During the District 2 Candidate Forum, I was asked whether I would support returning to the old neighborhood program with elected leaders. At the time, I had limited information about why the program was updated and hadn't given the issue much thought, so I answered honestly that I didn't know.

If elected, I promise to be transparent and follow up with constituents on important issues. In that spirit, I'd like to update my answer:

I would not support returning to elected neighborhood leaders for several reasons:

The current program is working. Participation has increased, and we're seeing more diverse voices in neighborhood leadership roles.

Logistics matter. Running 30+ neighborhood elections fairly and ethically is extraordinarily difficult to administer, leading to situations where certain voices were elevated and others diminished.

Diverse leadership strengthens neighborhoods. Having various perspectives and leadership styles benefits the entire program.

Elected positions create confusion. Having neighborhood leaders who are elected but lack official city authority creates confusion about roles and accountability.

Better engagement alternatives exist. I'd rather invest in efforts that welcome more people into city involvement rather than processes that might discourage participation through unnecessary competition.

The goal should be making it easier for residents to engage with their city, not harder. The current system appears to be achieving that goal. However, there's still more the city can do to engage residents who are unable to make evening meetings or follow city developments closely.