Sidewalk to Nowhere - Lumberton TX Council Illegally Targeting Businessman, Killing Tax Revenue

Investigation article by David Bellow

A city can only enforce the laws, regulations and ordinances of the city right? Not according to the Lumberton, TX City Council. Corruption in East Texas runs deep. The City of Lumberton, in Hardin County, has a record of getting into trouble for doing the wrong things, and they are about to get into trouble yet again. Don’t get me wrong, there are a couple of good council members who speak up in meetings, but they are overruled by the majority of the board. The majority on the board, led by Andy Kelley and Don Burnett, does some crazy things. See end of article for a list of recent abuses by the city including losing a million dollar lawsuit because the city stole a man’s land.

Lumberton City Council’s “Sidewalk to Nowhere” Illegally Kills Business Center that will bring Jobs and Tax Revenue

The latest crazy thing the Lumberton City Council is trying to do is kill a planned business center in Lumberton by not allowing the business center to be built unless there is a sidewalk to nowhere included in the plan. The sidewalk would literally go nowhere and not connect to ANYTHING and would NEVER be used. Yep, the city is killing a multimillion dollar project that will bring in good businesses, jobs, and tax revenue to the city. They are killing the project over a sidewalk that is NOT required by law or ordinance to be built. The city has no authority to kill this project and in the end the city will lose, again, and the residents of Lumberton will have to foot the bill. This abuse of authority reminds me of the EPA not having a legal reason to stop oil drilling in Texas so they create new endangered animals to stop oil drilling in Texas. Why the hostility from the city? I don’t know, but I do know that David Gracedel supported an outsider candidate in a recent city council election. The councilman that Gracedel did not support in the election was quick to be the first councilman to make a motion to reject a variance for Gracedel.

I first heard about this issue in an article written by Kevin King in The Examiner. The city defended itself by saying businesses in the city are required to build sidewalks.  The city’s story sounded strange because the city has never required ANYONE to build a sidewalk in Lumberton so I wondered why the city was trying to force businessman David Gracedel to build one, and I wondered if the City even had the authority to force him to build one. I wanted to know more so I did a little research and I read the entire code of ordinances for the City of Lumberton. Well, it turns out that the city rules and regulations do NOT require Mr. David Gracedel to build sidewalks. Furthermore, this sidewalk would be a sidewalk connecting to nowhere because there are not sidewalks in front of most businesses in the city. Even more troubling is the city seems to be singling out Mr. Gracedel because the city has never tried to force any business, even recent ones, to build a sidewalk.

This situation is almost a repeat of when the city approved a subdivision a few years back for Mike Hawkins. The city then they tried to come back and force the man to build another road in the subdivision. The developer got a lawyer and the city was slapped down because, well, the city cannot approve a design and then come back and try to change the design

Here are the facts about the illegal Sidewalk to Nowhere in Lumberton

·         David Gracedel applied for a commercial construction building permit to build a business center on 4 acres of land that he owns on Hwy 69 in Lumberton.

·         Gracedel’s plat and building design was submitted to the city. It was drawn by professional engineers and architects, it was in full compliance with city building regulations, it had handicap parking and sidewalks to the entrances of the business center, and the design was ADA APPROVED (Americans with Disabilities Act).

·         The city had 30 days to approve or deny the plat, otherwise the plat would be automatically approved. The city did NOT send Mr. Gracedel an approval or denial within 30 days so the plat was approved by default.

·         Well after 30 days had pased, after the plat was already automatically approved, the city contacted Gracedel and told him that the plat would not be approved because it did not include a sidewalk along Hwy 69 in front of the parking lot.

·         Gracedel pointed out that the design was in compliance with ALL city ordinances and also in compliance with all disability laws. The city cannot make you do something unless they have passed an ordinance requiring it.

·         The city countered and told Gracedel that the city was forcing him to build sidewalks under the subdivision ordinance.

·         Gracedel pointed out that the subdivision ordinance does not apply to him because he is not applying to build a subdivision nor is he applying to subdivide his property. He is only applying for a commercial construction building permit.

·         The city countered by saying that at one time the land was subdivided.

