Additional Information

Candidate Survey Responses

RESPONSES TO THE 2026 ATPE CANDIDATE SURVEY:

If elected, what do you believe your primary role and responsibility as a State Board of Education (SBOE) member should be, particularly in comparison to or in coordination with the Texas Education Agency (TEA) and the Legislature?

As an SBOE member, my primary responsibility is to set strong academic standards, oversee curriculum and instructional materials, and protect the integrity of public education for all Texas students. The Board should provide thoughtful oversight of TEA’s implementation of those standards, ensuring accountability without micromanagement. While the Legislature sets policy and funding, the SBOE’s role is to represent parents, educators, and local communities by focusing on what happens in the classroom and making decisions grounded in evidence, transparency, and student success—not politics.

In your opinion, what is the most pressing issue facing public education in Texas?

The most pressing issue facing public education today is sustainable, equitable funding paired with teacher retention. Schools are being asked to do more, raise achievement, address learning loss, ensure safety, and meet students’ mental-health needs without keeping pace with inflation or competitive teacher pay. Underfunding drives teacher shortages, larger class sizes, and fewer student supports, hitting high-need communities hardest. Addressing this requires long-term investment, respect for educators, and accountability focused on student outcomes. We must increase the per student funding to at least the national average (a bare minimum request) and increase teacher and staff pay. I believe it is also possible to establish an education fund out of the rainy-day fund to help permanently fund public education. Also, it is expected that vouchers will continue to take up more funding so we must hold the voucher program accountable to the same standards as public school and require transparency, reporting, standards, and more for any private school that gets voucher funding. We must not let public education suffer for vouchers to flourish.

If elected, what degree of input will you seek from educators, ATPE, and other educator organizations in policy decisions made by the SBOE? How would you seek that input?

If elected, I would actively and consistently seek input from educators, ATPE, and other educator organizations, because those closest to the classroom understand what works and what doesn’t. I believe policy is strongest when it is informed by real-world experience. I would engage educators through regular meetings with educator organizations, teacher roundtables across the district, surveys, and open forums, especially during curriculum reviews, rulemaking, and major policy changes. I would also maintain an open-door approach, so teachers and school leaders know their voices are valued and respected. The SBOE should be a partner to educators, not a top-down body. Listening first leads to better decisions and better outcomes for students. Over my six-year tenure at the McAllen City Commission, I consistently engaged our partners at the local ISD and the local AFT office. I have maintained positive relationships with those who are invested and on a grander scale at the State, I would do the same with ATPE and other organizations.

How much weight should the SBOE give to educator input when developing curriculum standards (known as the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills, or “TEKS”) and approving instructional materials?

Educator input should carry significant weight in developing TEKS and approving instructional materials. Teachers, principals, and curriculum specialists understand what works in real classrooms and what students need to succeed. The SBOE should actively seek their expertise, along with feedback from parents and subject-matter experts, to ensure standards are rigorous, age-appropriate, and practical to implement. While the Board has the final responsibility, decisions should be guided by professional experience, evidence, and student outcomes—not ideology. We need those who best understand to feel empowered in the decision-making process so that they feel confident proceeding in their job duties.

How should the SBOE approach curriculum and instructional materials decisions amid increased legislative emphasis on “parental rights”? What does meaningful parent engagement look like at the state level?

The SBOE should approach curriculum and instructional materials decisions by balancing parental transparency and input with educational expertise and local control. Parents absolutely deserve to know what their children are learning and to have meaningful opportunities to be heard, but curriculum decisions must remain grounded in facts, age-appropriateness, and the professional judgment of educators.

Meaningful parent engagement at the state level means more than reacting to a small number of loud voices. It includes broad, inclusive outreach—public hearings held across the state, clear and accessible materials, online feedback tools, and input from diverse parent communities, including working families who can’t attend meetings during business hours. It also means ensuring parents understand how curriculum standards differ from local classroom instruction and that the SBOE’s role is to set high, statewide expectations—not micromanage classrooms.

The SBOE should create processes that bring parents, educators, and subject-matter experts to the table together. When engagement is transparent, inclusive, and informed, parental rights and strong public education are not in conflict; they reinforce one another.

Under HB 1605, the SBOE now reviews and approves TEA-developed instructional materials, including state-funded “Open Education Resource” options. How should the board balance local control and state oversight to ensure materials are high-quality and aligned to standards, as well as reflect Texas values without politicization? 

Under HB 1605, the SBOE should focus on quality assurance, not control of classrooms. The board’s role is to ensure TEA-developed instructional materials are accurate, age-appropriate, aligned to the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS), and usable by educators, while preserving districts’ authority to choose what best fits their students.

Balancing local control and state oversight means setting clear, transparent review standards rooted in academic rigor and evidence-based practices, not political ideology. Materials should reflect Texas values, such as civic responsibility, respect for history, and opportunity for all, without inserting partisan viewpoints or cultural litmus tests that distract from learning.

