Cynthia Trejo responds to District 4 recall petition

EL PASO, Texas (KVIA) – Thursday, El Paso City Council member Cynthia Boyar Trejo responded to an intent to start a petition for recall against her. She said voting to break an incentive agreement with Meta would have devastating consequences for the community.

In a statement sent to ABC-7, Rep. Trejo said:

"I respect the rights of residents to express their views, including through the petition process. Public service requires accountability, and I welcome civic engagement, even when there are disagreements.

However, I believe it is important for the public to understand the specific item that came before City Council on Tuesday, June 9th.

Item #37 was to initiate negotiations to terminate the Chapter 380 Economic Development Program Agreement and related contracts with Wurldwide LLC and Meta Platforms Inc. There is a misconception that the item was to renegotiate the agreement, and that is not the case. 

During this Council meeting, we heard passionate testimony from many residents who urged Council to break the agreement, some stating it should be done “at any cost.” While I respect those concerns, as elected officials we have a responsibility to consider the impact of our decisions on the entire community.

My decision and vote not to support the item was based on three key facts.

First, the Chapter 380 Agreement is a legally binding contract that was approved and executed in 2023. Wurldwide LLC became the owner of the property in 2024 and officially broke ground on the project on October 13, 2025. Terminating a legally binding agreement could expose the City to significant legal and financial consequences that would ultimately be borne by taxpayers.

Second, terminating the Chapter 380 Agreement would not guarantee the end of construction of the data center. Meta already is the legal owner of the property and development rights.

Third, City legal counsel advised Council that the City could face direct damages ranging from approximately $370 million to $760 million, with potential liabilities exceeding $1 billion. For perspective, the City’s General Fund is approximately $655 million for 2027. 

A judgment of that magnitude would have devastating consequences for our community. According to information provided by City leadership, taxpayers could face significant financial burdens, including increased debt obligations, pressure on property taxes, and reductions in critical services such as street maintenance, public safety, and parks and recreation.

At a time when the City is already working through budget challenges and eliminating more than 300 vacant positions to preserve core services, I was not willing to support a course of action that could place such extraordinary financial risk on our community and residents.

Breaking the agreement at any cost was not a risk I was willing to take on behalf of our residents, especially families on fixed or limited incomes.

My vote was not a vote against accountability. In fact, I stated publicly that Meta should be held accountable, but we must do so legally, responsibly, and collaboratively.

From the beginning, my goal has been about community engagement and finding a solution that brings all voices to the table. That is why this week, I initiated a series of roundtable discussions that will include representatives from Meta, the Mayor, utility providers, residents who oppose the project, residents who live close to the data center, as well as residents who support the project, and other community stakeholders.

These discussions are intended to ensure that every perspective is heard to help shape a separate agreement with Meta that addresses community concerns related to infrastructure, resources, environmental impacts, and long-term accountability.

I understand that not everyone agrees with my decision, and I respect those differences of opinion. The decisions I make from the dais are never taken lightly. I carefully consider the facts, the potential consequences, and the impact on all residents before casting my vote.

I remain committed to listening, engaging in meaningful dialogue, and pursuing solutions that are responsible, transparent, and in the best interest of our residents and the city of El Paso."

Wednesday, an El Paso community member filed an intent to circulate a petition for recall against Rep. Trejo.

The document listed the reason for recall as Rep. Trejo's June 9 vote against a path to renegotiate a tax incentive agreement with Meta Platforms despite community advocacy against the incentive agreement.

Joshua Dagda filed the notice. Dagda was a 2015 candidate for City Council District 8. He ran against incumbent Courtney Niland. Dagda received 45.7% of the vote.

City Council Item 37 was voted against 5-3 on June 9. Trejo voted against initiating negotiations to terminate the Chapter 380 Agreement and related incentives with Meta.

Item 37 would have had this outcome:

"Discussion and action to direct the City Manager and City Attorney to initiate negotiations to terminate the Chapter 380 Economic Development Program Agreement and any related incentive agreements with Worldwide LLC and Meta Platforms, Inc., in light of significant public concern regarding utility affordability, water resources, environmental impacts, infrastructure burdens, transparency concerns, questions regarding contractual enforceability and governmental immunity, and the adequacy of projected public benefits associated with the project."

In her council comments during the meeting, Trejo advocated for the jobs the data center would create. She said she's optimistic about the initiative moving forward. She said the risk of breaking the agreement is too high.

"Unilaterally cancelling a legally binding agreement exposes our city to significant legal risks and substantial financial consequences that would ultimately fall on our taxpayers. I cannot support this item. It's too great a risk," Rep. Trejo said in the meeting.

El Paso Strategic Communications Director Laura Cruz-Acosta told ABC-7 the organizer has 60 days to collect signatures that are at equal to at least 20% of the votes cast in that individual's election.

After the votes are collected, the city clerk's office certifies the signatures. Cruz-Acosta said the most common concerns for signatures are:

• Not a registered voter
• Signature is not legible.

If the petition did have enough certified signatures, city council would have to call a special election. Cruz-Acosta told ABC-7 no recall position has ever resulted in a recall election in recent history.

ABC-7 reached out to someone to speak behalf of the petition and is waiting to hear back.