The City of Lubbock maintained that Gary Boren failed a state residency requirement, but the Seventh Court of Appeals ordered officials to accept his candidacy. Boren has since advanced to an Aug. 1 runoff.
LUBBOCK, Texas — A legal dispute that began with the City of Lubbock declaring Gary Boren ineligible for a City Council special election ended with an appellate court ordering his name onto the ballot—and voters subsequently sending him to a runoff.
City Secretary Courtney Paz originally rejected Boren’s application because he reported living in District 4 for two months. The city maintained that Texas law required him to reside in the council district for at least six months before the candidate filing deadline.
Boren countered that Lubbock’s home-rule charter establishes a different standard, requiring a council candidate to be a “bona fide” resident of the applicable district at the time of filing without specifying a minimum number of months.
That disagreement reached the Seventh Court of Appeals in Amarillo after Boren filed an emergency petition for a writ of mandamus, asking the court to compel Paz to accept his application.
City said state’s six-month rule applied
Boren submitted his first application and filing fee March 26, 2026. On the sworn application, he stated that he had lived in Texas for 74 years but had resided in District 4 for two months.
Paz notified him March 31 that he was ineligible under Section 141.001(a)(5) of the Texas Election Code. That provision generally requires a candidate to have lived continuously in the territory represented by the office for six months before the filing deadline.
Boren submitted a second application April 7 to correct a clerical issue, but the stated length of his District 4 residency remained unchanged. The city rejected that application for the same reason.
In its April 13 filing, the city asked the Seventh Court to deny Boren’s petition. The city’s formal response to the court argued that the Lubbock charter does not actually replace the state’s six-month requirement.
The charter says a candidate must be a bona fide city and district resident “at the time of filing for office.” The city interpreted that language as identifying when residency must exist—not how long the person must have lived in the district.
Because the charter does not expressly establish a different number of days or months, the city argued, the state’s six-month requirement fills the gap. It also said the requirement had been included in information provided to prospective candidates and reflected the city’s longstanding interpretation of election law.
The response was filed on Paz’s behalf by attorneys from the Fort Worth firm Taylor, Olson, Adkins, Sralla & Elam, along with Lubbock City Attorney Matthew Wade and Deputy City Attorney Jeff Hartsell.
Boren criticized the city for using an outside law firm and called the litigation a waste of taxpayer money in comments reported by Lubbock Lights.
Boren said the city charter controlled
Boren and his attorney, Eric Opiela, argued that state law expressly permits a home-rule city to adopt a different residency requirement through its charter.
According to Boren, the phrase “at the time of filing” was itself an affirmative residency standard. He maintained that requiring a candidate to be a bona fide district resident on filing day was different from requiring six months of prior residency.
In his reply to the city’s appellate brief, Boren argued that applying the state rule would render the charter’s point-in-time language largely meaningless. He also emphasized the general legal principle that restrictions on ballot access should be interpreted narrowly when the governing language is ambiguous.
Mandamus proceedings are used to obtain emergency judicial relief when a public official is alleged to have failed to perform a legal duty and an ordinary appeal would come too late. The approaching ballot-printing and mail-ballot deadlines made the normal appellate process impractical.
Appeals court ordered Boren onto ballot
On April 24, a three-judge panel unanimously sided with Boren.
In its memorandum opinion in In re Gary Boren, the Seventh Court concluded that the charter’s “at the time of filing” language was not silent. Instead, the judges found that it established an express residency requirement authorized by Texas law.
The court also noted that restrictions on a person’s right to seek public office should be strictly construed, with uncertainties generally resolved in favor of the candidate and voters.
The court conditionally granted Boren’s mandamus petition and directed Paz to withdraw her declaration of ineligibility, accept his application and place him on the District 4 ballot. A formal writ would have been issued only if she failed to comply.
The city accepted the ruling. Paz’s office subsequently confirmed that it would follow the court’s direction and add Boren to the ballot, according to KCBD’s coverage of the decision.
Boren advances to August runoff
Boren ultimately competed in the June 27 special election against Tim Green, Bill Curnow, Stephanie Ferran and Boyd Goodloe. The election was called to complete the unexpired term of Councilman Brayden Rose, who announced his resignation for family reasons.
The city’s official canvass recorded 1,230 votes for Green and 1,006 for Boren. Curnow received 184, Ferran received 121 and Goodloe received 72.
Because no candidate won a majority, Green and Boren advanced to a runoff. The City Council’s official election resolution scheduled that election for Aug. 1.
Early voting runs from July 20 through July 28. Only registered voters residing within Lubbock City Council District 4 may participate.
The election outcome will determine who completes the remainder of Rose’s District 4 term. Regardless of the runoff result, the appellate ruling established that Boren met the residency standard governing access to the special-election ballot.
