.
Feedback

New Mayor John Chiang: Focus on City Finances

Chiang says he wants to create a new citizens' advisory committee within 45 days that will focus on Piedmont's municipal budget and long-term financial stability

Minutes after the Piedmont City Council selected John Chiang as the city's new mayor Tuesday night, Chiang outlined his priorities – with an emphasis on managing the city's finances in order to maintain current levels of of municipal services.

Chiang said he supports the Municipal Tax Review Committee's recommendation to include a five-year financial projection in the city's budgeting process.

In line with that, he hopes to form a new citizens' advisory committee within 45 days to focus on financial planning.

Chiang also emphasized the need to "live within our means" as a city. A large part of that, he said, is controlling the rising costs of city employee benefits. That should include employee contributions to cover increases in pension plan costs, he said.

Among Chiang's other major points:

  • The need to renew the municipal services tax.
  • Meeting EPA mandates for sanitary sewer repair and replacement.
  • Support for public/private partnerships. He cited the Japanese Tea Garden and the Piedmont Center for the Arts as examples.
  • Ensuring sufficient reserves for capital improvement projects.

Chiang also praised the work of groups that support a vibrant, diverse Piedmont community, citing the Appreciating Diversity Committee and PAAC (the Piedmont Asian American Club).

More Voices

Other city council members also spoke at Tuesday's combined council meeting and swearing-in ceremony at Piedmont Community Hall.

Margaret Fujioka, re-elected to the council and chosen as the city's new vice mayor, said the city "must bring expenditures in line with revenue" and also emphasized the need to renovate Piedmont's sanitary sewer system.

Other priorities, she said, include"being smarter and tougher on crime" and "encouraging greater civility in public discourse."

Bob McBain, newly elected to the council, thanked his supporters and praised a Piedmont Post series of articles on community cohesiveness.

In a letter read aloud at the meeting, council member Garrett Keating, on vacation this week, congratulated the winners of the Feb. 7 municipal election. He also praised Tim Rood, who lost a council seat to McBain by 26 votes, for his civic participation and said running for office should be recognized as a form of volunteerism.

