D-1-GN-20-004258 CAUSE NO. _________________________ DSCC; DSCC; and MARY JENNINGS HEGAR, Plaintiffs, v. RUTH HUGHS, in her official capacity as Texas Secretary of State; GREEN PARTY OF TEXAS; DAVID B. COLLINS; THOMAS WAKELY; ALFRED MOLISON; and LAURA PALMER, Defendants. § § § § § § § § § § § § § § 8/17/2020 11:17 PM Velva L. Price District Clerk Travis County D-1-GN-20-004258 Ruben Tamez IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS 98TH ___________ JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFFS’ ORIGINAL PETITION, APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER, REQUEST FOR TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, AND REQUESTS FOR DISCLOSURE Plaintiffs DSCC, DCCC, and Mary Jennings (M.J.) Hegar file this original petition, application for temporary restraining order, requests for temporary and permanent injunctive relief, and requests for disclosure, complaining of defendant Ruth Hughs, in her official capacity as the Texas Secretary of State (the Secretary), the Green Party of Texas, David B. Collins, Thomas Wakely, Alfred Molison, in his capacity as co-chair of the Green Party of Texas, and Laura Palmer, in her capacity as co-chair of the Green Party of Texas, and for cause of action would respectfully show as follows: I. 1. DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN Plaintiffs request that discovery be conducted under Discovery Control Plan Level 3, as set forth in Rule 190.4 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. II. 2. INTRODUCTION This action concerns the eligibility of candidates to appear on the ballot under Texas -1- law. 3. Texas has several neutral, non-discriminatory provisions meant to ensure that candidates who appear on the ballot enjoy a modicum of voter support so as to reduce voter confusion. Among these provisions is Section 141.041 of the Texas Election Code, which states that to “be eligible to be placed on the ballot for the general election” a candidate nominated by a state party convention must either “pay a filing fee to the secretary of state for a statewide or district office or the county judge for a county or precinct office” or “submit to the secretary of state for a statewide or district office or the county judge for a county or precinct office a petition” that satisfies certain requirements. 4. Neither Mr. Collins (the Green Party of Texas’s apparent nominee for United States Senate) nor Mr. Wakely (the Green Party of Texas’s apparent nominee for United States House of Representatives Congressional District 21) paid the fee required by Section 141.041(a) or submitted the required petition in lieu of paying the fee.1 5. The Green Party of Texas openly and publicly admits that neither Challenged Candidate complied with the statutory requirements to be eligible to be placed on the general election ballot under Texas Election Code § 141.041(a).2 6. Despite openly acknowledging the ineligibility of the Challenged Candidates, the Green Party Defendants have repeatedly disregarded their statutory duty to declare both candidates ineligible to be placed on the general election ballot.3 That continued disregard for their statutory 1 Mr. Collins and Mr. Wakely are referred to throughout this original petition together as the Challenged Candidates. 2 See Ex. A (“None of the statewide nominees paid the new filing fees imposed on candidates under 2019’s HB 2504, nor did they submit the requisite petition signatures in lieu of the fee.”); id. (noting for non-statewide offices “[n]ames of candidates who paid the fees, thus assuring ballot access, appear in italics. As with the statewide candidates, the disposition of litigation and the Secretary of State's Office will determine whether the others may appear on ballots in their respective districts” and showing Defendant Wakely’s name is not italicized). 3 The “Green Party Defendants” refer to the Green Party of Texas and Alfred Molison and Laura Palmer, who serve -2- duties rapidly threatens to subject Plaintiffs to irreparable harm. 7. An ineligible candidate must be removed from the ballot if declared ineligible on or before the 74th day before election day,4 which falls on Friday August 21, 2020 this year. Shortly thereafter, by the 68th day before election day, the Secretary must certify the candidates for the ballot.5 That deadline falls on August 28, 2020 this year. 8. The Secretary is prohibited from certifying candidates who she learns are declared ineligible;6 however, she has allegedly indicated to the Green Party Defendants that, unless a court order is issued declaring the Challenged Candidates ineligible for the ballot, she intends to certify them. 9. Declaratory and injunctive relief is thus immediately necessary to ensure that the Challenged Candidates—who have admittedly not qualified for the ballot under Texas law—are not certified for and placed on the general election ballot for the November 2020 election. III. 10. JURISDICTION AND VENUE This Court has jurisdiction over this matter of election law pursuant to Section 273.081 of the Texas Election Code, Section 37.003 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, and other laws. Plaintiffs do not seek money damages and therefore make no statement under Rules 47(b) and (c) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. 11. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants, who are all residents of the state of Texas, including the Secretary, who is sued in her official capacity only. as co-chairs of the Green Party of Texas. 4 See Tex. Elec. Code § 145.035. 5 See Tex. Elec. Code § 161.008(b). 6 See Tex. Elec. Code § 161.008(c). -3- 12. Venue is mandatory in Travis County, Texas, because Plaintiffs have asserted a claim for a writ of mandamus against the Secretary, who is a head of a department of state government.7 13. Further, venue is proper in Travis County, Texas, because all or a substantial part of the actions sought to be enjoined will occur in Travis County.8 Because venue is proper in Travis County, Texas against one defendant, this Court has venue of all defendants because all of Plaintiffs’ claims arise out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences.9 IV. 14. PARTIES Plaintiff DSCC is the national senatorial committee of the Democratic Party, as defined by 52 U.S.C. § 30101(14), and its mission is to elect candidates of the Democratic Party to the United States Senate, including in Texas. DSCC works to accomplish its mission across the country and in Texas by, among other things, making expenditures for, and contributions to, Democratic candidates for U.S. Senate and assisting state parties throughout the country, including in Texas. 