|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Editor’s note: The Woodside Town Council agreed to a settlement with Nancy Reyering, paying $35,000 to cover her legal fees, on Nov. 14, 2017.
Here is the text of the Feb. 3, 2017, letter of resignation by Nancy Reyering, a member of the town’s Architectural and Site Review Board and Open Space Committee.
—
Thomas H. Livermore, Mayor
Town of Woodside
Independence Hall
2955 Woodside Road
Woodside, CA 94061
Dear Mayor Livermore:
I am writing to formally notify the Town of Woodside that I am declining to reapply for my positions on both the Open Space Committee and the ASRB.
I feel that I have no choice but to discontinue my service to the Town. The extended backroom discussions by many of the Town’s civic leaders that were uncovered through the recent “ethics investigation” related to my work on the ASRB have been painful to discover. This process also confirmed for me that petty politics and private profit are prioritized over retaining a professional and respectful environment for Town volunteers in Woodside.
My service has included countless volunteer hours in which I spent my time and effort to protect and improve quality of life in Woodside, and never to enrich myself or improve my own position in the community.
My 9-year tenure as a volunteer in Woodside included serving as a member of Woodside’s General Plan Task Force from 2008-2012; co-founding Woodside’s Backyard Habitat Award Program with Virginia Dare; being awarded the Environmental Champion Award in 2012; and working closely with council, staff, and Stanford to facilitate a special Backyard Habitat Award to Stanford University for its fencing retrofit along Sand Hill Road.
I will continue my service in the non-profit sector as a Director at the Committee for Green Foothills and on the Steering Committee for the San Mateo County Tree Ordinance Project. These organizations maintain a professional atmosphere for volunteers in which concerns are mediated in a respectful manner and personal attacks are avoided. I hope that the Town of Woodside will reflect upon the manner in which this “investigation” of my work and character were conducted and take steps to avoid such baseless attacks against Town volunteers in the future.
Most Popular
Parent group calls for Sequoia high school district superintendent to be firedSeptember 10, 2026 5:09 pm
Just read Livermore’s “thanks”. Saying she’s a champion of open space and
wildlife habitat is like “She’s tall!” True, but her service to Woodside
included being a clear public voice supporting the General Plan and
Residential Design Guidelines.
All online anonymous detractors of Reyering are foes of the town’s VERY REASON
FOR BEING!
No, her voice, including inflicting her OPINION on her fellow citizens rather than doing her job and assuring plans complied with town zoning. When the words “I think it would be better if…” came out of her mouth she was inflicting her OPINION on a fellow citizen. That is why she is so disliked and is having this problem. And it is why she wasn’t DOING HER JOB!
Wow. So being liked is a key measurement of doing one’s job.
That’s interesting because my understanding of the ASRB is as a gatekeeper with a mission to protect rural character and natural beauty, as seen from the road as well as in the mind’s eyes of one’s neighbors. You’re going to alienate people when you’re a gatekeeper. Is likability a criterion on the application to join the ASRB? For what kinds of jobs is likability important anyway? Whatever they are, they probably don’t require much character, something that is a requirement if you’re job is standing up to untethered ambitions fueled by wealth and a Libertarian culture. No limits, right Menlo Voter?
You guys don’t like rules except when they favor your interests. Not a lot of character required for your team. Smiling is important, and slapping one another’s backs. And secretly applauding the election of Donald Trump.
I’ve read every single post in all of the threads about this issue and I’ve yet to read one that faults Reyering for not “being liked.” Clearly you didn’t read the report because this is about ETHICS.
After meeting with architects and spending tens, even hundreds of thousands of dollars on our homes, subjecting your project to the ASRB can a harrowing and intimidating experience. Woodside’s ASRB review isn’t voluntary, a game or some exercise in community friendliness. It’s a permitting requirement imposed on us by our government. That is reasonable but it must come with fair treatment and a transparent process.
ASRB members are prohibited – PROHIBITED – from drawing conclusions until the project has been fully described. That’s important because some projects incorporate specific family needs or unique, problematic lots. ASRB members are instructed to hear from the staff and applicants, including providing them opportunities to answer questions, BEFORE they make a decision. That didn’t happen in this case. As I said, members are instructed on these rules when they take office. Reyering has a history of complaints and did not seem to be able to change problematic behavior.
Additionally, each project should be assessed on its merits. You don’t favor, penalize or hold the property owner to different standards based on their architect’s background. Even the appearance of bias is absolutely unacceptable.
Our citizens deserve a fair and transparent process. This is a small step in the right direction.
What POGO said.
Joe:
slapping backs and supporting Trump? Seriously?
It’s not about being liked, it’s about that Reyering hasn’t been following the rules. She’s been inflicting her OPINION on her fellow citizens. Get it now?