The SBOE should rely on input from educators, parents, and subject-matter experts during the review process, publish clear rationales for approval decisions, and avoid last-minute changes driven by political pressure. High-quality optional materials expand choices for districts; they should support teachers, not constrain them.

Done correctly, state-reviewed resources can raise quality statewide while respecting local decision-making and keeping politics out of the classroom.

Texas is transitioning to new assessment and accountability systems under House Bill 8. The bill transfers board authority related to the testing and accountability system from the SBOE to TEA. What should the role of the SBOE be regarding the statewide testing and accountability system?

With the passage of House Bill 8, the SBOE’s role in the statewide testing and accountability system should be oversight, alignment, and public accountability, not day-to-day control.

While TEA now holds primary authority, the SBOE should ensure that any assessment and accountability system remains aligned with the TEKS the board adopts, is developmentally appropriate, and supports instruction rather than distorting it. The board should use its public platform to ask hard questions, request clear data, and elevate educator and parent concerns when testing practices undermine learning or fairness.

The SBOE should also advocate for an accountability system that values multiple measures of student success, recognizes growth, and avoids over-reliance on high-stakes testing, especially in high-need communities. Transparency, clarity for families, and consistency for educators should be non-negotiable.

In short, the SBOE should act as a guardrail and voice for the public, ensuring TEA’s system serves students and teachers while staying true to the educational standards and goals set by the board and the Legislature.

Should the SBOE retain its authority to veto or approve new charter applications? Should the board’s veto authority be expanded to include charter expansion requests? How can the board ensure transparency and community input in this process?

The SBOE should retain its authority to veto new charter applications as a key accountability safeguard. Charter expansion should receive heightened scrutiny and be tied to academic results, financial stability, and community impact, not automatic approval. Transparency requires clear criteria, public notice, local hearings, and open opportunities for parent and educator input, with written explanations for board decisions.

How should the SBOE ensure that curriculum standards and instructional materials meet the needs of students receiving special education services, English learners, and other diverse student populations?

The SBOE should ensure curriculum standards and instructional materials are inclusive by design, not adapted as an afterthought. Standards and materials must reflect diverse learning needs while maintaining high expectations for all students. This means requiring alignment with evidence-based special education practices, built-in supports for English learners, and accessibility features such as scaffolding, language supports and differentiated instruction. The SBOE should seek input from special educators, bilingual educators, families, and advocacy groups during development and review, and ensure materials are flexible enough for local implementation. Ultimately, equity means giving every student, regardless of ability, language, or background, access to rigorous instruction and the support needed to succeed.

What steps should the SBOE take to make its processes, such as TEKS review committees, charter hearings, and instructional materials approvals, more transparent and accessible to educators and the public?

The SBOE can make its processes more transparent and accessible by:

(1) Publishing clear timelines, criteria, and agendas for TEKS reviews, charter hearings, and materials approvals.
(2) Holding public meetings and hearings across regions, including virtual options for broader participation.
(3) Providing accessible materials and summaries so educators, parents, and community members understand what’s being reviewed.
(4) Actively soliciting input through surveys, public comment periods, and stakeholder roundtables.
(5) Explaining decisions publicly with rationales tied to standards and evidence, not politics.

These steps ensure the SBOE is accountable and that educators and families have meaningful opportunities to engage.

Do you believe the SBOE should continue to have the authority to review and potentially veto any rulemaking actions taken by the State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC)? Why or why not?

Yes, the SBOE should retain authority to review and potentially veto SBEC rulemaking, because educator certification directly affects the quality of teaching in Texas classrooms. This oversight ensures that certification rules align with state standards, uphold educator quality, and protect students’ interests. However, veto authority should be exercised judiciously, based on clear evidence and impact, not political pressure, and decisions should be transparent and grounded in improving teacher preparation, licensure fairness, and student outcomes.

Additional Comments from Candidate on Survey

COMMENTS SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO THE 2026 CANDIDATE SURVEY:

As the only elected official in my primary, I know the measure of being held accountable to my decision making. I am currently Mayor Pro Tem for McAllen, Vice President of the Development Corporation, Executive Board Member of the Foreign Trade Zone, Board Member of the McAllen Chamber, Board Member of IMAS (International Museum of Arts & Science), President of TML Region 12, and a Director for TML at the State Level. I have also received the endorsement of Bobby Guerra, the outgoing seat holder for HD41 along with all four of the house representatives for South Texas (Armando Martinez, Sergio Munoz, Oscar Longoria, Terry Canales), and almost all of local leadership (city and ISDs) within HD41. I am also endorsed by a multitude of Fire Associations locally and the State along with Police, local and State. I have earned their trust based on my decision making, accessibility, reliance, honesty, and knowledge. I am the only small business owner in my primary, so I understand both sides of the paycheck and how the community is impacted by decisions made at the State level. I am the most qualified candidate in the Democratic primary and the strongest to win the general in November 2026.