HOWARD COUNTY, TX – The creation of the Emergency Services District #1 in Howard County was approved by voters during the local election on May 3, 2025; however, a Howard County resident is protesting the results and asking that the May 3 results be voided and a new election take place in November 2025.
Craig Wyrick is protesting the results of the elections and has filed a petition with the 118th District Court in Howard County. According to his claim, the election should be considered invalid because it did not accurately reflect all of the territories that would be impacted by the creation of the ESD #1. The canvassed results only list the City of Coahoma and the City of Forsan, but it also should have included the extraterritorial jurisdictions (or ETJ’s) for Coahoma, Forsan, Big Spring, and the area of Howard County that does not fall in those categories. Wyrick claims that as the Commissioners Court order currently reads, as per the results of the election, the ESD #1 is only approved within the city limits of Coahoma and Forsan; therefore, only the tax payers in those areas can be taxed for the ESD #1.
The petition also claims that the maps used for the election should have been created by the municipalities to show its boundaries and ETJ area, as per Texas State Law. Instead they were created by the County Elections Administrator.
Wyrick told KBest News he doesn’t feel that this was intentionally done, but believes that an oversight was made in the rush to get this item on the May 3, 2025 ballot because there would be less of a voter turnout. He hopes that the Howard County Commissioners Court and the District Judge will decide to correct the mistake.
In response to the petition filed, the Howard County Commissioners Court has provided the following statement:
“As required, a response to Mr. Wyrick’s petition is being prepared and will be filed with the 118th District Court. We look forward to the Court’s response and guidance in relation to the Emergency Services District election/creation.”
According to County Judge Randy Johnson, they have been advised by counsel to say nothing further as there is pending litigation.
Comments