCA website by Piedmont Civic Association is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
Some icons are Copyright © Yusuke Kamiyamane
