I read the whole thing carefully. Second half of the article, starting with the paragraph that starts 

The rush of poll closures in Texas cannot be attributed to any one policy. Just over half of the closures are part of a push toward centralized, countywide polling places, called “vote centers”....

suggests the problem is much more complex than a lot of direct manipulation by GOP powers that be that is suggested by headlines.

Says straight out some Dems were for vote centers. It's the vote centers thing is where the growth in minority population is. Suggests more like: they were trying something new bt it's a mess.  And that made me recall that I recently read that California is also transitioning to vote centers and might be a messy primary because of it.

And also second last sentence suggests, in the low population areas: somebody's got to come up with some mon-ay if they want to keep some places open where there is little voting traffic Elections officials have cited tight budgets and difficulty recruiting poll workers as among the reasons for the reductions. Mr. Steyer, Mr. Bloomberg? I bet: nope, because they want bang for their buck, too, not going to pay for a full day of workers to get 8 more votes? And here in the following we are back to the concept where you have to beg people to want to vote

And activists argue that low turnout at a particular polling place is not a reason to close it – it is a sign that the turnout itself, which is typically lower in Latinx neighborhoods, must be addressed. Closing a polling station for reasons of low turnout can have a discriminatory impact, activists say.

You have to beg them like a season ahead of time. So that you can agitate for a significant number of voters need a station.And get the mon-ay to pay for it. Since you have to do it in advance, why not just frigging agitate to get them to send in absentee ballots? Problem solved.