Each of the six City Council members who are seeking a new term in office was a part of a historic proceeding in Corpus Christi: a removal hearing of a fellow council member — in this case, Mayor Paulette Guajardo.
The hearing did not lead to Guajardo’s removal. She is running for the mayor’s position as the incumbent in the upcoming election, which, if won, would be her last term.
Instead, the majority of the six-member tribunal voted to issue a formal reprimand and impose a 30-day suspension — ending Sept. 7 — based on findings reached by the majority of the council members that the mayor had committed “misconduct, malfeasance, incompetence, or inability or willful neglect of performance of her official duties” on three charges listed in a citizen-submitted
articles of impeachment.
For her part, Guajardo has denied all wrongdoing in the matter, which had revolved around a controversial award of $2 million in tax incentives for development of a downtown Homewood Suites hotel.
A law enforcement investigation, and independent review by outside legal counsel, found no criminal wrongdoing; however, supporters of the administrative hearing have said its intent was to address ethical questions.
Playing out over four days in July and August, the removal hearing was only the third of its kind in the Corpus Christi and the first in nearly 30 years.
Five of the council members running for reelection were considered as “judges and jury” in the proceeding: incumbents Carolyn Vaughn, Eric Cantu and Mark Scott, and Kaylynn Paxson and Gil Hernandez, who both currently serve as district representatives but are vying for the mayor’s chair.
So how did each council member vote on 14 major decisions leading up to the hearing and its final penalties?
The Caller-Times compiled the data based on City Council agendas and minutes, as well as its previous reporting.
Below is a breakdown summarizing the items, the discussion and how each council member voted.
March 24, 2026
Item summary: “Discussion and possible action on August 29, 2025 petition from Rachel Caballero for removal action against Mayor Paulette Guajardo.” It is requested to be put on the agenda by Vaughn, Cantu and Hernandez.
Background: The petition, signed by six registered voters, accuses Guajardo of misconduct or malfeasance, asserting that she had been aware of allegations that Homewood Suites hotel developers had misrepresented the project by using an altered screenshot in a presentation but that she pushed the item forward to the council for a vote.
Allegations described in the document nearly mirror assertions made in a lawsuit filed against the city of Corpus Christi and Guajardo by competing developer Ajit David. He had sought to invalidate the tax incentive agreement through litigation.
Council members in favor of holding the hearing reference a need to listen to residents, and cite fulfillment of the City Charter.
Some council members against proceeding question whether political motivation may be a driver in decision-making and contend that that the allegations are baseless.
There is also debate over whether pursuing a hearing would be a distraction from the water crisis — at the time, Corpus Christi projected to reach a water emergency as soon as May.
Vote: To put an item on the April 14 agenda to discuss removal hearing procedures and select a pretrial date. Passes 5-3.
In favor: Vaughn, Hernandez, Campos, Paxson and Cantu.
Against: Barrera, Scott and Roy.
Abstain: Guajardo.
April 14, 2026
Item summary: Determining procedures for a removal hearing, certifying articles of impeachment submitted by Caballero, and setting a pretrial hearing on May 19 to “entertain motions, witness lists, requests for summonses, and all other related matters for the Removal Action of the Mayor.”
Background: Discussion covers reasoning on whether to move forward or whether to pursue another option in response to the removal petition, such as referral to the Ethics Commission. The 15-page document alleges the mayor had perjured herself during a deposition taken as part of a lawsuit related to the tax incentives. Questions are raised in public comment on whether a removal hearing usurps the power of voters.
Vote: To certify articles of impeachment passes 5-2.
In favor: Vaughn, Hernandez, Campos, Paxson and Cantu.
Against: Barrera and Scott.
Abstain: Guajardo and Roy.
Vote: Adopting rules of procedure for the removal hearing and scheduling pretrial for May 19, where the council may consider witness lists, motions and filings. Passes 5-2.
In favor: Vaughn, Hernandez, Campos, Paxson and Cantu.
Against: Barrera and Scott.
Abstain: Guajardo and Roy.
June 2, 2026
Item summary: A motion by Guajardo’s attorney, John Flood, requests that council members who participated in the 2024 vote on the tax incentives recuse themselves or be disqualified from the tribunal that is acting as “judge and jury” in the removal hearing.
