Texas Town Leader Fights Border Fence

Eagle Pass is a border town that prides itself on being both Texan and Mexican, a community with many cultural and financial ties that bind it to Piedras Negras, its sister city across the Rio Grande.

But the U.S. government's proposal to build a giant fence along the border threatens to remake the landscape in the name of national security, undermining the relationship between the two cities and, some say, permanently scarring the riverfront.

Local leaders and residents who are fighting the fence have become increasingly frustrated with what they regard as the federal government's heavy-handed tactics, which include threatening letters, lawsuits and swift legal judgments.

"They come in here like storm troopers," Mayor Chad Foster said. "They are steamrolling the people and abusing our liberties and are absolutely out of control."

Residents of Eagle Pass and Piedras Negras, a Mexican city of 143,000 people with an American-style football stadium, cross the river in both directions all the time to work, shop or visit relatives. When a tornado damaged both communities last spring, Piedras Negras sent dump trucks and front-end loaders to help Eagle Pass clean up.

The twin cultures are on display throughout Eagle Pass: On historic Main Street, the stucco Gran Mercado - a Mexican-style general store - stands near the Popular Western Wear store. Elsewhere, a car with a license plate from the Mexican state of Coahuila displays a sticker that offers solidarity for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks: "9-11-01. We'll never forget."

A two-story steel wall, if built, would cut Eagle Pass residents off from a park and a golf course on the banks of the Rio Grande. And although bridges will still span the river here, the wall could sever Eagle Pass psychologically from Piedras Negras.

Eagle Pass was the first community to be hit with a lawsuit after the federal government began demanding access to the land to survey it for the fence. A federal judge ruled in favor of the government Jan. 16, the same day the complaint was filed and before city officials had even been served with legal papers.

"Other than trying to make an example out of us, we don't understand what their issue is," said Foster, who suspects his leadership of an anti-fence group called the Texas Border Coalition might have something to do with it.

Eagle Pass leaders had already agreed to allow the Border Patrol to remove giant weeds that can provide hiding places on the riverbank; to widen a golf cart path to support Border Patrol trucks; and to install towers that would bathe the golf course and park in light around the clock.

"No one worries about border security more than the people who live here," said Foster, a bilingual real estate agent who cuts a cowboy-like profile with boots, a beige Stetson and a steady supply of Marlboros.

The river at Eagle Pass is about 280 feet wide and a muddy 8 1/2 feet deep - too deep to wade, and too dangerous for many people to swim.

The fence, as proposed, would be built to withstand the crash of a 10,000-pound vehicle at 40 mph. The barrier would bisect a property slated for a new riverfront housing development and cut in front of the park and golf course, slicing through the grounds of a historic fort built in 1849.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection hopes to construct 670 of fence across the 2,000-mile border by the end of the year. Agency spokesman Michael Friel said of the roughly 600 border landowners contacted nationwide, about 100 refused to grant permission to survey their property.

The resistance was particularly strong in Texas. The Justice Department has filed about 50 lawsuits against landowners - 35 in the heavily populated Rio Grande Valley, a dozen in Arizona and two in California.

The Eagle Pass mayor said his city never refused to allow customs officials to look at the land.

Friel declined to comment on any specific complaints but said lawsuits were a last resort. He also noted that the exact location of the fence has yet to be decided and that gates or other access could be granted for landowners with property between the fence and the river.

A fence "has proven to be an effective tool" for securing the border, said Friel, citing barriers in San Diego, El Paso and Nogales, Arizona.

Local officials and residents say the fence will not work without other reforms, such as a guest-worker program for Mexicans. The economic draw of the U.S. is too strong, they say, and the fence will cover only a third of the border.

"There's no way this is not going to be very detrimental to us," said John Stockley, a 74-year-old native of Eagle Pass. "I keep thinking if we took this money that's going to be spent not just here, all along the border, and put it into the Mexican economy, we'd probably have people going back the other way."

Meanwhile, a lawsuit was filed Tuesday over a Dallas suburb's latest effort to keep out illegal immigrants by barring home rentals to people who can't prove their legal status.

The suit, filed on behalf of real estate broker Guillermo Ramos, alleges the Farmers Branch City Council violated the Texas Open Meetings Act when it drafted and approved the new rule late last month.

Ramos believes "it's high time that a court give them some strict instruction as to what their obligations are," said his attorney, William A. Brewer III.

The law requires prospective tenants to get a city license to rent houses and apartments. It was set to take effect 15 days after a ruling on a similar ordinance currently being contested in court.

Opponents allege that while the council was supposed to discuss legal challenges against a previous ordinance, it actually drafted a new, more sweeping anti-illegal immigration measure behind closed doors, according to the suit.

City spokesman Tom Bryson did not immediately return a call seeking comment on the suit Tuesday.

There also were only a few days for residents to analyze and deliberate the proposal, opponents say.

Council members didn't announce until five days before they were to meet that a new ordinance had been drawn up. It wasn't posted on the city's Web site until the Friday before the council met. The following Tuesday, the council approved the measure unanimously, without changing a word of the proposal.