Sunday, June 30, 2013

JP Marriage



A poster asked if the income has to be reported to the IRS - well yes it does. In the same way they say people here demand their corruption, I feel like I can say we have a lot of saps who demand they be lied to so they can then justify their stupid ignorant beliefs.

TWO KEYS FACTS: One, the couple cannot get married until 72 hours after the license is issued. This means there is no incentive for the JP's to be directing couples to their offices. They cannot marry them anyway for 72 hours. Now, they certainly can make an appointment for 72 hours later. But why would someone from an outlying area of the county come back to Brownsville to get married when they can get married with any number of other JP's on the list given to them by the clerk's office. If you live in Brownsville you are not going to go to La Feria to get married unless you personally know Mike Trejo and want him to marry you. Conversely, if you live in La Feria you are not going to come back to Brownsville to have Linda Salazar marry you, unless you know her and want her to marry you. It is that simple.

KEY FACT TWO: The marriage certificate issued by the clerk has a section on it for the JP or other authorized person to perform marriages to complete and return to the clerk. This is how the number of weddings are kept track of and by whom.

There is no secrecy here - just pettiness by people who hate everyone who earns a living better than their own. There is also dirty politics coming out of commissioners court. I find this very disheartening.


This has become a hot potato issue, and I am not sure why? Well, for the most part. I think for the most part Linda Salazar has fallen out of grace with commissioner's court, so they are leaking information to make the JP's look bad.   The BV never makes itself party to dirty politics,  and has not published the information sent to the BV.

But there is a truth, that commissioners court has reached their limit with Linda Salazar.  In fact because of her breach of courthouse security on the weekends she has been sent a letter from the  constable to stop performing weddings at the courthouse when there is no scheduled security at the courthouse.  On this issue the constable and commissioners court are on sure footing in their complaint.

As to Linda Salazar this appears to be just one of several issues they are looking at.

But here is the scoop.  JPs Garcia and Salazar are located in the same building as the clerk who issues the marriage license.  It is only logical that the vast majority of the people getting married will either go to JP Garcia or Salazar.  This is a simple reality.

It is my understanding the game plan is to move both JP's to one of the BISD buildings traded to the county to make room for new district and county courtrooms at the court house.  The front of the building will be remodelled to extend to the current columns. 

Unless someone personally wants another JP to marry them because they are a friend of the family, or because they are doing a backyard wedding on SPI, it seems logical the bride and groom would just go to JP Garcia or Salazar because of their proximity to the clerk's office.

I asked the staff of both JP's how much the fee is for a wedding.  It seems to range from about $150, during regular business hours, to $250 for a weekend wedding at some one's house or a hall.

I am the first to say these fees seem high - but here is the scoop - it is  for the legislature to regulate the matter.  If they were to choose so, they could set a standard fee, which includes a percentage going to the state.

I am not one to attack someone who engages in a legal business, just because I find the  fees to be high. 

The letter to JP Salazar to stop the weekend weddings is well placed.  But beyond that, what is the issue?  The law is being followed.  So what is the basis of the complaint other then people being petty?

If you want it to change write Rene Oliviera and ask that the state better regulate the practice of weddings by JPs.

Another issue you can raise with Rene Oliviera is - seek a change as to who is qualified to perform marriages.  Maybe it is time we open the process to anyone who can pass a state test.  I thought Texas was about free enterprise - ah but this is about money - so we limit who can earn it.


From the Herald: Click

For over 20 years now, all over north Texas, any DWI plea bargain must include a guilty plea, two years probation, and all of the statutory restrictions and classes. The benefit to the defendant is - they avoid jail time,  and a significantly higher fine.

What is the point of DPS enforcing DWI laws in Cameron county when this and all past DA's do not take DWI's seriously.  The entire issue of DWI's in Cameron county is a joke, and it is best for all concerned we just finally admit to it.

Saturday, June 29, 2013

TC Activity


Note, even though both storms dissipated, it does not mean both of these same storms cannot come back. This screen updates automatically, which is why it went from showing two storms to no storms.


At the same time people all over the courthouse were talking about the grand jury taking no action against Ernie Hernandez, Ernie Hernandez was telling same to a reporter at the Brownsville Herald.  There was no need for any employee within the DA's office to leak anything because Ernie Hernandez was already discussing it with the Herald.  It was all over the courthouse.

But facts always elude pathological liars.

A SIDE NOTE:  Some years back I warned a Brownsville businessman to not tie his business to the endless lies and defamation of the convicted drunk.  I warned him his business would be sued.  He ended up being sued 4 times by different people.  At least in my  case his business insurance coverage ended up paying to get the business man and the convicted drunk released from the lawsuit for defamation.  In all $60,000 was paid, by two different insurance companies.

Pay attention Zeke you idiot - by paying this drunk through your ads, you have exposed your LLC.  And to be clear to you Zeke, you have no say in what your insurance company chooses to do.  They will do what is best for them regardless of how it impacts your business.  Some people never, ever learn.

I would personally hope Melissa Zamora would end this by suing Zeke's LLC and the drunk.  She will not.  And the defamation and lies will continue.

Now if DA Saenz wants to convene a grand jury to learn how people found out about the result, his first witness needs to be himself.  He needs to tell the grand jury everyone he told who had no need to know.  If my sources are to be believe, his mouth ran over big time. 

You happy now Zeke.  Saenz you deserve every bit of bad press you get.


Here is how the grand jury works since the alleged journalist does not seem to know. When a potential defendant is called before a grand jury, and the grand jury takes no action the first thing any DA does is inform the possible defendant that the grand jury took no action. This is standard practice. The reality is DA Saenz probably told several people on his staff of this fact. Once the alleged defendant is told no action was taken, he or she is free to tell the world. There is no secrecy.