Lynn Dee February 22, 2012 at 01:16 pm
Congratulations to the new Council. Good wishes to Mr. Chiang; I am happy he is taking finances seriously. The PIEDMONT POST deserves a slap for it's smear campaign during the election. It's ironic Mr. McBain praises the POST for "community cohesiveness" when it fact Mr Cathrall does the exact opposite- he divides the town and fuels the fires week after week. Its a new day in Piedmont- Mr Cathrall should no longer be part of it.
Dixie Jordan (Editor) February 22, 2012 at 03:31 pm
In fairness, the phrase "community cohesiveness" was mine, not Bob McBain's, although I think it's a reasonable thumbnail description of the gist of his remarks about the Piedmont Post series.
Tim Rood February 22, 2012 at 04:05 pm
I am glad to hear that Mayor Chiang has put a timetable on the creation of the new financial planning committee, and I hope that the new Council will favorably consider my application for it. I also thank Council Member Keating for his kind remarks.
karen barbieri February 22, 2012 at 04:26 pm
You could not be more wrong about the Post. The articles were researched, clear and very much needed to provide some balance and relief from the nonsense, half-truths and general misinformation that was being disseminated by blogs, the Piedmonter and a pile of mailers. I understand why you didn't like the information provided by the Post, but that's because it didn't support your chosen candidate, not because it wasn't true. The Post has been a wonderful asset to this community and I have no doubt that it will continue to be so.
karen barbieri February 22, 2012 at 05:02 pm
And congrats to Bob, Margaret and John. The meeting was great, speeches were positive and well received. Keep up the good work!
Lynn Dee February 22, 2012 at 06:19 pm
How can the blogs, mailers and The Piedmonter all be wrong and only the Post correct? The POST is vile. It could be a community asset if it were truthful, but sadly, it represents the sole political opinion of Mr Cathrall.
karen barbieri February 22, 2012 at 07:48 pm
Honestly that's too easy. The blogs have no fact checking, they are just a collection of random people's opinions. Anybody can say anything they want on a blog, there's certainly (and obviously) nobody checking for accuracy. The mailers are campaign pieces, designed to be biased, and the Piedmonter, sadly, has been little more than a vehicle for ads for some time. For heaven's sake if you don't like the Post, don't subscribe to it and certainly don't read it. If you don't pay for it, it won't arrive on your doorstep every week, unlike the Piedmonter.
David Cohen February 22, 2012 at 11:11 pm
As an avid follower of Piedmont affairs, particularly the Moraga Canyon situation, I would call out appreciation to the Piedmont Patch for its role in providing a venue for public discourse. The most important role of the press is to inform and to allow expression of a diversity of views. It’s not really the responsibility of the press to provide community cohesiveness, although that can happen, happily, while fulfilling its main obligation. And it’s certainly not the role of the press to provide a one-eye-closed and storybook version of cohesiveness, per the practice of the Piedmont Post. As for Ms. Fujioka’s promotion of civil discourse, I would suggest moving forward from the apple pie of her campaign and on to more difficult real issues, unless she wants to call out particular examples of recent discourse that are bothering her.
Rick Schiller February 23, 2012 at 01:13 am
I well understand the praise heaped upon the Post by those who are in agreement and benefit from its viewpoint. However, concerning factual based issues the Post "fact checking" is either very poor or missing. During the Measure A debate, there were outright misinformation and lies concerning opponents. The Post agenda continued with its recent Feb. 15 article on sewers, stating "among other demands the (EPA) mandate demands that Piedmont purchase its own vactor truck." Mutually exclusive is the statement by EPA Regional Director Alexis Strauss to me on Oct 11, 2011: "Contrary to what was reported in the local paper (the Post) a few months ago, we did not specifically require the City to purchase a vactor truck." The Post still can't get it right.
The Post reporter does not understand the primary use of a vactor truck, which is to control sewer system overflows, not "for capturing video footage of underground pipes" as stated in the Post. Camera equipment can be added to a vactor, but this is not the desirable solution and Piedmont is already in the process of purchasing a separate camera equipped vehicle. The Post could have chosen to provide useful comparison information before the $400k vactor is purchased. For example, Oakland has five vactors which equates to 1 for each 78,000 population. Piedmont will have one vactor for our 10,667 population. We had three sewer system overflows in 2010, down from 13 in 2005 (source: Chester Nakahara “Counterpoints”).
Lynn Dee February 23, 2012 at 10:53 am
Karen, you have been led down the garden path if you think the POST does fact checking! The POST is the mouth piece of Mr Cathrall and his friends. They publish their points of views only and dismiss everyone else. Look at their Blair Park coverage- the POST never interviewed or represented the people opposed. They did not print opposition letters, except for a few.The POST castigated people who opposed as "uncivil". Two big demonstrations were held to protest the project and the POST never mentioned them as The Piedmonter and East Bay Express did. The Piedmont Civic Association website certainly checks facts. And the Piedmont Patch has done a terrific job of providing a forum for discussion.
I have not subscribed to the POST for years. I read it because I want to be media savy and know what is being said. Some people, like yourself, love the POST and think it is a quaint little town paper, but as a former mayor's wife, you know it is actually a manipulative force.
Lynn Dee February 23, 2012 at 11:04 am
One last thing: In yesterday's POST, on pg 2 is a letter from Bevan Vinton and Manny Myers. The say " Multiple viewpoints need to exist...so does respect for those viewpoints...It is hard to miss the bias in the POST...some people made election choices in opposition to the perceived bias in the POST...the closeness of one race suggests there are multiple viewpoints in town..it is unfortunate the POST did not reflect (that). We would appreciate more objective coverage in the future."
Don't hold your breath Mr Vinton/Meyers!! The fact that the POST printed this letter is Mr Cathrall's little mea culpa after the damage was done. It's his trade mark trick. We can only expect more unless we speak up.
karen barbieri February 23, 2012 at 03:21 pm
Please, enough with the condescension. Those who disagree with your opinion regarding the Post have not been led down the garden path nor are in need of any further education or enlightenment on this issue. They (and I) just disagree with you. The fact that you think a publication that disagrees with your views should not be a part of the community, as you said in your first post, is, however, an interesting commentary about your understanding of the media in general.
Rick Schiller February 24, 2012 at 12:36 am
I responded to assertions that the Post does careful fact checking; it does not and I see my direct information about the Post's continuing misinformation campaign has not been responded to. Perhaps that is the underlying problem with the Post, the polarization and divisiveness it has created in our community by its very evident editorial stance posing as factual reporting and news. I thought Bevan and Manny's letter thoughtful and relevant coming from two people I know to be reasonable, decent people who are well familiar with the Post.
Regardless, let's all step back, welcome John Chiang as Mayor whom I believe to be decent and honorable.
Susan Kahn February 24, 2012 at 05:59 pm
