Lago Vista's City Hall fights itself, and taxpayers foot the bill

Lago Vista officials, city employees, and members of the public brought or took up 16 complaints, investigations, and claims against each other from 2021 through 2026, by our count, counting the complaints two Charter Review Committee officers filed against one council member as two. The count comes from a Lago Vista Watchdog review of council minutes, agenda packets, and other records.^1,2,3 The council dismissed or took no action on 9 of them, acted against the person accused in two more, including a mayor's censure, and settled one.^4,5 The record does not show how the other four ended.^6,7,8,9 On October 3, 2024, the council voted 4 to 2 to settle discrimination and retaliation claims from its own departing city manager for $210,291.32.^10,11,12 A later budget exhibit ties the payout to the General Fund's City Manager line.^13,14 On January 6, 2026, after the 2024-25 budget year had ended, the council voted 6 to 1 to amend that year's budget, adding $25,000 to Legal Services, $75,000 to the City Manager line, and $100,000 to the City Secretary line, among other changes.^13,15 Staff said the General Fund increase was covered by underspending in another account.¹⁵ The budget exhibit explained the Legal Services increase this way, "There have been grievance investgations, lawsuits, and multiple separations."¹³ That same January, a council member sent two notices of claim over his removal as the council's liaison to the Planning and Zoning Commission.^3,16 The first, addressed to "Council Members, Mr. West, and Mr. Bullock," named no dollar amount and asked for corrective action.¹⁶ The second, emailed to the city manager and city attorney as an advance copy of a formal notice he wrote would be served on the mayor and each council member, listed $250,000 in damages "for purposes of the City's notice provisions."³ In March 2026, the city's lawyers at Messer Fort wrote that his demand for damages "is not being considered."^3,17 The bills the city paid its outside lawyers and investigators for these disputes are not in the records we reviewed.^6,18

Counts, sums, and the tally of how each dispute ended in this story are our own calculations from the records cited throughout. We count the May 2024 employee complaint and the July 2024 complaint against the city manager separately because the records describe them differently. They may be the same matter. We did not count separately the council's closed-session updates on an employee grievance on September 5, 2024, and January 16, 2025, or its March 20, 2025, closed session on a "city manager investigation," because the records do not show whether they are matters already counted.^19,20,21 We count the May 2025 incidents report once, as one item about several council members.⁸

An earlier Watchdog story, Lago Vista's outside legal bills grew 17 times in two years, found the city's Legal Services account rose from $27,383 in 2021-22 to $468,390 in 2023-24.^14,22,23,24 That story also told of lawsuits from Alicie Reed, Brittany Henry, and David Stewart, plus a 2025 federal suit that named the city among many defendants.^22,23,24,25 Another earlier story, Lago Vista's city manager settlement, told in detail how the council reached the October 2024 settlement described above.¹⁰ A third, Lago Vista's charter rewrite, told of the mayor's 2024 censure and the complaints two Charter Review Committee officers filed against Council Member Adam Benefield, which the council heard in 2026.^2,26,27

2021

Don Barthlow had raised allegations while he was still on the council. On September 17, 2020, the council voted 6 to 1, with Barthlow opposed, "that we conclude all investigations into the allegations that were brought forth by Council Barthlow on August 7."²⁸ At the March 18, 2021, meeting, Barthlow, by then a former council member, used public comment to raise what the minutes call "fraud and City spending."^29,30 A later council statement said he had, on several occasions, made "general accusations of illegal purchasing activities and complicity of certain city staff and council members."³⁰ He repeated the accusations at the April 1, 2021, meeting, and on December 16 spoke about what the minutes call "his issues with the City."^31,32

On August 24, 2021, Mayor Ed Tidwell and Mayor Pro Tem Arch Davila wrote a complaint dated that day accusing Robert Durbin, chairman of the city's Charter Review Committee and its Board of Adjustment, of seeking information beyond his role. The complaint also accused him of trying to direct two city staff members.¹ On September 2, the council voted unanimously to table the complaint and have staff schedule a preliminary hearing.³³ On September 22, after a hearing where four people spoke, the council voted unanimously to dismiss the complaints against Durbin.⁴