·         Gracedel pointed out that his land was subdivided over a decade ago before the subdivision ordinance was even on the books, and furthermore, the subdivision regulations only apply to someone who is applying for a new subdivision after the subdivision ordinance was passed.

·         Gracedel also pointed out that the subdivision ordinance has been on the books for several years but all the recent construction projects that the city has approved did not require sidewalks and his business was the ONLY one that the city was trying to force to build a sidewalk. Heck, the city did not even require the Lumberton school to build a sidewalk along Hwy 69 when the school just did a major construction project along Hwy 69 this year. Furthermore, his business is not near any other businesses or sidewalks. Even if he did build a sidewalk it would not connect to anything because it would dead end at a sewer lift station to the right of his property and it would dead end well before it reaches a private road to the left of his property.

·         The city said too bad, we want you to build a sidewalk. The city went further and said that even if the ordinance is not clear that sidewalks are required, the city council plans to make a new ordinance requiring sidewalks so Gracedel is forced to build a sidewalk now even before there is an ordinance requiring him to do so.

Does the City even Read their own Ordinances? Sidewalks NOT required!

First of all, Gracedel’s plat was already approved by default so the city cannot force him to change it and they cannot deny the permit. Second, I took a look at the code of ordinances for the city of Lumberton and I wonder if the members of the Lumberton City Council have ever read their own code of ordinances. It is clear that Mr. Gracedel does NOT have to build a sidewalk. The only mention in the ordinances of someone having to build a sidewalk is in the subdivision application rules, and the subdivision application rules do not apply to Gracedel.

But wait, there is more! Even if the city inaccurately tries to impose the subdivision ordinance on him, the subdivision ordinance is clear that sidewalks are ONLY required if the person applying for a subdivision is going to build a NEW road. In other words, according to the subdivision rules, only if Gracedel is building a NEW ROAD in a subdivision is he required to build a sidewalk with curbs along the new road. Mr. Gracedel’s business center will not have any new roads as customers will enter the parking lot directly from the Highway.

The City of Lumberton has been getting into lots of Trouble over Abuses of Power

Sometimes I wonder if the City Council in Lumberton, TX believes that they are above the law. They sure act like it. It seems like yesterday that I broke a story about the city losing a million dollar lawsuit after they stole a man’s land and tried to give the man nothing even close to what the land was worth. They thought they were above the law and could do what they wanted but the man had money to hire a lawyer and the city lost. They actually were able to keep the lawsuit a secret from the residents of Lumberton until I found out about it. Or how about the fact that the city council knowingly hired a man to be the city attorney and prosecutor even though the city prosecutor owed $40,000 for not paying local property taxes in over a decade. Yep, the city prosecutor would prosecute people who violate city laws even though the prosecutor himself was violating law and not paying his taxes. I broke that story as well and the city finally fired the attorney after the public found out. Even more recently, Councilmen Don Burnett and Andy Kelley saw the Political Action Committee they belong to fined by the Texas Ethics Commission after the committee illegally got a $25,000 donation from Walmart. These city councilmen then turned around and gave Walmart a variance that Walmart had wanted.

The City Gives Variances to Businesses like passing out candy in order get more Tax Revenue, so Why Kill this Multi-Million Dollar Business Center?

I just do not get it. The city of Lumberton has an ordinance that does not allow alcohol to be sold within 300 feet of a school or daycare. The city has recently allowed businesses to break the city rules and sell alcohol within 300 feet of schools and daycares. Why? Because the city says we need the tax revenue. What I do not understand is why the city is killing Gracedel’s good business project that will bring jobs and money to the city, but the same city is willing to allow other businesses to break the rules and sell alcohol by a school because the city says it will bring in more money for the city. It just does not make sense and it reeks of corruption, political games, and the good old boy system.

GUILTY! Lumberton Councilman Don Burnett's Committee FINED by Texas for ILLEGAL $25,000 from Walmart (bribe?)

Lumberton City Councilmen Don Burnett and Andy Kelley have had their political committee

fined for serious violations of the law.

I filed the complaint months ago with the State of Texas Ethics Commission. This week I got a letter in the mail from the Texas Ethics Commission. The State of Texas concluded that the councilmen's committee, Keep Dollars in Lumberton Committee, violated Texas law by accepting $25,000 from Walmart and giving it to Texas Petition Strategies. The financial transaction was illegal because it was a behind the scenes massive money exchange that was done before the committee was even formed. It is illegal for a committee to accept or expend such a large amount of money without having first formed the political action committee.

