A hearing to decide whether Mayor Paulette Guajardo should be removed from office ended in her suspension for 30 days. But the implications of the surrounding discord may influence Corpus Christi politics in the months to come.
Guajardo’s removal hearing was initially launched by a petition signed by six registered voters.
The majority of the six-member tribunal that decided the outcome affirmed three allegations related to the award of a $2 million tax incentive in 2024, but ultimately voted to suspend Guajardo for 30 days and issue a formal reprimand.
Guajardo is seeking reelection for her sixth and final term on the council.
A removal, had it been approved, would have barred her from running as a candidate in the race for two years.
That there
hadn’t been enough support to remove Guajardo “suggests uncertainty about her future and the future of some of the critical policies that the city will face,” said Brandon Rottinghaus, a political science professor at the University of Houston.
Among those is water — not only locally, but statewide, Rottinghaus said, noting Gov. Greg Abbott’s criticism of the city leadership and the speed and manner in which issues were being addressed.
There has been divide — at times steep, such as in the case of the Inner Harbor seawater desalination plant — between council members on how to respond to the water shortage that at one point threatened an emergency, as well as the decision to pursue the removal hearing.
Although the city has seen reprieve from the water crisis, the “concerns about how elected officials are handling that is all going to present itself at a critical moment,” Rottinghaus said.
“The removal hearing didn't resolve the political conflict,” he said. “It just moved the conflict from City Hall to the ballot box.”
The hearing
The four-day hearing — two days for petitioners’ case and two days for Guajardo’s defense — was sparked by accusations made by the petitioners that the mayor had been aware that developers of a new Homewood Suites hotel had used an altered screenshot as part of their pitch in a presentation to the city.
They asserted that Guajardo had promoted a false narrative related to flood map changes on behalf of the developers, ultimately leading to a $2 million tax incentive agreement.
The screenshot had been of a news release on the website of the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency.
In the developers’ presentation, the screenshot did not show the date the news release was issued about new flood maps going into effect, as it did on the website.
That was because they were attempting to support a falsely stated reason for the $2 million funding request, according to Doug Allison, the petitioners’ attorney.
Developers have said there was not a deliberate concealment of the dates in the screenshot and that they hadn’t intended to deceive anyone.
They, and Guajardo, have denied all allegations of wrongdoing.
Both have also cited a law enforcement investigation, and an external legal review that did not find criminal wrongdoing.
John Flood, Guajardo’s attorney, maintained that the petitioners’ case lacked evidence and relied instead on assumptions, speculation and suspicion.
The council voted 5-1 in the affirmative of findings that Guajardo had committed “misconduct, malfeasance, incompetence, or inability or willful neglect of performance” by allegedly perjuring herself in a deposition related to the tax incentives, and “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.”
The last charge asserting that she had violated Corpus Christi Regional Economic Development Corp. confidentiality was affirmed 4-2.
The findings by the council tribunal are not criminal charges.
Council members ultimately ordered a 30-day suspension on the “aiding a fraud” charge and a reprimand on the perjury charge. The confidentiality charge did not lead to any of the available penalties after none met the votes to approve one.
The election
The largest of the immediate consequences of the removal hearing is that Guajardo “survives politically, but not politically unscathed,” Rottinghaus said, adding that the event “will certainly turn what would normally be a low-profile City Council races into proxy battles over the mayor.”
Rottinghaus named prime issues in the election as likely to be “centered on the questions about accountability and representation, in addition to how the elected officials are currently handling the water crisis.”
“That changes the political calculation for every council incumbent,” he said. “This isn't just a mayoral election — because all nine positions are on the ballot, voters could potentially reshape the entire governing coalition. So in a way, it’s a chance for voters to effectively decide whether the coalition that pursued the mayor should remain in power or whether they need to be replaced and everybody changed out for new leadership.”
The majority of the council members who responded to the Caller-Times' interview requests said they believed the hearing would bear on decision-making in the upcoming election.
City Councilwoman Carolyn Vaughn, in an Aug. 10 message to the Caller-Times, noted the council’s findings on the allegations, stating that “if our city doesn't stand up and fight this corruption, it will continue.”
For herself, she felt the allegations needed punishment, she told the Caller-Times, but she believes that had the mayor been removed, Guajardo may have filed another lawsuit or an appeal related to the hearing.
City Councilman Roland Barrera — who had abstained from participating in the tribunal because he had been on the council when the incentives agreement was approved — has staunchly said he believes the allegations against the mayor are false.
He was glad, he said, that Guajardo hadn’t been removed and that voters will be able to decide whether to keep her in office.
It will have an impact on the election, he said, noting the water issues.
“I think the public loses confidence in their elected officials,” Barrera said. “So then you have a tendency where everybody gets lumped in together. I mean, you see social media posts, ‘get rid of all them,’ where the adults in the room just didn't prevail.”
City Councilman Mark Scott, who voted against each of the charges against the mayor, said he hadn’t seen sufficient evidence to affirm the allegations.
Those in the community who “like the mayor think that we wronged her,” he said, while those who dislike her are split — either satisfied with just the affirmation of the charges or viewing penalties as inadequate.
“I do think … this will have some polarizing impact on voters,” Scott said.
City Councilwoman Sylvia Campos was among the five on the council tribunal who affirmed the allegations. She also voted in the minority for removal on all three charges, saying that she was convinced by the testimony in the hearing.
It’s about right and wrong, not perception, said City Councilman Gil Hernandez.
He had voted in the minority for removal on the charges of perjury and “aiding a fraud” charges. On the confidentiality violation charge, which didn’t lead to a penalty, he had voted in favor of a 30-day suspension.
Some have viewed the hearing as negative; others have seen it as appropriate, he said.
“The way I look at it is, the truth eventually manifests itself … in one way or another,” Hernandez said. “Things come out, and more information gets populated over time — so the immediate reaction is going to be different from a reaction two, three weeks from now, or maybe a month from now. I don’t think it'll have the kind of lasting impact; it’s just something that we had to go through because of what had transpired.”
City Councilman Everett Roy said that he believes “there's going to be more people that want to be informed voters.”
“I feel like this upcoming election, that we’ll have a good turnout,” he said. “I think that this has certainly got a lot of people that may have not been involved in the past more involved in the process.”
The campaign
The mayor’s suspension began Aug. 8 and continues through Sept. 6.
In the meantime, City Councilwoman Kaylynn Paxson is carrying the role as mayor.
Both Paxson and Hernandez are vying for the mayoral seat in the upcoming election.
Guajardo told the Caller-Times on Aug. 11 that among the council’s priorities must be in addressing important issues, such as water.
Of the hearing, Guajardo said she has been grateful for the community support she has seen through the process, among those people who “seem to know the facts.”
She declined to comment on whether a lawsuit related to the hearing would be filed.
During the suspension, she intends to work on her campaign, Guajardo said.
“They've elected me five different times over the last 10 years,” she said. “They know who I am, they trust in who I am and they support me and they also know what I stand for. So although this has been, in in my opinion, a very negative event for our city, I see the community seeing it for what it is.”
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: Controversy around mayor may have effects on Corpus Christi elections
