Tempers Flare at Val Verde County Commissioners Court Over Precinct 4 Streetlights

A split vote at the Val Verde County Commissioners Court left the first of eight streetlight proposals for Precinct 4 defeated, with Owens and Flores voting yes and County Commissioner Pct. 1 Kerr Wardlaw, Garcia, and County Commissioner Pct. 2 Juan Carlos Vazquez voting no, after Owens declared, "Motion fails." The contested cluster of eight agenda items included seven proposals to install new lights and one upgrade.

The court’s regular session on March 2, 2026, became contentious as County Engineer Carlos Velarde displayed a map showing "a stretch of Cienegas Road in southern Val Verde County from the Duck Pond to a block or so east of Industrial Boulevard," the area targeted by several of the proposed installations. Owens began to read a subsequent agenda heading approving "an agreement with AEP for the installation of an LED light and SEC cable at Cienegas Road across from the Dollar General" before pausing to ask whether items 31 through 36 should be read separately.

Wardlaw framed his opposition around rural light-pollution concerns and the county’s nearby Dark Sky area, telling the court, "I’m putting them up one at a time to try and prevent light pollution in Precinct 1, and light pollution is an issue in Val Verde County. We have a Dark Sky Sanctuary north of here on the Devils River." Wardlaw recounted his own experience on Dolan Creek Road, saying, "When I was a kid, you couldn’t see from our ranch on Dolan Creek Road, you couldn’t see any glow. In the 90s, there started to be a dim glow. Now there’s just this huge glow coming off the city of Del Rio. And just putting up lights left and right, and everybody moving out into the country, and wanting lights in the country, makes no sense."

Procedural exchanges followed the failed vote. Owens had asked Velarde to show the map at the start of the streetlight discussion and then called for the vote on the first item. After announcing the motion failed, Owens began the next reading and asked, "Well, is there any other ones on there, between (Items) 31 and 36..." Garcia responded on the record, "I’m fine with the rest of them," but the public account provided does not record subsequent roll-call outcomes for the remaining seven streetlight items.

The session was reported as having "become contentious" and having "drew heated exchanges among court members and public comment," but the county record provided with these remarks does not include names or statements from public speakers, nor does it include contract amounts, installation timelines, or technical specifications for the AEP LED light and SEC cable item. Without the official minutes, the map file shown by Velarde, and the AEP agreement text, the final disposition, costs, and placement details for the seven remaining Precinct 4 streetlight proposals remain unresolved pending those documents.