The SF Chronicle article was very disappointing: one guy with bumper stickers does not a movement. But the article failed to look at the diverse racial and cultural makeup of Piedmont's City Council and school board. The media seem focused on historical racism, while the main reason people move to Piedmont is for the superior schools, not to mention a more responsive and functional city government. Real estate agents will tell you that the price difference between two essentially identical houses in the two towns works out to be about the cost of sending two children to private school.
"Cancel Piedmont" is a great example of social-media-era far left thought - it's often a mean-spirited effort to drag rich people down, instead of compassionately lifting poor people up
I know a few people in Montclair and, I think, Piedmont Pines, that spurred a movement in the late '90s to secede from Oakland. The movement didnt last as I think the city gave them more attention and resources (police).
However, if that movement was revived today, it would gather a lot of steam to the point of possibly succeeding (or seceding). This has nothing to do with demographics, history or economics but a situation where residents deserve a more competent government that is pragmatic, not ideological, and of course, a police force that is responsive.
Residents want a reasonable return for their taxes and Oakland fails this, miserably.
This is an utterly useless topic to spend any time on. Piedmont has been a separate city since 1907, when Oakland was a little city on the other side of the lake. Under California law, both Piedmont and Oakland would have to mutually agree for Piedmont to to disincorporate and join into Oakland.
Why would that ever happen?
Since it realistically can't happen, what is the motive of the few who are trying to publicize this idea?
Thanks Sean for another provoking article. I agree that we should not divide up the city council districts into individual cities-that would be a disaster. Instead let us build Oakland into a great city, with businesses growing, a beautiful clean city and a place for our children to grow. I don't think this is the time to bring Piedmont into Oakland. Let us work together to rebuild our Oakland. Looking forward to your next installment. Mindy Pechenuk, for Oakland Mayor 2026
Mr Reinhart's article is deep and quite interesting, academically speaking. His analytical exploration buttressed by a whole "library" of data opens up deep but a reasonably inapplicable idea. To be fair, he labeled it as a thought experiment. Of course, that's my take from personal experience. For context, I do not belong to a non-Hispanic, non-Asian, non-xxx white ethnic class. Neither am I AA or mixed. My experience confirmed over and over that, for "living life" people divide themselves in economic class first, then education, then quickly drops down to vicinity to work, scenery etc. If the community exhibits too wide a spectrum, Area-engineering bubbles up as a potential solution. Arguably, it works in Malibu or Hampton. Difference in personal interest, therefore choice, shortens down as one gets up in economic/academic ladder.
Piedmont is essentially a homeowner’s association pretending to be a city, “gated” by surveillance cameras (there are at least eight at the corner of St. James annd Park). Take a look at Piedmont’s city budget and you’ll see that the only financial reciprocation with Oakland is for library services. But the frequent response of OPD and OFD at Piedmont’s behest is essential to the safety of that ‘independent’ town’s 10,000 residents. Piedmont uses Oakland parks and recreation facilities, traverses our city streets, and donates money to our elections — but they charge non-resident rates when we want to use their facilities (Oakland does not) and most importantly, they don’t share their significant real estate transfer tax revenue with us.
Real estate transfer taxes (over and above the county rate) are calculated at a different rate in the two cities. Piedmont charges a flat 1.3% of sales price; Oakland’s fees run between 1% (for properties under $300k) and 2.5% (for properties over $5 million). A $1.5 million home purchase in Piedmont generates $19,500 in transfer tax revenue; a home of the same value in Oakland generates $22,500. A $2 million dollar home generates $26,000 for Piedmont, $35,000 for Oakland. A $5 million property: $65,000 transfer tax in Piedmont; $250,000 in Oakland. For comparison, Atherton and Hillsborough charge much less; only San Francisco seems to charge more.
And how much better are Piedmont schools? Not much, they’re just whiter. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Universities of California admitted 52 of every 100 Piedmont High graduates; 53 of every 100 Skyline High grads; and 50 of every 100 Oakland Tech grads. (Fun fact: Piedmont stopped competing with Oakland Athletic League teams in the 70s — we aren’t considered worthy neighbors or peers).
Yes, there is a lot of ingrained and deserved animosity between Oakland and Piedmont residents. But annexing “small town” Piedmont is not a matter for Piedmont residents, it is a matter for the Attorney General of the State of California, who can best evaluate whether Piedmont exists purely to maintain its segregated school system, its opaque redline practices, and its hoarded taxes — and whether any of that is legal under state law.
I lived in Oakland for 12 years and would have much preferred to stay there. Three simple reasons to move to Piedmont:
If you call the police, they show up.
Trash on the streets is not a "feature."
The school district is not in a permanent state of disarray.
Oaklanders deserve this level of service too.
The SF Chronicle article was very disappointing: one guy with bumper stickers does not a movement. But the article failed to look at the diverse racial and cultural makeup of Piedmont's City Council and school board. The media seem focused on historical racism, while the main reason people move to Piedmont is for the superior schools, not to mention a more responsive and functional city government. Real estate agents will tell you that the price difference between two essentially identical houses in the two towns works out to be about the cost of sending two children to private school.