The reality is, by the time I got to the courthouse, people all over the courthouse knew the grand jury took no action against Ernie Hernandez.  There was no secret.  The information was public information.  There is no rule which bars DA Saenz or Ernie Hernandez from telling the world.

But when you have no story, which more often than not is what Juanito publishes, you make one up.

He says he does not believe Melissa Zamora was my source, but in his original story on my source the first comment he published was, it was Melissa Zamora.  He expects people to believe they never saw it.

DA Saenz told numerous people there was no action taken, both inside his office and outside his office, if my source if to be believed.  This source has never failed me.  And for the record, I did not go with the story after the first person told me, I chose to go to a reliable source to verify it.

The courthouse is like Peyton Place.  If you were in the courthouse when I was you knew the grand jury took no action.  DA Saenz announced it to both staff members and non staff members.  There is no secrecy issue.  He had a legal duty to inform any targets of the non-action.  They had no legal obligation to not speak.  Non-action means non-action - nothing stops Guz Garza from going back with more evidence and trying again.

But let's step back for a second and pretend we are not stoned drunk.  Ernie Hernandez verified in the Herald he was not indicted - which - here it comes - the grand jury therefore took no action against him.

The problem with the drunk is, he was not out of bed early enough to be at the courthouse to hear what happened.  So he just makes up a stupid story about secrecy when in fact there was no secrecy - it had become common knowledge.

When he was too lazy to get out of bed for the first 8 Liner press release he ran the same bogus story to the point of saying DA Saenz told him I accosted him in front of the sheriff, ICE, and the police - and no one chose to arrest me.  With numerous cameras running, press everyone - and no one saw it.  If this guy were to tell me DNA testing showed he is a male, I would want to investigate the lab which did the testing.  Nothing he ever says is ever reliable.

His writing is so bizarre he claims I revealed my source, but then claims he believes it was not Melissa Zamora - so then please tell the world - who was my source since I revealed my source.  He cannot, because he does not know.  Why?  Because the source was not revealed.

The problem is real simple - had he been out of bed and in the courthouse by 10 a.m. he would have heard the same story I heard.  It is really that simple.

And for the record, if Zeke Silva is not involved in these type matters, why has he been at the press conferences on the 8 Liners?  Ah, the drunk would  not know that because he was still in bed and never made it to any of the press conferences.

I am convinced that Zeke Silva got an earful over the latest false claims by this guy.  But Saenz deserves this mess - he hired Zeke Silva and now he has to live with that decision.

This blogger goes after Commissioner Hernandez for hiring someone with a criminal history, but then turns a blind eye to  the fact that DA Saenz did the same thing in the hiring of Zeke Silva - his mind is so far gone he cannot see just how stupid he looks with his double standard.

I am certain DA Saenz will stay in this Peyton Place soap opera for a long time.  He seems clueless how he got there.

Just for the record, would not a real journalist tell his readers that this Zeke Silva he seeks to protect is paying him for an ad.  Or is he providing a free ad in exchange for information?  Either way, this ad proves DA Saenz's deserves to be in the middle of this soap opera.  His so called loyal  friend and employee is paying the drunk to make DA Saenz look inept.

As is always the case with Juanito every word he prints is bought and paid for.


For the Opinion click here

I like the way this opinion is written - it cuts to the chase with a really simple summary before it gets into the factual summary.

The bottom line is, the press now must investigate whether or not statements provided to them are at least substantially true.  Under the guise of news they can no longer just print whatever they are told under the protection they are just reporting what they were told.  If the statement is defamatory they may not repeat it without liability.

The Coronado case against Peter Zavaletta and the Brownsville Herald is pending a motion for new trial.  This decision could put that case back in a state for trial.

Not everyone will qualify to use these forms.  They are for small dollar divorces.  But it is a start.  You do not need an attorney to use the forms.  Just scroll down - there are different forms for different facts.


When all variables are  compared, the Netbook is the better deal.

The Netbook has an 8" screen, the Kindle Fire has a 7" screen.  Both have 8GB of memory and 1GB of Ram.   The Netbook has a 1.54GHz processor, the Kindle Fire has a 1.2GHz processor.

The Netbook is $99.00 at Walmart on line.  The Kindle Fire is $159.00 at Amazon. 

The Netbook - click here

The Kindle Fire - click here

I bought Bela and her mom, and aunt the Netbook - they are all very happy with it.  Best to order it on line, since it is rarely in stock at the store.  Click pick up at the store  for free delivery.

Friday, June 28, 2013

TC Activity


This storm is moving north northwestern - in short order it will be in the Caribbean.   I figure a week before it enters the gulf, assuming it does not die before then.  Just something worth watching over the next week.


"Discussion to consider an offer to lease the premises known as the “Cueto Building Complex”,
located at 1301 East Madison Street, Brownsville, Texas, to the University of Texas System
through its Board of Regents, pursuant to Texas Government Code §551.071 (
on a matter in which the duty of the attorney to the governmental body, under the Texas Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas, clearly conflict with the Texas Open Meetings Act) and pursuant to Texas Government Code §551.072, (deliberations to discuss the lease of real
property) (Mayor A. Martinez/Commissioner R. Gowen – 15 min.)"

Click for Agenda - ORIGINAL POST

Click  for Correct Agenda

On the correction the information is still the same.  What happened is, I read the agenda as it was in the email notice.  Sometimes the agenda is not posted right away to the official agenda link.  I went to the link and just clicked on the last entry without looking at the date.  Sorry - but the substance of the post is the same - just the wrong link.

