Del Rio Approves $941K Pool Contract to Councilman’s Business After Failed Vote

After a failed vote, Del Rio City Council revisits a nearly $1 million contract involving a fellow council member’s business, with officials divided over ethics, transparency and the treatment of local contractors.

DEL RIO, Texas — October 28, 2026 — What began as a discussion over a $941,000 swimming pool rehabilitation contract became a broader debate over public trust, elected officials’ private businesses and the responsibilities of the Del Rio City Council.

On Tuesday, October 27, the council reconsidered awarding the Buena Vista Pool Rehabilitation Project to Connected Home Solutions, doing business as Stella’s Pools, a company associated with Mayor Pro Tem Randy Quiñones.

The contract had failed to secure the required four affirmative votes just two weeks earlier, despite receiving three votes in favor and two against.

This time, following extensive remarks from council members and a closed-door consultation with legal counsel, the vote was announced as 4–2, providing the four affirmative votes required for approval.

But the discussion leading to that decision revealed substantially different perspectives on the controversy.

Mayor Arreola: From questioning the precedent to urging a vote of conscience

During the October 13 meeting, Mayor Al Arreola questioned whether the city had ever awarded a contract of this magnitude to a sitting council member.

According to reporting published October 20 by The 830 Times, Arreola said:

“I don’t think it’s ever been done that a city councilman gets awarded a contract of $1 million.”

— Mayor Al Arreola | October 13

His concerns extended beyond whether the procurement process was legal.

Arreola questioned what would happen if the project encountered problems, particularly because Quiñones, as a council member, participates in overseeing the city manager responsible for administering municipal contracts.

The mayor also raised questions about whether other contractors had been adequately informed of the opportunity.

Arreola voted against the contract on October 13, alongside Councilwoman Carmen Gutierrez.

Two weeks later, following renewed discussion and the council’s return from executive session, Arreola delivered another statement immediately before calling for a vote.

“You vote your conscience. We don’t vote how everybody feels. We vote how we think it’s the best interest to our community.”

— Mayor Al Arreola | October 27

The remark emphasized the individual responsibility of council members to make decisions based on their judgment of the community’s interests.

It also came after council members had acknowledged receiving calls and concerns from residents about the proposed contract.

The October 27 recording announces the final vote as 4–2 but does not clearly identify each council member’s individual vote.

Carmen Gutierrez: “He should not be penalized”

Councilwoman Carmen Gutierrez, who opposed the contract on October 13, offered one of the most nuanced positions during Tuesday’s discussion.

She made clear that she was not attempting to prevent Quiñones’ company from receiving municipal work solely because of his elected position.

“He should not be penalized … because we are in a small community and many of them here on council are business owners.”

— Councilwoman Carmen Gutierrez | October 27

Gutierrez acknowledged that the procurement process had undergone legal review and that city officials had been advised the arrangement was permissible.

She also recognized the financial benefits of the negotiated price.

But her willingness to accept the contractor’s eligibility did not eliminate her concerns about the documentation supporting the council’s decision.

“I would have liked to have deferred awarding the contract until we had a written finding, a written legal opinion that all documents have been reviewed.”

— Councilwoman Carmen Gutierrez | October 27

Gutierrez explained that legal assurances had been communicated verbally. She wanted those findings documented, along with any safeguards recommended to protect the city.

Her position was not that Quiñones should be disqualified from competing for a city contract.

Rather, she argued that the council and residents should have access to written legal assurances before approving an arrangement involving a fellow council member’s business.

The distinction was especially important given concerns raised during the previous meeting about potential contract disputes, change orders and the council’s authority over the city manager.

Gutierrez suggested that a written legal opinion would provide an additional measure of transparency for residents who wanted to understand how the decision was reached.

Leno Hernandez: “It’s very hard to avoid conflicts of interest”

Councilman Leno Hernandez delivered one of the lengthiest explanations of the evening, defending the city’s procurement procedures and addressing allegations circulating in the community.

He argued that in a community the size of Del Rio, elected officials frequently have personal, family or professional connections to individuals conducting business locally.

“It’s very hard to avoid conflicts of interest.”

— Councilman Leno Hernandez | October 27

Hernandez explained that the project had been advertised twice, for approximately six weeks each time.

According to his account, the first solicitation received no responses. The second attracted two, including the company associated with Quiñones.

He said the council had already confronted questions about potential conflicts of interest during the August selection process, rather than waiting until October.

Hernandez also addressed the council’s decision to enter executive session before reconsidering the contract.

“I don’t want you to think that we were trying to decide what we were gonna do over there, ’cause that’s not what happened.”

