The city’s Ethics Review Board dismissed a local GOP official’s complaint alleging Mayor Gina Ortiz Jones broke the city’s ethics rules by using official city letterhead to court the 2028 Democratic National Convention.

Jones did not attend the hearing, but filed a written response on Sept. 30 asking for the board to dismiss the complaint. She said that “securing major conventions” is a legitimate part of her role as mayor, and that she ran the letter by City Attorney Andy Segovia before it was sent.

On Monday, she was represented by a former city attorney, Frank Garza, who said the convention application was actually initiated by the city’s tourism nonprofit, Visit San Antonio, and that the “complaint was filed to harass the mayor.”

He provided numerous emails between Jones, City Attorney Andy Segovia and City Manager Erik Walsh discussing the letter, ending with Walsh giving his approval on June 27: “Andy reviewed. Letter is good to go.”

It’s the fourth time this year the Ethics Review Board has been asked to consider whether an elected official misused city resources this year — something each official argued was a stretch from the policy’s intended purpose but was still sanctioned. With the exception of Jones, all were still sanctioned.

“We don’t want the Ethics Review Board to become a gotcha board,” Chair Patrick Lang said. “That’s not what we’re for.”

Last month the board cited former Mayor Ron Nirenberg for using city resources to create social media content, something Nirenberg’s attorney contended was an attempt to “meet the people where they are.”

Councilman Marc Whyte (D10) was fined for using photos with city officials in his campaign material, which critics said implied an endorsement from the police chief. Meanwhile, Councilwoman Sukh Kaur (D1) received a lesser punishment after her chief of staff addressed a neighborhood gathering on behalf of both the council office and her campaign — also classified as a misuse of city resources.

‘Quid pro quo’

As with many of the board’s recent cases, Jones’ complaint came from a political foe.  It was filed by Kyle Sinclair, a former vice chair of the Republican Party of Bexar County who recently resigned that role to launch a campaign in Texas’ 21st Congressional District. 

Sinclair told KSAT last week that he’d revoke the complaint if Jones also applied to host the 2028 Republican National Convention, not knowing that the Republicans had already made an unusually early decision to hold it in Houston.

Jones said in her response that Sinclair was in essence asking her to repeat the same action he’d deemed unethical, and her attorney asked the board to sanction him for a frivolous complaint.

“[Sinclair’s] willingness to drop the ethics complaint — upon my agreement to engage in the same conduct that he found problematic, but this time toward the Republican National Convention, clearly demonstrates this complaint is politically motivated and lacks merit,” Jones wrote.

The Ethics Review Board is made up of 11 members: 10 members appointed by their respective councilmembers and one appointed by the mayor.

It takes complaints referred to it after an independent attorney helps determine whether the issue qualifies as a violation of city code.

Once a complaint is filed, it can’t be taken back. But District 8 appointee Jim Reidy said Sinclair’s attempt to pressure Jones in exchange for rescinding the complaint was an alarming twist that shouldn’t go unaddressed.

“I’m sure somebody else might be thinking this too, but the quid pro quo aspect of Mr. Sinclair’s request to take down this complaint in exchange for applying for the Republican National Convention troubles me a little bit,” Reidy said.

Garza asked the board to fine Sinclair for a frivolous complaint, but Lang said that would require Jones to file a separate complaint against him. 

Sinclair said afterward that complaints of harassment were unjustified. He hasn’t spoken to the mayor, he told reporters, and Jones even blocked him on social media.

“I simply filed a complaint against her. That’s not harassment. That is the legal way to do it,” he said. “I have absolutely no issue with what I did, how I did it, and I would do it again, even right now.”