The reality is, the COB just needs to sell the Cueta building to UT and be done with it - we never needed it to begin with.

You will also note, the vote is coming before Portillo is sworn in.  This means Tony thinks he has the 4 votes without Portillo.


It is in fact true that Ernie Hernandez appeared before the grand jury this week related to the employment of his brother-in-law - Cadriel. I hate grand jury leaks - but they are what they are.

It took a bit of doing - but I learned from very reliable sources that the grand jury took no action after hearing the evidence presented by Guz Garza.


The entire matter is a constructive conspiracy.  More often than I care to admit, people will come to me and tell me they did me a favor at the political level and now they expect something.  I cannot control what people do without my consent or knowledge.  I am not accountable for their actions.  By me refusing the quid pro quo they get the message - I will not play.

I believe low level employees at the county decided that if they helped Cadriel they could later gain favor with Ernie Hernandez - hence the constructive conspiracy.  In my opinion this is why no evidence has ever been found against Ernie Hernandez on this issue.

People need to know the entire story.  The entire story is - the grand jury took no action.


One would hope that we see nothing on Tuesday's agenda related to real estate deals between UT and the COB. The COB needs to stand down until the UT Board of Regents signs off on the UT TSC real estate agreement.

Further, it is not humanly possible for Deborah Portillo as a commissioner to do her due diligence in reviewing any such deals between UT and the COB when she will have been on the commission for literally minutes before executive session is called to consider the matter. We shall see - will she say she needs to do her due diligence or just do as commanded by Tony Martinez?

I would hope in response to Tony Martinez's conduct during this entire difficult time that TSC would vote to pull out of United Brownsville.  It is clear that Tony Martinez, United Brownsville, and Juliet Garcia all worked not in harmony with TSC but in constant conflict.  If TSC would vote to withdraw from United Brownsville it would send a very, very strong message.

Thursday, June 27, 2013



"Be careful what you ask for." The Republicans have set themselves up for a battle royal.


The Texas abortion debate for me is a win win.  I personally have no problem with the law Texas seeks to impose concerning abortion.  Once its application is in place there may be a few areas where a court may need to intervene, but the 20 week issue will be upheld by the Supreme Court.  This is not 1973.  Today any woman of any age on demand can buy emergency contraceptives.  This means any woman who has been raped can end any possible pregnancy even before it occurs or within hours of conception.  There is no reason for a rape victim to have to wait more than 20 weeks to make that decision.

For the record, the true left sees the right to life as a human rights issue and oppose abortion except for the health of the woman.  Birth control and Plan B are not considered abortion among the true left.

The reason the Texas abortion law is a win win for me is, I support it - hence a win - but I know it will cause an uproar among the faux left to get to the polls in 2014 and 2016 - which is bad news for the Republicans.  Trust me I want a Democrat in the White House in 2016.  It will mean a permanent change of the Supreme Court to the left, or at least preserve the status quo. 

On abortion - what did the Supreme Court say in Roe v. Wade? - "We, therefore, conclude that the right of personal privacy includes the abortion decision, but that this right is not unqualified, and must be considered against important state interests in regulation.."

The decision to have an abortion as part of the right to privacy is not unqualified.  It is well established within the juridical methodology used by the Court that over time they modify precedent based on new facts or science.  This is not unusual.

The fact we can now hear the heart beat of the baby at an earlier time is significant.  This coupled with Plan B to deal with rape or just stupid decisions, make it easier for the states to regulate abortion.


I am not sure the Court got this one wrong.  Which states and jurisdictions are under the Voting Rights Act should be based on current data, and not data which may or may not reflect the current situation on the ground.

The problem is, this Congress and President cannot fix the VRA as ordered by the Supreme Court.  In effect the VRA is dead until the Democrats take back control of the House.  This simple reality will rally minorities to vote big time in 2014 and 2016.  The decision by the Republicans to not allow for a vote on immigration reform which is bipartisan, will also rally minorities to vote in 2014 and 2016.

We need the Voting Rights Act - but not based on old policies to limit minority participation.  It needs to be reformed to reflect the new racism, and the new tactics used by the right to limit minority access to the polls.


The DOMA decision means any state law which discriminates in marriage based on sexual orientation is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.  The only thing which can stop this ruling is if a liberal member or Justice Kennedy leaves the Supreme Court before the case gets to the Court.  Advocate groups know this.  I expect cases to be filed within 30 days with the parties seeking expedited rulings so the case can make it to the Supreme Court within 2 years.

If it  does not, holding on to the Supreme Court will be a big issue in 2016.   Abortion, Voting Rights, and Gay Marriage will bring out the left to the polls in unprecedented numbers.

Wednesday, June 26, 2013

Justice Kennedy as predicted was the swing vote.
Here is the BV's post from December predicting the gay marriage win and why.  Click for Post

From Justice Kennedy's majority opinion.  It's done - we are no longer second class citizens.

"The States’ interest in defining and regulating the marital relation, subject to constitutional guarantees, stems from the understanding that marriage is more than a routine classification for purposes of certain statutory benefits. Private, consensual sexual intimacy between two adult persons of the same sex may not be punished by the State, and it can form "but one element in a personal bond that is more enduring.  Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U. S. 558, 567 (2003). "

Justice Kennedy wrote a sweeping opinion which puts an end to the debate.  He held DOMA violates the equal protection clause of the Fifth Amendment.  This means under what is known as the Incorporation Doctrine the ruling will be applied against States via the Fourteenth Amendment.  It will still require more suits before all of the bigotry ends.

This opinion is a celebration of marriage because it puts the nature and purpose of the relationship ahead of the sex. 

