rud summary

7/28/2019 RUD Summary

1/36

RUD Corruption Summary 1991 Enabling legislation requested by the Woodlands Development Corp (Developer) established the Road Utility District (RUD). The

developer supplied names for temporary RUD board members which controlled the RUD until the confirmation election held in 1992.

The developer gerrymandered the RUD to include only main roads and commercial property (see map of this radical gerrymandering) plus tworesidential addresses.

Three token or puppet residents (Randy & Janet Councill at 9706 Grogans Milll Rd and Nancy Primeaux at 9700 Grogans Mill Rd), required bylaw to form the RUD, elect the developer-selected candidates at the confirmation and bond election in 1992 ($46 million bond).

The RUD subsequently de-annexed the residential property eliminating all voters and voter accountability. The district now includes only roadsand commercial regions in which no houses were allowed by the zoning ordinance. The token residences were eventually torn down.

Except an exception was made for Dirk and Kate Laukien to build a residence within the district. These two people registered in the RUD inJan 2010 and are the only officially recognized voters. Hence they elect the board, if they even bother to have an election. They own otherresidences in the Woodlands in which they have lived for a number of years.

Until June 2010, the RUD board met monthly in the developers office at 24 Waterway, a building owned by Dirk Laukien. Mr. Laukien ownsseveral RUD tax abated properties.

The RUD currently has $110 million of debt obligations. (P&I)

On discovering the RUDs existence and their indebtedness, Adrian inquired about the next board election and was told there were 3 seats

coming up for re-election, but that there would be no election as there were no voters in the RUD. This led to the email chain attached belowwhere Mike Page suddenly finds two voters Dirk & Kate Laukien in the RUD. Developer Dirk Laukien as the sole resident can vote for thenext bond election.

Mike Page is the general counsel and bond counsel for the Woodlands RUD, the Woodlands MUDs, the Woodlands Township, the San JacintoRiver Authority, and the Houston Ship Channel Authority. He bills the Township $400k annually.

(~May 2010) Adrian attempted to visit a board meeting, but was told it had been rescheduled. At a subsequent board visit, he observed avery unstructured process that did not begin until Mike Page, who was running late, had arrived.

(May 2010) After extensive research to understand the residency requirements for voting, including talking to the SOS and local electionsoffice, Adrian Heath moves into the RUD in order to elect new board members who have filed as candidates in the May 2010 RUD boardelection. 9 other people also move into the RUD to help defeat the corrupt board members. They use the same long established residency

requirements, also used by the Councills and Nancy Primeaux to establish residency for the RUD confirmation election.

The ousted board members sue the RUD board to annul the 10 voters. The 10 voters file as interveners. Their pro bono attorney (Plaintiff) doesnot present any evidence or any arguments. He fails to challenge objectionable questions in examination. The election is overturned and thetrial court is sustained on appeal.

7 of the 10 receive felony indictments for voter fraud in March 2012.

Two witnesses personally hear Tommy Williams say that the 10 voters who ousted the RUD board should be criminally prosecuted . FOIA emailsshow RUD attorney (James Stillwell) being helped by Tommy Williams in getting AG office to investigate.


2/36

Something is rotten Denmark.Hamlet Act 1, scene 4,
http://www.enotes.com/hamlet-text/act-i-scene-ivhttp://www.enotes.com/hamlet-text/act-i-scene-iv


3/36


4/36

What is the RUD?

Special District set up in 1991 by thenstate [now federal] Rep. Kevin Brady

5 member board

Held one election [2000] since initialelection in 1192

Claims no voters except Laukiens (ifneeded)

