Even with a federal judge’s recent denial of an injunction request aimed at halting the city’s 2017 Brackenridge Park bond project, it’s unclear when the city will actually begin its work restoring historic features of the park.
Last week, U.S. District Judge Fred Biery denied a request by two members of the Lipan-Apache Native American Church for an injunction in their religious freedom lawsuit filed in August. The Native American plaintiffs plan to appeal.
But the city is still waiting on several permits to begin work on the project, city officials said this week. While the city had been hoping to start the project’s first phase by now, there is no specific timeline for when work to restore historic features of Brackenridge Park will begin, they said.
In Biery’s order, issued last week, he granted the plaintiffs, Gary Perez and Matilde Torres, the right to access a portion of the San Antonio River bank that has been fenced off by the city since February. This section of the river, held sacred by the plaintiffs, is slated for improvements under the approved project plan.
But Biery rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that the City of San Antonio should create a plan that would entail fewer trees being removed. The judge stated a redesign and re-permitting process would be lengthy and would “exponentially extend Plaintiffs’ and the public’s presently fettered ability to enjoy the area.”
Biery also denied the plaintiffs’ request to stop the city’s efforts to deter birds from nesting in the area, actions Perez and Torres say hurt the area’s spiritual ecology because it hinders cormorants — a bird they view as sacred — from nesting.
Biery stated the court heard credible testimony that the city’s bird deterrent efforts are “in the realm of public health and safety.”
John Greil, an attorney representing the plaintiffs and a professor at the University of Texas Law and Religion Clinic, told the San Antonio Report the plaintiffs plan to appeal all three parts of the order, even on the item they were granted because they want to see the fencing removed.
Calling it a difficult case, Biery heard four days of testimony last month from the plaintiffs, religious experts, the city, arborists and engineers. In his order, Biery found that Perez and Torres have “have a sincere religious belief[s]” and should be given access for religious services — up to a point.
Biery stated the plaintiffs will need to tell the city dates of their planned religious ceremonies to ensure they are given safe access. He also instructed the city to make the area safer by trimming some tree branches.
The plaintiffs’ plan to appeal is the latest twist in a long-running battle pitting the city’s Parks and Recreation Department against a small but dedicated group determined to preserve trees in a section of 343-acre Brackenridge Park.
Perez and Torres have been vocal opponents of the bond project throughout the city’s yearlong public input process. The two talked to the San Antonio Report in 2022 about their religious beliefs and opposition to the project.
Approved by voters as part of the 2017 municipal bond, the project will restore several historic structures in the park around Lambert Beach, including an 1870s pump house and 1920s-era retaining walls.
But after the city’s planning commission approved a project design in January 2022 that would have removed more than 100 trees, including nine “heritage trees” — defined as a tree with a trunk of 24 inches in diameter or more — a group of residents, which included Perez and Torres, mobilized to block permission from the city’s Historic and Design Review Commission.
The commission tabled a decision, paving the way for a series of public meetings, a public apology from the city and a redesigned project that reduces the number of trees slated for removal.
The council-approved version of the project design, approved in April by the HDRC, slated 48 trees, including six heritage trees, for removal — fewer than half the 105 the plan originally called for.
An additional 19 trees were marked to be relocated within the park. The approved plan includes planting 26 new trees in the area.
However, a core group of tree preservation advocates — including Perez and Torres — have remained dissatisfied with the plan. The lawsuit, filed against the city in mid-August on behalf of Perez and Torres, was the latest attempt to stop the project from progressing.
Greil said he and his team plan to submit the appeal “soon,” although the action depends on when the city says they plan to begin working. If the city plans to begin its work within the next few weeks, his plaintiffs may need to seek emergency relief, he said.
