|
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.
Woodside Mayor Tom Livermore released a statement Friday that he will recommend the Town Council take “no further action” on a complaint alleging that Nancy Reyering as a member of the town’s Architectural and Site Review Board wrote an email in May 2016 that violated the town’s code of ethics.
He said he will make this recommendation given Ms. Reyering’s decision to resign from the board and the Open Space Committee and not seek reappointment.
In her Feb. 3 resignation letter, she said she had no choice but to resign.
“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 (review board) have been painful to discover,” she said in the letter. “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.”
In a statement on Sunday, Feb. 5, Ms. Reyering said: “Frankly, I remain mystified as to how the Town could launch such as costly investigation when all I did was advocate for the same high standards that the Mayor endorsed in his statement.”
She said she would like to see “a substantive change in policy to ensure that this type of vendetta-driven selective prosecution cannot take place in the future.”
She said the town should clarify and enforce a policy that addresses conflicts when members of the Town Council bring private business before subordinate boards.
The complaint
The ethics complaint filed by former councilman Dave Burow concerned a May 2, 2016, email from Ms. Reyering to two members of the five-member review board and to the town’s planning director. In the email, she gave her views on a home remodeling and construction project that was coming before the board, noting that the architect was Councilman Peter Mason.
“Even a cursory review of the project raises questions as the architect is a member of the Town Council, and as such, is someone in charge of writing our building regulations,” Ms. Reyering wrote in the email. “Therefore, he, and anyone else in a similar position, has a great responsibility to bring in projects that are reflective of the Residential Design Guidelines, the General Plan, and the Municipal Code, and these projects should not ask for exceptions (to allow a larger main residence).”
An investigation and report by an outside attorney hired by the town at a cost of $27,000 recommended that the City Council sustain five of the nine charges in the complaint. Among them: that Ms. Reyering asserted that council members should receive unequal treatment when their firms come before the board representing clients, that she reached a conclusion about the project without hearing testimony, and that she attacked a council member by suggesting that he was using his position to gain special consideration for his client.
According to the town’s ethics code, when an investigation of an ethics complaint is completed, the report “shall be presented to the Town Council at a public meeting of the Council. The Town Council will accept testimony on the matter and determine whether a violation of the Code has occurred.”
The code lays out the council’s options if it determines that a violation has occurred: reprimand, censure or, if the person charged is a member of a commission, board or committee, removal from office.
Mayor Livermore said he intends to make his recommendation of no further action to the council in open session at the council’s meeting on Tuesday, Feb. 14. He said he will also recommend that the town provide more training for all elected and appointed officials on the Brown Act (the state’s open meeting law), conflicts of interest and ethical decision-making.
“On behalf of the town, I sincerely thank Nancy for her nine years of dedicated volunteer service in Woodside,” he said. “She has been a passionate advocate of open space and wildlife friendly fencing.”
—
Chan Zuckerberg Initiative announces $10M donation for Menlo Park, East Palo Alto familiesApril 13, 2026 12:00 pm
Wait, do I have this right? A City Council member was involved in a project coming before the City Council — in other words, he has a conflict of interest? And when a member of the public points this out, she’s the one being accused of ethics violations?
What the heck is going on in Woodside?
Sounds like they just wanted her to go away. Which is the right outcome.
Shame it took this much effort and outcry to effectuate change.
Reyering continues with her innuendo of others violating the town’s volunteer ethics policies, but never manages to say specifically what the others did. She should do exactly what was done to her: file a formal complaint.
Nancy: it’s time to put up or shut up.
Confused: I might have my details wrong, but Ms Reyering’s letter was concerning a project being considered by the ASRB, it the Council. And due to a debilitating medical problem at the time the project was to be considered, Ms Reyering was not going to be able to attend, but wanted to convey her concerns to the Board and Town Staff. And since she wasn’t going to be able to vote on the project, claiming she had reached a ‘premature’ decision is rather silly.
Rick (and “confused”). —
Read the report: http://www.almanacnews.com/news/reports/1485473322.pdf
As you can see, the situation was not at all as you have described it.
What we really need now, to achieve any kind of closure on this mess, is for Nancy to cite specifics in a complaint to the town so that what she claims was the real problem can be investigated. That’s what she should have done in the first place.
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!
ASRB Victim is spot on. The evidence of wrongdoing is beyond the pale. Read the report: http://www.almanacnews.com/news/reports/1485473322.pdf
An independent investigator determined Reyering had committed five violations of Woodside’s ethics code including coming to conclusions before an applicant had the opportunity to present their project and attempting to influence other ASRB members prior to their meeting. Citizens, property owners and applicants are entitled to a fair process where they can present their project, have it judged on the merits, and have open deliberations in public. These due process safeguards were ignored and, according to the report, ignored repeatedly.
Reyering also inappropriately contacted witnesses prior to and during the investigation. Those contacted by her said they felt pressured by her to conform to her story. Nice.
We should be grateful that Mayor Livermore brought this matter to a conclusion. I implore the Town Council to get control of their ASRB.
It’s vaguely sickening to encounter people willing to countenance the possibility of corruption in their local government and look away, to be complicit in allowing conflicts of interest to pass unchecked and uncommented upon because maybe it will be them in need of a special favor some day.
Rules? Concern about even perceptions of corruption? They’re for suckers.
Ugh. The smell.
Funny that “concerned for the environment” blasts Reyering’s anonymous detractors… while remaining anonymous!
Citizens don’t feel comfortable publicly stating their identities because they’re afraid of the ASRB holding grudges and retaliating in the future.
Which we should be, given the ASRB history!
Those of you supporting Reyering:
read the complaints about her. Read the investigative report. She needs to go. She’s victimized her fellow Woodside residents for far too long.
PEOPLE IN CROWD:
I hear she has an extra eye
That always remains awake
I hear that she can shed her skin
As easily as a snake!
I hear some rebel Animals
Are giving her food and shelter!
I hear her soul is so unclean
Pure water can melt her!
FIYERO
What!?
CROWD
Melt her!?
Please – somebody go and melt her!
FIYERO
(spoken) Do you hear that – water will melt her?! People
are so empty-headed, they’ll believe anything!