Mayor: City Commission violated Open Meetings Act

For months, Brownsville elected officials voiced their opposition to the proposed border wall, speaking publicly about the city’s united stance on the issue. But on Jan. 8, the City Commission decided to allow surveyors onto municipal land — surprising many of the commission’s constituents who expected politicians to show their support by resisting preliminary steps toward the wall’s construction.

Some Brownsville residents were shocked not only by the commission’s decision, but by the way the decision was made. City Manager Charlie Cabler signed the form giving consent to federal surveyors in executive session. Commissioners never voted publicly on the issue. “We looked at it more substantially than procedurally,” said City Attorney Jim Goza.

“It’s disturbing that the decision was made behind closed doors,” said Elizabeth Garcia, founder of Coalition of Amigos in Solidarity and Action (CASA), a community organization. “I feel like I was betrayed.”

Mayor Pat Ahumada said he has no doubt that the City Commission’s action violated the Texas Open Meetings Act.

The act states that “a government body’s final action, decision or vote on any matter within its jurisdiction may be made only in an open session held in compliance with the notice requirement of the Act.”

The only relevant discussion of the issue was at an Oct. 16 City Commission meeting, when commissioners denied Mayor Ahumada’s motion to strengthen opposition to federal surveyors. At that point, the Department of Homeland Security had not yet sent letters to landowners asking for consent.

“They interpreted that discussion as consent, but the form didn’t even exist at the time. How could we vote to sign the form if the form didn’t exist?” Ahumada asked.

The city returned the signed form to the federal government two days after DHS’ Jan. 6 deadline had passed, managing to narrowly avoid a law suit. On Friday, 12 Cameron County landowners — including the Brownsville Public Utilities Board — were sued over access to their land.

If the City Commission is found in violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act, the validity of the consent might be held in question. In several precedents, including the Toyah Independent School District v. Pecos-Barstow Independent School District,decisions made in executive session against the act’s requirements have been ruled ineffective.

“If there is an allegation, we would ask the Brownsville Police Department to determine whether there was intent to bypass the Open Meetings Act,” said District Attorney Armando Villalobos. He added that a violation of the act might not necessitate a retraction of the consent given by commissioners.

“The way the process was conducted might have been illegal,” he said, “but that doesn’t negate the commission’s decision.”

Opponents of the fence are left to guess why the commission made its decision, and why the decision was made outside of the public forum. Some suspect that politicians were eager to conceal what would inevitably be an unpopular choice.

“I’d been talking to Commissioner (Ricardo) Longoria for months, and he always told me ‘I am with you,’” Garcia recalled. “He turned out to be just another politician, pursuing his own political agenda instead of the will of the community.”

Garcia has organized a CASA vigil to be held at 3 p.m. today at Hope Park, a stretch of the city’s property that stands to be divided by the wall. The group will gather around an orange survey marker bearing the insignia of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the words, “Please do not disturb nearby.”

“The commissioners need to know how strong we still feel about this issue,” Garcia said.

The City Commission’s next meeting is on Tuesday, Jan 22. The issue of the consent given to federal surveyors is currently on the agenda