BY JASON CHAPPEL
Candidate for
Los Alamos County Council

Last weekend, while working at Smith’s, I had a conversation that reminded me why I decided to run for Los Alamos County Council.

A woman approached me and said, “Normally, I wouldn’t vote for a Republican, but you don’t seem like a typical Republican. I’m on the fence about voting for you, so in two minutes or less, why should I vote for you?”

I appreciated her honesty. Rather than talking about party politics, I told her about my experience serving on the Los Alamos County Transportation Board and the circumstances that helped motivate my campaign.

One experience in particular has stayed with me. Following a tragic pedestrian fatality at an intersection, our Transportation Board was presented with recommendations intended to address safety concerns at that location. Those recommendations were expected to proceed through the county’s decision-making process, including consideration by County Council. However, as I experienced it, neither our board nor Council ultimately voted on the proposed recommendations before the department implemented changes.

I understand the urgency of addressing safety concerns, and I would never suggest that we should leave a dangerous intersection unaddressed while waiting for government to act. But I also believe we must be able to explain how decisions are made, what authority is being exercised, and how public input and established processes are respected. Public safety and government accountability are not competing priorities; both are essential to maintaining public trust.

That experience helped shape my belief that residents deserve a fair opportunity to understand important decisions affecting their community before those decisions are made. Public participation should mean more than being allowed to comment when a decision is already approaching. People deserve time to ask questions, examine the facts, and offer their perspectives while their input can still matter.

The woman shared her own frustration with what she described as decisions being rubber-stamped. We found common ground in the belief that local government should encourage independent judgment, accountability, and meaningful public participation.

By the end of our conversation, she told me I had her vote.

That interaction reinforced something I believe strongly: our community has more in common than political labels sometimes suggest.

Earlier this summer, I also had a meaningful conversation with Jodi Benson about the County’s debate over single-use plastic bags. We approached the issue from different perspectives, but rather than allowing our disagreement to end the conversation, we discussed whether we could pursue something more ambitious: a broader recycling effort that could deliver a more meaningful environmental benefit.

I don’t believe every problem has a simple solution, and I can’t promise that every idea will succeed. But I do believe we should be willing to look beyond the immediate debate, explore alternatives, and ask whether there is a better way forward. Sometimes, the most productive conversations begin when people disagree.

The same principle applies to questions about public safety technology, including the County’s automatic license plate reader system. These cameras may offer a valuable investigative tool, particularly when trying to identify vehicles involved in serious crimes. My own family has experienced the tragedy of a hit-and-run, and I understand why technology that might help investigators identify a responsible driver can matter so much.

But recognizing the potential benefits of a tool does not mean we should stop asking questions about how it will be used.

Residents deserve clear answers about who can access collected information, how long it will be retained, under what circumstances it can be shared, and what safeguards will prevent misuse. They should understand what the system can and cannot do, and what oversight will be in place. These questions deserve thoughtful answers so the County can make informed decisions and maintain public trust.

The same philosophy applies to other county decisions. Whether we are discussing public expenditures, economic development, housing affordability, support for local businesses, or community safety, residents should be able to understand the reasoning behind decisions made in their name.

If public money is being invested in a project, we should be able to explain why, what benefits we expect, and how we will evaluate the results. If a policy affects our community, we should make a reasonable effort to hear from the people who will live with its consequences. And when important questions remain unanswered, our elected officials should be willing to ask them.

I am not suggesting that every decision requires endless debate or that every resident will agree on the outcome. Government must function, and sometimes difficult decisions must be made. But efficiency should not come at the expense of informed judgment, and transparency should not be treated as an obstacle to getting things done.

I am a Republican, and I am proud of my background. But I am running to represent the people of Los Alamos County, not simply a political party. I believe effective local leadership requires listening to different perspectives, examining the facts, considering alternatives, and being willing to explain our decisions.

My goal is not to promise that everyone will agree with me. It is to earn the public’s trust by being accessible, asking difficult questions, and remaining accountable to the people I would serve.

Los Alamos County belongs to all of us. Its future should be shaped by thoughtful decisions, responsible stewardship, and a community that has a meaningful voice in its own government.

That is what I mean by Building Bridges, Empowering Citizens.