On April 15, the San Marcos City Council approved moving forward with a ceasefire resolution on their May 6 meeting, sparking mixed reactions.

The agenda item was titled “Hold a discussion regarding a possible resolution calling for the immediate and permanent ceasefire in occupied Palestine, an arms embargo on Israel, recognition of Palestinian sovereignty, and the protection of constitutional rights for all people under national and international law.” No vote was made on the resolution, instead council approved placing an actual ceasefire resolution on their next agenda.

Days before the meeting, city council received threats from multiple people, both in the community and in government.

State Senator Donna Campbell (R-New Braunfels) warned Hughson of the possible consequences of the resolution passing. Campbell also copied the Office of the Attorney General in the email.

“Only through steadfast support for Israel can we dismantle tyranny and secure lasting peace,” Campbell wrote in her email. “Should San Marcos’s leadership oppose this vital alliance, I respectfully warn that state funding could be at risk, as Texas firmly rejects support for entities aligning with instability and terror.”

David Sergi, a local defense attorney, said he reported the meeting to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in a now-deleted Facebook post.

“Why are some Hamas supporting members of San Marcos City Council sponsoring a pro Hamas resolution?” Sergi wrote in the post. “ICE will be there. Those calls have been made.”

Hours before the vote or discussion took place, over 60 people spoke during the public comment period, which lasted almost three hours. The majority of speakers spoke either for or against the resolution, with only a few speaking on other matters.

Some residents criticized the resolution because it was not a local matter, but something the federal government should be dealing with. Thomas Alter, assistant professor of history at Texas State, spoke at the meeting as a San Marcos resident. He countered that it is a local issue, as tax money from local residents is going to fund the conflict.

“This is very much a local issue when billions of our tax dollars go to fund a genocide where our local school district is facing an $8 million budget deficit, let alone the other countless underfunded education and social and welfare programs,” Alter said.

Rabbi Ari Weingarten, rabbi for the local Chabad Jewish Community Center, criticized the resolution. He said the resolution would create a “hotbed for unwanted things in the city” and questioned why there had been no such resolutions for other conflicts around the world.

“Did the city make a resolution regarding Russia and Ukraine? Did the city make a resolution regarding the Kurds, regarding Syria? We didn’t,” Weingarten said. “Why is this different? Because it’s Jewish people.”

After public comment, the council moved on to other agenda items before getting to their discussion about the resolution.

The discussion opened with statements from Councilmembers Alyssa Garza and Amanda Rodriguez, the two sponsors for the resolution.

“We cannot afford to stay silent, not when silence means enabling intimidation and injustice. I echo the concerns of our neighbors that said ‘You’re elected to serve San Marcos,’ our duty is to the people San Marcos, not to the fragile egos of those who govern through coercion and fear,” Garza said.

Garza argued the resolution was a local issue, saying it was taking a stand against a federal and state government seeking to restrict the power of local governments across the nation.

“I won’t apologize for centering human dignity over political convenience,” Garza said. “I won’t apologize for fighting to protect local power and for asserting that supporting this ceasefire resolution is one way that we reclaim this power.”

Rodriguez also said the matter was local, due to money being paid by local taxpayers being sent by the U.S to the Israeli military. She further criticized some speakers during public comment, who used God and Biblical prophecy to justify their stance on the issue.

“You should feel shame invoking God as a reason to justify that our tax dollars are literally subsidizing over 70% of this genocide,” Rodriguez said. “[Locals] come to that dais and they tell us what we can’t afford, housing can’t afford to take care of my kids. You go to the schools in the school district, our kids are literally waiting to get to school to eat their first meal… Where have we gone wrong in our society?”

Mayor Jane Hughson quoted Austin Mayor Kirk Watson’s comments on a similar resolution that was attempted in Austin as part of her reasoning for being against moving forward with the resolution.

“I’m going to say that I agree when he said ‘the proposed resolution of Austin City Council will not realistically end the violence on the other side of the globe, nor will it stop federal taxes from being used to implement foreign policy that is not in our power,'” Hughson said.

Hughson also questioned why this resolution was brought to council and not for any other current conflicts around the world.

Because the item was a discussion, no binding vote was made on the resolution, instead what council approved was placing the resolution on the May 6 agenda.

Councilmember Lorenzo Gonzalez said he would propose 17 amendments to the resolution before council votes on whether to adopt it. Gonzalez amendments will be viewable through City Council’s message board prior to the May 6 meeting.

The San Marcos City Council meets at 6 p.m. every first and third Tuesday of each month. For more information, visit its website.