Mayor John Whitmire speaks to the media about the city’s immigration policies, after reports that at least two officers violated policies by transporting people to ICE, during a news conference at HPD headquarters in Houston, Wednesday, March 11, 2026.
Brett Coomer/Houston Chronicle
Houston City Council members notched a win this week in a process designed to give them more power in Houston’s strong-mayor form of government, passing a proposal limiting how police work with federal immigration agents.
But the process leading up to that 12-5 vote has some council members questioning whether Mayor John Whitmire’s office has too much sway over the policies they pitch, and Council Member Alejandra Salinas is now calling on the city to revisit its rules for Proposition A, the charter amendment she used to advance the proposal.
Salinas, with Council Members Abbie Kamin and Edward Pollard, pitched the proposal to undo a rule requiring officers to wait 30 minutes for federal agents to arrive when they stop someone with an administrative U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement warrant. The proposal also requires the Houston Police Department to make public reports to the council about ICE referrals.
Article continues below this ad
ICE PROPOSAL PASSES: Houston City Council approves proposal to limit HPD’s ICE cooperation
Proposition A, which voters approved in 2023, was intended to help the council place items on the agenda, a power that typically rests only with the mayor. But rules passed by council require that each item be reviewed by the city legal department – which reports to the mayor. City attorneys determined a section of the council’s ICE proposal that would’ve given HPD officers discretion on whether to call ICE was illegal – even though Dallas and Austin have implemented similar policies without issue.
Salinas and Kamin have questioned that ruling, with Salinas noting the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas and the Texas Immigration Law Council backed their view that the proposal was lawful as submitted.
Whitmire for months fought attempts to limit HPD’s ICE cooperation, repeatedly saying the city was following state and federal laws. He ultimately supported Wednesday’s measure – without the discretion provision – saying he felt it codified existing policy.
Article continues below this ad
“There needs to be a thorough legal review of an item prior to it coming to council. That’s not being questioned,” Kamin said. “It’s whether there is an independent legal determination, or whether this is all at the direction of the mayor.”
Salinas added that “this experience demonstrates that council needs to revisit the rules” for Proposition A. She also publicly asked the mayor to call a special hearing in hopes of getting the legal department to reconsider its decision.
Neither Whitmire nor City Attorney Arturo Michel returned requests for comment.
Council Member Julian Ramirez, who has raised concerns about how the charter amendment should work in the past, said he didn’t see any issue with the way the city’s lawyers handled the ICE proposal.
But he said there needs to be more discussion on the city’s Proposition A rules, and said he sees value in the council having an independent attorney outside of the city legal department.
Article continues below this ad
“In theory, the city government is the client for the city attorney, but they work for the mayor,” Ramirez said. ”And I have the greatest respect for (Michel), but you know that’s the way it works in reality.”
A ‘one-person veto’
The way Proposition A should work – and whether existing policies violate its spirit of empowering the council – has been debated since it was passed in November 2023.
As the council decided the rules for how to pitch policy changes under the charter amendment, several members worried the mayor’s office could use the city legal department to block proposals from advancing.
PROCESS CONCERNS: Council members clash over Prop A rules, saying they put Houston at risk of ‘dictatorial’ mayors
Article continues below this ad
Proposition A says items proposed by council members must be “lawful” to reach the agenda, but the rules council approved for that process give the power of determining that to city attorneys.
“What we are doing now is really convoluting the intent of Prop A,” Council Member Martha Castex-Tatum said during an April 2024 meeting.
During the same meeting, Ramirez agreed that future mayors “might be rather dictatorial and might seek to squelch discussion and debate.”
While the mayor’s office at the time assured the council that wouldn’t be the case, the ICE proposal has reignited these concerns.
“I’m not aware of another jurisdiction where a city attorney has effectively a one-person veto on the policies that city council members who are elected by Houstonians, can pass,” Salinas said Wednesday.
Article continues below this ad
In blocking the provision giving HPD officers discretion in when to call ICE, city attorneys said that policy could put the city’s access to the National Crime Information Center database, or NCIC, at risk, and could imperil state and federal grants.
The Dallas Police Department has not had issues with their officer discretion policy, spokesperson Allison Hudson said.
Krystal Gómez, an attorney with the Texas Immigration Law Council, said the city’s legal interpretation was shaky, and misreads HPD’s contract for NCIC access.
“None of the other cities that have made it discretionary to call ICE have suffered a loss of grant funds,” Gomez said. “It’s hard to imagine restating the law would be a cause for retribution.”