On Tuesday, Feb. 18, the Colorado Independent Ethics Commission (IEC) instructed staff to commence investigation into the complaint against Archuleta County Commissioner Veronica Medina that was filed by Ashley Springer.
IEC vice chair Dan Wolf also noted during the meeting that the motion to dismiss in the case has been fully briefed and is pending.
The announcements came after an 11-minute closed session on the case.
The case was filed in June 2024 by Springer in her capacity as a private citizen (Springer also works for Archuleta County), with the IEC deeming the complaint nonfrivolous in November 2024.
The complaint alleges, among other things, conflict of interest in Medina not recusing herself during county property purchase and land use regulation votes, as well as alleging Medina pushed commissioners to make a “swift” decision regarding purchase of a property presented by Exit Realty Broker Shelley Low, with Medina not disclosing to the state potential conflict of interest and failure to recuse when voting on property selection for the county’s administration building property listed under Exit Realty’s Low, “where Medina’s license hangs.”
Medina is a licensed real estate agent.
Springer writes in her complaint that she has witnessed “many other violations” by Medina, along with Commissioner Ronnie Maez, “regularly breaking Colorado Open Meeting Law.”
Medina and attorney John. S. Gleason of Burns, Figa and Will then filed a motion to dismiss in January.
“[Medina] disclosed her association with Exit Realty and Ranch to the other commissioners publicly,” the 24-page motion states in part. “She had nothing to do with the listing of the Highway 160 property and would receive no financial benefit had the property been selected.”
It continues, “Furthermore, the county does not pay any realtor fees. Respondent also sought guidance from the County Attorney and was advised that the fact she was a realtor did not create a conflict sufficient for recusal.”
The motion also quotes Colorado Revised Statute 18-8-308, defining potential conflicting interests as existing “when the public servant is a director, president, general manager, or similar executive officer or owns or controls directly or indirectly a substantial interest in any nongovernmental entity participating in the transaction.”
The motion denies wrongdoing on the part of Medina.
“The Respondent denies that she has violated any Colorado statute,” the motion states, and calls Springer’s allegations “mere labels and conclusions” and “rumor” that “are not entitled to the assumption of truth.”
Springer filed a response to the motion to dismiss on Feb. 2 asking the IEC to deny the motion, with the nine-page response reiterating Springer “is concerned about ethical behavior concerning Respondents tenure as an Archuleta County Commissioner.”
The response further alleges that Medina failed to recuse herself for the vote on a piece of property listed by the real estate agency Medina is a broker, did not notify the state of potential conflict of interest on the vote and did not state she is an associate broker with the real estate office during the meeting or at subsequent meetings.
“Respondent refused to disclose potential conflict, or recuse herself in votes at the August 6th, 2024 and September 3rd meetings of the Board of County Commissioners,” it states.
It further indicates that Medina was asked at an Aug. 20, 2024, public meeting if she would benefit in the future if the project were to move forward at that site and she suggested she doesn’t have a crystal ball.
Springer’s response later alleges that Medina’s email from the county attorney states nothing in regard to recusal from the vote on the same property, instead only mentioning no conflict with respect to land use regulation changes, and no additional emails from the county attorney were provided as exhibits in the motion to dismiss.
Springer also notes in the response, “The pertinent facts are consideration of agency, failure to recuse from voting, followed by undue influence of fellow commissioners and their vote, and finally, failure to notify the state of the potential conflict of interest concerning her simultaneous principal/agent relationship with the public and Respondent’s principal/agent relationship with Exit Realty Home & Ranch.”
It adds later the “complaint has nothing to do with the recall effort, but rather adhering to fiduciary duties to represent residents in their best interest at all times when making formal decisions.”
randi@pagosasun.com
>