2022

On February 8, 2022, the council met in closed session, a private part of the meeting closed to the public under state law, on Barthlow's claims and directed staff to take the matter back to the city's auditors for more inquiry.^34,35 On March 17, a motion for one option discussed in closed session failed 3 to 3, and a second motion for another option also failed 3 to 3. The minutes do not say what either option was.³⁶ On April 21, 2022, Council Member Paul Prince read a statement on the council's behalf.^30,37 It said no independently verifiable evidence of criminal activity or complicity by any staff member had been found. The statement also said audits for the years in question showed some contracts not consistent with good procurement practice or lacking proper documentation. It said the employees who may have caused those problems had already left the city, and that the council would close its inquiry unless witnesses came forward or new facts emerged.³⁰

On November 17, 2022, Lisa Shaw, a private citizen, told the council she had filed an ethics complaint over developer site tours of the proposed Turnback Ranch development.^38,39,40 She alleged the tours were orchestrated between the city's development services director and the developer, with most of the Planning and Zoning commissioners attending.^40,41 On December 1, the council voted 6 to 0, with Council Member Prince abstaining, to set a preliminary hearing for December 12.³⁹ At that hearing, commissioners and Shaw testified under oath. The council voted unanimously to dismiss the complaint against commissioner Tom Monahan, who had not gone on the tour, against Prince, whom Shaw withdrew, and against two others who, the minutes say, were not members of the board, so the hearing did not apply to them. It then voted unanimously to apply a sanction from the city's ethics policy against six other commissioners, sending each a letter of notification and requiring training to prevent future violations.⁴²

2023

On January 19, 2023, the council held a work session on the city's ethics policy, prompted by the Turnback Ranch complaint.^43,44 On March 2, a motion to adopt a first rewrite of the policy was withdrawn before a vote.⁴⁵ That same night, and again on March 16 and April 6, the council also met in closed session with its lawyer on "the role of individual council members in legislating, governing, and investigating." It took no action any of those times.^46,47,48 Amendments from the March 2 meeting were added to a revised draft the council took up on March 16.⁴⁹

On March 16, 2023, the council adopted Ordinance 23-03-16-01, rewriting the ethics complaint rules, by a vote of 5 to 1.⁴¹ The adopted policy did not include hearing language that an earlier draft had proposed, requiring a hearing on whether a complaint found "baseless" was filed to harass or damage someone's reputation.^41,49 It instead let the city manager or council refer a baseless complaint to a court or prosecutor.⁴¹ The policy included independent legal counsel for complaints against the city manager or a council member, and included a letter of censure as the sanction for serious or repeated violations by an elected official.⁴⁹

2024

On March 7, 2024, the council met in closed session on the duties of a public officer under the charter sections covering the mayor, council conduct, and the city manager, and took no action.⁵⁰ On April 18, the city secretary received a sworn complaint that Mayor Kevin Sullivan had violated the charter by not signing a council resolution about airport funding.²⁶ The complaint came from James Edward Peck, president of the Rusty Allen Airport Property Owners Association.⁵¹ On May 2, the council voted 5 to 1, with Council Member Stephanie Smith opposed and Sullivan abstaining, to investigate the complaint and hold a hearing on May 13. That same night, the council voted unanimously to have the city attorney engage an outside investigator to look into a separate employee complaint and the city manager's response to it.⁶

At the May 13 hearing, the council found unanimously that Sullivan had not violated one part of the charter. It then voted 5 to 1, with Smith opposed, that he had violated another part by not signing the resolution. A censure motion then died for lack of a second, and another tied 3 to 3. A final motion passed 4 to 2, with Smith and Council Member Rob Durbin opposed, directing the city attorney to draft public censure language.⁵² On the video, the chair announced, "Motion carries four to two."⁵³

On June 6, the council reviewed the attorney's first draft and sent it back for changes.⁵⁴ On June 20, the council voted 5 to 1, with Smith opposed, to adopt Resolution 24-2062, publicly censuring Sullivan "for willfully and knowingly violating Charter Section 3.06." It ordered the censure posted online and published in the Austin American-Statesman.^5,26

At a special meeting on July 25, 2024, the council voted 6 to 1, with Smith dissenting, to approve "Option 1" as discussed in a closed session on a complaint filed against City Manager Tracie Hlavinka.^7,12 The motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Chelaine Marion, and the minutes do not say what Option 1 was.⁷ On August 15, on a motion by Marion, seconded by Durbin, the council voted 5 to 1, with Sullivan opposed, to approve a "recommended action" discussed in a closed session on Hlavinka's employment.^12,55 The minutes do not say what that action was either.⁵⁵