"Cancel Piedmont" is a great example of social-media-era far left thought - it's often a mean-spirited effort to drag rich people down, instead of compassionately lifting poor people up
I know a few people in Montclair and, I think, Piedmont Pines, that spurred a movement in the late '90s to secede from Oakland. The movement didnt last as I think the city gave them more attention and resources (police).
However, if that movement was revived today, it would gather a lot of steam to the point of possibly succeeding (or seceding). This has nothing to do with demographics, history or economics but a situation where residents deserve a more competent government that is pragmatic, not ideological, and of course, a police force that is responsive.
Residents want a reasonable return for their taxes and Oakland fails this, miserably.
Oakland collects about $2440 in tax revenue per resident, Piedmont - $2690, about 10% more. Oakland has 40x more residents.
Cities look strikingly different in terms of roads condition and street cleanliness. What has to be broken is Oakland’s revenue spending pattern.
Maybe we should just charge a toll for Piedmont to use Oakland streets!!
This is an utterly useless topic to spend any time on. Piedmont has been a separate city since 1907, when Oakland was a little city on the other side of the lake. Under California law, both Piedmont and Oakland would have to mutually agree for Piedmont to to disincorporate and join into Oakland.
Why would that ever happen?
Since it realistically can't happen, what is the motive of the few who are trying to publicize this idea?
Thanks Sean for another provoking article. I agree that we should not divide up the city council districts into individual cities-that would be a disaster. Instead let us build Oakland into a great city, with businesses growing, a beautiful clean city and a place for our children to grow. I don't think this is the time to bring Piedmont into Oakland. Let us work together to rebuild our Oakland. Looking forward to your next installment. Mindy Pechenuk, for Oakland Mayor 2026
Agree, lets make Oakland thrive to the point that Piedmont would want to annex to Oakland, voluntarily.
Mr Reinhart's article is deep and quite interesting, academically speaking. His analytical exploration buttressed by a whole "library" of data opens up deep but a reasonably inapplicable idea. To be fair, he labeled it as a thought experiment. Of course, that's my take from personal experience. For context, I do not belong to a non-Hispanic, non-Asian, non-xxx white ethnic class. Neither am I AA or mixed. My experience confirmed over and over that, for "living life" people divide themselves in economic class first, then education, then quickly drops down to vicinity to work, scenery etc. If the community exhibits too wide a spectrum, Area-engineering bubbles up as a potential solution. Arguably, it works in Malibu or Hampton. Difference in personal interest, therefore choice, shortens down as one gets up in economic/academic ladder.
Piedmont is essentially a homeowner’s association pretending to be a city, “gated” by surveillance cameras (there are at least eight at the corner of St. James annd Park). Take a look at Piedmont’s city budget and you’ll see that the only financial reciprocation with Oakland is for library services. But the frequent response of OPD and OFD at Piedmont’s behest is essential to the safety of that ‘independent’ town’s 10,000 residents. Piedmont uses Oakland parks and recreation facilities, traverses our city streets, and donates money to our elections — but they charge non-resident rates when we want to use their facilities (Oakland does not) and most importantly, they don’t share their significant real estate transfer tax revenue with us.
Real estate transfer taxes (over and above the county rate) are calculated at a different rate in the two cities. Piedmont charges a flat 1.3% of sales price; Oakland’s fees run between 1% (for properties under $300k) and 2.5% (for properties over $5 million). A $1.5 million home purchase in Piedmont generates $19,500 in transfer tax revenue; a home of the same value in Oakland generates $22,500. A $2 million dollar home generates $26,000 for Piedmont, $35,000 for Oakland. A $5 million property: $65,000 transfer tax in Piedmont; $250,000 in Oakland. For comparison, Atherton and Hillsborough charge much less; only San Francisco seems to charge more.
And how much better are Piedmont schools? Not much, they’re just whiter. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Universities of California admitted 52 of every 100 Piedmont High graduates; 53 of every 100 Skyline High grads; and 50 of every 100 Oakland Tech grads. (Fun fact: Piedmont stopped competing with Oakland Athletic League teams in the 70s — we aren’t considered worthy neighbors or peers).
Yes, there is a lot of ingrained and deserved animosity between Oakland and Piedmont residents. But annexing “small town” Piedmont is not a matter for Piedmont residents, it is a matter for the Attorney General of the State of California, who can best evaluate whether Piedmont exists purely to maintain its segregated school system, its opaque redline practices, and its hoarded taxes — and whether any of that is legal under state law.
Sent from my iPad
First move city hall into the Taco Bell on Grand and Telegraph like everybody has been asking for, for decades. All other issues follow that.
Can you please give the context for this as I am not following?
Live mas.
That 2.8% … how much money would that translate to be? Just wondering.