Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Brewster County commissioners approve canvass of November 2026 election results, name 2026 election judges
Summary
At a Nov. 19, 2025 special meeting in Alpine, the Brewster County Commissioners Court approved the final results of the November 2026 elections as presented by Elections Administrator Cynthia Cox and unanimously approved the countys list of 2026 election judges and alternates.
Get email alerts on the Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At a Nov. 19, 2025 special meeting in Alpine, the Brewster County Commissioners Court approved the final results of the November 2026 elections and unanimously approved the countys slate of 2026 election judges and alternates, the courts minutes show.
The actions came after Cynthia Cox, Brewster County elections administrator, presented the official canvass of the November 2026 election. Commissioner Jim Westermann moved to approve the final results and Commissioner Mo Morrow seconded; the motion passed 3-0.
The vote followed a public-comment period in which Monica McBride thanked Judge Greg Henington for filing paperwork related to his re-election. The court then considered the elections administrators proposed list of judges and alternates for 2026. Commissioner Mo Morrow moved to approve the slate; Commissioner Westermann seconded and the motion passed 3-0.
Judge Greg Henington called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. in the Brewster County Commissioners Courtroom. Other officials recorded as present were Commissioner Jim Westermann (Pct. 1), Commissioner Mo Morrow (Pct. 4), Commissioner Sara Allen Colando (Pct. 2), and Commissioner Ruben Ortega (Pct. 3). Katrina Muf1oz was noted as present in the absence of County Clerk Sarah Lujan. The meeting adjourned at 9:48 a.m.
The courts minutes identify the meeting date as Nov. 19, 2025 and record the items above, including the approval of the canvass for the "November 2026 Elections"; the minutes contain that phrasing. The record does not specify whether that phrasing is a typographical error in the agenda or reflects a particular electoral timeline; the courts minutes provide no further clarification in the transcript provided.