The Ethics Commission assessed a fine against the committee's treasurer, Joan Abshire, a local realtor.

You can see a copy of the State's findings that a violation of the law occurred here: http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/sworncomp/2013/3130227.pdf

Many members on the Lumberton City Council have a bad history of lies, corruption and of illegal back room deals. Most recently, a jury ruled against the City of Lumberton and ordered the city to pay an over One Million Dollar judgement. The city had been sued because they stole a man's land without giving him even close to proper compensation. They thought they could railroad him but the man got a lawyer and the city lost.

This latest finding of guilt from the Texas Ethics Commission is just the tip of the iceberg.

To make a long story short, these councilmen wanted to bring alcohol sales into the city. The people of Lumberton were not necessarily against drinking, the councilmen just wanted Lumberton to stay a safe, quiet community. To get their petition passed, they promised the city residents that no alcohol would be sold near the schools. In order to finance their petition they got Walmart to donate $25,000 even though Walmart is near a school. Walmart and the councilmen knew they they could not sell alcohol near a school so it was strange that Walmart put up that money. After the alcohol sales came to the city, Walmart immediately requested that these city council members give Walmart a variance to be able to sell alcohol by the High School. Walmart was given a variance to sell alcohol near the Lumberton High School by the same people whose political committee was given $25,000 from Walmart. A bribe? What do you think? Illegal transfer of money? Yes, according to the Texas Ethics Commission.

There is much more corruption in Lumberton that is yet to be exposed and will be exposed soon.

Oh, and if these councilmen claim they were not a part of this committee, just refresh their memory with a flyer that the committee sent out with Don Burnett's and Andy Kelly's names proudly displayed on the article as main members of the committee.

These councilmen do not like me because I stand for the people and I expose public corruption. They are always trying to say I am wrong but at the end of the day it is they who are always the ones getting in trouble with the law.

 

Walmart in Lumberton, TX Wants to Sell Alcohol by High School – Hearing Monday 2/11/2013 6:30PM

There will be a hearing at the Lumberton City Hall in Lumberton Texas on 2/11/2013 at 6:30PM. The hearing will be to hear public comments about whether or not the city council should vote to allow Walmart to sell alcohol in Lumberton even though the Lumberton Walmart is within 300 feet, property line to property line, of the Lumberton High School.  

Welcome to Local East Texas Politics at its best. City Council Members Don Burnett and Andy Kelly promised Lumberton Residents that if alcohol sales passed there would not be any alcohol sales near our schools. Well, alcohol sales passed and who would have guessed, these City Council members who touted no alcohol sales near schools turn around and are set to vote to allow Walmart the ability to sell alcohol directly across from the Lumberton High School.

I have always been in favor of local control and people in communities getting to vote on important local issues like whether or not to allow alcohol sales within their community. When alcohol sales were passed by the voters of Lumberton in November 2012, I was completely supportive of the people getting to decide. In the past they have decided to keep alcohol sales out because they like the safe quiet city bedroom community we have, but this time they decided to have alcohol sales and voted to pass alcohol sales in the city. That is their decision so that is what Lumberton will get.

That being said, I would bet that very few people who voted for alcohol in Lumberton would approve of alcohol being sold right by the Lumberton High School. Local law prohibits alcohol sales within 300 feet, property line to property line, of a school. It doesn’t matter if the front door of the school is 800 feet to the front door of the place selling alcohol. All that matters is the 300 foot distance property line to property line. Why is property line to property line important? It is important because High School kids do not stay by the front door of the school. They walk to the edge of the property and cross roads when they get out of school, or if they decide to skip school, or after a game. They typically will also find the nearest place to congregate or hang out. When the Lumberton High School kids get out of school, the biggest most popular place for them to go is right across the street to the Walmart. This is where their friends work. This is where they wander around. This is the nearest hangout by the school.

Now do you understand why the law is 300 feet no alcohol zone property line to property line from a school and not door to door?

