Ethics commission schedules Gregson hearing

An ethics complaint against San Marcos City Council member Scott Gregson will move forward after the city’s ethics commission voted to hold a public hearing on the complaint. City spokesman Trey Hatt said the commission voted unanimously to hold a hearing, which will be  at 5:30 p.m. on Oct. 25 at the city council chambers.

A complaint filed by San Marcos resident Dale Ryder on Aug. 19 accuses Gregson of “taking advantage of discretionary grants for personal gain.” The complaint is based on a report by KXAN stating that Gregson used his position on the city council to benefit from the Business Improvement and Growth (BIG) program. 

“This report states Scott Gregson used his position on the San Marcos City Council to benefit financially from the BIG program to the tune of almost $28,000. His voting for this program should have excluded him from its benefits. His business partner, Vance J. Elliott, and himself used grant monies to improve their properties.”

City records indicate East Hopkins LLC, which Gregson is shown owning 50 percent of shares, had received upwards of $24,000 in funding through the BIG program. Gregson has denied any wrongdoing, saying neither he nor any business he owns interest in has applied for BIG funds but that some of his tenants have received funds through the grant program. The BIG grant program does allow for tenants, rather than building owners, to apply for grants, but the building owners must acknowledge the application. 

The city council voted to appoint the Law Firm of Davidson, Trollo, Ream and Garza as special counsel for the ethics commission to help determine if the complaint against Gregson should move forward. The city hired the same firm in 2016 when Gregson requested an ethics advisory opinion on his eligibility to vote on matters related to the Downtown Master Plan. Lawyers representing Gregson have written to attorney Frank Garza stating that Gregson had not received formal notice of the ethics commission hearing and that the complaint against him does not cite which provision of the city’s Code of Ethics he is accused of violating.

“While Mr. Gregson has committed no ethics violation, it is not possible for him to adequately respond to the complaint filed, because it omits a critical and required piece of information. … it does not specify any particular provision violated as required by the code.”

Gregson’s counsel also states that since the complaint omits the provision, the complaint should be dismissed.

Hatt said the city attorney’s office has no records showing any other sitting city council member being subject to an ethics complaint hearing in the past.