On August 15, 2024, an ethics complaint was filed against Council Member Paul Roberts.^56,57 Under the city's ethics policy, such a complaint must be sworn, must name the provisions it says were violated, and is sent by the city secretary to the council and the person accused.⁵⁸ No public record we found says what this one alleged, and the complaint itself is not in any council packet.^56,57,59 The council held its August 29 preliminary hearing in closed session.^59,60 On the video, the council was told the ethics policy is silent on who chooses, and that Roberts had been asked and chose a closed session.⁶⁰ Back in open session, a motion by Council Member Stephanie Smith to move the complaint to a final hearing tied 3 to 3 and failed, with Sullivan, Mayor Pro Tem Chelaine Marion, and Smith in favor and Council Members Shane Saum, Rob Durbin, and Paul Prince against. The council then voted 5 to 1, with Saum opposed, to have the city attorney give the complainant, whom the minutes call Mr. Johnson, 10 days to refile.⁵⁹ The policy allows one such chance to revise a complaint before it is dismissed for failing to allege a violation.⁵⁸

On August 29, 2024, Hlavinka's attorney sent the city attorney a demand letter alleging gender discrimination and retaliation by council members, and asking for $181,500 in exchange for a confidential release.¹² On October 3, on a motion by Council Member Prince, seconded by Mayor Sullivan, the council voted 4 to 2, with Durbin and Roberts opposed, to accept a separation and settlement agreement with Hlavinka.¹⁰ The agreement, signed the next day, set a "Settlement Sum" of $158,913, plus $4,493.52 for six months of insurance, $41,884.80 for accrued leave, and $5,000 toward her attorney's fees, for a total of $210,291.32.¹¹ The same night, the council voted 6 to 0 to appoint then-Public Works Director Taylor Whichard interim city manager.¹⁰ It also voted 5 to 0, with Roberts recusing, to direct the city attorney to act on hiring outside counsel for the Roberts ethics complaint, as city code requires.^10,61

On October 17, the council considered an ordinance that would have required its approval for every department head separation agreement, but tabled its personnel policy rewrite and removed the ordinance from the agenda that night.⁶² On November 7, the council voted 5 to 0 to dismiss the Roberts ethics complaint "because it fails to allege violation of the ethics policy."⁵⁷ On November 21, the council voted 7 to 0 to adopt personnel policies requiring that it be notified of every separation or severance agreement going forward.⁶³ A later audit of the city's finances for the year that ended September 30, 2024, found that a director had been separated from the city through an agreement rather than through council approval. It also found that three leave payouts exceeded policy. The audit does not name the director or give dollar amounts, and it said the auditor could not interview anyone involved because none still worked for the city.⁶⁴

2025

On February 6 and February 20, 2025, the council met twice in closed session on charter, personnel policy, and ethics policy requirements tied to the city manager's duties, taking no action either night.^65,66 On March 20, it met in closed session on a "city manager investigation," again with no action.²¹

On May 15, 2025, on a motion by Mayor Pro Tem Durbin, seconded by Prince, the council voted 6 to 1, with Benefield dissenting, to ratify personnel actions on the roles and duties of executive staff. The minutes say the human resources director and the city's employment counsel had taken those actions. The same meeting, the council held a closed session on a "possible contract with Public Works Director" and took no action.⁶⁷ Taylor Whichard then held both the interim city manager and public works director posts.^18,20,67 Later that night, on a motion by Prince, seconded by Roberts, the council voted 7 to 0 to accept "an employee separation agreement as amended," conditioned on the employee's signature by May 19. The minutes do not name that employee.⁶⁷

On May 18, 2025, three days later, Whichard dated a 13-page "Report of Incidents with Council Members Since Becoming Interim CM."⁸