The TABC just busted over a dozen people selling alcohol to minors in right over in Jefferson County in 2012, including grocery stores. A couple of cities over, when Vidor passed alcohol sales a couple of years ago, within a year of alcohol sales starting, 3 different places were busted for selling alcohol to minors including a large grocery store. In the last 2 years Walmart has had nearly 2 dozen busts for selling alcohol to a minor in Texas. They act like that is a low number, but isn’t one minor getting alcohol and getting in a wreck too many? Alcohol is the LEADING killer of all youth and young people. Also, these number of busts for selling alcohol to a minor are just the ones who have been CAUGHT.

Alcohol sales at Walmart right across from the Lumberton High School will be very detrimental. It is not a matter of if, it is a matter of when. Kids will go across the street during a game or after school and get their cashier friend to sell them alcohol. The alcohol section will not be for adults only and Kids will inevitably sneak a beer into their jacket and then get out of the massive store at one of the many exits.

Why do we have local laws that do not allow alcohol sales within 300 feet property line to property line of a school if the local law is NOT enforced. What good does that law do? Also, if this variance is allowed, who gets a variance next? You cannot give Walmart a variance and not let the next guy come and build close the the high school and not grant him a variance.

Walmart is not hurting for cash. This Walmart was built and has thrived without alcohol sales and it will do no harm to Walmart to keep it from selling alcohol. On the other hand, the harm that allowing Walmart to sale alcohol close to the High School could have deadly effects. Furthermore, the city does not need Walmart to sell alcohol to help city revenues because many other places in Lumberton already sale alcohol, so if someone does not get alcohol from the Lumberton Walmart then they will still buy in Lumberton at one of the other places that sell alcohol not close to the school. The city does not lose money.

I am very disappointed that The Lumberton City Council is even considering allowing alcohol sales so close to the Lumberton High School and I hope the do the right thing choose to protect our schools over a little possible financial gain.

New Texas Law Will Prohibit Cities, like Lumberton, TX, from Secretly Using Eminent Domain

By, David Bellow

Earlier this year I uncovered that the City of Lumberton, TX had secretly used Eminent Domain to take over 100 acres from a man and told the man he was only going to get $2000 per acre. This man took the city to court and the city lost and was ordered to pay over one million dollars to the man. None of the residents knew about the use of Eminent Domain and no residents knew that there was a judgment against the city for over one million dollars because it was all kept secret by the city. To put a one million dollar judgment into perspective, the yearly budget for the city is only about three million dollars.

This secret use of Eminent Domain really bothered me, especially since the City of Lumberton has had problems with eminent domain in the past. I even contemplated doing a petition for the people to vote on creating a city ordinance that would prohibit the City of Lumberton from secretly using eminent domain and would help protect the property rights of the people of Lumberton.

It looks like I will not have to do any petitions.

In 2011, the Texas Legislature passed a new law, SB 18, that strengthens Private Property Rights. This new law includes a requirement that public entities must take a public vote to initiate eminent domain proceedings.

Texas State Representative Charles Perry had this to say about SB 18:

Private Property Rights were strengthened by Senate Bill 18, which requires governmental entities to take a public vote to initiate eminent domain proceedings.  It also requires condemning entities to make bona fide offers in writing, or if they fail to do this, it requires the entity to pay the landowner's expenses and attorney's fees.  SB 18 also levels the playing field by requiring that a condemning entity compensate landowners for damages from a loss of access to their property, as well as provides relocation assistance if a landowner is moved off of their property due to the eminent domain process.   It goes further to include buy-back provisions and clarify that the land may only be used for a public use.

Texas Republican Party Under Attack – Indictments on Criminal Charges, Court ordered Injunction, Attorney General Investigation

The Republican Party of Texas is under attack. This attack does not come from the outside, but rather it comes from the inside. Does the term RINO come to mind? Well it should. RINO is a term used to describe a REPUBLICAN IN NAME ONLY. These are people who run as Republicans but do not share the values of the Republican Party of Texas Platform. What is happening now is MUCH WORSE than someone just running as a Republican who does not believe in Republican values. As we speak, Democrats have infiltrated the Republican Party with the intent of taking over and destroying it. It is the modern day Trojan horse.
Why is this happening? Well, Texas has always had a very strong Democrat stronghold on local elections even though the majority of Texans vote Republican in State and National elections. Then Obama got elected and Conservatives woke up. The local Democrat networks saw that the people of Texas would soon be voting Republican in local county elections (and not just State and National elections) and the local Democrat control would be broken apart.

