THE CASE OF THE ERNIE "AHUMADA" HOT POTATO CHECK

By Juan Montoya
Have you heard of the check no one seems to want?
Well, apparently, there was a check issued by Cameron County to a certain surety company to cover the performance bond of a certain elected public official. That much is certain. But now, it appears that the recipient of the check – through a relative of his on the Cameron County Commissioners Court – is attempting to return it to the county.
Inquiries to County Treasurer David Betancourt and the County Auditor Martha Galarza have failed to turn up any documentation or facsimiles thereof of the wayward note.
There have also been requests for information from both of these parties initiated by various parties, also with no avail.
It seems that no one, not David, not Martha, or for that matter, anyone knows about the check, or wants to know about it.There are even some unconfirmed reports that commissioner Hernandez has collected the check and is desperately trying to get the county to take it back.
No, it's not a repeat of former Brownsville Mayor Pat Ahumada $26,000 check that ended up in his personal account when it should have been sent to a vendor in New York.
No, by that measure, this was small potatoes.
We understand that it totaled something more like $50.
For as long as anyone sitting on the commissioners court can remember, Flood, Public Official Bonds and Law Enforcement life insurance had been awarded – after Requests For Proposals were issued, evaluated and awarded – to Johnny Cavazos Insurance.
Following Cavazos' death October 2012, his widow notified the county on that she was closing the office and that she would no longer be servicing the policies after Oct. 31. The RFP which gave Cavazos the contract for insurance would have expired August 22, 2013. She told the court that the policies had been issued by Western Casualty Insurance and they could go there for inquiries.
On Nov. 5, 2012, Cavazos' longtime associate Sandra Tamez offered to continue providing the service.
Mrs. Cavazos notice and Tamez's offer forced the county to issue RFPs for the service which were sent out, received, and evaluated with the recommendation that the polices be awarded  to Tamez's Legacy Insurance during the court's Dec. 6, 2012 meeting. The motion passed unanimously, including Ernie himself voting to approve the contract. The county pays for the bonds of all its elected officials.
But that window of opportunity – between Oct. 31 and Dec. 6 when Legacy's RFP was approved – was not to be wasted.
Newly-voted Justice of the Peace 2-2 Erin Hernandez Garcia (Ernie and Norma's daughter) took office to fulfill the unexpired term of Tony Torres on November 20. Instead of turning toward Tamez's Legacy Insurance, she turned to another vendor.
Wouldn't you know it? That vendor turned out to be none other than her brother, owner of CNA Surety, with its agent of record Ernie J. Hernandez, doing business out of 1425 FM 802, Ste. R, in Brownsville. In case you missed the connection, that's the commissioner's son and the justice of the peace's brother. What conflict of interest, say you?
Curiously, 11 out of the 16 elected officials ranging from DA Luis Saenz to precinct constables went with Legacy when they signed their bonds.
And so we come to the new Public Official Bonds for 2013-2014.
Apparently, the Purchase Order for check was generated by from the JP 2-2 office to go again to her brother's company and dutifully sent.
Now we understand there has been a mad scramble to return the offending note to the county to avoid the glare of publicity on the already-seared family and avoid charges of conflict of interest against them
They are no strangers to that.
In 2009, the contract for vending services with the county was signed with Norma Hernandez, Ernie's wife and Erin's mother, and the company was known as Central Vending Services. However, after Ernie was elected commissioner, the vending contract renewal was with CV Services and his daughter Erin (Hernandez) Garcia signed the contract on behalf of the company, not his wife Norma.
Wait, there's more.
If that didn't pass the stench test, consider this.
When Hernandez’s wife and Garcia’s mother Norma Hernandez submitted the proposal to Cameron County in 2009, she identified herself as the owner of C V Services.
As Emma Perez-Treviño noted at the time: According to Cameron County’s vending machine policy, "The County prohibits operation of machines on county property of which profits go to county employees or county elected officials."
Everyone could see that the name changes and the shuffling of ownership of the company doing business with the county was just a ploy to keep the profits in the family. But the curious thing about this is that no county legal eagle never seems to have bothered to consult the state code to determine if the stratagem passed the conflict of interest test.
We have been advised by someone who should know that the county dropped the ball on this one. They point out that the Texas Local Government Code contains a statute that apparently controls this arrangement. [see link]
 Section 171.001 is the pertinent statute governing a “Conflict Of Interest” for local (as opposed to state) officials, which is codified in the Code.
The Code defines “local public official” and “business entity,” while Section 171.002 defines a “substantial interest in [a] business entity,” which focuses upon a “local public official” in the context of having a “substantial interest” under this statute “if a person [is] related to the official in the first degree by consanguinity or affinity.”
 This appears to confirm that if a County Commissioner entered into a contract with the County, the “excuse” that the business was recently transferred to his wife or daughter would run afoul of that statute (in regard to, respectively, affinity and consanguinity).
Will the magic check issued to the company of Erin's brother (and Ernie and Norma's son) finally appear? Or will it dissipate like a bad case of indigestion?
(For What it's Worth Dept.: A commenter took the time to insult the blog writers and asserted that the JP herself paid for it from her own money (JP's marriage ceremonies' account?) to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest. Which raises the interesting question: Since the county pays for the bonds for public officials , why did she steer  business her brother's way anyway instead of following the county's purchasing process?  However, other than the insults, no evidence (such as a copy of the JP's check (?) was produced.)