"DOMA instructs all federal officials, and indeed all persons with whom same-sex couples interact, including their own children, that their marriage is less worthy than the marriages of others. The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws" sought to protect in person hood and dignity.By seeking to displace this protection and treating those persons as living in marriages less respected than others,the federal statute is in violation of the Fifth Amendment. This opinion and its holding are confined to those lawful marriages."

It is sad the Chief Justice will be remembered for being on the wrong side of history.


The Court found those opposed to gay marriage had no legal standing to bring their challenge.  This is a bad ruling.  Look, I clearly favor gay marriage - but this standing issue has always been an issue for me and I will not change my opinion just because I like the result.  As I have said - it is never about the result - it is about the process.

How is it possible that citizens of the state of California have no standing to bring such a lawsuit? - a lawsuit which impacts their alleged rights.

What makes the opinion really interesting is, it is written by Chief Justice Roberts.  The majority is a mixture of liberals and conservatives.  The same goes for the dissent.  Roberts and Scalia were in the majority along with three liberals.

Here is the scoop - the conservatives want to avoid the issue, and the liberals are using the case to make it more difficult for conservative groups to bring these type lawsuits in the future. This is a very, very bad decision - although I am happy with the result.  On process - liberty was lost on this one.  The people must always have standing to defend their laws - after all the people are the Sovereign - and not a fictitious governmental body created by the people.

In the end it does not matter -

The DOMA ruling will be used for advocates of gay marriage to immediately sue states like Texas under the Equal Protection Clause.  This decision along with the Voting Rights Act decision are going to be big issues in the next presidential election.  The Democrats will make control of the Supreme Court a huge issue.  In the end both of these decisions will hurt the Republicans. 


CNN's experts are saying what is next in California is not clear and that the state officials better carefully study the opinion.  Where do they find these idiots?  The intervenors had no standing to intervene.  This means the district court ruling is now the only official ruling. The District Court found Prop 8 to be unconstitutional.  What is there to study? - but this is CNN which got the Obamcare decision wrong and is now wrong in their analysis of this decision.
 "After a 12-day bench trial, the District Court declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional, permanently enjoining the California officialsnamed as defendants from enforcing the law, and "directing the official defendants that all persons under their control or supervision" shall not enforce it. Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 704 F. Supp. 2d 921, 1004 (ND Cal. 2010)."

I. OUR law considers marriage in no other light than as a civil contract. The Holiness of the matrimonial state is left entirely to the ecclesiastical law: the temporal courts not having jurisdiction to consider unlawful marriages as a sin, but merely as a civil inconvenience. The punishment therefore, or annulling, of incestuous or other unscriptural marriages, is the province of the spiritual courts; which act pro salute animae [for the health of their souls]. And, taking it in this civil light, the law treats it as it does all other contracts; allowing it to be good and valid in all cases, where the parties at the time of making it were, in the first place, willing to contract; secondly, able to contract; and, lastly, actually did contract, in the proper forms and solemnities required by law.

William Blackstone:


If journalist where anything but a bunch of crock, there would be no need for blogs. Tony Martinez and Juliet Garcia balk again and the Herald remains silent. Where is the story about what is happening? No where to be found. Where are the Sarkis' people? "Vote for me if you love Brownsville." No where to be found.

Martinez put all real estate deals on hold until UT finishes their negotiations with TSC.  The UT Board of Regents must approve any deal.  Their meeting is July 10, 2013.   My source was clear - the decision was based on a desire to allow TSC and UT to finish their negotiations first.  Where is the story?  UT had a lot to lose had they continued with their childish game of pitting the TSC against the COB.

I will trust the result of Thursday's TSC meeting.  The current TSC Board has stood with the people in the past when it came to UT.  We might not get everything we want, but we can be assured this Board will find the best possible deal.

If UT does not agree to pay the back rent, the people are still free to fight for the money.  Now, I know Brownsville - the people will fight for nothing other than their right to post anony comments to the Internet - and to be frank with you - I am not sure the people would even fight for that.

One person contacted me about doing the ad as I suggested.  I have not heard from them since.  I am certain when they tried to raise money for the ad they quickly learned none would be forthcoming.


To put this in context.  For the same crimes which got Abel Limas convicted and headed for federal prison, the Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct gave him a private reprimand.

For nearly some of the same acts - no evidence of bribes though - the Commission on Judicial Conduct gave Ben Neece a private reprimand. The allegation involved Ben Neece converting a felony DWI into a misdemeanor for a paid propagandist who at the time was printing lies to the internet to help Ben Neece make money in the Art Rendon case.  Ben Neece was allowed to negotiate down to private reprimand for allowing his office to be used to raise money for the paid propagandist while he sat in jail.  No reprimand for converting a felony charge into a misdemeanor charge.  The propagandist who also blogs, in the course of about a year received three DWI's and one reckless driving along with one of the DWI's.


On the border many poor peope do not realize notaries cannot practice law.  Many notaries take advantage of this confusion.  In writing Linda Salazar told the parties in her  court they should hire notaries to help file their lawsuits.  This of course was illegal.

In this  case the Commission on Judicial Conduct did not even give her a private reprimand - they dismissed the investigation based on proof Linda Salazar stopped the practice and promised to not do it again.

A judge - by her own actions promote criminal conduct - and the Commission on Judicial Conduct says - okay since you promised to stop promoting criminal conduct we will let you off.

As I have said a million times - the legal system in Texas and the entities deemed to oversee the system are hopelessly corrupt.  Abel Limas and Armando Villalobos did not just happened - they were made by the Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct and the State Bar of Texas.


