.PNG)
City commissioner Gus de Leon calls this illegal dumping; others call it illegal free road improvements
The collage above and the one below of the entrance and of the wall were posted by the commissioner on his social page
By Juan Montoya
Special to El Rrun-Rrun
If, come next Tuesday, the City of Brownsville Commission members approve a "settlement" with their fellow District 3 commissioner Gus de Leon over his charges that city Engineering and Public Works crews "dumped" tons of expensive asphalt millings on his family's property without his consent, it will mean political suicide for them and a brazen example of his self-dealing as a public official bordering on the criminal.
De Leon – personally and without the benefit of an attorney – has negotiated with City Attorney Will Treviño and City Manager Alan Gard, both of who see him as their boss with the power to hire and fire them, since May 4, when he claims he "discovered" city Public Works Crews overlaying a pothole-pocked dirt road on his property adjacent to the old railroad easement the family had leased to Union Pacific Railroad at the old bridge.
When he started "negotiating," he had demanded $1 million, which he later lowered to between $700,000 to $900,000, an offer later presented for consideration by his fellow city commissioners during the July 7 commission meeting. It's been going down since. At that time, no decision was reached by the commission and moved to this Tuesday's July 21 meeting.
Interestingly, the Cameron County Appraisal District places the taxable value of the property at $250,000 and the family has been offering it for $825,000 in local real estate listing since 2018 without any takers.
Unbeknownst to the and city management and the commissioners, De Leon had also entered into a lease
agreement with the Department of Homeland Security for the property and to access for the construction of a section of the Border Wall and to patrol the riverside. It is unknown whether the lease with the DHS includes a guarantee that the entrance and the road that leads to the Wall be in a condition which will allow them to move vehicles and heavy equipment. It clearly wasn't in such a condition before the "dumping."
agreement with the Department of Homeland Security for the property and to access for the construction of a section of the Border Wall and to patrol the riverside. It is unknown whether the lease with the DHS includes a guarantee that the entrance and the road that leads to the Wall be in a condition which will allow them to move vehicles and heavy equipment. It clearly wasn't in such a condition before the "dumping."
In fact, a construction warning sign has been erected and security guard the entrance.
Access to the property located south of the intersection of Sam Perl and Mexico Blvds., is now restricted by a security firm under subcontract with DHS. The contract for security by the federal government started just this past Thursday, when DHS started construction.
Many questions on this issue by the public remain unanswered. Some are:
1. Who ordered the city crews to enter the property and "dump" the valuable road material?
2. Was De Leon involved in a verbal, unwritten "agreement" – and with who? – to have the crews "dump" the asphalt millings and fill the potholes and make the road improvement in return for allowing the crews to supposedly use the property as a "staging area" for their work on downtown alleys?
Guerrero, by the way, has no engineering degree, but specialized in public relations before she was appointed as assistant EPW director under Garcia and then director of the department. As director with authority to order work crews, has she been interviewed? Did she clear it with her ex-boss? What role did she play? The buck stops there.
If there was an "unwritten" verbal agreement to send the crews in the property and make the road improvements, the city commissioners paying De Leon one red cent in taxpayers' money before ascertaining who was involved would be tantamount to engaging in a conspiracy to defraud the public.
Local contractors say that it costs $700 for a 20-yard load of asphalt millings. De Leon says that the city spread nearly one acre (1,700 square feet) five inches deep of the material on the road leading to the Wall. All that milled asphalt did not come from the downtown alleys. Did the city buy it or tap its road materials? What did it cost taxpayers?
And does no one see the huge conflict of interest in De Leon negotiating with the city administration (which he hires and fires), and with his colleagues on the city commission to benefit himself and his family?
It will be up to these six city commission members Tuesday to do their due diligence. We will see if they cave in to De Leon's litigation threats and demand ruse without demanding the facts, or if they will defend the interest of the public which elected them to protect their interests.
7 comments:
A Failure of Leadership, Transparency, and Public Trust
The circumstances surrounding the proposed settlement involving Commissioner De Leon raise serious questions about the judgment of the City Commission, the City Manager, and the City Attorney. Regardless of how this matter ultimately concludes, the appearance of conflicts of interest and the lack of transparency have severely undermined public confidence in city government.
At the heart of this controversy is an extraordinary demand for hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars for property that has a reported taxable value substantially below the amount sought. Before any public funds are considered, the Commission has an obligation to establish an independent factual record supported by appraisals, engineering analyses, legal opinions, and documented evidence.
Even more troubling is the allegation that a sitting city commissioner personally negotiated with the very governmental body of which he is a member. Public officials must avoid not only actual conflicts of interest but also circumstances that create the appearance that personal financial interests could influence governmental decision-making. When elected officials stand to benefit financially from actions taken by their own governing body, the public is entitled to expect extraordinary transparency and complete recusal from every aspect of the process.
The City Manager’s Office also bears significant responsibility. If city employees entered private property and performed work, someone authorized those actions. City employees do not independently decide to deploy personnel, equipment, and public materials to private property. The public deserves to know who authorized the work, under what legal authority it occurred, whether written documentation exists, and whether established policies were followed.
Likewise, the City Attorney should have insisted upon a comprehensive factual investigation before any settlement discussions advanced. The City’s legal responsibility is not merely to resolve disputes but to protect the interests of taxpayers and ensure that public funds are expended only after the facts have been fully developed. Recommending or facilitating settlement discussions before determining exactly what occurred risks placing expediency ahead of accountability.
Before a single taxpayer dollar is paid, several fundamental questions require clear answers:
* Who specifically authorized city personnel to enter the property?
* Were written work orders, permits, or agreements issued?
* What public purpose justified the expenditure of city labor, equipment, and materials?
* Who supervised the work?
* What is the actual market value of the alleged damages?
* What legal analysis supports the City’s potential liability?
* Were all commissioners fully informed of every material fact before settlement discussions began?
* Were appropriate conflict-of-interest procedures followed throughout the process?
Government earns public trust through transparency, accountability, and adherence to ethical standards. When those principles are questioned, the proper response is not to negotiate larger settlements or rush difficult decisions. The proper response is an independent investigation, complete public disclosure, and decisions based on verified facts rather than political pressure or litigation threats.
Taxpayers deserve confidence that every public dollar is spent lawfully, ethically, and only after a complete examination of the facts. Until that occurs, approving any substantial settlement would be premature and would only deepen public skepticism about the integrity of the City’s decision-making process.
Public office is a public trust. The Commission, the City Manager, and the City Attorney each have a responsibility to demonstrate that protecting taxpayers—not protecting political relationships—is their highest priority.
Gustavo Deleon , Pedro Cardenas, Steve Guerra, Carlos Elizondo out to screw the taxpayer. Vote them out of office.
Get a life, punk.
You bore me.
Todo en su tiempo.
El Diablo
los
Agarra
por
Fin. . .
That's what happens when you make a Police Chief a deputy City Manager!!
If he ran the Police Department to the ground!!
what do you think he will do to the City of Brownsville!!
Brownsville you are the laughing stock of th RGV!!! LMFAO
To make up for this grotesque payment to De Leon, the City of Brownsville is expected to raise local bus fare, charge for public restrooms like they do in Europe and raise PUB rates for residential customers.
Mark my words.
They will charge a toll for using International, Southmost and Boca Chica, Paredes and Central. There will be no transfers. Ten dollars each time you use these roads.
Post a Comment