POSSIBLE EVIDENCE OF UNLAWFUL ELECTION EXPENDITURES EMERGES

Ever since the RENT-A-VOTER story broke on October 13th  we have believed the focus of readers should be upon the Developers and MUD directors who are orchestrating elections, rather than the voters themselves who are just the expendable pawns in an elaborate multi dimensional high stakes chess game based on the establishment of special purpose districts and the debt bonds they can emit  to make special interest dreams come true.

We should all agree there is no  reason to question how a landowner uses his own land or his own money, but as we have said from the beginning in the Woodlands RUD case, no private land developer or other private company can lawfully control and operate their own private government without violating a first principle of legitimate open government. Specifically,  all political power is inherent in the people who are pledged to uphold a republican form of government, in other words, legitimate voter control and operation.

If developers from outside your community are forced to import voters into their soon to founded new government entity by offering special enticements then who can deny that political subdivision of the state is in any way legitimate? And such enticements have long been ruled illegal.

That voters in Texas may choose their residence for voting purposes according to their desire is well settled and all Texans are protected by the common law principles summarized in Texas Election law Opinion GSC-1.  However, other actors who offer a valuable consideration in exchange for a particular vote run afoul of Federal law like 18 U.S.C. §597. Expenditures to influence voting which states –

Whoever makes or offers to make an expenditure to any person, either to vote or withhold his vote, or to vote for or against any candidate; and Whoever solicits, accepts, or receives any such expenditure in consideration of his vote or the withholding of his vote— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if the violation was willful, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

So unless its OK for candidates or others interested in insuring their election or that a proposed bond is voted for to offer reduced rent in exchange for that outcome then why would it not be a violation of 18 U.S.C. §597 for a developer to pay full price for a the setup of a temporary voter trailer rental and then to pass that valuable consideration on at an “offer you can not refuse”  reduced rate in exchange for a vote?

Thanks to the work of Houston Chronicle reporter Cindy Horswell we now have a glimpse at actual details of such an offer. In Cindy’s November 1, 2015 story she reports on RENT-A-VOTER Dan Speicher –

Daniel Spiecher, who is originally from Lufkin, said he was enticed into signing a nine-month lease for the trailer by Stingray Services Inc. because the rent was cheap, only $150 a month. “It’s better than an apartment,” he said.

Is this possible evidence of unlawful expenditures to influence voting?

Off course Stingray Services, aka, Stingray Elections, LLC is merely a middle man for the Special Purpose Districts Industrial Complex otherwise known in the Texas Senate as The Invisible Government who will serve as another expendable chess piece if and when Developers need a fall guy or or even a convincing scapegoat for reluctant lawmakers, prosecutors and other who dare not touch the hem of the garment of their campaign fund sponsors and patrons.

Here is what we know,

Developers and directors have contracted with and agreed to pay Stingray Services LLC for election services.

Developers and directors have contracted with and agreed to pay Stingray Services LLC for Temporary Voter Trailers.

Developers and directors have contracted with and agreed to pay Stingray Services LLC to provide eligible voters who will vote for confirmation of district for confirmation of directors and for confirmation of in excess of $1 Billion in bonds combined.

Developers and directors have contracted with and agreed to pay Stingray Services LLC for city permits, where required for Temporary Voter Trailers.

Developers and directors have contracted with and agreed to pay, either directly or via attorney, Montgomery County Elections Registrar for election services subject to reimbursement by new district once voter approved.

Developers and directors have offered something of value such as reduced rent or other things to voters in exchange for establishing residence in the district and voting affirmatively in the interests of the developers and directors.

The actions have taken place in Montgomery County Texas and Harris County Texas in 2015.

Website belonging to Stingray Services LLC, www.stingrayservices.com states in part – Stingray Services specializes in providing turn-key voter trailer installation services, and election services.  We have completed over 70 trailer installations in Texas over the last 10 years, and have supported nearly 100 elections.  We locate residents, perform landlord services, support residents in changing their license and voter registration, and assist with the district election.  We have worked with a host of major developers and engineers including Lennar, Toll Brothers, Friendswood, Land Tejas, Taylor Morrison, Pate Engineers, Brown & Gay…to name just a few.