15. In 2020, DSCC has already invested tens of thousands of dollars to support plaintiff MJ Hegar, the Democratic candidate for United States Senate selected as the nominee, and it intends to dedicate further substantial resources towards her election, totaling more than one million dollars this cycle. DSCC will be harmed absent relief because allowing the inclusion of statutorily ineligible candidates on the ballot will require DSCC to expend additional and incalculable funds and resources to persuade voters not to support those ineligible candidates. If 7 See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 15.014. 8 See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rec. Code § 15.002(a)(1). 9 See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rec. Code § 15.005. -4- those ineligible candidates were not on the ballot, those diverted resources could instead be spent promoting DSCC’s core mission and engaging in other mission-critical activities, including to encourage turnout and to educate and persuade voters to support MJ Hegar. DSCC will also be harmed because Ms. Hegar will be forced to compete with a candidate who has failed to legally qualify for the ballot, a competitive harm that inures not just to Ms. Hegar as the candidate, but to the DSCC specifically, which is the official committee dedicated to electing Democrats to the U.S. Senate. 16. Plaintiff DCCC is the national congressional committee of the Democratic Party, as defined by 52 U.S.C. § 30101(14). DCCC’s mission is electing Democratic candidates to the U.S. House of Representatives from congressional districts across the United States, including from Texas’s 36 congressional districts. DCCC works to accomplish its mission across the country and in Texas by, among other things, making expenditures for, and contributions to, Democratic candidates for U.S. Congress and assisting state parties throughout the country, including in Texas. 17. For 2020, Texas’s Twenty-First Congressional District is one of several targeted races for the DCCC. It plans to expend resources to support the Democratic candidate, Wendy Davis. DCCC will be harmed absent relief, because allowing the inclusion of statutorily ineligible candidates on the ballot will require DCCC to expend additional funds and resources to persuade voters not to support those ineligible candidates. If those ineligible candidates were not on the ballot, those diverted resources could instead be spent promoting DCCC’s core mission and engaging in other mission-critical activities, including to encourage turnout and to educate and persuade voters to support Wendy Davis. DCCC will also be harmed because Ms. Davis will be forced to compete with a candidate who has failed to legally qualify for the ballot, a competitive -5- harm that inures not just to Ms. Davis as the candidate, but to the DCCC specifically, which is the official committee dedicated to electing Democrats to the U.S. House of Representatives. 18. Plaintiff Mary Jennings (MJ) Hegar is the Democratic nominee to represent Texas in the United States Senate. Ms. Hegar will be harmed absent relief because she will be forced to compete with a candidate who has failed to legally qualify for the ballot. 19. Defendant Ruth Hughs is sued in her official capacity as the Secretary of State of Texas. The Secretary’s official responsibilities include serving as the Chief Election Officer for Texas, assisting county election officials, and ensuring the uniform application and interpretation of election laws throughout Texas.10 As the head of the Elections Division of her office, the Secretary is charged with administering the Texas Election Code. She is also responsible for certifying the candidates for the ballot on not later than the 68th day before general election day.11 The Secretary is prohibited from certifying candidates who she learns are declared ineligible.12 The Secretary may be served with process at 1019 Brazos Street, Austin, Texas 78701; P.O. Box 12060, Austin, Texas 78711-2060; P.O. Box 12079, Austin, Texas 78711-2079; 900 Congress Avenue, Suite 300, Austin, Travis County, Texas 78701; and/or wherever she may be found. 20. Defendant Green Party of Texas is a political party pursuant to Title 10 of the Texas Election Code,13 and, upon information and belief, an unincorporated association within the meaning of Section 17.021 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. The Green Party of Texas’s presiding officer has a statutory duty, upon receiving applications for statewide offices, to review the applications to confirm that they “compl[y] with the requirements as to form, content, 10 See Tex. Elec. Code § 31.001(a). 11 See Tex. Elec. Code § 161.008(b). 12 See Tex. Elec. Code § 161.008(c). 13 See Tex. Elec. Code § 161.001 et seq. -6- and procedure that [they] must satisfy for the candidate[s’] name to be placed on the ballot.”14 The Green Party of Texas’s presiding officer is required to reject any applications that do not comply with statutory requirements.15 After nominating candidates at its convention, the Green Party of Texas’s presiding officer has the responsibility for certifying the eligibility of its nominated candidates to the Secretary of State under Texas Election Code § 181.068. Importantly, however, “[a] presiding officer may not certify a candidate’s name if, before delivering the certification, the presiding officer learns that the name is to be omitted from the ballot under Section 145.035.”16 The Green Party of Texas is also named as a party to this litigation as it has an interest that would be affected by the declaration requested here.17 The Green Party of Texas may be served with process through service on (i) its chairs, Alfred Molison and/or Laura Palmer; (ii) its president, vice-president, secretary, cashier, assistant cashier, or treasurer;18 and/or (ii) an agent or clerk employed in the Green Party of Texas’s office or place of business.19 21. Defendant Alfred Molison is one of two co-chairs of defendant Green Party of Texas, who, upon information and belief, unlawfully accepted the statutorily deficient applications of defendants David B. Collins and Thomas Wakely to be candidates for statewide office,20 and, upon information and belief, acted as the presiding officer in falsely certifying the eligibility of Defendants David B. Collins and Thomas Wakely in violation of Texas Election Code § 14 Tex. Elec. Code § 141.032(a); see also Tex. Elec. Code § 181.032. 