The report lists his own written allegations against named council members, one incident at a time. During a City Hall HVAC repair, the report says, Roberts emailed a staff member for all three contractor quotes without copying him, Benefield emailed concern that a certain contractor had not gotten the job, and Saum sent him a revised quote from a contractor. He also accused Roberts of calling him repeatedly to argue against hiring Ed McRoy as development services director because of McRoy's age and of separately pushing him toward firing another city employee, and wrote that Saum arranged an invitation-only meeting on the island, with Council Member Norma Owen attending, where residents discussed water rates and road connections tied to the Drapers Cove and Firefly Cove developments. In another incident, he wrote that the council pushed him to fire a staff member before Charles West arrived as city manager, and that he refused without an indemnification agreement. It describes a call after the council chose West as permanent city manager, when Roberts phoned him and explained, among other reasons for the vote, complaints from someone outside city government. On his own performance review, Whichard wrote that Benefield said, "depending on how he (Taylor W.) reacts to this, will be what determines my vote." The report says that in a recorded call, Roberts said words to the effect of, "sorry man, it is just politics...I do not agree with Benefield's items, but I won't be voting against them at the next City Council meeting because I need him to help take care of my private vineyard." He accused Benefield of putting a resolution on code enforcement onto a council agenda after a code inspection at a property tied to Benefield's company. In another incident, he wrote that Benefield, in a text that included Saum and Roberts, pushed for site visits tied to stop-work orders after Whichard objected, then apologized and asked that the properties be removed from the agenda.⁸

These are Whichard's own written allegations, and his report does not show that the council responded to them.⁸ We are asking the officials he named for comment.

On June 26, on a motion by Prince, seconded by Benefield, the council voted 6 to 0 to ratify a personnel action City Manager Charles West had taken concerning Whichard, citing pending or contemplated litigation. On a motion by Prince, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Durbin, the council also voted 6 to 0 to ratify a personnel action West had taken concerning former Development Services Director Ed McRoy, also citing pending or contemplated litigation. The record does not say what either personnel action was or whether either employee was paid anything.¹⁸

On August 8, 2025, West emailed the mayor and council with his concerns about the office's working relationships. He wrote that a message from Roberts that day "crossed a line" for him. The same email described "a growing culture of recording conversations within City Hall" and said there had been "discussions about compensating a former City Manager due to fears over what might be on those recordings." He offered to "step aside" if a majority of the council wanted him to.⁶⁸ That message followed an email exchange over the Planning and Zoning agenda, in which West wrote to Roberts, "either I run the city, or you let Lynda run the city." He added that he would "have to rethink the decision I made to come here." Roberts had asked why items the council had directed onto the Planning and Zoning agenda were missing from it.⁶⁹ The council's September 4, 2025, agenda packet included an August 13 email in which West told the mayor and council that Planning and Zoning Chair Lynda Aird had raised public-notice concerns about a pending preliminary plat.^69,70,71

On November 22, 2025, Benefield emailed Mayor Saum, West, and City Attorney Bullock asking for a closed session under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 on referring "former Councilmember Paul Roberts" to a prosecuting authority. He wrote that a text message, statements Roberts made in an earlier closed session, and his own experience supported what he called potential criminal conduct. He described the conduct as "the handling and disclosure of confidential and executive-session information."⁷² The December 4 minutes list no such closed-session item, and the later council minutes we reviewed show no referral.^9,15,73,74

On December 4, 2025, the council considered a budget amendment to the 2024-25 budget that would have added $25,000 to Legal Services, $75,000 to the City Manager line, and $100,000 to the City Secretary's professional services line, all within Fund 10, the General Fund.^14,75 It cited "grievance investgations, lawsuits, and multiple separations," separation and relocation costs for city managers, and the cost of hiring an interim city secretary twice in one year.⁷⁵ The council voted 7 to 0 to table it and rewrite it.⁹

Later that meeting, the council voted 5 to 1, with Council Member Amanda Chavarria opposed and Benefield abstaining, to remove him as its liaison to the Planning and Zoning Commission. It then voted 5 to 1, with Council Member Jess Hall opposed and Benefield abstaining, to appoint Prince in his place.⁹ Council members said they had received calls from residents and city commissioners about his conduct, and Benefield called the claims "misinformation" and said the fact that the council was discussing it with him "never even serving one day shows that it's a political hit job."⁷¹

During board appointment votes later in the meeting, the minutes recorded Benefield abstaining without a stated reason on five of eight votes.^9,71,76 Asked whether he intended to keep voting that night, he said, "I have every right to abstain from a vote," and that he could "abstain from a vote for the next 12 months."^9,76,77