— Councilman Leno Hernandez | October 27

He explained that the closed-door discussion concerned a legal question about the proposed contract and said he was satisfied with the explanation provided.

Although Hernandez defended the procurement process, he acknowledged concerns about how municipal contracting opportunities are advertised.

He suggested that some contractors may be reluctant to participate because of the administrative requirements associated with government work.

“Some vendors don’t want to work with city government. The bureaucracy is disgusting.”

— Councilman Leno Hernandez | October 27

Hernandez also addressed rumors that he and Quiñones were first cousins.

He disputed the characterization, describing a distant family connection involving relatives by marriage, and said he did not understand how it established the relationship being alleged.

He closed by emphasizing that the council had an obligation to follow established procedures while maintaining public confidence.

Elsa Reyes: “What’s going on? This all should have been addressed prior”

Councilwoman Elsa Reyes, who was absent from the October 13 meeting, expressed frustration that the contract had become controversial after earlier council action.

Reyes noted that the council had already authorized negotiations with the contractor in August.

“I don’t even know how this discussion came upon us because we voted in August to accept him as the vendor unanimously.”

— Councilwoman Elsa Reyes | October 27

Reyes explained that she had watched the previous meeting from the hospital and questioned why concerns about the arrangement had not been resolved earlier.

“What’s going on? This all should have been addressed prior to, and maybe the community would have been more comfortable with where we are now.”

— Councilwoman Elsa Reyes | October 27

She also defended city purchasing staff, saying she had worked with the department for approximately 20 years and had confidence in its procedures.

Reyes emphasized that municipal procurement opportunities are publicly available and encouraged local contractors to monitor city capital improvement plans rather than waiting until contracts are brought before the council.

She also reminded residents that contractor selection does not always depend exclusively on price.

Her remarks reflected a belief that the controversy could have been reduced if concerns had been addressed and explained more clearly earlier in the process.

LeRoy Briones: “The numbers matter”

Councilman LeRoy Briones approached the debate primarily from the perspective of economic development and taxpayer value.

Briones acknowledged receiving questions about the contract but argued that the council’s decision should rest on whether proper procedures had been followed and whether the project offered sufficient value.

“The decision comes down to facts, the process, and the value that this project brings to our city.”

— Councilman LeRoy Briones | October 27

Briones emphasized the benefits of supporting businesses that operate locally, particularly when those businesses follow the same procurement requirements as other bidders.

He also pointed to the difference between the city’s budget and the negotiated contract amount.

“The numbers matter. This project is expected to save the city $600,000. That is a substantial saving for taxpayers.”

— Councilman LeRoy Briones | October 27

Briones argued that awarding municipal work to local businesses helps keep jobs and economic activity in Del Rio.

The city’s original allocation for the rehabilitation project was $1.5 million. The proposed contract totals $941,000, a difference of $559,000.

While several council members characterized the difference as approximately $600,000 in savings, the final amount available for other purposes would depend on the project’s complete costs and funding requirements.

Why the vote changed

The October 13 vote was not an outright majority rejection.

Three council members — Leno Hernandez, J.P. Sanchez and LeRoy Briones — supported the contract.

Mayor Arreola and Carmen Gutierrez opposed it.

Quiñones recused himself, and Reyes was absent.

Although the proposal received more votes in favor than against, it failed because four affirmative votes were required.

Reyes’ participation on October 27 meant an additional council member was present for the renewed discussion.

The recorded 4–2 result established sufficient support to approve the resolution, although the supplied transcript does not establish whether any council member changed their position between meetings.

The unresolved questions

The council’s approval advances a project intended to restore a public recreational facility, but the discussion revealed questions extending beyond the construction work itself.

City officials maintained that the contractor selection complied with applicable procurement and conflict-of-interest requirements.

The October 13 discussion included assurances from City Attorney Ana Markowski Smith that the conflict had been properly disclosed and that the necessary filings had been completed.

However, the questions raised by the mayor and Gutierrez dealt in part with what happens after a contract is approved.

How will the city handle a potential dispute or change order involving a company connected to a council member? What additional safeguards, if any, have been recommended? Will the city release the written legal findings sought by Gutierrez?

Those questions were central to the public discussion, even as other council members defended the process and the economic merits of the proposal.

For Del Rio, the decision means the Buena Vista Pool rehabilitation project can move forward under the approved contract.

For residents following the debate, it also presents an opportunity to examine how the city manages contracts involving elected officials, ensures competitive opportunities for local businesses and documents compliance with its procurement requirements.

Del Rio News Network will continue monitoring the Buena Vista Pool project, including contract implementation, expenditures and any additional legal safeguards made public by the city.