No website

4.3 cents commercial property tax

$110 Million debt

Office is in Galleria- not in RUD

Board Meets in the Developers Office

Various surrogate spokesmen

Builds roads outside RUD

Lends to Montgomery County

BillNeill

Mike Page


5/36

RUD Debt as of January 2010


6/36

From: Mike Page To: "[email protected]" , Alex Sutton

[email protected]>Cc: "[email protected]" Sent: Mon, Mar 8, 2010at 9:05 AM

As we have discussed on several previous occasions, the RUD has been in existence since 1991 to assistin financing major road improvement projects; as was discussed with Steve Burkett during his tenure asGeneral Manager of WCA, and with John Rutledge, Assistant Manager of WCSC, who attended andmonitored the meetings of the RUD Board of Directors for approximately two years before his departure,

the boundaries and taxing jurisdiction of the RUD include only commercial and retail properties thatwere included/added by petition ofthe landowner;

no residential properties are included or subject to taxation;

the RUD finances improvements to major thoroughfares only, when the County is unable orunwilling to do so;

the completed projects are then turned over to the County for operation and maintenance;

since the last two houses were torn down for construction of the Waterway west underGrogan's Mill Road, there have been no residents or voters in the RUD;

the directors receive a per diem of $25 for a day of service;

if either the County or TWDC advances funds to the RUD, at the RUD's request, to financea project for which the RUD has insufficient funds until its next bond issue, thoseadvanced funds are repaid at the time of the next bond issue;

the current tax rate is approximately $0.476 per $100 of taxable valuation on business properties

Email Chain with RUD Counsel after being caught by AdrianHeath failing to hold an election


7/36

From: Mike Page To: "[email protected]" Sent:Tue, March 9, 2010 12:23:21 PMSubject:The Woodlands Road Utility District No. 1

Attached are the minutes of the meetings of the Board of Directors of The Woodlands Road UtilityDistrict No. 1 for 2008 and 2009, the most recent audit report of the District and the list of checks fromthe operating, debt service and capital projects fund check registers, as requested.

Since there are no residents in the District, there is no document that is responsive to your requestfor a list enumerating any residents or voters whose registered address is inside the District. Thesematerials, together with the materials previously sent to you, are being provided without charge as acourtesy of my firm. Please be advised that the District's policy is that all of its non-exempt records areavailable for inspection by any interested person during normal business hours at our offices [which arenot in the RUD and involve an 80 mile round trip to inspect PSA]. If, after inspection, copies ofdocuments are requested, they will be made at the prevailing rate of charge. This policy will be followedhereafter.


8/36

From: Mike Page To: Adrian David Heath CC: Peggy Hausman ; Julie Kime Sent: Fri, March 26, 2010 6:25:38 PM

Subject: RE: The Woodlands Road Utility District No. 1

Following your e-mail, I requested that a complete canvass of the boundaries of the RUD be made toconfirm that there are no registered voters in the District;

[S]everal days later, I was advised that only one parcel of land in the District was shown on theMCAD records as not being restricted to commercial or retail use; after further inquiry, wefound that this property is owned by Dirk and Kate Laukien, who apparently own severaloffice buildings in The Woodlands and who received specific deed restriction permission toconstruct and maintain a residence adjacent to one of their office buildings; following up onthis development, it appears that a residence has been constructed on this property, that it isoccupied by the Laukiens as a residence and that they are registered to vote in Montgomery County;

[S]o, we do, indeed, have two voters in the District, and the election is on;

[T]he election will be held jointly with the two MUD elections on May 8 at The Woodlands WaterResources Building, 2455 Lake Robbins Drive, The Woodlands, TX 77380; early voting will take place atthe same location from April 26 through May 4, on weekdays only, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and4:00 p.m.;

[A] ballot drawing for position is being scheduled for next week on March 30 at 9:00 a.m. at the same

location; there are no write-in candidates and the ballot will be made available after the drawing;[W]e are quite aware of the timetable for giving notice of and conducting the election.


