AT A GLANCE
•The story was first reported by KABB Fox San Antonio as search warrants were executed in a widening election integrity probe tied to vote by mail activity
•Search warrants were served on Bexar County political consultant Josephine Ramon as well as Zavala County Sheriff Eusevio Salinas and 293rd Judicial District Attorney Robert Serna
•Campaign finance records show Ramon is consulting for Audrey Martinez, Peter Sakai and Marissa Giovenco, and reported a 12,000 dollar in kind vote by mail contribution to State Representative candidate Ryan Ayala.
•Martinez is also facing a separate residency lawsuit brought by Judge Carlo Key, and a judge assigned to hear the case stepped aside after disclosing that Martinez’s attorney serves as his campaign treasurer.
Peter Sakai and Other Local Candidates Surface in Expanding Election Investigation
A Bexar County political consultant has been named in a widening state election integrity probe that coincided with the first day of in person early voting.
The story was first reported by KABB Fox San Antonio.
Investigators with the Election Integrity Division of the Texas Attorney General’s Office executed search warrants in multiple counties this week. Law enforcement sources confirmed that Bexar County political consultants and operatives were among those involved.
The developments come as early voting begins across the county and as scrutiny intensifies around vote by mail applications.
Search Warrants Served Across South Texas
Among those served with warrants were Eusevio Salinas and a staff member, as well as 293rd Judicial District Attorney Robert Serna, who serves Dimmit, Maverick and Zavala counties.
In San Antonio, political consultant JoAnn, also known as Josephine Ramon of Ramon and Associates, was also served. Authorities have not publicly detailed the scope of the investigation or announced specific allegations.
Ramon confirmed during a phone call that investigators took papers and cell phones from her home. She said the search involved another individual and members of his team, and declined a full interview until next week.
The Attorney General’s Office has not responded to requests for clarification regarding the breadth of the investigation or whether specific campaigns are targets.
Rice University political science professor Mark Jones said vote by mail has historically been the area where fraud cases surface in Texas.
“While election fraud is rare in Texas, we do have instances of it, and they almost exclusively occur in the area of mail ballots, because it’s the one place where you have the ballot not in constant custody or under constant monitoring of election authorities,” Jones said.
Bexar County Elections Administrator Michele Carew said a few hundred requests for mail in ballots have already been rejected.
Documents reviewed by local media outlets show campaign literature for several Bexar County candidates included in ballot request packets that were prefilled with “Democratic” and language requesting ballots for the entire election cycle.
Return envelopes were labeled “Official Bexar County Vote by Mail Application.” Carew said that is not an official form issued by her office.
Jones said altering or distributing a ballot application that differs from the official state form raises red flags.
“There are two big missing pieces,” Jones said, noting that the form lacked a place for voters to select a primary and did not include a proper option for requesting ballots for the entire election cycle. “So effectively, the ballot application form that’s being distributed is a flawed ballot application form.”
Related: Jim Lefko Investigation: A Timeline of the Ombudsman Review in Sakai’s Office
Bexar County Consultant’s Past Scrutiny
Ramon has previously faced allegations tied to earlier election cycles but has never been charged.
In 2012, a local investigation reported that more than 150 ballots from the 2008 elections shared the same return address, identical request letters and similar handwriting, according to a handwriting expert cited at the time.
In 2020, Ramon’s name surfaced again in a voter fraud investigation involving Raquel Rodriguez. That case, led by the Attorney General’s Office, included undercover video evidence. Rodriguez was prosecuted. Ramon denied wrongdoing and was not charged.
Ramon said the wording on her current candidates’ forms originated from what she described as a Democratic Party program used by consultants in prior cycles. She said she did not independently design the template.
Campaign Ties and Finance Records
Campaign finance records show Ramon is consulting for multiple Bexar County candidates this primary cycle.
Judicial candidate Audrey Martinez paid Ramon $20,000 in consulting fees.
Separately, Martinez is facing a legal challenge over her residency eligibility. Administrative Judge Sid Harle appointed Judge Benjamin Robertson to hear a lawsuit questioning whether Martinez meets the residency requirement to run against incumbent Judge Carlo Key.
During proceedings, Robertson disclosed that Martinez’s attorney, Mae Garza, serves as his campaign treasurer. Key’s attorney requested that Robertson recuse himself, and Robertson stepped aside. Another judge will now be assigned as the case moves forward.
Key alleges Martinez lived in Wilson County, not Bexar County, up until the day she filed to run for his seat.
Meanwhile, Peter Sakai paid Ramon and Associates $14,000 for political consulting. District court candidate Marissa Giovenco paid more than $13,000 in consulting and event expenses.
In the State Representative District 119 race, records show Josephine Ramon reported a $12,000 in kind contribution labeled VBM, meaning vote by mail, to her grandson, Ryan Ayala.
None of the candidates named responded to requests for comment or declined to comment.
Jones noted that campaigns can face scrutiny even if candidates do not personally handle ballots.
“If you’ve paid someone and that person acting on your behalf is engaged in potential ballot fraud,” Jones said, suggesting legal and political consequences could follow depending on investigative findings.
As early voting continues, the state election integrity probe appears to be expanding, with both local operatives and elected officials now under review.