15 See Tex. Elec. Code § 141.032(e) (“If an application does not comply with the applicable requirements, the authority shall reject the application and immediately deliver to the candidate written notice of the reason for the rejection.”). 16 Tex. Elec. Code § 181.068(c). 17 See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 37.006(a). 18 See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code 17.023. 19 See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code 17.021. 20 See Tex. Elec. Code § 181.032; id. § 141.032(e). -7- 181.068(c). Mr. Molison is also named as a party to this litigation as he has an interest that would be affected by the declaration requested here.21 Mr. Molison may be served with process at (what is, upon information and belief, his residence) 7623 Candlegreen Lane, Houston, Texas 77077; his place of business; or wherever he may be found. 22. Defendant Laura Palmer is one of two co-chairs of Defendant Green Party of Texas, who, upon information and belief, unlawfully accepted the statutorily deficient applications of Defendants David B. Collins and Thomas Wakely to be candidates for statewide office,22 and, upon information and belief, acted as the presiding officer in falsely certifying the eligibility of defendants David B. Collins and Thomas Wakely in violation of Texas Election Code § 181.068(c). Ms. Palmer is also named as a party to this litigation as she has an interest that would be affected by the declaration requested here.23 24 Ms. Palmer may be served with process at (what is, upon information and belief, her residence) 5402 Bent Bough Lane, Houston, Texas 77088; her place of business; or wherever he may be found. 23. Defendant David B. Collins is the Green Party of Texas’s apparent nominee for the United States Senate. On April 18, 2020, the Green Party of Texas confirmed Mr. Collins’s nominations to the November 2020 general election ballot, despite the Green Party of Texas’s awareness that Collins was ineligible due to his failure to comply with Section 141.041(a) of the Texas Election Code by either paying a filing fee of $5,000 or submitting a petition in lieu of filing fee containing 5,000 valid signatures in support of his candidacy by no later than December 9, 2019. Collins is also named as a party to this litigation as he has an interest that would be affected 21 See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 37.006(a). 22 See Tex. Elec. Code §§ 181.032, 141.032(e). 23 See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 37.006(a). 24 See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 37.006(a). -8- by the declaration requested here.25 Mr. Collins may be served with process at (what is, upon information and belief, his residence) 3560 Dixie Drive, Apartment 1111, Houston, Texas 77021; his place of business; or wherever he may be found. 24. Defendant Thomas Wakely is the Green Party of Texas’s apparent nominee to represent Texas’s Twenty-First Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives. On April 18, 2020, Green Party of Texas confirmed Mr. Wakely’s nominations to the November 2020 general election ballot, despite Green Party of Texas’s awareness that Mr. Wakely was ineligible due to his failure to comply with Section 141.041(a) of the Texas Election Code by either paying a filing fee of $3,125 or submitting a petition in lieu of filing fee containing 500 valid signatures in support of his candidacy by no later than December 9, 2019. Mr. Wakely is also named as a party to this litigation as he has an interest that would be affected by the declaration requested here.26 Mr. Wakely may be served with process at (what is, upon information and belief, his residence) 16406 Ledge Point Street, San Antonio, Texas 78232; his place of business; or wherever he may be found. V. A. BACKGROUND Ballot access requirements 25. Section 181.005 of the Texas Election Code establishes when the candidates of a political party nominated by convention are guaranteed a place on the general election ballot. A party can guarantee its candidates placement on the ballot by submitting to the Secretary a petition containing precinct convention participants and other signatures in support of the petition. 25 See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 37.006(a). 26 See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 37.006(a). -9- 26. Before September 1, 2019, a party’s candidates would be afforded a place on the general election ballot if, in the most recent general election, the party’s nominee for a statewide office received at least five percent of the votes cast for that office. HB 2504 (2019) revised Section 181.005 to lower the minimum threshold that is required for a party nominating by convention to guarantee its candidates a place on the general election ballot. 27. To become a Libertarian or Green Party nominee for a particular office, one must file an application for nomination with the county or state party chair, as appropriate.27 The application must be filed no later than 6:00 p.m. on December 9, 2019.28 Candidates for federal office must file a federal application. 28. Under HB 2504 (2019), which amended Texas Election Code § 141.041(a), the application for nomination must be accompanied by either: (1) a filing fee, or (2) a petition in lieu of filing fee, delivered to the Secretary of State, for a statewide or district office, or to the county judge, for a county or precinct office. The amount of the filing fee or the number of signatures required on the petition in lieu of a filing fee is the same as what is required for a candidate seeking nomination by primary election.29 29. The application to be a federal candidate in Texas requires a certification that the candidate has either paid the filing fee or submitted the required petition in lieu of a filing fee.30 The application’s instructions make clear the penalty for failure to comply with this statutory 27 See Tex. Elec. Code § 181.032. 