Lawsuit challenges single-member districts in Weslaco

WESLACO — A lawsuit is questioning the validity of the city’s move to single-member districts, alleging the city didn’t follow proper procedures during May’s election.

The plaintiffs — city residents who did not file the lawsuit as or on behalf of a political group — say that since the city charter had to be changed in four places, the proposition should have been broken into several questions instead of one all-encompassing measure.

Additionally, the lawsuit states the election was ordered by a resolution city commissioners adopted, but that such an election must be ordered by an ordinance’s adoption — as required under Texas Local Government Code.

Finally, the plaintiffs contest in the lawsuit that city officials failed to comply with procedures listed in the federal Voting Rights Act.

“The lawsuit is to challenge the election of Proposition 1 and to see if they can get the court to overrule the election,” said Mayor Buddy de la Rosa, who was the lone defendant in the lawsuit.

De la Rosa said he is being represented by City Attorney Ramon Vela until the city’s insurance firm can assign another attorney or legal firm to take over — a customary practice — he said.

As of Friday morning, de la Rosa said he did not know whether new legal counsel had been assigned, and Vela did not return phone calls seeking comment on the lawsuit.

“Frequently the city is sued and sometimes can be sued in conjunction with the mayor,” he said.

Defense’s response

In a response filed with the court July 10, attorneys representing de la Rosa claim the points raised in the lawsuit do not fall within the scope of contesting an election, according to Texas Election Code.

“It is the contestants’ burden to plead a case that properly invokes the court’s subject matter jurisdiction,” the response states.

City commissioners voted on March 6 to place Proposition 1 on the May 12 ballot, where it passed 1,895 votes to 1,724. Commissioners adopted Proposition 1 on May 22.

The proposition consisted of several parts, including increasing the number of city commissioners from five to seven including the mayor and creating six single-member districts and providing procedures for their initial elections.

Proposition 1 also called for a revision to the city charter that would force ordinances or resolutions to be approved by a majority of all commissioners, not a majority of the quorum of commissioners present and voting at a given meeting.

Separation of church and state

Xavier E. Casanova Sr., one of the plaintiffs, said he witnessed the violation of specific “legal procedures” during the election but would not elaborate further.

Casanova said he mainly disagreed with the Catholic Church’s involvement in the election process.

“I think there should be a separation of church and state and I’m not saying that church-going people shouldn’t vote, but they’re not babies,” he said. “You shouldn’t tell them what to say or what to vote, and they’ll do whatever the church says without looking at all the pros and cons.”

Linda Caballero, who served as treasurer for the Keep Weslaco United group which opposed Proposition 1, said she also felt the church became too involved with the proposition’s

passage.

“I went (to church) myself and I had people shoving papers in my face telling me to sign it and they said ‘Don’t worry about it, just sign,’” Caballero said.

She said she also saw petitions in favor of Proposition 1 being distributed at St. Pius X Church in Weslaco.

“Father Patt (Steitz) from the pulpit said, ‘You had to vote for Proposition 1.’”

Caballero declined to sign the petition because she said there was no explanation regarding for what the document was, only spaces for signatures.

Steitz was unavailable for comment, but Monsignor Bob Maher of the Brownsville diocese said the church will always act in the best interest of its parishioners, which can cause misunderstandings.

“We support no particular political party or candidates. We do recognize (policy formation) plays a very important part in making decisions which directly impact the people. We look at public policy to see how well it supports the family and community,” Maher said.

Applying the ethical and moral teachings of the church to those political situations calls for individual parishioners to use “prudential judgment,” which will vary from person to person, Maher said.

Moving forward

De la Rosa said city officials appropriately handled Proposition 1 and that it was adequately presented to local residents.

“There are a lot of technicalities they state the city did not comply with. They haven’t been substantiated,” he said. “That’s an opinion.

“The city is going to implement single-member district because it’s the law of the land because the citizens voted. The city is moving forward in the best time we can to set up the single-member districts, but those things take time and this lawsuit is taking focus from doing those administrative things.”

Still, De la Rosa said he believes the citizens who filed the lawsuit have a right to voice their opinion.

“They certainly should be heard in court if they feel they have complaints and that there are violations of the law, they certainly have their opinion. We’ll look at all the different options out there,” he said.

The Citizens in Action group — which strongly lobbied for Proposition 1’s passage — is backing the city in the legal wrangling, said member Viola Elizondo.

Elizondo said the group has supplied the city lists of lawyers and contacts in cities that have successfully undertaken the single-member district process to use as potential legal references.

She believes the individuals presenting the lawsuit are simply “splitting hairs” to keep the proposition from taking effect.

“I think it’s simply keeping the process from happening, because as far as a legal standpoint, there is none,” she said.