League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
Alameda County, CA February 2, 2010 Election
	Garrett Keating Answers Questions Candidate for Council Member; City of Piedmont

The questions were prepared by the LWV Piedmont and asked of all candidates for this office.
Read the answers from all candidates (who have responded).

Questions & Answers

1. Discuss the current process of utilities undergrounding project development in Piedmont and how to make it more effective.

Undergrounding of utilities in Piedmont can be undertaken as either a public or private project. Public undergrounding is accomplished with funds from a PG&E surcharge and the city accumulates these funds for years until sufficient funds are available for a small public project. More common is the private undergrounding of neighborhood utilities undertaken when 70% of a proposed district sign a petition to obtain cost estimates and conduct a neighborhood vote. A majority vote of the district binds all the properties in a district to pay the assessment, which can range from $25,000 to $50,000 per household. Historically, these votes have achieved majorities of over 70% but recent districts have fallen below 60%, partly due to rising construction costs. Council needs to develop clearer guidelines for what is an acceptable level of majority support. Also, recent districts were aggregated into larger districts in an effort to reduce construction costs however this may be a factor in the dilution of neighborhood support. Council needs to limit the size of districts to achieve high levels of neighborhood support.

It is established city policy that General Funds not be used to pay for undergrounding. Piedmont does facilitate private undergrounding through the management of project bidding and construction by city staff. In providing this service to the districts, the city should not assume any responsibility for cost over runs, bond payments or legal liability for these private projects. Recent management of the Piedmont Hills Undergrounding District has identified deficiencies in the contracts and oversight of these projects that can expose the city to liability and those deficiencies need to be corrected. Regarding cost over runs, there needs to be a mechanism to prevent the city from having to use public funds to complete a private project. The most efficient way to do this would be to factor an appropriate contingency into the initial cost estimates for the project. As to the city's liability, stronger language releasing the city from liability is needed in its agreements with the private undergrounding districts.

2. What role do you think the citizen commissions should play in the city government decision-making process?

Piedmont thrives on volunteerism, from our city government to our schools and sports. Our standing Commissions provide valuable service to the city both in the expertise that members bring to the commissions as well as public forums for obtaining public input and reaching compromises. I think our Commission must remain advisory as actual decision-making must reside in an elected body such as City Council.

One of my campaign themes is to plan for our city's future and I think citizen commissions play a valuable role here. I would like to see a greater role for special commissions in city government. There is a wealth of talented people in town who could provide expert guidance on many issues facing Piedmont. In addition, these commissions would provide more opportunity for public comment but more importantly, facilitate consensus building among residents. I advocated for such a commission in the development of the Civic Center Master Plan but city staff opposed this idea as too cumbersome. In hindsight, I think a Commission would have provided needed peer review of the consultant's design as well as established a mechanism for taking the Master Plan to the next level of public discourse. The Brown Act requires that meetings of commissions be public but I would support facilitating a role for these commissions with special meeting times and minimal staff oversight. Ultimately, the recommendation of these commissions would be brought to Council for further public scrutiny.

3. The Blair Park Sports Center is a controversial project that is under consideration by the City Council. Please address the decision making process, including public input, regarding Blair Park.

The Blair Park proposal has been brought forward by a group of residents who want to assist the city in developing additional field space, a goal I agree with. As designed, the plan requires extensive infrastructure to accommodate fields at Blair Park, which is the undeveloped piece of city property bordering Moraga Avenue across from Coaches Field. The Blair Park proposal is part of a larger project proposed for Moraga Canyon which includes the installation of artificial turf and field lighting at Coaches Field. The EIR currently being conducted for the Moraga Canyon project will provide valuable information on the impacts of this proposal on traffic on Moraga Avenue and on the neighborhoods around the canyon.

Once the EIR is completed, I support convening a commission to evaluate the multiple options available for meeting the field space needs of the city. In addition to examining the feasibility of these different options, the commission must evaluate the annual operation/maintenance costs of these field options. There are several field options for the city to consider. A city-sponsored commission previously recommended moving the Corporation Yard across to Blair Park and developing more field capacity in its place. Local colleges are soliciting proposals for the development of leased fields on their campuses. Local communities have developed a Joint Powers Agreement to develop the new fields on Route 80 at Gilman Avenue and are seeking new partners. Oakland-based soccer clubs have expressed interest in developing new fields and the potential for new fields in these communities needs to be considered.

Our goal should be to find the most cost-effective field option that meets the needs of our community. I am the parent of three children playing sports and I know first-hand the limited practice time and travel burden our current field capacity places on families. Piedmont provides its residents with great public amenities - top-notch schools, beautiful parks and streets, a community pool - and will support new field capacity if it designed for our beautiful town and is cost-effective. Piedmont's current fiscal condition cannot support building a field at this time so the city should take the time now to review all options and engage the community in this decision.

4. Piedmont faces serious challenges to its budget with reductions in revenues and continual increases in expenses. Discuss possible cost containment and revenue accrual measures that would keep the budget balanced in the years to come.

Unlike most East Bay communities, Piedmont, with its small commercial sector, derives its revenues almost exclusively from property taxes. These revenue sources have been fairly consistent over the past decade, with the property tax revenues rising annually from 5 to 8%. Additionally, the real estate transfer tax collected when a home is sold is a significant source of revenue but it is subject to severe fluctuation. During my 4 years on Council, the highest and lowest annual transfer taxes on record were collected. Property tax revenue growth is expected to slow as housing prices and sales in Piedmont remain flat, while our expenses will increase. We face a fiscal challenge in Piedmont.

The City needs to proactively keep the budget balanced. To address the current decline in revenues, the City Council adopted a trigger mechanism whereby salary increases for public safety staff will not take effect unless annual transfer tax revenue exceeds $1.8M. We should expand this provision and apply it to all city staff pay increases. The City Council also suspended most capital improvements projects (e.g. City Hall basement repair, upgrades to Hampton Field) - this policy should be continued. We must also reconsider the large equipment replacement expenditures that are planned for the next two years. Finally, staffing levels should be adjusted to reflect the City's actual business operating requirements. The growth in staffing over the past four years has been driven by increased home remodel activity, complicated undergrounding projects and Centennial activities + let's consider what Piedmont's needs will be for the next four year and staff appropriately. On January 19, the City Council will consider a mid-year budget report. The report will provide a timely assessment of the city's fiscal position and I expect the City Council to actively consider prudent plans and spending controls necessary to balance our budget.

---

Responses to questions asked of each candidate are reproduced as submitted to the League.  Candidates' statements are presented as submitted. Word limits for answers are 400 words for all 4 questions. Direct references to opponents are not permitted.

Read the answers from all candidates (who have responded).

Candidate Page || Feedback to Candidate || This Contest
SmartVoter Home (Ballot Lookup) || About Smart Voter

---

Created from information supplied by the candidate: January 14, 2010 19:57
Smart Voter <http://www.smartvoter.org/>
Copyright © League of Women Voters of California Education Fund   http://www.lwvc.org
The League of Women Voters neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office or political parties.