The BV will be back about 9 to 9:10 a.m. to post on the Supreme Court decisions concerning gay marriage

We expect the Supreme Court to hold DOMA unconstitutional.  How they handle the California case is unknown.  The worse case scenario for gay rights advocates is, the Court finds Proposition 8 unconstitutional and limits the ruling to California.  - Hey, but a win is a win.

My only interest at this time is to see how Chief Justice Roberts rules in the DOMA case.  Will he put his legacy ahead of his politics?  Will he choose to be on the wrong side of history and rule in favor of DOMA.  It is no small thing when the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court rules in a way which denies liberty to a group which has now won those liberties all over the world.  Such a ruling would have the US Supreme Court Chief Justice saying to the world - the US people have  fewer liberties than the rest of the world.

Monday, June 24, 2013



What has now become clear is, Juliet Garcia and Tony Martinez along with the UT Board of Regents, are working jointly to pressure TSC into giving them a better deal, because if they do not Tony Martinez will give them what they want for free or at a major discount.

At Thursday's TSC Board Meeting the trustees need to send UT packing without anything if they think this will fly with TSC.  Today's Herald piece is nothing more than a puff piece to bolster Tony Martinez and Juliet Garcia in their efforts to defraud some of the poorest people in the US.  This should shock no one - Daniel Cavasos of the Herald has never let facts get in the way of his newspaper.  It has always been and always will be a propaganda piece for the corrupt or for Daniel Cavasos to settle personal scores.  It is a classic example of American journalism - which is why newspapers continue to fold, and blogs which opt to not follow the unethical and suspect rules of journalism continue to grow. 

On Thursday, Texas Southmost College will vote on several real estate deals with the UT System.  The BV has always supported the deals, so long as they are fair.  Any deal should include Texas paying is past rent.  Without TSC leases UTB fails.  I say until the UT System Board of Regents demonstrates respect for our community it is best to let UTB as a university falter without classrooms.

The TSC agenda.  You can see the real estate items on the agenda by clicking here

TSC needs to hold their ground and call UT Systems bluff that they can get a better deal from the city.  Let them try - TSC must demand a fair deal which includes Texas paying its past rent.  As a tenant UT has been a disaster.  You do not lease to a tenant who owes you $10-17 million dollars already unless you have real assurances you will get paid that which is already owed.

Any agreement must include a clear waiver of immunity with the right to directly sue UT Systems.  The agreement must include clear language that TSC can collect directly against UT Systems without having to go to the legislature to collect.

We  cannot have a repeat of the 1991 agreement wherein payment is subject to approval by the state legislature.


Senator Lucio is not up for reelection in the next primaries come March - but Rene Oliviera is - he must go.  We need to find a real viable candidate - the only issue which needs to be discussed is how in 1991 he screwed Brownsville by pushing an agreement which made UT's payment of the rent discretionary and his failure year after year to insure the legislature funded the rent payment.  This simple message in a long term narrative which begins now, will allow any real viable candidate to beat Rene Oliviera come March during the primaries.


TSC needs to be the last line of defense against Juliet Garcia and Tony Martinez.  By rejecting any offers from UT Systems until Juliet Garcia and Tony Martinez are taken out of the  discussions, TSC will be the mouse that roared.  UT Systems will find itself with nowhere to turn other than to announce UTB is dead.  UT Systems will not do this - TSC needs to hold out for a fair deal and all of the past rent - or send UT Systems packing with no place to put its students.

If the Trustees stand up to UT Systems it will be heard all over the world.  UT Systems will be humiliated as an incredibly wealthy university system milking some of the poorest people in the US without any shame for its actions.


UT Systems must approve any deal done with the COB and TSC.  It is too late for a Friday ad in the Austin American Statesman.  Wednesday is the deadline for the Sunday ad.  July 2nd is when Tony Martinez and Juliet Garcia are expected to sign off on the final deal to turn over City Plaza to UT Systems.  A Sunday ad is a must if we are to stop this.

Where are all of Sarkis people now?  Nowhere to be found - their candidate lost so this issue all of a sudden does not matter.  There is no reason why the people cannot raise the money for the ad.  There is no reason why a handful of attorneys cannot donate the money to pay for the ad. 

We fight or surrender - and I know Brownsville - we surrender - the issue was nothing more than a way for Sarkis to gain votes from saps.  If he truly cared about the issue he would have had a contingency game plan to fight.   Nothing - he does not get to be a commissioner so screw Brownsville.

This does not mean other people who truly care cannot take the lead in the fight.


When you listen to the discussion what you learn is the original 1991 lease agreement between TSC and UTB only required that Texas pay the rent if the legislature provided the funding.  Juliet Garcia needs to be remembered for this.  She signed an agreement which said Texas only has to pay the rent if they want to.

Where were our elected officials to stop this?  This original agreement was a major screw of our community.  Texas only had to pay if the legislature funded the payment.  Juliet Garcia really screwed Brownsville and its children when she signed this.

Rene Torres and Trey Mendez do an awesome job in laying out the facts and refuting the claim that UT can be trusted to pay off the bonds.

You can fast forward to 4:15 for a full understanding of the past rent owned to TSC.  Rene Torres takes no prisoners   Under the terms of the lease it says it creates no debt.  The payment of the rent is  subject to the legislature providing the funding.  the legislature did not provide the funding so some $10-17 million in rent was never paid.  In 2010, legislation was passed which said the parties will try and arbitrate the issue of the past rent.  This has no happened.

On Tuesday - more on this story.  The BV is not running for public office - so these issues are not temporary issues to get me votes.  The issue remains - where are all of the Sarkis supporters in their outrage?  Where are the cyber politiqueros  - oh yea the money stopped.