28 Tex. Elec. Code § 181.033; see also Ex. B. 29 See Tex. Elec. Code §§ 172.024 and 172.025; see also Ex. B (indicating that, for United States Senator for the 2020 general election, one must either pay a fee of $5,000, or, in the alternative, submit a petition containing 5,000 signatures; for United States Representative, one must either pay a fee of $3,125, or submit a petition containing 500 signatures). 30 See Ex. C at 1. - 10 - requirement, stating “[i]f a candidate does not complete the Petition in Lieu of a Filing Fee or pay the filing fee, they will not be eligible for nomination by the party convention process, even if they have completed and submitted their application for nomination.”31 B. The Challenged Candidates failed to comply with ballot access requirements. 30. Admittedly, neither Mr. Collins (the Green Party of Texas’s apparent candidate for United States Senate) nor Mr. Wakely (the Green Party of Texas’s apparent candidate to represent Texas’s Twenty-First Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives) paid the fee required by Section 141.041(a) of the Texas Election Code or submitted the required petition in lieu of filing a fee. Accordingly, the Challenged Candidates violated Section 141.041(a). 31. Upon information and belief, the Challenged Candidates were and are fully aware of their ineligibility based on their failure to comply with Texas Election Code § 141.041(a).32 32. Nevertheless, the Challenged Candidates submitted their unlawful applications for nomination to the Green Party Defendants for certification. C. The Green Party Defendants failed to comply with ballot access requirements. 33. The Green Party Defendants openly acknowledge that the Challenged Candidates, Mr. Collins and Mr. Wakely, failed to comply with the requirements of Tex. Elec. Code § 141.041.33 Upon information and belief, such failure should be plain from Mr. Collins’s and Mr. 31 Id. at 2 (emphasis added). 32 See e.g., Ex. E (reflecting Collins’s admission on his own website that his “nomination comes with a major asterisk: My name may not appear on Texas ballots, because I submitted my application to run without the $5,000 filing fee (or 5,000 signatures in lieu thereof)” and citing a pending federal lawsuit challenging Texas Election Code § 141.041(a)). Of course, the fact that the Green Party Defendants and the Challenged Candidates are parties to a federal lawsuit that challenged Texas Election Code § 141.041(a) does not free them from their obligations and eligibility requirements under the law as it stood at all relevant times to this action, and as it stands today. 33 See Ex. A (“None of the statewide nominees paid the new filing fees imposed on candidates under 2019’s HB 2504, nor did they submit the requisite petition signatures in lieu of the fee.”); id. (noting that for non-statewide offices - 11 - Wakely’s candidate applications.34 34. Indeed, upon information and belief, the Secretary is also aware that the Challenged Candidates never paid the statutorily required fee or submitted the required petition, as the fee must be paid to the Secretary,35 or alternatively the petition must be presented to the Secretary.36 Documents provided by the Secretary of State’s Office reflect this awareness. 35. Despite the Challenged Candidates’ failure to comply with Section 141.041(a) of the Texas Election Code, the Green Party Defendants have repeatedly disregarded their statutory duty to declare them ineligible to appear on the ballot. Upon information and belief, the Green Party Defendants’ failure to comply with Section 141.041 was facially apparent from the Challenged Candidates’ applications. The Green Party Defendants were required to review the applications to confirm that they “complie[d] with the requirements as to form, content, and procedure that [they] must satisfy for the candidate[s’] name to be placed on the ballot.”37 Since the Challenged Candidates neither filed the statutorily required fee nor completed the alternative petition, the Green Party Defendants had a duty to reject their applications.38 36. Following the completion of the Green Party of Texas’s April convention, the Green Party Defendants again acted unlawfully in certifying the Challenged Candidates as candidates to the Secretary of State’s office. The Green Party Defendants had a statutory duty to “[n]ames of candidates who paid the fees, thus assuring ballot access, appear in italics. As with the statewide candidates, the disposition of litigation and the Secretary of State's Office will determine whether the others may appear on ballots in their respective districts” and showing Defendant Wakely’s name is not italicized). 34 See Ex. C at 1 (requiring a certification that a candidate has either submitted a declaration or filed the appropriate filing fee). 35 See Tex. Elec. Code § 141.041(a)(1). 36 See Tex. Elec. Code § 141.041(a)(2). 37 Tex. Elec. Code § 141.032(a). 38 See Tex. Elec. Code § 141.032 (e) (“If an application does not comply with the applicable requirements, the authority shall reject the application and immediately deliver to the candidate written notice of the reason for the rejection.”). - 12 - declare the Challenged Candidates ineligible due to their failure to comply with Section 141.041 of the Texas Election Code, and they were not permitted to certify ineligible candidates to the Secretary.39. Despite these statutory responsibilities, upon information and belief, the Green Party Defendants unlawfully and knowingly certified the Challenged Candidates to the Secretary’s office. 37. The Green Party Defendants still may declare the Challenged Candidates ineligible today under Section 145.003 of the Texas Election Code if they so choose; but they have not done so and have made no indication they intend to do so absent a court order. In fact, in an attempt to avoid litigation, on August 13, undersigned counsel served a letter on the Green Party Defendants, indicating the statutory basis for the Challenged Candidates’ ineligibility, requesting that the Green Party Defendants declare the Challenged Candidates ineligible and provide written notice of their ineligibility to the Secretary, and advising that, absent such action, Plaintiffs’ counsel would be required to take legal action. Plaintiffs’ counsel copied the Secretary on this correspondence. The Green Party Defendants have taken no action in response to adhere to their statutory mandates to declare the Challenged Candidates ineligible. D. The Secretary has the responsibility of certifying candidates for the ballot. 