2026

On January 5, 2026, the council held a special meeting on an ethics complaint a member of the public had filed against Mayor Shane Saum.⁷⁸ The first of the complaint's four allegations was that Saum broke the city's ethics policy by endorsing another sitting council member's campaign and engaging in a partisan exchange within a large public forum.⁷⁹ City Attorney Brad Bullock told the council that its ethics policy requires outside counsel to be retained when a complaint is made against a member of council, including the mayor.⁸⁰ The council voted to hear the matter in open session instead of a closed one, which waived attorney-client privilege over the outside lawyer's report.⁷⁸ Catherine Clifton, the outside lawyer retained for the complaint, told the council she did not find any violations "that appeared to be sustained by the facts."⁷⁹ On a motion by Council Member Amanda Chavarria, seconded by Prince, the council voted 5 to 0 to dismiss the complaint and give the complainant ten business days to submit more information. Saum is not listed among the members voting.⁷⁸ The next day, Bullock told the council the complaint would probably result in "a couple thousand dollars in attorney's fees between my office and outside counsel." He added that he would "be surprised if the total is less than $2,000 for one complaint."⁸¹

On January 6, 2026, the council voted 6 to 1, with Benefield opposed, to approve the budget amendment tabled in December.^9,13,15 At the same meeting, during citizen comments, Robert Owen, secretary of the city's Charter Review Committee, raised concerns about council members abstaining from votes.^15,27 He said his only recourse under the charter was a sworn complaint to the mayor.^15,82 He filed a sworn complaint at that meeting alleging Benefield had violated the charter's voting rule fourteen times on December 4, 2025, by abstaining seven times without a valid reason and by not giving a valid reason for each abstention.^15,77

On January 26, 2026, Benefield sent two notices of claim over the December 4 vote removing him as the Planning and Zoning liaison.^3,16 The first, sent at 6:11 p.m. and addressed to "Council Members, Mr. West, and Mr. Bullock," said the removal functioned as a "public disciplinary proceeding" without advance notice of the allegations. It asked the city to "identify and implement an acceptable corrective solution within thirty (30) days" and named no dollar amount.¹⁶ At 7:40 p.m., he emailed West and Bullock what he called an "advance copy of my formal Notice of Claim," which he wrote would be served by certified mail on the mayor and each council member. It called the action a "stigmatizing disciplinary proceeding" and listed a "Settlement / damages demand (for purposes of the City's notice provisions)" of "$250,000.00 inclusive of attorney's fees and costs, together with the corrective action described above."³ Both letters said that if the city did not act within 30 days, he would have a lawyer pursue legal remedies, including monetary damages.^3,16 On February 18, Melissa Cranford, a partner in the city attorney's firm, Messer Fort, wrote that the city was tentatively scheduling a March 2 hearing on Owen's complaint and on complaints Gene Harris, vice chair of the Charter Review Committee, had filed against Benefield.^17,27,66,83 Harris's complaints were over Benefield's conduct at the June 26 and July 17, 2025, council meetings and his December 4 abstentions.^84,85 On February 19, the council met in closed session on the notice of claim and took no action.⁷³ Because City Attorney Bullock was named in Benefield's claim, the city told Benefield that Messer Fort partner Art Rodriguez would appear for the city at the hearing.⁸³

At the March 2, 2026, hearing, Harris, Owen, and Benefield each gave sworn statements to the council.² The outside counsel who reviewed the complaints told the council that two of the allegations had been filed too late under the city's rules and that a third was not properly sworn.⁸⁵ The counsel said the charter allegation over the abstentions was supported by the meeting video and minutes.^2,86 The council voted 6 to 0 four times, taking no action on the two late allegations and the improperly sworn one, and dismissing the charter allegation over the abstentions.^2,84,87 On the video, the chair then said, "That is unanimously dismissed."⁸⁸

Benefield did not vote on any of the four.²

The March 2 votes disposed of the complaints against Benefield, and the council took no vote on his own notice of claim.² On March 3, Benefield wrote to the city that his notice of claim "has not been substantively addressed."⁸⁹ On March 6, the city's lawyer, Melissa Cranford of Messer Fort, answered that the council had "taken no action authorizing the expenditure of funds for any settlement." She added that his "demand for damages is not being considered," and that "the matter is considered closed at this time."¹⁷ Benefield replied that same morning that the issues in his notice of claim, which he called "stigmatizing statements and procedural deficiencies," "remain unresolved," since the city had "not proposed or implemented any corrective action." He wrote that his notice had offered remedies "such as a formal public apology or other appropriate measures."⁹⁰

On March 19, 2026, the council met in closed session on Benefield's notice of claim and took no action on it.⁷⁴ Later that day, Benefield asked the council to change the December 4, 2025, minutes that had recorded his abstentions as "no reason given."^74,91 After a closed session, a motion on his request failed on a voice vote.^74,92 The minutes record no action on the item. We found no record that he withdrew his notice of claim.⁷⁴

