Gregory: Isn’t there a conflict here?
In the May 16 Aspen Times, it was reported that: “Councilman Bill Guth, who lives in the most affected neighborhood, spoke of studying a web of traffic improvements and other bridge ideas, even another bridge over the power plant, saying there was no way he would vote for anything like the Preferred Alternative.”
According to The Colorado Code of Ethics (which includes conflicts of interest) For Public Officials and Employees- C.R.S. 24-18-109:
A local official or employee shall not:
“Perform an official act directly and substantially affecting to its economic benefit a business or other undertaking in which he either has a substantial financial interest (which includes “ownership interest in real or personal property”), or is engaged as counsel, consultant, representative or agent.” C.R.S. 28-18-102.
“Official act” is defined as any “vote, decision, recommendation, approval, disapproval, or other action, including inaction, which involves the use of discretionary authority.” C.R.S 24-18-102.
My question is: Why should Guth be allowed to vote or officially opine on anything related to the Entrance to Aspen?