38. Pursuant to Section 161.008(a) of the Texas Election Code, the Secretary is responsible for certifying “in writing for placement on the general election ballot the name of each 39 See Tex. Elec. Code § 181.068(c) (“A presiding officer may not certify a candidate’s name if, before delivering the certification, the presiding officer learns that the name is to be omitted from the ballot under Section 145.035.”); Tex. Elec. Code § 145.035 (“A candidate’s name shall be omitted from the ballot if the candidate withdraws, dies, or is declared ineligible on or before the 74th day before election day.”) - 13 - candidate nominated at a primary election or convention of a political party for a statewide or district office.” 39. The Secretary is required to deliver this certification “to the authority responsible for having the official general election ballot prepared in each county in which the candidate's name is to appear on the ballot.”40 This statutory duty must be undertaken “[n]ot later than the 68th day before general election.”41 40. However, the Secretary is prohibited from certifying a candidate’s name if “before delivering the certification, the secretary of state learns that the name is to be omitted from the ballot under [Texas Election Code] Section 145.035.”42 41. Section 145.035 of the Texas Election Code provides that “[a] candidate's name shall be omitted from the ballot if the candidate withdraws, dies, or is declared ineligible on or before the 74th day before election day.” 42. Upon information and belief, the Secretary intends to certify Defendants Wakely and Collins despite her statutory responsibility to not certify ineligible candidates.43 VI. 43. CAUSES OF ACTION Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the preceding paragraphs and the allegations they contain in each of the causes of actions and requests for relief below. A. Writ of mandamus 44. A party is entitled to mandamus relief to compel a public official to perform a 40 Tex. Elec. Code § 161.008(b). 41 Tex. Elec. Code § 161.008(b). 42 Id. at § 161.008(c). 43 See Ex. D. - 14 - ministerial act.44 That relief is available where there is a legal duty to perform a non-discretionary act, a demand for performance, and a refusal to perform.45 A “ministerial act” is one where the law clearly spells out a duty to be performed by the official in question, with sufficient certainty such that nothing is left to the exercise of discretion.46 Mandamus relief is available even if a court is first required to determine if a statute, rule, or order imposes a ministerial duty.47 45. In City of El Paso v. Heinrich, the Texas Supreme Court defined an ultra vires claim as “an action to determine or protect a private party’s rights against a state official who has acted without legal or statutory authority . . . .”48 The court noted that an ultra vires suit “must not complain of a governmental officer’s exercise of discretion, but rather must allege, and ultimately prove, that the officer acted without legal authority or failed to perform a purely ministerial act.”49 46. The Challenged Candidates, David B. Collins and Thomas Wakely, are ineligible for inclusion on the 2020 ballot as a result of their failure to comply with Texas Election Code § 141.041(e), and, as a result, the Secretary and the Green Party Defendants acted or intend to act ultra vires in including the Challenged Candidates on the ballot, in direct contravention of their express statutory duties and obligations to exclude them from the ballot on the basis of their ineligibility. 47. Plaintiffs seek a writ of mandamus compelling the Secretary and the Green Party Defendants to perform their ministerial duties under Texas election law and omit Mr. Collins and Mr. Wakely from the general election ballot. 44 See Anderson v. City of Seven Points, 806 S.W.2d 791, 793 (Tex. 1991). 45 Doctors’ Hosp. Facilities v. Fifth Court of Appeals, 750 S.W.2d 177, 178 (Tex. 1988). 46 Cmty. Health Choice, Inc. v. Hawkins, 328 S.W.3d 10, 13 (Tex. App.—Austin 2010, pet. denied). 47 See generally Hawkins, 328 S.W.3d at 13. 48 284 S.W.3d 366, 368 (Tex. 2009). 49 Heinrich, 284 S.W>3d at 372. - 15 - 48. Absent injunctive and declaratory relief, Plaintiffs will be irreparably and imminently harmed by the Secretary’s and the Green Party Defendants’ ultra vires actions in certifying the Challenged Candidates for inclusion on the 2020 general election ballot, in direct contravention of the Secretary’s and the Green Party Defendants’ duties and obligations pursuant to the Texas Election Code.50 B. Request for declaratory relief 49. A justiciable controversy now exists between Plaintiffs and Defendants as to their respective rights, obligations, and status under Texas election law. 50. Section 141.041(e) of the Texas Election Code requires that, in order to “be eligible to be placed on the ballot for the general election,” a candidate nominated by a state party convention must either “pay a filing fee to the secretary of state for a statewide or district office or the county judge for a county or precinct office” or “submit to the secretary of state for a statewide or district office or the county judge for a county or precinct office a petition” which satisfies certain requirements. 