Government is a core pillar of society. When choosing our leaders there is a lot to unpack, and this column, running every last week of the month up to election day, is intended to help readers do just that.
My dad was a Garfield County Commissioner in the ‘80s, and while we shared the honor of holding elected office, we didn’t exactly share views on much else, especially politics. But I respected his belief that whether you run for re-election or not, you must hold true to your ideals, regardless of political party pressure, and to govern like a one-termer.
My own experience with elected office is that some of the time is spent governing — listening to many different people, analyzing issues, finding common agreement with stakeholders, etcetera. But most time is spent leading, whether you want to or not. Issues and votes come and go like the wind, but what can set the tone of a community and shape culture is how leaders carry themselves, how they respond to adversity, when they choose to listen and when they choose to act. It’s humbling to say the least.
This column focuses on two Garfield County races. County governance has a unique opportunity to weave together communities and serve as a liaison to state and federal agencies. They can heavily shape economic trends, land use policies, transportation, law enforcement and more. Or they can choose not to. So I think it matters how county leaders view their roles in, say, economic development or social services, or whether some laws — or, worse yet, rights — are theirs to interpret.
Brent Baker and Dan Loya are running as Republicans for the Garfield County Sheriff seat.
Baker is currently a patrol lieutenant for the Garfield County Sheriff’s Office, and he had positive things to say about his department, including that it had a “great culture and climate.” He stated that he “isn’t a fan of red flag laws” and he sees the biggest threat to public safety being “behavioral and mental health, as well as substance abuse.” In terms of connecting with all segments of our population, he said, “We need to be understanding of them
[Latinos], but we also need to educate them on our laws.”
Loya currently serves as Eagle County’s undersheriff but grew up and lives in Garfield County. Loya seemed fine with being labeled a “hard ass” by some, and stated his department “has built a good connection and trust with the Latino community in Eagle County.” He said, “I agree and support the red flag [law] if used appropriately and vetted properly by the judges ensuring it’s not being misused.” To him the greatest threat is the local drug problem, specifically fentanyl.
Eric Rudd, the Republican commissioner candidate, stated, “We have reached a point where we need to redefine what the future of our county will be,” and he sees the recreation industry as key. Rudd doesn’t necessarily think transit is the best solution and, with respect to affordable housing, he thinks having the private sector build more housing is the best path. “I don’t believe in incentives,” he said, and “public subsidy is the nuclear option.”
Jonathan Godes, the Democrat running for commissioner, states on his website that “The lack of a diversified economy and good-paying jobs in our communities has made us vulnerable.” He criticized previous boards in over supporting one part of the economy, while only offering local businesses “a pittance.” Godes seems more convinced than Rudd that transit is crucial to the county’s future and, with respect to housing, he said, “The reality is government needs to participate.”
A question that seemed relevant for all four candidates was how they would respond to current Sheriff Lou Vallario’s disparaging emails about State House Representative Velazquez, if they were in office. The purpose was to better understand how the candidates view their role as leaders with respect to accountability, and when they choose to act.
Baker said nothing to Vallario because “Lou has a right to voice his opinion,” he said, and he would not feel comfortable offering his comments to Lou. Loya called the emails “completely unprofessional and unacceptable,” and referenced ways he helped change a previously “nasty culture” in Eagle County. Godes stated that “the county needs leaders who model the professionalism they expect from others.” Rudd said, “My stance is always to maintain a decorum of mutual respect.”
Despite common agreement that Vallario’s behavior was unacceptable, what was not voiced by any candidate was a willingness to speak directly to, in this case, Vallario, and communicate what’s unacceptable. This seems to be a disconnect between espousing accountability, and delivering it. I applaud leaders who “model professionalism” and “maintain a decorum of respect,” but we are seeing in real-time what happens when they don’t hold their peers accountable for bad behavior.
Ben Franklin called it when describing our government: “A republic, if you can keep it.” Democracy and elections are a hot mess at any level, and candidates (aka soon-to-be leaders) must balance electability, integrity, humility, courage and more. These desperately needed character traits and skillsets aren’t new to elected leadership, but they can be overshadowed by our quest for “likes” and fear of being “canceled.”
Truth be told, I doubt I’d vote for my dad today, but I am voting for those with the courage to buck the party, the integrity to call out unacceptable behavior when appropriate, the humility to change their mind, the discipline to choose responsibility over power and the resolve to govern as a one-termer.