The solution was that if all the Democrats switched over to the Republican Party all at once then they could effectively take over the county Republican Party and retain control of local politics and keep the good old boy Democrat network in place.

Upshur County, TX
5 Democrat officials switched over to the Republican Party In 2010 and then systematically and illegally attempted to rid the Republican Party of Republicans so that the old Democrats could keep their power. Read this statement from and email that I received from Steve Findley, the State Republican Executive Committeeman for Upshur County:

“5 D’s rolled over into the Republican primary 2010. They picked a RINO Chairman to wipe out the conservatives and replace them with RINOs to protect the D’s who rolled over in ensuing elections. Three of those rolled over D’s, the County Judge, the Sheriff and a County Commissioner were indicted last week for official oppression” – Steve Findley

WHAT?

First things first, According to Steve Findley, the new RINO Upshur County Republican Chairman held his first County Republican Meeting on June 5th, 2010. This new Chairman, Ken Ambrose, disregarded all rules in an attempt to become a dictator of the County Republican Party. When he could not get the Precinct Chairs (the voting body of the County Republican Party) to go along, he illegally relieved the precinct chairs of their positions and appointed his own RINO Precinct Chairman. Just so everyone knows, Precinct Chairmen are voted on by the people of their precinct and the County Chairman cannot just kick them out and appoint his own. After SREC member Steve Findley, and other Republican Officials, attempted to resolve the issue privately to no avail, there was no choice but to file a lawsuit against the RINO Chairman. On January 3rd, 2011, Judge Banner granted an injunction against the RINO Upshur County Chairman Ken Ambrose by ruling in the plaintiffs favor and against the Upshur Chairman on every complaint. 

That is just the beginning.

In September 2010, the Upshur County Commissioners Court voted to end public comment at county meetings. Then on November 30th, 2010, Jimmy Caughron protested the Commissioners Court decision by showing up at the Commissioners Court meeting and sitting silently with tape over his mouth. Mr Caughron got a Sheriff’s escort out of the meeting. As a result, three county officials, all three are Democrats turned Republican, were indicted on charges of official oppression. 

The county defended their actions by stating that Mr. Caughron illegally disrupted the meeting because having tape over his mouth at the meeting was public comment at a meeting where public comment had been prohibited.

This is contrary to the Supreme Court ruling in Tinker vs. Des Moines. In that case, three students were sent home from school for wearing wristbands to protest the Vietnam War. The Supreme Court ruled that this silent, not-disruptive speech was protected under the First Amendment. Remember this Supreme Court ruling because you might see it again soon.

Hardin County, TX
Hardin County has always had Democrat local officeholders. Just in 2006 there were NO republicans on the ballot in Hardin County. With the new national wave against Democrats happening, these Hardin County Democrats knew they had to do something to keep their control so most of the Democrats in Hardin County switched to the Republican Party in 2010. Some of these office holders are really conservative and made the decision for right reasons. Others only did it to keep control and do not care about the Republican Party.
The Democrat Justice of Peace in Lumberton, TX was running as a Democrat in the 2010 election, that is until he, and other county Democrats, got a Republican Challenger. This Justice of the Peace, Butch Cummings, knew he would lose as a Democrat so he switched to the Republican Party. Instead of having a fair election for the people to decide, Butch Cummings secretly went to his opponent’s job and used his official position to get his opponent fired unless he dropped out of the race. REALLY? It is against Texas Law to coerce a candidate to drop out of an election. This kind of thing you hear about in reference to Chicago-style, mob-controlled politics. Whatever problems that Mr. Cummings had with his opponent, he should have used in his campaign against his opponent and the people would decide. You CANNOT rig your election and deprive a community of an election by illegally forcing your opponent out of an election by trying to get him fired unless he dropped out. This illegal activity was discovered during the primary election when the opponent of Mr. Cummings approached the Republican Party of Hardin County and explained that he was being coerced to drop out of the race by Mr. Cummings.

