BECAUSE OF A LACK OF REPORTING SKILLS, WE REMAIN CLUELESS AS TO WHAT IS REALLY HAPPENING WITH THE BAR DISTRICT ON PABLO KISEL

I believe I have read most of what is out there on the issue.  I have read nothing specific enough to allow me to form a qualified opinion.

This is in part why I no longer send letters to the editor with the Herald.  They will always run from any story which speaks to the incompetence of the city of Brownsville.

I do not doubt the claims about how dangerous the area may be.  It is unacceptable if the city can prove its numbers.  But the law does not look to results but, process.  Every bar owner deserved a notice of which codes they violated, before they were shut down.  This is basic law.  

Now I can imagine an urgent situation wherein the city can prove the bars were specifically warned about violations of the new code, and chose to not act, while leaving the patrons in the area in a very dangerous situation.  In law this is known as exigent. 

So even if the claim the area is very dangerous is true, the city had a constitutional duty to tell the bar owners of their specific code violation, before the bars could be closed. 

I do have legal experience on this issue.  Over 20-years ago Dallas was going through the same thing, which eventually led to a Red-Light district.  I did a lot of the consulting work on legal issues.

If all I go on is the social media posts, then I am to believe the City of Brownsville just closed these bars without warning.  Well, that would be a black and white violation of the constitution.  I need to see the evidence before I make such a claim. When regulations are enforced in a random and arbitrary fashion it violates due process.

I want to see the lawsuit and exhibits of what was posted on the doors of the establishments before I form an opinion.

The social media coverage gives me no information as to the judge who signed the TRO.  We are in Cameron County where the practice of law is discretionary.  Once I see the pleadings, I will be shocked if they are in order.  But I would not be shocked if the city violated the due process rights of notice and opportunity to respond, afforded the bar owners.

IN MY CASE THE CITY IS IN COURT STATING CODE ENFORCEMENT IS DISCRETIONARY

The defense by the city is so bizarre because it opens a response, they are enforcing the city code in a random and arbitrary way. 

This is where the bar owners need to focus their claim.  They can use the pleadings in my case to show the city as a matter of policy has opened a policy of random and arbitrary enforcement of the code.

IF SOMEONE CAN GIVE ME THE STYLE OF THE CASE, CASE NUMBER, PARTIES, I CAN DO A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS OF WHAT IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING.

send it to bobbywc58@yahoo.com