Background: Flood asserts those on the tribunal who voted on the tax incentives in 2024 are also witnesses and that there are issues with impartiality.
A federal judge had rejected similar arguments made when Guajardo had requested a preliminary injunction related to the hearing.
Had Flood’s motion been approved, it would have applied to two of the council members on the tribunal, Campos and Hernandez.
Barrera and Roy have recused themselves.
Vote: For council members who considered the tax incentives in 2024 to either recuse themselves from the tribunal or be disqualified. Rejected 5-1.
In favor of denial: Paxson, Cantu, Vaughn, Hernandez and Campos.
In dissent: Scott.
Aug. 7, 2026
Item summary: The culmination of four days of testimony and evidence — two days each made available to Guajardo’s attorney and petitioners’ attorney. Decisions by the six-member tribunal are recorded by public votes — nearly one dozen in all between affirming charges and assessing disciplinary measures.
Background: The tribunal met in executive session for more than two hours after the attorneys rested their cases. Ultimately, the mayor is not removed but suspended for 30 days and issued a reprimand.
Charge 1
Vote: Finding that the mayor had committed “misconduct, malfeasance, incompetence, or inability or willful neglect of performance of her official duties” on Charge 1:
“Aiding a fraud upon the taxpayers of the city of Corpus Christi related to the alleged need for complying with newly defined FEMA flood maps and/or altered FEMA screenshot.”
Finding: Yes, 5-1.
In agreement: Campos, Cantu, Hernandez, Paxson and Vaughn.
In disagreement: Scott.
Penalty on Charge 1:
Vote: Removal from office based on Charge 1 fails 2-4.
In favor: Campos and Hernandez.
Against: Cantu, Paxson, Scott and Vaughn.
Vote: 30-day suspension based on Charge 1 passes 5-1.
In favor: Campos, Cantu, Hernandez, Paxson and Vaughn.
Against: Scott.
Charge 2
Vote: Finding that the mayor had committed “misconduct, malfeasance, incompetence, or inability or willful neglect of performance of her official duties” on Charge 2:
Perjury while testifying in a deposition taken as part of a lawsuit filed by a competing developer related to the tax incentives.
Finding: Yes, 5-1.
In agreement: Campos, Cantu, Hernandez, Paxson and Vaughn.
In disagreement: Scott.
Penalty on Charge 2:
Vote: Removal from office based on Charge 2 fails 4-2.
In favor: Campos and Hernandez.
Against: Cantu, Paxson, Scott and Vaughn.
Vote: Suspension from office based on Charge 2 fails 4-2.
In favor: Campos and Hernandez.
Against: Cantu, Paxson, Scott and Vaughn.
Vote: Reprimand for “conduct beneath the office of Mayor,” based on Charge 2, passes 5-1.
In favor: Campos, Cantu, Hernandez, Paxson and Vaughn.
Against: Scott.
Charge 3
Vote: Finding that the mayor had committed “misconduct, malfeasance, incompetence, or inability or willful neglect of performance of her official duties” on Charge 3:
Failure to keep confidentiality on activities of the Corpus Christi Regional Economic Development Corp.
Finding: Yes, 4-2.
In agreement: Campos, Hernandez, Paxson and Vaughn.
In disagreement: Cantu and Scott.
Penalty on Charge 3:
Vote: Removal from office based on Charge 3 fails 5-1.
In favor: Campos.
Against: Cantu, Paxson, Hernandez, Scott and Vaughn.
Vote: Suspension from office based in Charge 3 fails 4-2.
In favor: Campos and Hernandez.
Against: Cantu, Paxson, Scott and Vaughn.
Vote: Reprimand “for conduct beneath the office of Mayor” based on Charge 3 fails 3-3.
In favor: Campos, Hernandez and Vaughn.
Against: Cantu, Paxson and Scott.
Kirsten Crow covers city government and water news. Have a story idea? Contact her at kirsten.crow@caller.com.
Consider supporting local journalism with a subscription to the Caller-Times.
This article originally appeared on Corpus Christi Caller Times: 'Judges' in mayor's hearing are running for reelection. See the votes