Everyone knew what happened but no one was brave enough to stand up for fear of retaliation. Some knew about it and just ignored it. Liberal reporter Gerry Dickert, from The Silsbee Bee, even admitted on a media blog that he had a voice recording of Butch Cummings in which Mr. Cummings admitted that he was trying to get his opponent fired from his job simply because he decided to run against him in the JP race. That is how bad it is here in east Texas when the local newspaper has a recording like that and just sits on it. It also says something that these good old boy Democrats believe their political positions are entitlements that they get to keep forever without anyone running against them.

It gets worse. When I questioned Butch Cummings about illegally coercing his opponent to drop out of the race, Mr. Cummings used obscenities and threatened me with bodily harm (in front of small children). It was caught on voice recording. The rest of his political, good old boys came to his aid. Mayor Don Surratt, who was fined for unethical financial reports, was part of this argument too because I asked him why he lied on his finance reports. City Manager Steve Clark told me to leave a public parking lot or he would have me arrested for “inciting a riot”, simply because I asked the Justice of the Peace and the Mayor about their illegal actions. (Sounds similar to the Upshur County Official Oppression doesn’t it?) Councilman Don Burnett even attempted to call the Police Chief and have my mother’s car towed because he said she was “illegally parked in a handicap spot even though my mother was dying of cancer (she passed away a few months later). While we argued she was the one with the strength to tell everyone to pray about their actions and stop arguing with each other. She always showed the Love of Christ.

When no one else would stand up and defend Democracy I knew I had to do something, so I stood up and filed a criminal complaint against Butch Cummings for rigging the election by coercing his opponent to drop out.

The complaint with the Attorney General seems to be stalled because no one wants to talk. The complaint sent to the county was rejected by the county, including District Attorney David Sheffield. David Sheffield is also a Democrat turned Republican and part of this old county political system. David Sheffield is a very nice guy, but that is the problem because he is nice to the bad guys too and lets them off on many occasions! (Remember David Sheffield because you might hear his name again soon.) I have not heard anything back from the City Court in regard to my complaint against Mr. Cummings threatening and cursing in public. Lastly, there is a current investigation against Butch Cummings being conducted by the Texas Committee on Judicial Ethics.

Conclusion
Now, with all that being said, many of the Democrats currently switching to the Republican Party are doing it for the right reasons and I am happy they are coming over to be part of our Party! On the other hand, we in the Republican Party must always be diligent to protect the Republican Party rules and values. That even means standing up against a fellow "Republican" if need be if that fellow Republican is breaking the law or doing something contrary to the Republican Party rules and values. You see, people do not make the Republican Party. A set of values and beliefs make the Republican Party and people who prescribe to those values make up the people of the party. It is all about the values. We must especially be wary when it comes to Democrats switching over. We WANT Democrats to switch over whose beliefs are really Republican beliefs even though they have always been a Democrat. We WANT those people and there are a bunch of them and many of them have been switching over lately. I am especially excited to see minority groups coming to the Republican Party because they are realizing that the Democrat Party is not for them. So we are excited to see so many Democrats turning Republican. But what we DO NOT want are Democrats switching over who DO NOT believe in the Republican Party values and instead they are only switching over because they know they cannot win as a Democrat anymore. These Democrats will, and already are, trying to sabotage the Republican Party from the inside.

Sincerely,
David Bellow

Hardin County Denies Lumberton Man Democratic right to petition government. Facts prove County clearly wrong

Contact:

David Page

409 223 3548

PageDavid62@yahoo.com

450 N. Blanton

Lumberton, TX 77657

June 10th, 2010





Hardin County Wrongfully Denies Lumberton Man the right to collect signatures for a petition to prohibit the sale of alcohol in Lumberton. Facts prove that Hardin County is wrong to deny petition. Democracy and the People’s right to vote are under attack in Hardin County.



David Page, a senior citizen and a long time resident of Lumberton who is not against anyone drinking but just likes Lumberton the way it is as a quiet bedroom community, has submitted an application to circulate a petition to prohibit the sale of alcohol within the city limits of Lumberton so Lumberton can stay dry like it always has been.



The county clerk and the county attorney have flat out denied the application for a petition from David Page. Remember last year when they denied Lumberton the right to vote based on some technical questions about the law. Well the State of Texas changed the law just for Lumberton so they could vote. You would think the county would let Lumberton finally get to vote now right? Wrong!



