Board of Ethics dismisses two complaints against mayor and council member; public raises procedural concerns

The Board of Ethics voted to dismiss two complaints filed by Stephen McCauley — one against Mayor Patrick McNulty and one against Council Member Joe Rico — and voted not to order a show‑cause hearing, amid public criticism about agenda posting and access to comment.

The board took three separate actions on agenda items numbered 3.1 through 3.3. On agenda item 3.1, the board voted to dismiss the complaint against Mayor Patrick McNulty (motion made by Bridal, seconded by Jim), with the board recording three votes in favor, zero against and one abstention. On agenda item 3.2, the board dismissed the complaint against Council Member Joe Rico by a 4‑0 vote. On agenda item 3.3 — whether to order a show‑cause hearing under section 4(e) of the Board of Ethics Rules and Procedures — the board voted not to order a show‑cause hearing; the motion not to order the hearing carried and the meeting was adjourned.

The meeting included extended public comment in which several attendees alleged conflicts of interest and procedural irregularities. Commenters said the agenda failed to disclose executive‑session language and said that the public had been deprived of an opportunity to comment at this meeting; several also accused officials of improper relationships and of having “falsified” records. Those claims were made by members of the public and were not substantiated or confirmed during the meeting.

The city attorney, Ed Sejanewicz, told the board that “for some reason the executive session language wasn't included in the agenda,” and said he did not feel comfortable proceeding on that basis. Board members also referenced the prior meeting on these complaints and characterized the session as a continuation of earlier consideration in which public comment had been taken.

At several points in the public discussion attendees urged the board to follow the Texas Open Meetings Act and questioned whether certain officials hold dual offices in ways that could present conflicts. Speakers referenced a cited 1994 attorney general opinion about attorneys serving as municipal judges; those references were raised as arguments by commenters and not as findings by the board.

Procedurally, the board clarified that ordering a show‑cause hearing would have required scheduling another hearing. After discussion and the recorded votes, the board dismissed the two complaints and declined to order further proceedings under the show‑cause provision.

The meeting record shows the board moved directly from item 3.1 to items 3.2 and 3.3 after taking the votes described above and then adjourned. Members of the public suggested appeals to the courts and to the state attorney general might follow; board members did not adopt those steps at the meeting.

Agenda items discussed: 3.1 — decision on complaint by Stephen McCauley against Mayor Patrick McNulty (dismissed, yes 3, no 0, abstain 1); 3.2 — decision on complaint by Stephen McCauley against Council Member Joe Rico (dismissed, yes 4, no 0); 3.3 — whether to order Stephens Macaulay to show cause under section 4(e) of the Board of Ethics Rules and Procedures (motion not to order a show‑cause hearing passed).