Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethics Conflict Of Interest topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rowlett council finds ethics complaint against Councilmember Mike Britton not sustained
Summary
After a public hearing, the Rowlett City Council voted to find an ethics complaint alleging undisclosed conflict of interest against Councilmember Mike Britton without merit, citing legal advice and lack of evidence of a knowing violation; the motion carried with six yeses and one abstention.
Councilmember Mike Britton defended himself at a public hearing July 16 after an ethics complaint filed Jan. 26 alleged he failed to disclose a familial affinity to First Baptist Church of Rowlett (FBC) and voted on a rezoning that could benefit the church. Britton said he sought and acted on legal advice at the Jan. 16 meeting and denied any personal or financial gain.
The complaint, read into the record by the mayor, cited provisions of the Rowlett code of ethics alleging special consideration, dishonest acts and failure to disclose a private interest. Complainant Kelly McKee told the council she believed Britton’s daughter is married to a senior pastor at FBC and that the pastor received more than 10% of his income from the church, which she said would create a substantial interest under Texas law.
Britton responded that he is a member and deacon at FBC but said he has never received money from the church and that proceeds from the cited property sale went directly to a construction loan or line of credit, not to general church operations. He said the city attorney at the time told him participation would not be illegal though it could be politically or morally disadvantageous.
The current city attorney told the council that, under the city code and by close reference to Texas Local Government Code chapter 171, a substantial interest could exist if a relative received 10% or more of income from a business (here, the church). But the attorney said the record shows Britton relied on legal advice and that there is insufficient evidence of a knowing violation required for sanction under state law.
Councilmembers debated whether the vote and disclosure practices reflected poor judgment. Several members said the existing code of ethics lacks clear definitions and that the city will pursue code revisions. Mayor Pro Tem Tim Winget moved that the council "failed to sustain the allegations and [that] the complaint is without merit." The motion passed with six yeses and one abstention.
The council framed the outcome as a procedural decision: the complaint was not sustained, but members signaled intent to revisit the ethics policy to clarify disclosure requirements and process for future complaints.
