COUNTY TO DEFEND GARZA, GRACIA LEFT ON HIS OWN; COURTHOUSE SECURITY LEFT UNDER CONSTABLE GOMEZ

 By Juan Montoya

The Cameron County Commissioners Court – by unanimous vote – voted to hire outside counsel to defend Cameron County Sheriff Eric Garza in his official capacity in federal court on a lawsuit by Sgt. Rodrigo Almanza where he alleges that his First Amendment rights were violated and that he suffered retaliation as a result of his open political support for former Sheriff Omar Lucio.

Garza and his Chief Deputy Robert Gracia were sued in their official and individual capacity by Almanza after he said that he had been subjected to humiliation and had been subjected to retaliation for his support of the former sheriff.

The commissioners did not include Gracia in the motion, which means he will have to acquire his own attorney to represent him in his individual and official capacity. Garza, also, will have to provide his own attorney to defend himself from the lawsuit in his individual capacity.

Gracia – a retired Drug Enforcement Agency veteran – took over the chief deputy position even before Garza had been sworn and issued orders to department personnel in December 30 to attend the swearing in January 1 and ordered them to reapply for their jobs on pain of termination. 

But there was one hitch, he had not been hired yet and he was not certified by the Texas Commission On Law Enforcement (T-COLE), as required by the job description. He is now listed as chief deputy at a $86,020 salary.

He took over the position even though he wasn't one of the eight applicants for the chief deputy advertised slot. 

But even before he passed the test, he had authorized transfers in personnel from various divisions and implemented policies that seemed to some supporters of the previous sheriff they were retaliatory. 

He figures prominently in two lawsuits in federal court, one of them for allegedly violating the First Amendment rights of former sheriff Omar Lucio supporter and subjecting him to demeaning and humiliating chores below less qualified personnel. In the other, before the election, he is listed as having been the recipient of a smuggled tape from inside the jail of a jailer apparently beating an inmate. 

Since Gracia was not officially a county employee, the commissioners didn't feel that it was appropriate to have the county pay for legal counsel to defend him in the federal lawsuit.

Among the retaliatory acts Almanza lists are: 

a. transferring him to the Transport Division from the prestigious Criminal Investigations Division, where he handled major crimes and also served as liaison to the CCSO’s counterpart in the Republic of Mexico;

b. stripping him of all subordinates and supervisory duties

c. assigning him to shift schedules and working conditions not given to other CCSO supervisors;

d. having him report to a person not certified as a peace officer; and

e. requiring him to perform menial and pointless tasks like distributing inmate meal carts and physically manning a perfectly operational gate during the "lethal" freezing weather.

Commissioners: Gomez Keeps Courthouse Security Budget

Commissioners also voted to keep the county's Courthouse Security Budget and 15 bailiffs and deputies under Pct. 2 Constable Abel Gomez, as per a Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) signed before by Lucio and the court.

Garza and Gracia had ordered the deputies ad bailiffs to report to the sheriff office at Rucker-Carrizales and issued them new uniforms and swore them in and requird them to report to them instead of reporting to Gomez.

In a letter dated March 25, Cameron County Sheriff Eric Garza has notified the Cameron County Commissioners Court that he is unilaterally rescinding the MOU signed by Lucio giving Pct. 2 Constable Abel Gomez administrative control over 15 court bailiffs and security deputies. 

In one fell swoop, Garza says he was going to remove them from Gomez's control and take over their supervision. 

To make his point, he sent one of Gomez's former challengers for the constable's office, Silverio "Silver" Cisneros, to order the 15 court bailiffs and security personnel to report to the sheriff's office at Rucker-Carrizales Correction Center. If they did not show up, Cisneros told the officers, they could consider themselves fired.

However, while the deputies are under the authority of the new sheriff, they still remain under the courthouse security fund budget under Pct. 2 constable Gomez. As far as anyone knows, there have been no budget amendments to place the slots under the sheriff's department, a move required before they can be in his budget. In short, there are no slots in which to place the 15 officers in the sheriff department budget.

Under the state statute, the commissioners can fund: "bailiffs, deputy sheriffs, deputy constables, or contract security personnel during times when they are providing appropriate security services." The courthouse security fund, then, is not under the control of the sheriff, but rather under the "direction of the commissioners court." 

The court, apparently, thought that the statute gives the control of the security budget and chose to keep it under Gomez. Now it's up to Garza to see whether he will sue the commissioners court to establish his authority over courthouse security.