Hidalgo County loses final appeal before state Supreme Court in Precinct 1 election dispute

EDINBURG — The Texas Supreme Court was the last chance Hidalgo County voters had to be able to choose from more than a single candidate for Precinct 1 commissioner.

That’s according to a brief filed on behalf of A.C. Cuellar, the man currently occupying that seat by virtue of an interim appointment to the position.

But in the end, the state’s highest court did what others had done in hearing the county’s argument for a special election: It dismissed it.

The result: Democratic Party nominee Joel Quintanilla will be the sole Precinct 1 candidate to appear on the ballot in the Nov. 2 general election. Cuellar, who lost an 8-6 vote in May’s candidate forum that played out like so much political theater, will vie for voters’ support as a write-in candidate.

He has maintained that he was not directly involved in Hidalgo County District Attorney Rene Guerra’s push for a special election — a process that would have allowed the incumbent commissioner to put his name before voters. But with the final appeal lost before the state Supreme Court, Cuellar said the process that allowed Quintanilla to appear on the ballot with only eight votes was unfair.

“I really don’t think it’s fair for voters. They really want a choice,” he said. “We’re just going to go forward (with a write-in campaign) to let the people have a voice.”

The state Supreme Court dismissed three motions filed by Guerra on Friday, bringing an end to the elections imbroglio that began when he called on the county to replace former Precinct 1 Commissioner Sylvia Handy with a special election.

Handy stepped down after the March primary, following her guilty plea to felony charges of tax fraud and conspiracy.

A state district court judge later stopped the special election called by County Judge Rene Ramirez, saying it unfairly opened the process to anyone and was contrary to state law. Both the state’s 13th Court of Appeals and the Texas Supreme Court upheld the district court judge’s injunction.

But in the brief filed on behalf of Cuellar, an attorney for one of the state’s top law firms wrote that the injunction froze the ballot with Quintanilla as the only candidate and deprived Hidalgo County voters of the opportunity to choose from among more than one name.

“The effect of the injunction is to put the courts in the middle of the political process and effectively to decide the outcome of the election,” wrote C. Robert Heath, an attorney with Austin-based Bickerstaff, Heath, Delgado, Acosta.

Heath wrote that an election to fill a vacancy does not fit within the Texas Election Code’s definition of a general election: “an election, other than a primary election, that regularly recurs at fixed dates.” And because the Precinct 1 vacancy doesn’t fit that definition, he wrote, it must be a special election even if it’s held the same date as the general election.

But Gilbert Hinojosa — Quintanilla’s attorney — said that argument is contrary to the process that’s currently being used to fill Nueces County’s district attorney vacancy and runs counter to the opinion of the Texas Secretary of State’s Office, whose top attorney called Guerra’s preferred choice an “illegal election.”

Hinojosa said the fact that the court system took less than three weeks to completely decide the issue — as opposed to an appeals process that takes years for most cases — shows its clarity.

With the question over whether the county should use a special or general election settled, Quintanilla said he would focus on running a campaign against a write-in opponent.

But Hinojosa said he will insist on strict compliance with the Texas Election Code in how the county conducts the Precinct 1 election. He said the code stipulates how the name of a write-in candidate is presented on the ballot, which ones will be counted, the instructions given by election judges and other details that may pertain to issues as they arise.

“The last alternative is to run as a write-in,” Hinojosa said. “It should be the most difficult process, given that they missed opportunities to get on the ballot.”

Guerra said he would ensure the county complies with the injunction that stopped the special election.

He also said he would ask to testify before the state Legislature on how to improve what he described as “inadequacies in the Election Code.”

But Guerra seemed resigned to the outcome after the state district court, appeals court and state Supreme Court ruled against him.

Rather than continue his legal arguments for a special election that relied heavily on semantics in interpreting the statute, Guerra summarized his disappointment with the Supreme Court’s ruling by saying, “It’s not right.”

“You cannot let 14 votes decide out of 200,000 voters who will be the next county commissioner,” he said. “It’s not just an injustice — it’s a grave injustice. But the Supreme Court doesn’t care. Let them sleep comfortably in their beds tonight.”

____

Jared Janes covers Hidalgo County government, Edinburg and general assignments for The Monitor. He can be reached at (956) 683-4424.