What's up with the Nueces County Sheriff's race?

[TexasLinda]

Last night's local news said the head of LCS Correction Services was threatening to move a proposed facility out of Nueces County if Pete Alvarez wins the primary and becomes Nueces County Sheriff. This race had become so negative that I'd just about decided not to vote for either candidate. Then this jerkwad comes in and DARES me to vote for Alvarez! What to do, what to do...

I suspect more than a few people have a whole lot of money riding on having this "inmate detention facility" built in Nueces County. One of our Republican county commissioners looked like he was in pain while discussing the issue (probably trying hard not to crap his drawers). I know these kinds of business shakedowns ("vote this way or I'll take my business elsewhere") happen, but aren't they usually a bit more subtle?

For those of you in more civilized (i.e., boring) counties, here are some links:

April 8 - KRISTV: Alvarez wins, LCS kills detention center deal

April 7 - KRISTV: LULAC Council #1 concerned about comments made by Council #4444

April 7 - South Texas Chisme: Nueces County Sheriff's race

April 6 - Caller-TImes" Political ad could alter deal

April 6 - Caller-Times: LULAC No. 4444 seeks information on Democratic Sheriff's race

April 5 - Caller-Times: Campaign mud being slung hard

February 24 - Caller-Times: Work on new jail starts near Robstown

[meg]

1. That pushed me over to Alvarez, too

What's up with all of this? What is reported doesn't make sense. The meat of this story has yet to be reported.

[Czolgosz]

2. The over-the-top negative campaign would have driven me away from the poll

if I were not out rustling up votes for BAR and supporting Judge Jim Klager's re-election effort.

I'm just sick about the sheriff's race. It's so embarrassing and I suspect Jim Kaelin's chances in November have doubled over the past weeks (I've been block walking and stopped to talk to a few neighbors -- triple Ds -- who have already decided to support Kaelin and I know nothing positive about either Democrat nominee with which to rebut them). I've run into several triple Ds who are seriously entertaining the prospect of voting for Republican candidates for the first time in their lives -- in the sheriff's race and in a judicial race depending on the outcome Tuesday -- and that just KILLS me.

Can't the local party do something to discourage such negative campaigning and encourage Democrats who lose in the primary to endorse their successful Democratic opponents?

[TexasLinda]

3. I believe both candidates have said they'd support the winner

of the Democratic primary, but there's bound to be a few hard feelings. If they can patch things up and work together, one of them will be sheriff in November. As for the local party getting people to play nice with each other, neither the current chair nor the two chair candidates has that kind of pull.

[Czolgosz]

4. The sheriff's campaign was so relentlessly negative that I could hardly

stand to vote in this race.

I was wholly ambivalent about Jimmy Rodriguez's win until Pete Alvarez endorsed the Republican candidate in November. Until today, I was unsure, but now we all know that the Nueces County Democratic Party voters clearly elected the correct sheriff's candidate. If Alvarez is willing to endorse the Republican, he was never the sort of Democrat who deserved the people's trust or their vote. In a way, I'm glad Alvarez endorsed the Republican candidate because I was feeling ambivalent about this race and now I am reinvigorated.

On a related topic, Hector Rene Gonzalez was a good Democrat and a complete gentleman when he graciously endorsed Judge Jim Klager.

[TexasLinda]

5. I would have preferred "none of the above"

to either of our sheriff candidates. The LCS deal still has a bad smell about it. However, I will be voting for the Democrat in November.

BTW, I hear there's going to be a recount in the party chair race. It was extremely close, but I doubt a recount will change anything. Still, it'll be interesting to see how a recount is done with no paper trail. Does a recount ever involve checking the sign-in sheet (combination form) and comparing signatures with the signatures on file? I've heard vague rumors of ballot stuffing by one or more dishonest election workers and checking the signatures on the combination form is the only way to check this.

[Czolgosz]

6. I'm also curious how a recount would work.

[susanr516]

8. Here's what I know

The SoS website says the candidate is eligible to ask for a recount, due to the razor-thin margin. It looks like only a tie would generate an automatic recount. The recount request must be in writing, and it falls under the non-expedited category, which gives the candidate until 5 p.m., two days after the vote canvass, which will be held Apr. 20. However, Apr. 22nd is a Saturday, and the website says the deadline for the Primary non-expedited recounts was extended to the Mon. after the 1st canvass at 5 p.m. I'm assuming (damn, I'll have to call back) that means the candidate actually has until 5 p.m. on Apr. 24th, since the County Party is not usually open on Saturday. The Nueces County Democratic Party, the authority conducting the Primary runoff, is the place where the recount request and deposit is filed.

An attorney from the SoS's office said a candidate for a Party office can request a recount, just like a candidate for a Public office. The deposit DOES apply to a Party office, just like a public office recount, even though Party offices have no filing fee. A recount is an all-or-nothing proposition--i.e. you can't just recount the early vote, or just certain precincts--UNLESS a counting error is claimed as the reason and there's no indication that happened. The candidate DOES have the option of requesting a machine or a hand recount, which also affects the amount of deposit required--there's a different formula for each type. If the election is overturned, the candidate gets their deposit back; otherwise, the candidate's deposit is applied toward the actual cost of the recount. If the recount cost more than the deposit, the candidate is responsible for the difference (if it cost less than the deposit, he gets the difference back. Having seen one recount, I can't imagine it coming in for less than the deposit, particularly a full hand recount.)

According to the County Clerk, a hand recount IS possible with the E-Slates. They have something called a "vote catch record," which captures a record of each ballot cast by the voter. These vote catch records can be reproduced for a hand count--they're randomly generated, so it's impossible to match the record with the sign-in sheets.

I remember the Huerta-Greenwell recount with the old Opti-Scans. She hand-counted the early ballots and machine counted the Election Day ballots--I assume that could also be done in this case, but I haven't checked.

I understand the candidate announced at the Coffee Club that he was going to seek a recount, and the County Clerk told me he had contacted their office for information. He has not contacted the Party headquarters yet.

From what I've heard, I'm not sure if the candidate is wanting a recount, or if he is talking about contesting the election. A contest and a recount are two different animals. I understand that the candidate and his campaign manager were questioning the number of mail ballots that had been rejected. A recount only deals with the actual ballots cast--any rejected ballots or other irregularities are addressed by a contest, not a recount. I have no idea what the procedure of a contest would be--I have only researched the recount aspect.

[Jack_DeLeon]

7. I'm defiantely glad...

that my vote for Jimmy Rodriguez was the right vote.