Ms Reyering brought this upon herself. We had a project before the board that was carefully thought out, planned and budgeted by our family, and then incorporated into drawings by a licensed architect. Nancy had the gall and arrogance to interject her "opinions" and determined that we should change what we have been saving for and dreaming of and CHANGE OUR PLANS BECAUSE SHE SAID SO. She even stated that if we complied with her request and made these changes, our plan would be approved. This is a volunteer serving the public good ??????????

I believe the point of this editorial is that the Town of Woodside should follow its own required process when there are allegations of ethics violations. The people of Woodside, after all, did foot the bill for close to $30,000 and deserve transparency in the form of appropriate closure rather than having the Council summarily close the matter. That is not good governance and this is the key point. Whether Nancy Reyering was serving the public well in her capacity on the ASRB is a completely separate matter. The ASRB is an "advisory committee" and its members are appointed for staggered four-year terms by the Town Council itself. If Nancy Reyering was so unfair, was able to arrogate power to herself and was not serving the public well in this role, the blame should lie with the Town Council as its members appointed her. Further, the Town determines the rules as to how the ASRB operates. Again, the blame lies with the Town Council. If the ASRB rules are so unclear and leave room for one person on a five-member "advisory board" to stop a resident's project without a good reason, the Town needs to amend these rules. Don't blame Ms. Reyering - effective governance requires transparent, clear processes which appear to be lacking in Woodside. And, Town Council, please follow your own rules and procedures when conducting ethics investigations.

I’m sorry to hear that “Afraid of ASRB” is under the impression that I, or the ASRB in general, holds enough power to derail a project as described here. The ASRB is an advisory board only, and its recommendations to the Planning Director are non-binding. The point of ASRB review is to help applicants avoid exactly the type of situation described here. The board offers Conceptual Review so that applicants can find out early in the process whether their project complies with the General Plan and/or a relevant Specific Plan as well as Woodside’s Design Guidelines. Conceptual design can take place even before an architect is paid to draw up initial plans, and meeting with the Planning Director prior to even Conceptual ASRB review is encouraged. Moreover, a project applicant always has the option of moving forward without ASRB approval, by appealing to the Planning Commission.