Stronger Ethical Guidelines
Why Pueblo City Council Needs Stronger Ethical Guidelines and Transparency
At the center of this conversation lies a difficult but crucial truth: public trust is not built on legality alone it depends on transparency, disclosure, and the confidence that decisions are made for the greater good, not personal or political benefit.
A Business Owner in Public Office: When Civic Duty Meets Private Enterprise
The local political consultant is not just a city councilmember; he’s also a well-known local entrepreneur, operating the Southwest Grill in north Pueblo. His hands-on experience with local commerce gives him a grounded understanding of the city’s economic struggles. Many voters initially saw that as an asset, someone who knew firsthand the impact of local crime, taxes, and regulation on small businesses.
However, the same strength that made him relatable to voters also opens the door to perceived conflicts of interest. He has frequently spoken out about drug activity, loitering, and vandalism in the Highway 50 business corridor, issues that directly affect his restaurant and nearby properties. He has also participated in council discussions on public safety enforcement, zoning changes, and redevelopment initiatives that could influence the economic viability of his own establishment.
Colorado’s state ethics law, C.R.S. § 24-18-109, clearly states that public officials must recuse themselves from any action “directly and substantially affecting” a business in which they have a financial interest. While there’s no evidence he has violated this statute, however critics argue that the appearance of personal gain is enough to justify transparency measures, including public disclosure and voluntary recusal on specific agenda items.
Perception, in the realm of public ethics, is often as damaging as proof.
Public Safety, Policing, and the Appearance of Self-Interest
He has been outspoken about rising crime near his business and has urged stronger police action in the area. He’s advocated for tighter enforcement of loitering laws, reconsideration of the city’s needle exchange policies, and greater police visibility in business districts. These are legitimate public safety concerns but when they align too closely with one’s personal financial interests, ethical red flags emerge.
For the public, the question becomes not whether he can advocate for safety, but whether he should be the one voting on ordinances that financially benefit the area where his business operates. Even the most well-intentioned policymaker risks losing credibility when personal and public interests overlap.
Ideology, Business, and Political Image
Beyond business ties, his voting record has raised eyebrows in other ways. In 2024, he voted to advance a controversial anti-abortion ordinance invoking the 19th-century Comstock Act, a move widely condemned as unconstitutional and politically motivated. Though the ordinance ultimately failed, the decision positioned him alongside the council’s most conservative members and cast doubt on whether he was representing constituent interests or ideological allies.
Similarly, he supported placing a measure on the ballot to dismantle Pueblo’s strong-mayor system, a structural change that critics called destabilizing and poorly planned. When he later backtracked and urged voters to oppose it, residents were left questioning his consistency and transparency. Was the move genuine reflection, political calculation, or pressure from internal alliances?
This pattern of shifting positions reinforces a public perception that personal reputation and alliances, not just policy, drive his decisions. In politics, perception is everything, and inconsistency feeds mistrust faster than any single vote.
Ethical Gray Areas: Salary Votes and Accountability Gaps
Like many councilmembers, he faced the delicate issue of voting on council salary increases. Although he opposed immediate raises, citing optics and public backlash, the situation highlighted an enduring ethical tension: when elected officials vote on matters that affect their own compensation, they are inherently conflicted, regardless of their position.
He has also been criticized for lack of assertiveness in enforcing accountability among peers. During debates over censuring a Council member for transphobic remarks, He sided with the motion to censure but stopped short of leading the charge. This hesitance reinforced a broader perception that he prefers to avoid conflict rather than lead ethical reform, especially when political alliances or public backlash are involved.
Public Perception: The True Test of Integrity
In small-city politics, reputation is everything. Pueblo residents have long demanded transparency from their local officials, especially as confidence in city governance has eroded over recent years. For many, his situation is emblematic of a deeper problem: ethical standards that rely on legality rather than accountability.
His supporters describe him as pragmatic and business-minded, a “fresh voice”, who brings real-world experience to the council. His critics, however, view him as selectively transparent, participating in votes that carry personal implications while projecting neutrality. Both views highlight the same underlying issue: public perception now defines political integrity as much as policy outcomes.
Even if his actions fall within legal bounds, public skepticism thrives when there’s no formal mechanism for disclosure or recusal. The absence of clear, enforceable ethics guidelines allows rumor, speculation, and distrust to fill the gap.
The Case for Stronger Ethical Guidelines and Transparency Measures
If Pueblo’s government is to regain and sustain public confidence, it must go beyond compliance it must embrace ethical transparency as a foundation of good governance. This means:
-
Mandatory Disclosure of Financial Interests:
Councilmembers should publicly file statements identifying any business or property interests within the city limits. Voters deserve to know when a policymaker has a financial stake in an issue before the council. -
Automatic Recusal for Appearance Conflicts:
Officials should recuse themselves not only when legal conflicts exist, but when reasonable people might perceive bias or self-interest. A culture of voluntary recusal protects credibility and fosters respect. -
Public Ethics Oversight:
Pueblo should establish a local ethics board to review and advise on potential conflicts before votes occur, ensuring objectivity and fairness. -
Transparency in Communication:
Every vote and policy statement should be accompanied by a disclosure note explaining any potential link between the issue and a councilmember’s private life or business. Even a one-sentence clarification can prevent weeks of speculation.
By adopting these standards, Pueblo’s city government could become a model for ethical reform demonstrating that transparency isn’t an obstacle to leadership, but its greatest safeguard.
Ethics Beyond the Law
His tenure on Pueblo City Council underscores an important civic lesson: ethics isn’t about what’s legal it’s about what’s right. The city’s residents expect honesty, impartiality, and clarity from their leaders. When public officials operate in gray areas - whether through personal business ties, inconsistent messaging, or ideological posturing - they erode not only their own credibility but the integrity of the entire institution they represent.
In a time when public faith in government is fragile, even the perception of impropriety can be toxic. The path forward for Pueblo, and for officials like the political consultant, lies in embracing the transparency that modern governance demands. By confronting conflicts of interest openly and committing to higher ethical standards, city leaders can rebuild the trust that democracy depends on.
Comments