Prairie Village City Attorney Alexander J. Aggen dismissed an ethics complaint against Councilmembers David Robinson, Tyler Agniel, and Ian Graves, and Mayor Erik Mikkelson earlier this month without a review by a disinterested third party.
The complaint
filed by resident Anna Gepson stemmed from a September 15, 2025, city council meeting in which “Messrs. David Robinson and Agniel are ignorant of a dais microphone, resulting in broadcasting the Robinson/Agniel conduct to the livestream audience of an untold number of viewers. The Robinson/Agniel conduct includes Councilmembers David Robinson and Tyler Agniel making comments, laced with extreme profanity, that undermine, ridicule, mock and intimidate” Gepson.
Gepson raised concerns about construction debris and trash from a jobsite being left out rather than picked up.
“One of the photos I sent showed a broken glass bottle inside a fenced area around a protected tree in the right-of-way on a new build construction site,” Gepson wrote in her complaint. “The workers were using the fenced area around the tree as a trash dump. Not cool.
“During my three minutes of public comment at the September 15 city council meeting, I expressed my disappointment that council wouldn’t ban construction work on Sundays and federal holidays. I also mentioned that the broken glass bottle had been sitting under that tree for two months, which I find unacceptable.”
Much of the hot mic exchange is laced with profanity, including the “F-Bomb” and all of it is clearly mocking Gepson.
One of the few comments not containing foul language from Agniel states “Every time I see one of her emails, I just hear her little voice.”
Aggen stated he did not find it “necessary to make a request under the Code of Ethics for a potential third-party investigation. After analysis of the Complainant’s specific concerns and the category of allegations, and after consultation with other counsel on any potential inability to ‘conduct [ ] such an investigation’ based on conflicts or regulations which govern the profession, such a third-party investigation was determined to be unnecessary.”
Aggen also found that, despite the city’s code of ethics specifically stating under “General expectations of conduct,” that “Members of the governing body are expected to be civil and professional in the performance of their duties,” the code did not require an actual investigation to determine if a violation of the ethics code had occurred.
“These findings do not condone the alleged action, nor is there a finding made that the Complaint is frivolous under Section 1-212(k)(iii),” he wrote. “However, the Complaint is centered and related on the purposes, policies, and goals of the code, as well as the general expectations of conduct, and is therefore subject to limitations on investigations and enforcement.”
However, according to former Prairie Village City Councilman Dan Runion, an attorney, not only did those comments breach the spirit of the code, but he also feels there is a conflict of interest in which Aggen should have at least sought an outside perspective.
“I would think you might want to get a third party,” Runion said. “‘Say, here’s the standard, here’s the situation. I was appointed by one of the people named in the complaint. I was confirmed by a body that included other people who are named in the complaint. Tell me, third party. Tell me, do you think I’m in the clear continuing the review of the complaint?'”
Aggen did discuss the matter with “other counsel” but apparently not an independent third party, before continuing the review of the matter.
Contacted via email, Aggen said; “I consulted with other attorneys at my firm, the Hunter Law Group, but did not consult with any outside/third-party counsel.”
Controversy abounds in Prairie Village
This is far from the first controversy in Prairie Village — and not even the first time an ethics complaint has been rejected.
According to public radio station NCUR, in 2023 resident Mike Sullinger — a frequent critic of the council — “contended that the mayor and five of the governing body’s 10 councilmembers had various conflicts of interest when it came to housing either because of their connections to United Community Services of Johnson County, a nonprofit that has a focus on attainable housing, or due to opinions they expressed about housing and other matters online.”
Then-City Attorney David Waters recommended the council dismiss the complaint, and it did so unanimously.
Moreover, in 2024, The Sentinel reported Mikkelson was pushing changes to the city’s code of ethics, which were constitutionally suspect.
Proposed changes to the Prairie Village code of ethics would’ve restricted elected officials’ private speech and subject them to public sanctions for representing constituent interests at the whim of the majority of council members. Mikkelson, who is also an attorney, believes it is constitutional to do so, but he declined to provide any legal analysis to substantiate his position.
Another constitutional question arises in the proposal to prohibit former elected officials from appearing before future City Councils to discuss issues in which they were involved as officeholders.
Additionally, most recently, a California climate group with ties to a state Political Action Committee — or PAC — called “Amberwave” funneled so-called “dark money” into the Prairie Village election, which took place earlier this month.
A report by Earl Glynne of Watchdoglab shows that in October of 2024, Amberwave — which was launched that year by Johnson County Board of County Commissioners Chairman Mike Kelly — took in the bulk of its funding, some $85,000 from a dark money outfit called the “Local Jobs and Economic Development Fund.” Another $65,000 was donated by labor unions, mostly from out of state.
