The Texas Ethics Commission is seeking to settle complaints against former Starr County Judge Eloy Vera with a proposed resolution on Thursday, June 29, 2023. The commission alleges that Vera violated state election laws by not reporting campaign contributions and expenditures, among other violations.

The case is entitled “In the Matter of Eloy Vera” with case no. SC-32206265, SC-32209325, and SC-32210388.

Eloy Vera, a former judge and now a political candidate, was found by the Texas Ethics Commission to have committed several violations. Allegedly, the respondent did not file a campaign treasurer appointment, accepted campaign contributions, and made campaign expenditures without a treasurer appointment. Additionally, he failed to file semiannual campaign finance reports and used public funds for a political advertising video. To resolve the complaints, the commission is asking Judge Vera to sign the order and agreed resolution.

The filing states:

“Sworn complaint SC – 32206265 alleged that the respondent did not file a campaign treasurer appointment. The information submitted with the complaint showed that the respondent did not have a campaign treasurer appointment on file with the Starr County Elections Administrator. In response to the complaint, the respondent swore that he filed his campaign treasurer appointment with the Starr County Democratic Party chair on November 18, 2021. The respondent included a copy of a campaign treasurer appointment that was dated November 18, 2021, but did not have a date stamp to indicate when it had been filed. In response to written questions, the respondent swore that filing with the chair of the local Democratic Party was the standard practice for Democratic candidates in Starr County. Records on file with the Secretary of State indicate that the respondent filed his ballot application on November 19, 2021.”

The filing continues:

“The information submitted with the complaint included a partial photograph of a large roadside political advertising sign for the respondent. The photograph included the respondent’s last name and website, and the political advertising disclosure statement r e a d “Pol. Adv. Paid for by Candidate.” In response to the complaint, the respondent denied the allegation as he had given a campaign treasurer appointment to the Starr County Democratic Party chair and believed that had fulfilled the requirement to have a campaign treasurer appointment on file. 15. In response to written questions, the respondent swore that he had accepted no campaign contributions and made or authorized no campaign expenditures during the period from January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2021. The respondent further swore that this period of time represented a “dormant and inactive political activity time.”

The filing further states:

“Sworn complaint SC – 32209325 alleged that the respondent spent or authorized the spending of public funds by using county resources for a political advertising video, in violation of Section 255.003(a) of the Election Code. The video was posted to the Starr County Texas Facebook page on September 12, 2022, with the caption “Your Starr County | Historical Growth | Accountable Governance: Information video from Starr County Judge Eloy Vera.” In the video, the respondent makes use of both Starr County facilities and equipment. The respondent appeared in his office, in a chair that appeared to be embossed with the county logo, wearing a shirt with the county logo, and behind a desk that included his nameplate.”

The filing additionally notes:

“The video was posted with an image of the respondent and the “checkmark” logo that the respondent uses in his political advertising. In the video, the respondent states “I am very happy today that thanks to God and with your help, the citizens of this County, we have been very successful in building a lot of things in our community. From the Medical Plaza, different things that are going on, your unemployment, just the quality of life in our community.”

In response to the complaint, the respondent provided a transcript of the video. In addition, the respondent swore that the video was recorded and produced entirely at his expense and that there was no cost or any expense to the county for the recording or production.”

According to the commission, the respondent, by signing the said order and agreed resolution and returning it to the commission, neither admits nor denies the findings of fact and conclusions of law described under Section III. The respondent consents to the entry of the order and agreed resolution solely for the purpose of resolving this sworn complaint. Additionally, the respondent agrees to the order and agreed on a resolution, waiving any right to further proceedings in this matter.

Moreover, the respondent acknowledges the filing requirements and restrictions of the Election Code. Notably, the respondent explicitly acknowledges that the Election Code prohibits officers or employees of a political subdivision from spending or authorizing the spending of public funds, including using public resources, for political advertising. This acknowledgment specifically pertains to the use of facilities or equipment owned by a political subdivision, which constitutes the use of public funds potentially subject to the Election Code. The respondent willingly commits to complying with these legal requirements.

The order states:

“The Commission hereby orders that if the respondent consents to the proposed resolution, this order and agreed resolution is a final and complete resolution of sworn complaints SC-32206265, SC-32209325, and SC-32210388.”

Judge Vera’s info can be found on

A copy of the original filing can be found here.