Without an ad, we will fix nothing.  This is not about being an elected official to make change.  This is about a community acting.  And where is the candidate and his supporters now that the election is over - no where to be found. 

Today I rejected a lot of insults posted by Sarkis' supporters - so yes they have time to post anony comments on the Internet, but no time take action.


I will not explain why, but it is important that a copy of this meeting be made to some one's computer which is separate from the YouTube.  If you can then email it to me I will upload it again under my name.

Sorry but I do not know how to save YouTube videos.
This is the only hope for humiliating UT.    I know there are people in Brownsville who can write the check and not even know they wrote it.  The question is, are the people with real money willing to do the right thing?
If someone has a copy of the TSC UT Partnership agreement I need it.  I was told something to look for.  I want to read the agreement myself before I go public with what I was told.  As is always the case with the BV -  documents are everything.
½ Page- B&W
Full Page- B&W
Friday Deadline- Tuesday prior to publication, end of business day
Sunday Rates include an 18% Surcharge
½ Page- B&W
Full Page- B&W
Sunday Deadline- Wednesday prior to publication, end of business day
As to the back rent issue.
"Trouble surfaced in 2009, when UT-Brownsville and TSC asked the Legislature for $10 million to help UT-Brownsville make its rent payments to TSC. The Legislature kicked the problem back, asking the UT System and the TSC Board of Trustees to figure out how to pay for the rent. But the rent money was just the latest in a series of clashes between the two institutions. In November 2010, the UT Regents voted to dissolve the partnership, saying the alliance had become “untenable.” UT-Brownsville President Garcia says that the joint governance of two schools under one roof contributed to the strain."
Because of the original terms in the partnership agreement, TSC may have no way of ever recovering the money owed by the state short of humiliating UT in a public forum.


Affirmative Action

The Supreme Court issued a remand opinion in the UT affirmative action case. The court did not strike down its previous rulings on affirmative action.

The trial  court is to review its decision based on a clearer standard of strict scrutiny.  It is possible the UT process will still be affirmed as constitutional.

The opinion was 7/1 - so there was no desire to overrule the previous decisions.

The Opinion

 The following is a summary written by the Court.

"(b) Under
Grutter, strict scrutiny must be applied to any admissions program using racial categories or classifications. A court may give some deference to a university’s "judgment that such diversity is essential to its educational mission," 539 U. S., at 328, provided that diversity is not defined as mere racial balancing and there is a reasoned, principled explanation for the academic decision. On this point, the courts below were correct in finding that Grutter calls for deference to the University’s experience and expertise about its educational mission. However, once the University has established that its goal of diversity is consistent with strict scrutiny, the University must prove that the means it chose to attain that diversity are narrowly tailored to its goal. On this point, the University receives no deference. Id., at 333. It is at all times the University’s obligation to demonstrate, and the Judiciary’s obligation to determine, that admissions processes "ensure that each applicant is evaluated as an individual and not in a way that makes an applicant’s race or ethnicity the defining feature of his or her application." Id., at 337. Narrow tailoring also requires a reviewing court to verify that it is "necessary" for the university to use race to achieve the educational benefits of diversity. Bakke, supra, at 305. The reviewing court must ultimately be satisfied that no workable race-neutral alternatives would produce the educational benefits of diversity. "

Supreme Court Press Release

Neither gay marriage case or the Voting Rights case will be announced today.  The Court can issue the opinions any time before the end of the month.  It could come tomorrow or a series of opinions could come on Thursday.


SIDE NOTE:  I am listing to open statements in the Zimmerman trial.  The prosecution started with 'fucking punks"  he said it over and over again - MSNBC is struggling to get a 7  second delay in place and cannot.  So we keep on hearing it.  Personnally, I think the FCC should allow  for it.  It is what is being said and we should be allowed to hear it.


Given the low turnout of this election, no rational person can possibly argue either candidate has the support of the people.  In fact based on the only known data, the Sarkis last minute ad got people worried about Tony Martinez's policy intent and turned around the trend in early voting which favored Portillo, to an election day win for Sarkis.  Sarkis election day win was not enough to overcome the early voting win by Portillo.

Tony Martinez's last minute push on City Plaza so angered city employees I am certain part of the increase for Sarkis came from city employees and their friends and families.

But the reality is, I am not sure all of the ads in the world would have increased the turnout.  Well educated voters saw both candidates as bad for the city.  More on this below.

The thing about political candidates and bogus community groups is they walk away from these so called pivotal issues the day after the election.

Only the BV covered the criminal case of politiquera Margarita Ozuna.  Where was Citizens Against Voter Abuse?  They made a  federal case about the issue during the election - oh wait - they were a bogus organization  financed by Yolanda Begum - a candidate who took down her opponent's sign and also used mail ballots.  Where were the cyber-politiqueros covering the story?  No where to be found - their candidate had lost and the issue no longer matter.


In January the BV called for the anti-Martinez voices to start a narrative in the Herald with weekly ads.  Given the clear impact the last minute ad by Sarkis had on the outcome, had the anti-Martinez  forces done as recommended by the BV, I  do not believe Porillo would have even been in the run-offs.

If Sarkis considers this to be a true issue as opposed to the issue being used just to gain power - he and his forces will move forward to stop Tony Martinez.

If these forces are serious, which I do not believe they are, they can raise enough money by the end of the day to take out 2 full page ads in the Austin American Statesman for the purpose of humiliating UT into submission.

