Wide Open Spaces: Federal barrier still not in sight in Cameron County

August 9, 2008 - 8:34PM
By Jackie Leatherman, The Monitor
McALLEN - The two southernmost counties in Texas are supposed to have a border wall further separating them from Mexico by the end of this year.



Hidalgo County is watching the days slide past and trying to beat the Dec. 31 deadline for completion. Construction crews just broke ground there a little more than two weeks ago - six months after the federal government finalized its plans for the structure.



Cameron County, on the other hand, is stuck in a holding pattern. No plans have been finalized, no contractors have been hired, and no dirt has been moved.



The Lone Star State's southernmost county still doesn't know exactly what its version of the border barrier will look like, when it will be built or where it will go, leaving Cameron County months behind its inland neighbor Hidalgo County.



Officials from both counties learned at the same time last spring that the federal government had already determined the wall's path along the Rio Grande. By that time, top officials from the two counties had already started trying to get their message across in Washington, D.C.: Stop the wall and instead focus on fixing the ailing levee system.



Officials from both counties were side-by-side in their combined battle to try to do what they thought was best for their communities.



But last fall, Hidalgo County started pulling ahead of its neighbor as Hidalgo County officials began making slow progress in its efforts to influence possibly the most impassive, resolute agency in the country: the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.



Meanwhile, plans to move forward in Cameron County stalled - officials were still fighting the fence concept, and the top county official said in January he was in wait-and-see mode.



Now two opposing forces in Cameron County are waiting to see what DHS will do next.



One wants to piggyback off Hidalgo County's success in reaching a compromise plan to build a levee barrier aimed at improving flood protection in Hidalgo County while also supporting Homeland Security's mission to secure the border; the other party - sometimes feeling like the last man standing in a crusade against the border wall - holds onto the hope that David will once again defeat Goliath.



NEIGHBORS WHO ARE WORLDS APART



Everyone seems to have his or her own theory on why ground has yet to be broken on the 36 miles of border barrier Homeland Security plans to build in Cameron County.



Hidalgo County Judge J.D. Salinas said the reason is simple: Cameron County doesn't have a Godfrey Garza Jr.



Garza heads Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 and has positioned himself as the point man for the border wall project in the county. Leading the county's only drainage district, he also has become the middle man between DHS and the U.S. International Boundary and Water Commission.



Comprised of a U.S. Section and a Mexican Section, the IBWC is responsible for resolving problems that arise during the application of treaties between the United States and Mexico regarding flood control and other issues in the border region. The U.S. Section is a federal government agency; it owns the flood protection system in the Valley and is responsible for maintaining it.



Garza was instrumental in convincing the feds to revise plans for a double-layer fence into plans for concrete floodwall that would also reinforce 22 miles of levees in the county.



Hidalgo County has been pressing the federal government for decades to upgrade its flood control system. Even before the border-barrier issue was reaching a head, the county had plans in the works to repair the levees with a $100 million bond issue voters passed in 2006.



One year ago, the Federal Emergency Management Agency was expected to release new floodplain maps this year and declare most of Hidalgo County in danger of flooding.



But when plans to repair Hidalgo County's levees took off earlier this year, FEMA pushed back the release of those revised maps until December 2009. The agency's floodplain maps show which areas are vulnerable to flooding and are used to determine who is required to purchase flood insurance.



The new floodplain maps would have shown that much of Hidalgo County's levees did not meet federal standards, which in turn would have driven up flood insurance costs. Because FEMA had planned to release the revised maps for Hidalgo County a full year before it planned to release Cameron County's, Hidalgo County was forced to find a solution quicker.



Cameron County Judge Carlos Cascos chalked up the delay in his county to lack of funding. Hidalgo County came to the feds' table with $100 million in bond money to play with. Cameron County initially thought it would need $40 million to $50 million of local money to even sit down at the table.



Cascos said Cameron County officials now think they could adopt the levee-wall plan using up to $12 million of the county's own money, because Cameron County's levees are in better shape than Hidalgo County's and don't need as much work.



But Cascos said they weren't able to determine that until they hired their own experts, which had to wait until Hidalgo County received its final design approval.



He said much of Cameron's wait-and-see approach was to avoid duplicating efforts - the county was waiting to see if DHS approved Hidalgo County's combined design and how that county intended to fund it before starting the approval process for Cameron County's own version.



"Basically, Hidalgo County kind of blazes the trail," Cascos said. "It's a long process. Our process shouldn't take that long."



Homeland Security could approve Cameron's plan for a levee-wall any day now, Cascos said, noting the county still has enough time to meet the Dec. 31 deadline.



Federal officials only provided vague comments as to why Cameron County was behind Hidalgo in planning.



Mike Friel, a spokesman for U.S. Customs and Border Protection, said his agency has requested additional details on Cameron's most recent proposal.



"Unfortunately, we have yet to arrive at a viable option in Cameron County," Friel said.



"We cannot wait indefinitely," he added. "Securing the nation's borders is an immediate need and ... we are working with a sense of urgency."



Although the aim is different, someone in Cameron County - a person Cascos refers to him as an "obstacle" in the border wall's path - also is working with a sense of urgency.



SUCCESSFUL DELAY?



Brownsville Mayor Pat Ahumada said the City Council is not on his side, and Cameron County officials are not on his side - but the public is standing right beside him.



"I think the easiest road was to take a defeatist position that, ‘Well, we're going to get the wall anyway, so let's work with them and mitigate it,'" Ahumada said.



He criticizes the levee aspect of the levee-wall concept as a sugarcoating designed to make the border barrier palatable to the public.



"It kind of allows people to say, ‘It's not such a bad idea,' but I think (any type of wall) is a bad idea because it goes against every principal, what we are all about as Americans," he said.



So far, though, DHS has shot down the mayor's proposal to reconfigure a nearby reservoir to satisfy the government's security concerns. The agency has insisted some type of structure needs to be built - contrary to the mayor's ideas of using trees and brush as a barrier, or using boats to patrol the river.



Brownsville joined in a lawsuit claiming DHS did not follow proper procedure when negotiating for property needed to build its barrier. However, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear a previous lawsuit challenging Homeland Security's congressional authority to bypass more than 30 laws to expedite the wall's construction.



"This is not just about the weir, and this is not just about a fence, and this is not just about a levee," Ahumada said. "This is about a nation of democracy, a nation of laws, which I believe the secretary (of Homeland Security) is violating to build this wall.



"I think we deserve to be heard in federal court, and let a third party decide. I feel in a court of law we will be heard. ... We threw a monkey (wrench) into the mix and it is causing (DHS) a lot of problems, legally and also logistically."



Ahumada contends that if Cascos would join his fight, the opposition could gain momentum - opposition that Ahumada has tried to keep strong by coaxing residents to public meetings to oppose the City Council's anticipated agreement with DHS.



But Cascos and Salinas have a different view.



"Whether we like it or not, the wall is the law of the land," Cascos said. "I don't think that DHS will pack their bags just because people are protesting."



http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/b ... paces.html