Reggie Shaw's Dilemmas

Reggie Shaw has just put a bid in for a job in her community. For this job she would be putting traffic barriers in one neighborhood to decrease the amount of traffic a different area; however, this would increase travel time to places for the neighborhood with the traffic barriers. The dilemma is the fact that she happens to live in the neighborhood where traffic would be increasing. So does Reggie tell the city council that she lives in the neighborhood that would be affected?
The two main ethical principles that are in conflict are confidentiality and veracity. Confidentiality this the principle were you are respecting the privacy of the person you are working with. This principle applies to the city, if Reggie believes she can provide non-bias results does the city council indeed need to know where she lives? With confidentiality, they would not

Now on to veracity, this principle is the duty to tell the truth even with consequences that are not favorable. With that being said, Reggie should inform the city council that she does live in the neighborhood that would have the potential to have an increase in traffic and travel time.
Reggie is torn between telling the council or not tell them. She does have the autonomy, which is being able to freely choose whether or not she should tell them. However, she should in fact tell the city council, because of veracity, the duty to tell the truth. Upholding veracity shows that you are a respectable client and you are willing to not take a job just so that they know the truth. As a respectable client, you should tell them that you do live in that area, nonetheless, you would still be able to provide a non-bias report. This could result in Reggie not getting the job because the city could question her fidelity. Fidelity is the duty to fulfill one’s contract and to keep promises. The city, if she were to tell them that she lives in that neighborhood, may believe that because