51. Section 141.032(a) of the Texas Election Code further requires that “[o]n the filing of an application for a place on the ballot, the authority with whom the application is filed” (here, the Green Party Defendants) “shall review the application to determine whether it complies with 50 See Tex. Elec. Code § 141.032(a) (requiring Green Party Defendants to review all applications for nomination for compliance with law); id. at § 141.032(e) (requiring the Green Party Defendants to reject any applications that do not comply with applicable requirements); Tex. Elec. Code § 181.068(c) (prohibiting the Green Party Defendants from delivering to the Secretary any certifications of ineligible candidates); Tex. Elec. Code § 145.003(b)(1) (permitting the Green Party Defendants to make an administrative declaration of their candidates’ ineligibility, even after improperly seeking certification, which they have not done); Tex. Elec. Code § 161.008(c) (prohibiting the Secretary from certifying to the authority responsible for preparing the general ballot in each county the names of any candidates who are ineligible, “if, before delivering the certification, the secretary of state learns that the name is to be omitted from the ballot under Section 145.035”); Tex. Elec. Code § 145.035 (requiring, in general, that a “candidate’s name shall be omitted from the ballot if the candidate withdraws, dies, or is declared ineligible on or before the 74th day before election day”). - 16 - the requirements as to form, content, and procedure that it must satisfy for the candidate's name to be placed on the ballot.” If the “application does not comply with the applicable requirements, the authority” (here, the Green Party Defendants) “shall reject the application and immediately deliver to the candidate written notice of the reason for the rejection.”51 After an application has been accepted and following the conclusion of a convention, the presiding officers of a political party committee must certify the eligibility of its nominated candidates to the Secretary under Section 181.068 of the Texas Election Code. Importantly, however, “[a] presiding officer may not certify a candidate's name if, before delivering the certification, the presiding officer learns that the name is to be omitted from the ballot under Section 145.035.”52 Political party committees and their presiding officers also have a statutory duty under Texas Election Code §§ 145.003(a), (f), and (g) to declare ineligible all candidates who fail to comply with Texas Election Code § 141.041. 52. It is undisputed that neither Mr. Collins (the Green Party of Texas’s candidate for United States Senate) nor Mr. Wakely (the Green Party of Texas’s candidate to represent Texas’s Twenty-First Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives) paid the fee required by Texas Election Code § 141.041 or submitted the required petition in lieu of filing a fee. 53. Texas’s courts have long held that “[s]tatutory requirements concerning candidacy for public office are mandatory, and must be strictly construed to ensure compliance.”53 51 Tex. Elec. Code § 141.032(e). 52 Tex. Elec. Code § 181.068(c). 53 Bejarano v. Hunter, 899 S.W.2d 346, 349 (Tex. App.—El Paso 1995, orig. proceeding) (citing Wallace v. Howell, 707 S.W.2d 876, 877 (Tex. 1986) and Jones v. Mather, 709 S.W.2d 299, 300 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1986, orig. proceeding)). - 17 - 54. The Texas Supreme Court has made clear that “compliance in regard to the completion of a candidate’s application rests primarily on the shoulders of the candidate.”54 Therefore, notwithstanding the Green Party Defendants’ statutory obligation to review and certify their eligible candidates’ applications, the Challenged Candidates had an independent duty to ensure that their applications “strictly complie[d] with state law.”55 Here, not only did the Challenged Candidates abdicate their duty, upon information and belief, they knowingly and willfully violated Texas Election Code § 141.041(a) in protest of the law. 55. Defendant Green Party of Texas also openly admits that neither candidate satisfied the statutory requirements to be eligible to be placed on the general election ballot under Texas Election Code § 141.041.56 56. Nevertheless, the Green Party Defendants knowingly and willfully violated Tex. Elec. Code § 141.032(e) in failing to reject the applications of the Challenged Candidates and Tex. Elec. Code § 181.068(c) in certifying the nominations of the Challenged Candidates, despite their ineligibility for ballot access as a result of their respective failures to comply with Texas Election Code § 141.041 by the deadline of 6:00 p.m. on December 9, 2019. 57. The Green Party Defendants have abdicated their duty to declare the Challenged Candidates ineligible under Texas Election Code § 145.003(a), (f), and (g) based on their wellknown and well-documented failure to comply with Texas Election Code § 141.041. 58. Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable injury absent declaratory and injunctive relief, 54 In re Gibson, 960 S.W.2d 418, 421 (Tex. App.—Waco 1998, orig. proceeding) (emphasis added). 55 Gibson, 960 S.W.2d at 421. 56 See Ex. A (“None of the statewide nominees paid the new filing fees imposed on candidates under 2019’s HB 2504, nor did they submit the requisite petition signatures in lieu of the fee.”); id. (noting that for non-statewide offices “[n]ames of candidates who paid the fees, thus assuring ballot access, appear in italics. As with the statewide candidates, the disposition of litigation and the Secretary of State's Office will determine whether the others may appear on ballots in their respective districts” and showing Mr. Wakely’s name is not italicized) - 18 - because the inclusion of the Challenged Candidates on the ballot, both of whom are indisputably ineligible, threatens Plaintiffs’ electoral prospects and will further require them to spend and divert resources in order to compete against ineligible candidates who have been unlawfully certified for and included on the ballot. 59. Pursuant to Section 161.008(c) of the Texas Election Code, “[a] candidate’s name may not be certified if, before delivering the certification, the secretary of state learns that the name is to be omitted from the ballot under Section 145.035.” (emphasis added); see also Texas Election Code § 145.035 (providing that “[a] candidate’s name shall be omitted from the ballot if the candidate withdraws, dies, or is declared ineligible on or before the 74th day before election day”) (emphasis added). Accordingly, the Secretary has a clear statutory duty to omit the inclusion of the Challenged Candidates from the ballot based on their ineligibility. 60. Again, it is undisputed and a matter of public record that Defendants Collins and Wakely are ineligible for inclusion on the ballot because of their failure to comply with Texas Election Code § 141.041. 