Responsiveness | Zoning Responsiveness Throughout my service on the council, my top priority has been listening to and responding to residents' concerns. I hope to continue doing this, and to work to make the council more open to fresh ideas. Recent examples of areas needing improvement have involved the city's citizen advisory boards and commissions. When a valuable commission member sought reappointment a couple years ago, a majority of council members decided not to reappoint her. The reason given was that she had not been sufficiently supportive of council policies. This was wrong. Her differing viewpoints (not all of which I agreed with) had been stated respectfully and had no bearing on her work with the commission, which had been exemplary. Further, her differences ensured that different viewpoints were represented on the city boards. Our boards should represent the diversity of beliefs and people in Golden Valley. The city also needs to do a better job of providing notice to residents and inviting comment. Recently, items have been added to the city council agendas at the last minute without notifying residents most affected by these decisions. We must ensure all our discussion items are public and that the appropriate people are notified. The city has also recently begun waiving second readings of ordinances. Although the city is legally authorized to do this, it should do so in only the most exceptional circumstances. Having two readings of ordinances ensures that residents who may not have weighed in are able to do so. I hope to continue to work to represent and respond to Golden Valley residents, and to ensure that our procedures are transparent and public. Zoning Residents have recently expressed concern with the growing presence of "McMansions" -- large houses that are grossly out of proportion to the houses in the neighborhood. Although the slowed-down housing market has eased the pressure on this issue, I believe that the city must still modify its ordinances to make the zoning code more resident-friendly. Many residents have expressed concern to me that our zoning code can be inconsistent. For example, residents will often want to build reasonable additions to their home, or to add a stall to their garage. These proposals are often supported by their neighbors, who believe it will add to the property value of their neighborhood. Yet too often, they are told by the city that there is no "hardship," and that they cannot proceed with their proposal. Yet when a developer wants to tear down a house in a neighborhood full of one-story ramblers, subdivide the property, and build two large homes, the city will say that its hands are tied and it must approve the proposal. The city should examine its zoning code to find ways to address this issue. I support reasonable limitations on house size that prevent grossly out-of-character houses from appearing in established neighborhoods, but protect the ability of homeowners to be creative with their property.