08241964 Special Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

\., fa spec i a I meet i ng, august 24, 1964, page two the present matter before the City Council; second to express his appreciation for the good job Judge Su~ton is doing. He said that he understood that a Corporation Judge could be removed from office only for cause; that the City Council does not 'judge', Col. Hill commented on how few persons ever take time to thank the City Man- agerj ,yet heis often subjected to abuse. He said that San Marcos has the most efficient city government he has ever seen. He called to mind that Charles I of England in 1629, had acted through his Provost and Sheriff and' t1U h.' ' t More t an 300 years later, in San Marcos, we have the same problem." Col. Hill praised the Chief of Police and all who, in the course of performing their function, protect the 14,000 people of San Marcos "from the terrors of the night", He sai~: " In this world the Morales the Veidts, the Buckners are al,l entitled to their day i~ court, My suggestion to you gentlemen is that this matter be tabled as not proper to come before the Council." I Mr. Morales was recognized from the floor. He said he would like to clear up a couple of statements made by Judge Sutton that concerned him personally, He made a number of complaints ~bout treatment accorded him in' Corporation Court; and criticized the manner in which the C~urt is handled, One charge was that latin-Americans were discriminated against in the matter of fines. This caused a man in the audience to callout: "That's a damned I ie!" The Mayor called for order, saying that others would be given an opportunity to speak when Mr. Morales finished. Mr. Taylor warned Mr. Morales that he must, confine his re- marks to the stipulated topics for which the meeting was called. Mr. Morales said his two complaints were that the docket books were closed to him, and that he had been de- tained in City Hall and threatened. William Veidt was re- cognized from the floor. He asked Mr. Morales what news- paper he represented, since he was not a certifie,d member of the Press Association. Upon being pressed a second time for an answer, Mr. Mora les said: "E I 'Reporteroff. Garl and Stokes was recogn i zed from the ,f I oor. He sa i d that as a former Counci Iman, he understood the mariy problems confront- ing them, but he did not see how the Council could lend it=- self as a public forum for a man who at this time has a suit against the City: "This man is a known liar - the nickname given him by his own people is 'Mentira' - and he should not be a I lowed to cast i gate the City Counc i I ." The Mayor replied that every complaint received was given the Council's attention. He said the Counci I had studied Mr,. Morales' letter carefully,and after due considerat,j;on, members were agreed on the answers. In reference to the first complaint, the Mayor stated that the City Counc i lis not a court to hand down judgements, but a policy-making body. 'He advised Mr. Morales that the place to take his, complaint was to Mrs. Hazel Duncan, District Clerk, where he could appeal to the District Court for a writ of mandamus to be given aCcess to the docket books. I n the second instance, the Mayor sa i d if Mr. Mora I es felt he had been mistreated, again, his complaint should go to a court of law: "If you feel you have been abused by Judge Sutton, you may file a complaint against him in County Court". Alderman Ruiz was recognized by the Mayor. He said that as far as the letter was concerhed, he felt the Mayor had given adequate answers, but he would like to put two quest- ions to Mr. Morales: "In the Aug. 21, 1964 issue of -EI Re- portero', you state that the letteryou published was sent to members of the Council. That is not true", Mr. Morales ans- wered that he took it for granted that Mr. Ruiz would get a I I Tg(;