61. Moreover, upon information and belief the Secretary is also personally aware of Defendants Collins’s and Wakely’s ineligibility because under Texas Election Code § 141.041 the fee must be paid to her, Tex. Elec. Code § 141.041(a)(1), or alternatively a petition in lieu of a fee must be presented to her, Tex. Elec. Code § 141.041(a)(2). 62. The Secretary is accordingly also necessarily aware that the Green Party Defendants have abdicated in their duty to declare the Challenged Candidates ineligible under Texas Election Code § 145.003(a), (f), and (g) based on Defendant Collins’s and Defendant Wakely’s failure to comply with Texas Election Code § 141.041. 63. However, upon information and belief, the Secretary nevertheless intends to - 19 - include the names of Defendants Collins and Wakely on the ballot absent an order from this Court enjoining her from doing same, see supra (citing Ex. D), in direct violation of Texas Election Code § 161.008(c), which prohibits the Secretary from certifying any candidates name, “if, before delivering the certification, the secretary of state learns that the name is to be omitted from the ballot under Section 145.035.” 64. Based on the foregoing, and pursuant to the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, Chapter 37 of the Texas Civil Practices & Remedies Code, Plaintiffs requests that this Court and the trier of fact construe Texas law (including the Texas Election Code and its requirements), and the facts and circumstances surrounding the Development Agreement, and that this Court then enter a declaration stating that Mr. Collins and Mr. Wakely are not eligible to be placed on the general election ballot for the November 2020 election. 65. Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable injury absent declaratory and injunctive relief, because the inclusion of the Challenged Candidates on the ballot, both of whom are indisputably ineligible, threatens Plaintiffs’ electoral prospects and will further require them to spend and divert resources in order to compete against ineligible candidates who have been unlawfully certified for and included on the ballot. VII. 66. REQUESTS FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the preceding paragraphs and the allegations they contain into the following requests for injunctive relief. A. Application for temporary restraining order 67. Plaintiffs’ application for a temporary restraining order is authorized by Sections 65.011(1)–(3) of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code. - 20 - 68. Plaintiffs ask this Court to order the Secretary (and anyone acting under her direction or control) to refrain from certifying Mr. Collins or Mr. Wakely for placement on the general election ballot prepared in each county in which the candidate’s name is to appear on the ballot. 69. Plaintiffs have asserted claims against Defendants for a writ of mandamus and for declaratory relief. Plaintiffs have and will present evidence establishing a probable right to recovery on those claims. 70. Specifically, Plaintiffs have shown that Mr. Collins and Mr. Wakely are indisputably ineligible candidates for office under Texas election law. They did not satisfy the statutory requirements for filing fees or petitions with signatures in lieu of filing fees. 71. The harm that would be inflicted if the Secretary’s actions are not restrained as requested will cause Plaintiffs immediate and irreparable injury. 72. Specifically, once nominees have been certified for placement on the general election ballot, it is unclear whether that process could be stopped or reversed prior to the November 2020 general election. Plaintiffs will be required to expend significant and as-yet unknown resources (including, but not limited to, scare time and effort) to campaign against statutorily ineligible candidates. Thus, Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law. 73. The threatened harm to Plaintiffs far outweighs the harm, if any, that a temporary restraining order would inflict on Defendants. Plaintiffs are simply attempting to maintain the status quo and halt actions that would violate Texas election law. Defendants will suffer no harm if they are enjoined from committing unlawful conduct. On the other hand, if Defendants are not enjoined from taking actions that violate Texas election law, Plaintiffs will suffer additional irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law. - 21 - 74. Plaintiffs are willing to post bond in support of their application for a temporary restraining order. 75. notice. There is not enough time to serve notice on Defendants and hold a hearing after The Secretary’s deadline to certify nominees for statewide and district offices for placement on the general election ballot is 68 days before election day (which this year falls on Friday, August 28, 2020). But that is a deadline; the Secretary may attempt to take unlawful action before that deadline. Relief is needed immediately to prevent such unlawful action, which could be taken at any time. B. Request for temporary injunction 76. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the preceding paragraphs and the allegations they contain into all the following requests for temporary and permanent injunctive relief, as if completely set forth therein. 77. Plaintiffs ask this Court to set their application for temporary injunction for a hearing and, after that hearing, issue a temporary injunction against Defendants. 78. Plaintiffs have joined all indispensable parties to this action as required by Rule 39 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. C. Request for permanent injunction 79. Plaintiffs ask this Court to set their request for a permanent injunction for a full trial on the merits and, after the trial, issue a permanent injunction against Defendants. VIII. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT 80. All conditions precedent to Plaintiffs’ right to relief have occurred, have been fully performed, or have been waived by Defendants. This includes, but is not limited to, any notice provisions required by law. - 22 - IX. 81. REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE Pursuant to Rule 194 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendants are each requested to disclose, within the time required by Rule 194.3, the information or material described in Rule 194.2. X. 82. RULE 193.7 NOTICE Pursuant to Rule 193.7, Plaintiffs give notice to Defendants that any and all documents and things each defendant produces may be used against that defendant at any pretrial proceeding and/or the trial of this case without the necessity of authenticating said documents and things. XI. 83. REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED FINAL HEARING ON THE MERITS Under Rule 503, this Court has the power to provide less than 45-days notice of a setting on the trial docket if “the judge that an earlier setting is required in the interests of justice.” 