The court ruled that Lubbock’s home-rule charter—not Texas’ default six-month residency requirement—controlled Boren’s eligibility. He has since advanced to an Aug. 1 runoff against Tim Green.
Gary Boren won his legal battle to appear on Lubbock’s District 4 City Council ballot after a state appeals court concluded that the city improperly applied Texas’ six-month residency requirement to his candidacy.
In an April 24 memorandum opinion, a three-justice panel of the Seventh Court of Appeals conditionally granted Boren’s request for a writ of mandamus. The ruling directed City Secretary Courtney Paz to withdraw her declaration that Boren was ineligible and place his name on the June 27 special-election ballot.
The city complied with the decision that same day. Paz sent Boren a letter accepting his application and confirming that his name would appear on the ballot, according to Lubbock Lights’ original report on the ruling.
The dispute arose after Boren reported on his candidate application that he had lived in District 4 for two months. Although he had previously served on the City Council and had lived in Lubbock for years, he recently moved into the district he hoped to represent.
Under the general eligibility rules in the Texas Election Code, a candidate for an elected office representing a geographic district ordinarily must have lived in that district for six months before the filing deadline.
Lubbock, however, is a home-rule city operating under its own voter-approved charter. The charter states that a council candidate must be a bona fide resident of the district “at the time of filing for election.”
That difference became the central question in the court case: Did the charter establish its own residency standard, or did the state’s six-month requirement still apply because the charter did not specify a minimum period?
The city argued that the charter established only the point at which residency should be measured. Because it did not state how long a candidate must have lived in the district, the city contended that the state’s six-month rule filled that gap.
Boren and his attorney, Eric Opiela, argued that the charter’s language was an affirmative eligibility standard. Under their interpretation, a candidate needed to be a bona fide district resident when filing but did not have to satisfy an additional six-month requirement.
The appeals court agreed with Boren.
Writing for the panel, Justice Alex Yarbrough concluded that the charter was not silent about residency. Instead, its “at the time of filing” language established an express point-in-time requirement that displaced the Election Code’s default six-month standard.
Texas law allows a home-rule city charter to prescribe a different residency requirement for municipal candidates. The court therefore found that Paz misapplied the law when she rejected Boren’s application based on the state rule.
The decision did not find that Boren had lived in District 4 for six months. His application said that he had not. Rather, the court held that he did not need to meet that six-month threshold because Lubbock’s charter supplied the governing standard.
The court also emphasized that restrictions on candidacy should be interpreted narrowly. When election laws are ambiguous, courts generally favor interpretations that preserve voters’ ability to choose among candidates rather than exclude someone from the ballot.
Boren initially filed his application March 26, about two weeks after then-Councilman Brayden Rose announced his resignation. Paz rejected the application March 31. Boren submitted a corrected version April 7, but it continued to disclose that he had lived in District 4 for two months.
He filed the mandamus proceeding that same day, asking the appeals court to intervene directly. The city formally rejected his corrected application April 13.
Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy used to compel a public official to perform a legally required duty. The appeals court determined that an ordinary appeal would not provide an adequate remedy because election preparation deadlines were approaching and any prolonged litigation could effectively deny Boren a place on the ballot.
The court conditionally granted relief, meaning it expected Paz to comply without issuance of a formal writ. The city secretary’s office subsequently said it respected and accepted the ruling and would follow the court’s direction, as also reported by KCBD.
Boren’s successful court challenge allowed him to compete in the June 27 special election—and voters have since advanced him to the next stage.
According to the city’s official canvass and runoff resolution, Tim Green led the five-candidate field with 1,230 votes. Boren finished second with 1,006 votes, followed by Bill Curnow with 184, Stephanie Ferran with 121 and Boyd Goodloe with 72.
Because no candidate received a majority, Green and Boren advanced to an Aug. 1 runoff to determine who will complete the remainder of Rose’s District 4 term.
Early voting in the runoff runs from July 20 through July 28. Election Day voting is scheduled for Aug. 1 from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
The appeals court’s ruling settled Boren’s eligibility to compete, but it did not award him the council seat. That decision now rests with District 4 voters.