9/36

Registered voters found in RUD by Adrian Heath that were ignored byRUD counsel Mike Page

2 voter registered in the United Way Building

2 voters registered in the Residence Inn

2 voters in the Panther Creek Shopping Center

1 in the Nexus Hospital

1 in the offices at 2203 Timberloch

1 in offices at Grogans Mill & Woodlands Pkwy

2 in office 10000 block Six Pines

The RUD conveniently ignored them all for years


10/36

From: Mike PageTo: Gene Miller; "Buck Davenport"; [email protected]; [email protected]; "elimayhew";Sutton,Alexander; Derr, RichardCc:Julie Kime

Subject: Conroe CourierDate:Thursday, May 06, 2010 1:23:07 PM

It appears that our friends at the Courier are going to run a story about the RUD election on Wednesday in anattempt to stir the pot a bit, courtesy of Mr. Adrian Heath and his friends who are running in the election andmany of whom (22) have registered to vote in the election using business addresses within the RUD;the Montgomery County Voter Registrar has registered these people officially, so the RUD has no legal basis tochallenge their eligibility to vote in the election, even if wrongdoing is suspected;so far, no one, other than the two clearly eligible voters in the RUD, Mr. and Mrs. Laukien, have voted during early

voting; it remains to be seen whether anyone else will vote on May 8;a letter was sent by the DA to all registered voters in the RUD cautioning them to seek legal advice about theresidency requirements under Texas law for registering to vote; however, if these apparently unqualified peopledo vote, the remedy under Texas law is for any aggrieved candidate to file an election contest within 30 days tocontest their right to vote; presumably, this would be done immediately after the election to enjoin the canvass ofthe election returns at the scheduled May 17 Board meeting.

The Courier seems uninterested in this potential voter fraud, or in the benefits to the entire Woodlandscommunity that the RUD has brought about over the last 20 years, courtesy of and at the sole expense of thebusiness community in The Woodlands; instead, they are more interested in who complained to the DA and thefact that there has been only two or no voters in the RUD for almost ten years; they don't seem to understandor care that it is irrelevant how many voters there are if there are no opposition candidates; whether 0, 1or 10,000 voters, if there are no opposition candidates, the election is called and then cancelled under theprovisions of the Election Code in order to save taxpayer money---the voters are presumed as a matter of law tohave voted for the unopposed candidates.

After learning the Conroe Courier was running a piece on the RUD election

Who is in Charge?Who is Mr. Page reporting to?


11/36

Laukien house 750 feet from the The WoodlandsTownship townhall can be seen from spacegoogle maps url http://goo.gl/maps/ZYSGH


12/36

Jobs Completed

Laukien Retreat [not called a home PSA]Owner: Mr. Dirk LaukienContact: Sean Quinn(713) 805-8509

Architect: Ken Anderson & Associates, Inc.Ken Anderson(281) 367-5430

Contract: $3,221,197

Completed: May 2009

http://ldfconstruction.com/site/jobs-completed/


13/36

Addition of separate tax account

for Dirk Laukiens home.


14/36

SOS in Interpreter of Texas Election law forTexas Voters


15/36

Election Law Opinion GSC 1


16/36

Election Law Opinion GSC (cont)

The definition of residence for the purpose of voterregistration is well settled in Texas.


17/36

Case Law on Voter Residence

There are a plethora of election cases on Texas residence regarding both voters and candidates.Because of the fact-intensive nature of the residence question, some have argued that it is possible toselect one case or another as proving that a certain factor is dispositive with respect to the question ofintent for residence purposes. However, it is the opinion of this office that such an approach can bemisleading. The one constant in the common law tests that have been approved by the Texas SupremeCourt, and federal courts interpreting Texas law, is that no one factor is dispositive. As stated by the

Texas Supreme Court in the leading Texas case,

Mills v. Bartlett , 377 S.W.2d 636, 637 (Tex.1964), regarding residence:

The meaning that must be given to it [residence] depends upon the circumstances surrounding theperson involved and largely depends upon the present intention of the individual. Volition, intention andaction are all elements to be considered in determining where a person resides and such elements are

equally pertinent in denoting the permanent residence or domicile.


18/36

Well Settled in Texas

Neither bodily presence alone nor intention alone will suffice to create theresidence, but when the two coincide at that moment the residence is fixedand Determined . There is no specific length of time for the bodily presence tocontinue ~

~ These principles apply equally to college students as well as other voters,and no more can be required of them in order for them to register and vote inthe State of Texas.