FACTS:  The BV attacked the first notice of a vote based on an Open Meetings Violation - the current agenda item proves the first was deficient.  The BV researched and proved Juliet Garcia has been divested of all authority to bind UTB or UT.  The agenda item makes clear the negotiations are with the UT System on behalf of the Board - not Juliet Garcia.

Real facts - and not made up stories - can change things.  A simple open letter to the people of Texas, not UT, will humiliate UT.  We do not need a long narrative - simple real facts.  Brownsville is one of the poorest cities of its size in the US.  Texas owes how ever many millions in back rent to TSC.  UT is one of the wealthiest university systems in the world. 

The population demographics of Brownsville also need to be included.

The letter should end with - have they no shame?

BUT nothing will be done - all of these whiners will move on - too busy posting anony comments which defy reality.

The test here for Sarkis and all of these whiners - was it an election issue only or a real issue for the community?

If they do act and try and publish the type ad Sarkis supporter "J.A. Sandoval" published, it will not work.  We need an ad based on facts.  We need an ad which paints a picture of one of the wealthiest university systems feeding off some of the poorest people in the US.


The Herald quotes the following from Commissioner Elect Portillo - almost too surreal to believe she actually said it. 

"Seeing the amount of votes she received left her feeling overwhelmed, she said.

“When you see the numbers and think ‘Wow, that many people believe in me,’ it’s an overwhelming feeling. It’s hard to describe,” she said."

Yes Debbie, 3.41% of the eligible voters believe in you.  This means 96.59% of the voters do not believe in you.  This is a woman without an ounce of self respect.   This is why she is such a willing puppet of Tony Martinez.  Debbie Portillo thinks it is a good thing when 95.59% of the people say they do not believe in you.


From Brownsville Unions Coalition

"Early voting numbers completely are in opposite of election day numbers .....mathematically questionable and highly unlikely. SAD."


Martin Sarkis was the worse possible candidate anyone could have backed.  Had BUC backed Leo Rosales Debbie Portillo may have ended up on the losing side.  But the BUC is hopelessly corrupt.  By their own admission they decided to back Sarkis before the candidates even asked for the endorsement.  Their own posts show how wonderful Sarkis was in helping them during the previous election even though they did not endorse him.

When I considered running for the BISD Board, I went to the BUC to learn about the endorsement process.  Before the deadline to even place your name on the ballot I was told they had already decided who to endorse so I should not even bother.


Will they have their first ad in the Austin American Statesman by Friday, and then Sunday?  I doubt it - the election is done - they will now do what they do best - post anony comments accusing everyone of corruption and coming up with mind numbing  conspiracy theories.

Saturday, June 22, 2013


The early votes and mail ballot returns should be posted between 7:05 and about 7:15 p.m. As soon as they are posted they will appear on the BV. You might keep an eye out here. Election Returns


Portillo takes lead in early voting and mail ballots.  The BV is calling it on the early voting.  It would be nearly impossible to overcome this lead - The Elections office is reporting no mail ballots.

UPDATE ON MAIL BALLOTS - The count was updated to show 3 for Portillo and 1 for Sarkis

PORTILLO  501    62.14

SARKIS        304    37.76


We should see the results starting to post between 7:30 and 7:45

                           EARLY VOTING      ELECTION DAY

PORTILLO        501                             183

SARKIS              304                              230

                          TOTAL                        PERCENTAGE
PORTILLO        687                               56.22
SARKIS              535                               43.78

The election day results show the Sarkis ad was effective - a big turn around in how people voted.

These results are final


The BV posted the early vote returns at 7:08 p.m.  As of 8:06 the Herald has yet to post any returns.  Did they forget there was an election?


People had a simple choice - a puppet or con artist?  Not much of choice.  There is no civic duty to have to choose between a puppet or con artist - until real qualified people run for public office the people will continue to stay home.

The District has 20,165 eligible voters - only, 1,222 voters voted.  This is an indictment on the quality of candidates running for office.

"(j)  A political subdivision may donate, exchange, convey, sell, or lease land, improvements, or any other interest in real property to an institution of higher education, as that term is defined by Section 61.003, Education Code, to promote a public purpose related to higher education.  The political subdivision shall determine the terms and conditions of the transaction so as to effectuate and maintain the public purpose.  A political subdivision may donate, exchange, convey, sell, or lease the real property interest for less than its fair market value and without complying with the notice and bidding requirements of Subsection (a). "

Subsection (a) related to notice in a newspaper - not required in this case.

For anyone interested

Friday, June 21, 2013


UPDATE:  Canvassing of the votes will be July 2, 2013.  From a source as to City Plaza

"Negotiations (for both) being done by UTB staff -- Rosemary Martinez on behalf of Dr. Garcia."

Technically I believe today's agenda item and the letter from General Counsel show that negotiations are for the Board of Regents.

On Monday I will post on what can be done as to the Board of Regents.  The actual next question is, does the Local Government Code provide for how a public entity can lease or sell public assets, and is the City of Brownsville in compliance with the Local Government Code?

Click on agenda to enlarge

Also see entire agenda here - you will not - no canvassing of the vote

In the city commission agenda just posted you will note how they changed the agenda from a mere real estate matter to being specific to renting the Cueto Building Complex to UT System through its Board of Regents. 

This now complies with the Open Meetings Act, and clearly shows Juliet Garcia is not the one binding UT to the deal - like the BV showed through research - Juliet Garcia has been divested of authority in the matter.

You will also not that City Plaza is no longer on the table. 

Tony Martinez is empowered because his opposition has no education as to how the process works.  Yelling "wake up people" on a Facebook page is where Rick Longoria's legal acumen begins and ends.

He has been on the city commission long enough to know the rules concerning the Open Meetings Act. 

