During its June 2 meeting, the Colorado Real Estate Commission (CREC) voted unanimously to dismiss a complaint against Archuleta County Commissioner Veronica Medina to the Division of Real Estate for a no license law violation.
The complaint was presented by Department of Regulatory Agencies lead Auditor Eddie Rose, explaining that on Feb. 21, 2025, information was received that the respondent (Medina), while acting in her capacity as county commissioner, failed to disclose her affiliation with the brokerage that was representing a potential land seller in the county.
The complainant stated that the respondent “misrepresented her license level to the public,” Rose said.
He then indicated that Medina “acknowledged through the investigation that she failed to disclose in writing her affiliation with the brokerage while acting in a public office capacity.”
Rose also mentioned that Medina asserts that she received legal guidance from the county attorney, “who informed her that there was no conflict of interest because she was not receiving any financial benefit from the transaction to her brokerage colleague presenting to the board of county commissioners.”
Rose explained that Medina provided two separate affidavits stating she is affiliated with the brokerage as an independent contractor, and affirms that in future interactions, she will disclose her license status.
Rose noted that there were multiple possible violations with recommended actions to include a diversion fine of $500, and coursework in brokerage relationships and ethics.
CREC chair Eriqueca Sanders asked for a motion on the matter prior to any discussion. A motion to accept the complaint was made and seconded prior to discussion.
“This is probably going to prompt some discussion,” she said.
CREC vice chair Erika Doyle opened the discussion by stating, “This is one where I felt like this should be thrown out.”
Doyle explained that Medina was acting in her capacity as a county commissioner and not listed as a licensee in the transaction, as the county attorney “was doing all of the review” and there was no monetary gain to be paid to Medina.
“The complainant was her opponent in the election for the county commissioner seat and lost, and it sounds like the complainant was running a campaign to get this woman recalled. It’s problematic,” Doyle said.
She went on to describe the complaint as “more of a personal and political attack” versus a real estate issue.
“I don’t feel like there were grounds for this one at all,” Doyle said.
CREC public member Bernadette Bugarin commented that the complainant was “reaching for a complaint … that she was trying to create something.”
Bugarin noted that the county attorney relayed to Medina that it wasn’t a conflict of interest, adding that “everybody knew she was a licensed agent.”
“I think the complainant might’ve been a little bit bitter about something and was trying to create an issue,” Bugarin added.
Sanders offered more comments, stating she didn’t see it as a conflict of interest or bad advice from the county attorney because Medina wasn’t a party in the contract.
Sanders also commented on the issue of Medina not disclosing her license and level, explaining that Medina used terminology such as “independent contractor” and “self-employed,” which Sanders said the complainant interpreted as Medina saying she works for herself, “but in our industry that’s not what that means.”
Sanders added real estate agents can be independent contractors with a brokerage, “because that’s typically how you’re employed as an agent.”
Sanders also noted that Medina did disclose that she worked under a brokerage, and followed the county attorney’s guidance.
“I feel that she did the right thing there,” Sanders said.
Sanders echoed comments of there being an “underlying issue” in that the complainant was Medina’s opponent in running for county commissioner while putting the complaint forward.
She explained that Medina followed protocol, and noted that the county ended up not closing on that property.
Sanders mentioned that if “legitimate issues” were there then the CREC would “obviously” look at those and make a ruling, “but I just don’t feel that there is enough evidence to show that there was a true conflict of interest.”
Sanders noted that a true conflict of interest would have involved Medina being listed as either the buyer or seller’s agent.
Bugarin also noted that the county commissioners decided not to move forward with this property, noting that public servants volunteer their time and that stating this as a conflict of interest may discourage other realtors and agents from stepping up for public servant roles.
“I don’t think she did anything wrong,” Bugarin added.
An amended motion to dismiss the complaint was then seconded and unanimously approved.
clayton@pagosasun.com
>