On May 21, 2026, the council's agenda listed two closed-session items, one on a "complaint asserted against City Manager, C. West," and one on a "complaint asserted against City Councilman, A. Benefield." Each item was to get legal advice and consider "possible authorization of investigation." The minutes record no action on either. The record does not say whether either was a written complaint, who raised it, or what it alleged.⁹³

On August 6, 2026, West was absent from the council meeting.⁹⁴ On the video, a council member moved to appoint Police Chief Ron Joy acting city manager, saying that West "has submitted his resignation and he is currently out on leave, medical leave."^95,96,97

The council voted 7 to 0 to appoint Joy, and 7 to 0 to appoint a subcommittee to work with a search firm, SGR, on finding an interim city manager. The minutes we reviewed do not say why West was absent or describe any separation agreement with him.⁹⁴

On September 3, the council voted 7 to 0 to approve a contract with SGR to appoint Isaac Turner interim city manager.⁹⁷ On September 28, 2026, Council Member Adam Benefield wrote in a public Facebook post that the council had received Turner's resignation. He quoted the letter as saying "someone else should lead the implementation of needed dynamic structural changes and cultural shifts to our organization." The letter itself is not in the records we reviewed.⁹⁸

Who started them

Every row below is told in the narrative above. Robert Owen and Gene Harris filed separate complaints against Benefield that the council took up together, so this row counts as two of the 16 complaints in this story.

Counted by whom they were about, Council Member Adam Benefield was named in three, the most of anyone in this story, and none of them led to any action against him.^2,77,93 City Manager Tracie Hlavinka, Paul Roberts as a council member and former council member, and the City of Lago Vista itself were each the subject of two.^{3,6,7,12,56,72} Only two of the 16 ended with action against the person accused, the 2022 sanctions on six Planning and Zoning commissioners and the 2024 censure of Mayor Kevin Sullivan.^5,42

What it costs taxpayers

The one confirmed payment tied to a complaint in this story is the $210,291.32 the city paid Tracie Hlavinka under her October 2024 settlement, which a later budget exhibit ties to the General Fund's City Manager line.^11,13,14 The January 2026 budget amendment added $25,000 to Legal Services, $75,000 to the City Manager line, and $100,000 to City Secretary professional services, also in the General Fund.^13,14,15 It cited legal costs, city manager turnover, and an interim city secretary hired twice in one year.¹³ For the January 2026 ethics complaint against Mayor Saum, the city attorney estimated "a couple thousand dollars in attorney's fees."⁸¹ Benefield's formal notice of claim listed $250,000 in damages, and the city's lawyers wrote that his "demand for damages is not being considered."^3,17 As of that March 6 letter, the council had "taken no action authorizing the expenditure of funds for any settlement."¹⁷ What the city paid its outside investigators and lawyers for the other disputes in this story is not in the records we reviewed.^2,6,10,18 That includes the 2024 investigator and the outside counsel on the Roberts and Benefield complaints.^2,6,10,61,85 The records also do not show whether Whichard or McRoy received severance.¹⁸

What we could not find

• What the outside lawyers and investigators the city hired for these disputes billed, including the 2024 investigator, the outside counsel on the Roberts, Owen, Harris, and Benefield matters, and the cost of publishing the mayor's 2024 censure.
• What the May 15, 2025, separation agreement covered and who signed it, and what the June 26, 2025, ratifications concerning Whichard and McRoy authorized or paid.
• Whether Whichard received any severance or separation payment, and whether the council responded to the incidents he described.
• The terms of Charles West's departure from the city manager's post.
• What the $25,000 the budget book shows in the Legal department's settlement account for 2025-26 paid for.⁹⁹
• Who filed the July 25, 2024, complaint against City Manager Hlavinka, and who raised the complaints asserted against Benefield and West on the May 21, 2026, agenda.

What you can do

• File a public records request with the city for attorney fee bills, which state law makes public unless privileged, under Texas Government Code Section 552.022(a)(16).¹⁰⁰
• Ask for settlement agreements, public under Section 552.022(a)(18), and any separation agreements, including any involving Whichard, McRoy, or West.¹⁰⁰
• Ask for the contracts and payment records behind these disputes, public under Section 552.022(a)(3).¹⁰⁰
• File these requests through the city's open records page.¹⁰¹

If you have records on this, you can share them with us at /share-records. We protect your identity and publish the evidence when we can do so safely.