He has been on the city commission long enough to have known to ask - does Juliet Garcia even have legal authority to negotiate for UT.

Screaming and yelling on blogs and Facebook fixes nothing.  To change things you must communicate with the right people with real evidence - like Open Meeting Violations and trivial things like state statutes which divest Juliet Garcia of all authority when it comes to leasing property.

The BV as always brought you the documents, the law, and the facts.

The first thing you notice about the ad placed by J.A. Sandoval for Sarkis is Sarkis's paid for liar propagandist has the same initials - J.A.  - more on the Sandoval below.

The ad is effective - but is it fraudulent?

The address on the ad is incomplete.  The address is a small apartment complex of upper lower income tenants.  The ad does not provide the apartment number of the person paying for the ad.

If you click below, at item 3452, far left - you will note the name of Martin Sarkis's paid for propagandist.  J.A. at 1501 Old Port Isabel Apt 18.

Now I think this is an old address.  After he lived at this address it is believed he lived at his mother's house on 2665 Weslaco - the house is owned by an Inez Montoya.  Maybe it is a sister.  The address came from the  documents he listed as his addresses in 2008-2009 for multiple DWI's

click below - 2008 Old Port Isabel Rd.;  2009  2665 Weslaco.

Assuming he is voting he may be voting using an address which is no longer valid - at least based on what he wrote on his bonds for his multiple DWI's

As to the Sandoval name - it is the same last name of the mother of his children.  Below is the contempt proceedings for failure to pay child support.

Just something to consider - it may all be one big coincidence  - but the fact is - the same paid for propagandist under sworn testimony related to BISD received a $1,000 in unreported campaign money for services rendered.
Board of Regents Header 1


"Dear Mr. Wightman-Cervantes:

I have reviewed your emailed communication of June 18 related to possible space leases by The University of Texas at Brownsville.  I am absolutely confident that there have been no violations of the Texas Open Meetings Act by the U. T. System Board of Regents related to potential leasing on behalf of UT Brownsville.  In addition, if any space lease is entered into on behalf of UT Brownsville, it will be done in compliance with all applicable laws and rules.


Francie Frederick

Xc:  Chairman Wm. Eugene Powell
        Chancellor Francisco G. Cigarroa, M. D.
        Executive Vice Chancellor Pedro Reyes
        Vice Chancellor and General Counsel ad interim Dan Sharphorn
        President Juliet V. Garcia"

Let's see what it says.  UT Board of Regents has not violated the Open Meetings Act.  No one said they did.  The issue is, are they trying to do business with an entity violating the Open Meetings Act.

Second, any lease will  be done in compliance with the law.  The law divests Juliet Garcia from any such negotiates in terms of binding UT.

So the letter says nothing.  Or does it?  Juliet Garcia obviously received a communication related to the matter.  The letter makes sure Juliet Garcia knows she will follow  the law.

In a few hours, the Agenda for Tuesday's meeting will be posted - let's see what is posted and how it is posted.

My system will not allow me to adjust the size of the ad - just click here and you will see the entire ad.

This ad could actually bring Sarkis votes which otherwise would not have been cast. It is a good thing a private citizen took out the ad. Citizen participation is always a good thing. But the problem is, this type ad should have been put out starting last January. The citizen advocate is assuming people will read the ad. A clear narrative which can change things takes weeks of repetition.

While the ad sends a clear message, it may be too late.  I do think it will make the election a lot closer than I previously believed it would be.

Thursday, June 20, 2013


With nearly a population of 200,000 people Brownsville's leaders continue to act as if it is some outpost city on a distant planet.

Policy is what it is - people can agree to disagree - that is fine.  But be sure, Tony Martinez has destroyed the morale at city hall and has lost massive support among the people because the other commissioners are his puppets playing along, or complete idiots oblivious to their job or duties.

I do not include Melissa Zamora in this group for two reasons.  One she voted against the Galonsky building purchase.  Further, for those paying attention, since Tony Martinez understood the $35,000 rule concerning spending without commission approval, Zamora has been paying attention.  The problem is, her fellow commissioners simply fell asleep at the wheel.

The second reason I do not include her in this group is an unfortunate reality.  Her position as the public relations officer for DA Saenz's makes her ability to speak out nearly impossible.  Had she resigned in January it would have cost the city a needless election it could not afford.  I think she did the right thing in not resigning - an interim election would have been a waste of limited resources. 

Jessica Teatreau, Rick Longoria, and John Villarreal seem to know nothing about the Open Meetings Act, or rules of the city commission.  They are the elected leaders.  Jessica and John remain deadly silent during these trying times, and Rick Longoria seems to believe leadership is throwing temper tantrums on Facebook.  Really, "wake up people"  Like a handful of people reading his Facebook page are going to care.

Several months ago I told several friends who were interested in investing in Brownsville by opening a true full service gym and piano bar, among other businesses - I would not help.  After several days on SPI seeing the filth with are its beaches and the lack of one  restaurant with good  food, my friends agreed Brownsville is going no where.

McAllen built a  first class airport, a  first class city, and then turned the entire thing into a  first class metroplex. 

Brownsville has an airport which looks more like a glorified shack, which the FAA was prepared to shut down. Its main frontage road looks like its been through a bombing.

No educated person wants to run for public office, unless it pays.  The Brownsville city commission will forever remain a group of non vision poorly educated individuals.

Not one commissioner was prepared to sue to stop the Open Meetings Act violation related to the UTB matter.  Not one commissioner was smart enough to ask, does Juliet Garcia even have legal authority to negotiate with the city?

Leadership Brownsville city commission style is an idiot going on his Facebook page yelling in an empty room "wake up people."