19/36

April 20, 2010

From: Grant, Phil

To: Gaultney, Carol

Subject: Residency Question

Date:Tuesday, April 20, 2010 3:40:36 PM

This is my email, would you please forward me the articleyou and I discussed. Also, during your discussions withAdrian Heath did you indicate to him that he could registerto vote in the RUD using this Secretary of State philosophyof residency? I know you are busy, but thank you for your

time.


20/36

March 24, 2011From: Walker, David

Sent:Thursday, March 24, 2011 8:51 AM

To: Gaultney, Carol [Election Registrar PSA]

Subject:

Carol:

I have looked at the Judgment and the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law in the RUDcase.

I do not see clear language in the judgment that the losing individuals were individuallydeclared to be not a qualified voter.

It appears that their votes were disqualified and the other side declared to be the winners inthe election. However, I would feel much more comfortable if the judgment said that John

Jones is ordered adjudged and decreed to be disqualified, or adjudged not to be a qualifiedvoter, just like Section 16.004 reads.

It is dangerous, in my opinion, to conclude that a judgment means something thatit does not clearly state, especially if you are are proposing to limit a citizensrights by enforcing the judgment. We can discuss this later today if you like. I have a TriCounty board meeting this morning.

David


21/36

Back Up Slides


22/36

1875

In re Duncan, 139 U.S. 449, 11 S.Ct. 573, 35 L.Ed. 219;Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162, 22 L.Ed. 627.

REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENT.

One in which the powers of sovereignty arevested in the people and are exercised by thepeople, either directly, or throughrepresentatives chosen by the people, to

whom those powers are specially delegated.


23/36

Constitution

Texas Constitution 1876 Article I Sec 2

Sec. 2. INHERENT POLITICAL POWER; REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. All politicalpower is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority,and instituted for their benefit. The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to thepreservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, theyhave at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in suchmanner as they may think expedient.

U.S. Constitution Article 4 - The States

Section 4 - Republican Government

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form ofGovernment, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of theLegislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) againstdomestic Violence.


24/36

Local Government Structure and Function in Texas and theUnited States September 15, 1997

The rapid spread of special districts in Texas can be traced to several factors, most notably the inabilityor unwillingness of counties and cities to deal with various regional problems. Special districts provide away that the fragmented power which characterizes local government in Texas can be overcome inorder to solve area-wide and cross-jurisdictional problems. Since Texas political culture has tended tocall for minimal government and the lowest possible taxes, special districts provide a mechanismwhereby government services can be delivered without existing government assuming responsibilityfor them. This therefore preserves the myth of limited government while insulating local public officialsfrom citizen complaints about inadequate service performance or mandatory taxes.

http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~rhwilson/fiscalprp/structure.html


25/36

Special Districts

Historically most special districts have as theirconstitutional basis two amendments to the Constitutionof 1876: (1) Article III, section 52 (1904), allowing theformation of special districts that could incur

indebtedness up to one-fourth of the assessed propertyvaluation, and (2) the conservation amendment, ArticleXVI, section 59 (1917), allowing the establishment ofconservation and reclamation districts with no limit as toamount of debt or taxation.


26/36

Cain & Able - Restrain Enable

Texas Constitution 1904 Article III Sec 52 (a)

Sec. 52. COUNTIES, CITIES OR OTHER POLITICAL CORPORATIONS OR SUBDIVISIONS; LENDING CREDIT;GRANTS; BONDS. (a) Except as otherwise provided by this section, the Legislature shall have no power toauthorize any county, city, town or other political corporation or subdivision of the State to lend its credit or togrant public money or thing of value in aid of, or to any individual, association or corporation whatsoever, or tobecome a stockholder in such corporation, association or company.

Texas Constitution 1987 2005 Article III Sec 52 -a

Sec. 52-a. LOAN OR GRANT OF PUBLIC MONEY FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. Notwithstanding anyother provision of this constitution, the legislature may provide for the creation of programs and themaking of loans and grants of public money, other than money otherwise dedicated by this constitutionto use for a different purpose, for the public purposes of development and diversification of the economyof the state, the elimination of unemployment or underemployment in the state, the stimulation ofagricultural innovation, the fostering of the growth of enterprises based on agriculture, or thedevelopment or expansion of transportation or commerce in the state. Any bonds or other obligations of

a county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state that are issued for the purpose ofmaking loans or grants in connection with a program authorized by the legislature under this section andthat are payable from ad valorem taxes must be approved by a vote of the majority of the registeredvoters of the county, municipality, or political subdivision voting on the issue.