What was the excuse that Hardin County gave David Page for denying his request for a petition?



County Attorney Rebecca Walton told David Page this week, “You want to get a petition together to dry up Lumberton, but Lumberton is already dry. Lumberton is in JP precinct 5 and it is already dry. Everyone who lives in the city limits of Lumberton is in a double dry area. The city is dry and the JP Precinct 5 is dry. The sale of beer is not legal in Lumberton. Nothing is legal in the city limits of Lumberton”



This is completely and factually false. The county attorney is factually wrong and has wrongly denied this application for a petition. By the County Attorney’s own admission, JP Precinct 3 is wet. It is a fact that parts of the west city limits of Lumberton extend well into JP Precinct 3. This means that there are parts of the city limits of Lumberton that are wet because the western city limits of Lumberton extends into the wet JP precinct 3.

So it is an undisputable fact that there are parts of the Lumberton city limits that it is legal to sale alcohol because it is part of JP Precinct 3. So why did the county lie and say that there is no part of Lumberton that is in wet JP Precinct 3 and therefore there is no part of Lumberton that is wet and so Lumberton cannot vote to be dry. The county denied the petition by lying and saying no part of Lumberton is wet but it is a fact that there are parts of the west Lumberton city limits that alcohol is legal because it is in the wet JP Precinct 3.

Maybe the county did not lie. If the county did not lie, then they are just incompetent and do not know the city boundary lines and they do not know how to read a simple map. Wait, that sounds familiar. Didn’t the county already not know their own county precinct lines? There is a gas station in a dry area of Lumberton that is currently selling alcohol because the county allowed that gas station to sell thinking it was in a wet precinct. The county had to come out later and admit that they made a mistake and that the gas station selling alcohol was actually in a dry area and not allowed to sell. But it was too late and the gas station is still selling. Is this another case of the county not knowing the simple boundary lines of the county?

Commissioner Bobby Franklin lives a stone’s throw away from this gas station that sells alcohol. How could he not know where his own precinct lines end and whether or not the gas station was in his dry precinct? How could Councilman Don Burnett not advise the county that this gas station was in a dry precinct. Burnett was on the committee that decided these precinct lines so he had to know that these gas stations were in a dry precinct and should have never sold alcohol. Furthermore, Don Burnett knows that there is a part of Lumberton city limits that is currently wet and yet this councilman has not informed the county attorney. Instead David Page has informed us that councilman Don Burnett called him last week and tried to get him to not do a petition against alcohol and Don Burnett instead was trying to persuade David Page to do a petition to legalize alcohol.

Something fishy has been going on for quite a while. Now it is finally getting exposed. It is a fact that Lumberton is part of the wet JP Precinct 3. This means it is a fact that part of Lumberton is wet. This means that the county either knows this info and simply lied to David Page, or the County is simply incompetent on more than one occasion when it comes to looking at a simple map to see if the city Limits of Lumberton extends into the wet JP precinct 3. Either way, it is not good for the county that they have wrongfully denied David Page a petition. Even worse they have denied the city residents of Lumberton a chance to vote once again. This mistake is so blatant that the county will not be able to talk themselves out of the big mess they are getting themselves into now.



In the past the county has gotten out of trouble by saying they did not know the boundary lines. Well David Page showed the county attorney the map of Lumberton which clearly shows that the city limits of Lumberton extends in the wet JP precinct 3. Even after seeing the map the county still said Lumberton was all dry and could not vote and they rejected the application for a petition. It is believed that David Page will be getting a lawyer soon to sue the county for wrongfully denying him a petition. The county has no chance of winning because any judge looking at a map would be able to see that the county is wrong. Not only is the county wrong for denying the petition. The county has also stalled long enough to possibly make David Page have to wait until next year to do another vote instead of this year as David Page was going to petition for. So the county’s incompetence is once again keeping the people of Lumberton from voting and there would probably be severe legal repercussions for the county for blatantly wrongfully denying David Page a petition to allow the city to vote.



David Page has provided all of the information contained within this email. David Page can be reached at :



David Page

409 223 3548

450 N. Blanton

Lumberton, TX 77657