Willow Park commission narrows scope, language for proposed Board of Ethics but leaves details to council ordinance

The Willow Park Home Rule Charter Commission spent most of its Jan. 14 meeting refining language for a proposed Board of Ethics that would be created by city council under Article 9, Section 9.01B of the draft charter. Chair (speaking as the meeting’s presiding official) said the goal is an independent board selected through an unbiased process while leaving detailed procedures to implementing ordinance.

Commissioners debated membership and powers, with multiple members suggesting the board be ‘‘not less than five volunteer members’’ to ensure credible decision‑making without making recruitment impractical. A commissioner argued the charter should require an ‘‘unbiased independent selection process’’ to avoid patronage and to reinforce public trust.

Subpoena powers drew repeated attention. Commissioners noted similar language exists in other city charters but questioned how a local ethics board could compel non‑city actors when vendors or contractors have not consented to city authority. One member summarized the practical limit: even if subpoena language remains, the board’s power over outside vendors will be constrained by contract and consent; for serious allegations the board could refer matters to the county district attorney or appropriate legal authority.

Members agreed the charter should allow the ethics board to investigate on its own initiative, on referral, or in response to complaints but favored placing procedural specifics (how investigations are conducted, evidentiary rules and remedies) in a council ordinance rather than in the charter’s text. The Chair read a proposed condensed paragraph to be embedded in 9.01B and asked staff to prepare a clean, un‑redlined version for review.

On confidentiality and records, commissioners reached consensus on public access to final outcomes. As one member put it during the discussion, "Records of final determination shall be considered public information to the extent permitted by applicable law," and the group noted that the Texas Public Information Act will govern what must remain confidential during active investigations and what must be disclosed after a final determination.

The commission also agreed the board should have access to independent legal counsel and other experts as needed (human resources, accounting) and recommended the city council appropriate funds to support the board’s duties, including training programs for officials and candidates. The commission proposed that the council appoint a subcommittee and draft an ordinance within a time frame (multiple members suggested a subcommittee named within 30 days and a first ordinance draft within about six months).

The commission did not vote formally to adopt a final text but directed staff to insert the discussed language into Section 9.01B, produce a clean draft, and send it for city attorney review. The Chair said the commission expects to return Jan. 21 if attorney comments require further edits and to submit the charter package to city council on Jan. 27.

The commission’s discussion touched on several operational limits — notably that the board’s jurisdiction would cover city council members, staff and boards/commissions but not private third parties except as contractually permitted — and repeatedly emphasized leaving detailed rules and enforcement mechanisms to an ordinance the council would later adopt.

Next procedural step: staff will post a clean copy of the charter with the newly‑edited Section 9.01B, send it to the city attorney for focused review of flagged items, and circulate it to commission members ahead of a potential Jan. 21 final meeting.