27/36

Candidates v Residents

Resident of Texas

18 years old

Not a felon Not insane

Or otherwise

disqualified No time limit

Registered voter

30 days in advance

for administrativepurposes

No residency time

requirement


28/36

Feb 24, 2010 Nine people registered DEA Office

Its the way the law is written, and the only way it would bechanged is through the legislature, said Steve Raborn,

Tarrant Countys elections administrator.

The residency requirement can be determined by thevoter, said Randall Dillard, a spokesman for the TexasSecretary of State's office.

And yes, a work address is OK if they consider that theirresidence."

Dillard cites a section of the states code regardingresidency:

"'Residence' means domicile, that is, one's home and fixedplace of habitation to which one intends to return after anytemporary absence.

Last year, a Tarrant County voter used a vacant piece of landas his residence on the voter rolls, Raborn said.

The fact is, any registered voter can challenge the votingstatus of another voter, Raborn said. But it generallydoesnt do any good.

any time there is an issueregarding voter access,the tendency is forpoliticization,State Rep. Dennis Bonnen


29/36

who apparently own several office buildings


30/36

Voter Registration Card


31/36

Case of Senator Brian Birdwell

Tex Const. ARTICLE 3. LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

Sec. 6. QUALIFICATIONS OF SENATORS. No person shall be aSenator, unless he be a citizen of the United States, and, atthe time of his election a qualified voter of this State, and

shall have been a resident of this State five years nextpreceding his election, and the last year thereof a residentof the district for which he shall be chosen, and shall haveattained the age of twenty-six years.


32/36

(Granbury, TX) This afternoon, the 5thCourt of Appeals in Dallasdenied the suit filed against Senator BrianBirdwell by the Texas DemocratParty and his Democrat Opponent to have

Sen. Birdwell removed from theballot. In a unanimous ruling, the threejustice panel found that theDemocrats failed to prove Birdwell is anineligible candidate for the TexasSenate. According to the court, the record

does not show, thatinformation on any application by Birdwell fora place on the ballotindicates that he is ineligible for the office.


33/36

Then What Happened?

The Vote 10 - 2

The Election Contest 0 -2

The Appeal

The Indictment The RUD 7

The Trial ?


34/36

The RUD Apologists view

Both the District and the Appeals Courts have nowruled on the RUD residency issue, disqualifying the 10

people who tried to vote in the last RUD election. Arewe not a county of laws? The current issue is only

whether or not these same people tried to defraud thevoting process. That is the current legal issue.

Mike Bass

The Woodlands Township, Director (Position 2)


35/36

What the non-confrontational access oriented aresaying


36/36

Willie Ray v. State of Texas

ABBOTT Accused

-Mr. Abbott, as you may know, has engaged in racially selective law enforcement activitiesin connection with prosecutions of the Texas Election Code.

LSP InvestigatesWhile Abbott's bogus anti voter fraud program was being lauded in the San Antonio Express-News and the Texas Attorney General was putting out press release after press releasecongratulating himself, the Lone Star Project issued numerous open records requeststo the AG and found that virtually all the prosecutions were of minority seniorcitizens who were doing nothing more than helping their neighbors vote. Additionalresearch showed that ALL those prosecuted were Democrats. This research was confirmed bya Dallas Morning News investigative report this month detailing that:

"26 cases all against Democrats, and almost all involving blacks or Hispanics... In 18 of the26 cases, the voters were eligible, votes were properly cast and no vote was changed butthe people who collected the ballots for mailing were prosecuted." (Dallas Morning News, May18, 2008)

http://www.lonestarproject.net/Permalink/2008-05-02.html

rud summary

Documents