NO WONDER SALAZAR HAS WEDDING RUNNERS IN THE HALLS

By Juan Montoya
After we posted the story about how Justice of the Peace Linda Salazar stationed a runner in the halls of the Cameron County Courthouse Judiciary wing to steer couples to wed in her court instead of next door at JP 2-2 (Kip Van Hodge), we received some news that explained why.
It seems that the $250 marriage fee that she charges to the happy couples does not have to be reported or tuned in to the county. In other words, it's a fringe benefit of judges, especially the justices of the peace have enjoyed as the perks of office.
At $250 a pop, it's no wonder Salazar devotes the energies of one of her employees to be stationed outside the County Clerk's office in the judiciary wing to nab the lovebirds before they get a chance to speak with Hodge's receptionist, the first one down the hall where the JP's offices are located. A conservative estimate at four weddings per week translates inbto $50,000 a year aside from her county salary. IS she reporting this income to the IRS?
Someone also told us that the late JP 2-2 Tony Torres used to complain to whoever would lend him their ear of Salazar's policy of posting one of her "girls" in the hallway to entice them to have Linda perform the nuptials.
By the way, the woman at right who works for Salazar has been identified as none other than Griselda Juarez. Besides working for the JP's office, she is also the stepdaughter of Cameron County Treasurer David Betancourt. It's not her fault she gets assigned the task of running wedding couples, of course, but surely one can be more discreet, can't we?
If Salazar performs four weddings a week, that's a coll thousand dollars that goes straight into her pocket. If she makes a home visit, the price goes up to $300 for the inconvenience of the judge driving to the couple's home or preferred place of wedding.
We have also heard that sometimes she performs ceremonies on Saturdays and has the wedding party go to the second story of the judicial wing after she lets them in with her passkey. It is not unusual to see a party of 10 or 15 members of a wedding entourage entering the doors of the courthouse and then going up to Salazar's office for the performance of the wedding ceremony.
More than once, county personnel have arrived on a Monday to encounter dirty bathrooms or waste receptacles full of trash when they should have been clean to begin the workweek. When asked, the janitor tells them that Linda had been busy over the weekend and that some in the party had to usse the bathrooms and that the mess was left there as a result.
More troubling than the mess left over the weekend is the breach of security that results when scores of people can enter the building and walk around at will. With only one janitor there and no one from the constables or bailiffs to guard their movements, it is not far fetched to think that someone may get the idea that they can enter during one of these ceremonies and stash a weapon inside for use at a later date, perhaps during a trial or to target a witness in a criminal case.
The judges have a secure parking lot in the rear and entrance from behind the back doors of the courthouse is restricted. But what about this serious breach of security that results when unscreened visitors such as those in a large wedding party enter the building when there are no security measures in place?
We've had bomb threats before at the courthouse. What if the next one turns out to be a real one because someone infiltrated the courthouse as a a member of a wedding party. Salazar made her $250, but at what cost?