The Post is anything BUT representative of all points of view in Piedmont. Hence, it is not a NEWSpaper; it's a printed blog. Real NEWSpapers report ALL views on issues causing such dissent in their community. Instead, the Post subtly and repeatedly implies that those who disagree are responsible for all of Piedmont's ills.
(continue to next comment)
Susan Kahn February 24, 2012 at 06:00 pm
Case in point: Paisley Strellis' series "Reflections on a Community: a weekly series examining the change in public discourse within the community from the perspective of long-time residents and active volunteers." Interviewees invariably say that in the good old days, there was mutual respect even when people disagreed; now, a small minority is causing all this dissent. Blair Park is inevitably mentioned: What a shame it is that children are being deprived because of these selfish NIMBYs!, or There has been enough/TOO MUCH input on this, The process has been MORE THAN fair (hmm. Then why are there lawsuits SPECIFICALLY ABOUT that process?Because the plaintiffs like throwing money away? I don't think so). And always support for public-private partnerships(private interests taking over public assets), comments re lack of civil discourse(old trick:accuse others of what YOU are doing), and the Us/Them dichotomy.
I won't bother to describe the Jeff Wieler "Taliban" column from last year. Wieler's and Cathrall's apologies simply...WEREN'T. Disgusting. Karen: the foregoing is "an interesting commentary about YOUR (sic) understanding of the media in general."
garrett Keating February 26, 2012 at 11:58 am
Karen - Your characterization of the blogs and the Piedmonter couldn't be further from the truth. PCA and Patch clearly distinguish their reporting from opinion pieces and have editorials policies on their websites. I think you should cite specific examples of failure to abide by those policies rather than making broadside criticsim. The Piedmonter has always provided balanced reporting of civic matters and again, you should provide examples where you think they have erred. As for research and fact checking, the blogs and the Piedmonter have always been accurate in their reporting. Specific examples to the contrary would help this discussion. In deed, PCA's analysis of Measure A and the sewer tax was one of the most researched and comprehensive pieces of journalism I have seen in Piedmont and provided voters more information about the issue than any other news source. I have to say the least amount of fact checking I have seen in Piedmont was the Post article about pool negotiations. Not interviewing members of the club board to get their side of the story - that violates the basic principle of balance we expect from the press. Fortunately the local blogs provided the opportunity for all the facts to be presented.
karen barbieri February 26, 2012 at 04:32 pm
Garrett,
I understand that you are making a distinction between opinion/letters and news reporting, but I was responding to an accusation that the Post was engaged in a "smear" campaign. That is a different matter and I don't think the accusation is true. But since you asked for an example, how's this: The Piedmonter and blogs, as you have indicated, carried lots of information about Measure A. Much of this information came from two individuals who publicly accused the entire city council, which included you, the staff and city attorney of lying and of violating the law. I believe that was misinformation. Finally, I do have a problem with people who think newspapers shouldn't exist if they don't agree with the news or views they see in that paper. If you don't like the paper, start your own, that's what Gray did.
garrett Keating February 27, 2012 at 03:47 am
Karen - I see your point but countering that accusation by accusing the blogs/piedmonter of disseminating "nonsense, half-truths and general misinformation" strikes me as the same conduct for which you are criticizing Lynn. Nevertheless, I think you are confusing your disagreement with two individuals with the conduct of the blogs/Piedmonter, which in my opinion have been fair and balanced. Whether the specific accusations of the two regarding council and staff is "misinformation" is irrelevent to what information is reported by the blogs/Piedmonter, both of which fact check their information and give ready access to readers to challenge their publication. For example, what does someone's opinion about council have to do with the very specific details of Measure A published on PCA website? Finally, I don't see anyone in this exchange claiming that the Post should not exist - they just have issues with its fact-checking and editorial policies.
Susan Kahn February 27, 2012 at 07:05 am
Karen, you say to Garrett that you were "responding to an accusation that the Post was engaged in a smear campaign," but you went WAY beyond that when YOU smeared other local media with your accusation about "the nonsense, half-truths and general misinformation that was being disseminated by blogs, the Piedmonter and a pile of mailers." That simply is not factual; YOU just didn't like it when they don't agree with you.
Re "I do have a problem with people who think newspapers shouldn't exist if they don't agree with the news or views they see in that paper," and "The fact that you think a publication that disagrees with your views should not be a part of the community, as you said in your first post...," - Lynn never said either of those; YOU are smearing HER by twisting the facts and putting words in her mouth. She said that Mr. Cathrall should no longer be a part of dividing the town and fueling the fires (of divisiveness) week after week (with his editorial bias in his paper). I can't gauge whether or not you can tell the difference between how you perceive these things and what others have actually said, written, or done.
karen barbieri February 27, 2012 at 01:28 pm
Garrett, I think that when an individual states that the council is lying and, along with city staff and the city attorney has committed crimes, and that they are creating a "slush fund" from sewer monies and that person's statements are carried as the lead editorial in the Piedmonter,and in multiple comments and letters to the blogs, then that does disseminate misinformation and frankly, nonsense. I don't know how the supporters of the blogs and Piedmonter "know" that they carefully check facts, in articles, letters or lead opinions, any more than they "know" that the Post doesn't. It gets down to a difference of opinion about candidates and issues. From my perspective, the Post didn't engage in any smear, and the blogs and Piedmonter sure didn't carry information that I agreed with. The difference between me and previous commenters is that I wouldn't presume to tell any of the news/opinion providers that they shouldn't be part of the community because I don't agree with the information that they carry, whether in articles or opinions..
garrett Keating February 28, 2012 at 12:46 am
Karen, from my perspective, the point of this exchange has been to understand your accusation that the blogs/Piedmonter disseminate "misinformation and half-truths". It seems you base that accusation on the statements made by two individuals about City Council, staff and the Sewer Fund which I don't think is relevent to your accusation about the blogs and press. If you don't agree with the information on the blogs/Piedmonter, either reported or posted as opinion, then argue the facts, not the messenger. And as to that, Rick Schiller was been quite accurate in his discovery of irregularities in the use of sewer funds and details of the EPA Stipulated Order. Likewise, PCA posted an incredible amount of information and analysis about the current sewer fund and Measure A that I found to be very informative. Suggesting these efforts were "matters of opinion" or candidate-driven understates the hard work these bloggers put in.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Piedmont Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something