84. This dispute involves which candidates will be listed on the general election ballots for the November 2020 election. Plaintiffs request a final hearing on the merits of this dispute as soon as reasonably possible after Defendants receive service of this lawsuit. XII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs DSCC, DCCC, and Mary Jennings (M.J.) Hegar respectfully request this Court issue citation for defendant Ruth Hughs, in her official capacity as the Texas Secretary of State (the Secretary), the Green Party of Texas, David B. Collins, Thomas Wakely, Alfred Molison, in his capacity as co-chair of the Green Party of Texas, and Laura Palmer, in her capacity as co-chair of the Green Party of Texas to appear and answer, and that, after a trial on the merits, to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants for the following: - 23 - (a) A temporary restraining order as described herein; (b) Temporary injunctive relief as described herein; (c) Permanent injunctive relief, consistent with the request for temporary injunctive relief; (d) Declaratory relief, that defendants David B. Collins and Thomas Wakely are ineligible to appear as candidates on the general election ballot; and (e) granting such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. Dated: August 17, 2020 Respectfully submitted, HOWRY BREEN & HERMAN, L.L.P. _____________________________________ Randy Howry State Bar No. 10121690 rhowry@howrybreen.com James Hatchitt State Bar No. 24072478 jhatchitt@howrybreen.com 1900 Pearl Street Austin, Texas 78705-5408 Tel. (512) 474-7300 Fax (512) 474-8557 Marc E. Elias* melias@perkinscoie.com John M. Geise* jgeise@perkinscoie.com Alexi M. Velez* avelez@perkinscoie.com PERKINS COIE LLP 700 Thirteenth Street, N.W., Suite 600 Washington, District of Columbia 20005-3960 Tel. (202) 654-6200 Fax (202) 654-9959 Counsel for plaintiffs DSCC, DCCC, and MJ Hegar *Motions for Admission Pro Hac Vice Forthcoming - 24 - EXHIBIT A 8/17/2020 2020 Candidates - Green Party of Texas  Home / 2020 Nominees Donate to GPTX Donate to Hawkins/Walker 2020 David B. Collins, 2020 GPTX nominee for US Senate On 18 April 2020, the Green Party of Texas Convention confirmed GPTX candidate nominations to the general election ballot. There are now seven nominees in total, two of whom are participating in statewide races. They join the Green Party US presidential ticket of Howie Hawkins and Angela Walker. Statewide Nominees David B. Collins (Harris County), US Senate: Web Twitter Facebook katija gruene (Travis County), Texas Railroad Commission: Twitter Facebook HB 2504, passed and signed in 2019, specifies that convention-nominating parties such as the Greens can retain ballot access for 10 years by earning 2% of the vote in a statewide race. If either of these two, or the Green presidential ticket, should garner a 2% share of the vote, that guarantees GPTX ballot access through 2030. www.txgreens.org/2020_candidates 1/4 8/17/2020 2020 Candidates - Green Party of Texas Tom Wakely, 2020 Green nominee for US House from Texas's 21st District Below is a list of the other candidates nominated for non-statewide offices. Names of candidates who paid the newly imposed filing fees (HB 2504 again), appear in italics. US House Tom Wakely (Bexar), CD-21: Twitter Facebook Hal J. Ridley, Jr. (Orange), CD-36: Web Twitter Texas Legislature Julián Villarreal (Bexar), SD-26: Twitter Brody-Andrew Mulligan (Tarrant), HD-92: Web Twitter Antonio Padron (Bexar), HD-119 Twitter The outcome of a pending lawsuit against the Texas Secretary of State's Office will determine whether all seven GPTX nominees will appear on Texas ballots. Neither of the statewide nominees paid filing fee, nor did either of them submit the requisite petition signatures in lieu of the fee. Do you like this page? Like 3 people like this. Sign Up to see what your friends like. Tweet Showing 1 reaction Sign in with Or sign in with email www.txgreens.org/2020_candidates 2/4 8/17/2020 2020 Candidates - Green Party of Texas Email Address Password Remember me Post your comment or Create an account David Collins published this page in About 3 months ago  Sign in with Facebook  Sign in with Twitter  Sign in with Email Email address Join Volunteer Donate TeXas Greens - G… Like Page Be the first of your friends to like this Follow @TXGreens Contact us. www.txgreens.org/2020_candidates Paid for by the Green Party of Texas 3/4 8/17/2020 2020 Candidates - Green Party of Texas Sign in with Facebook, Twitter or email. Created with NationBuilder www.txgreens.org/2020_candidates 4/4 EXHIBIT 8/17/2020 Nominees of Libertarian Party or Green Party in 2020 COVID-19 - As recommended precautions continue to increase for COVID-19, the James E. Rudder Building will be closed to visitors and customers beginning Wednesday, March 18, 2020. The Office of the Secretary of State is committed to continuing to provide services to ensure business and public filings remain available 24/7 through our online business service, SOSDirect or use the new SOSUpload. Thank you in advance for your patience during this difficult time. Information on Testing Sites is now available. Note - Navigational menus along with other non-content related elements have been removed for your convenience. Thank you for visiting us online. Nominee of Libertarian or Green Party in 2020 In order to become a Libertarian Party or Green Party nominee for a particular office, you must file an application for nomination with the county or state party chair (PDF), as appropriate (see chart). (Section 181.032, Texas Election Code). The application must be filed no later than 6:00p.m. on December 9, 2019. (Section 181.033, Texas Election Code). Candidates for federal office may file a federal application (PDF). NEW LAW: HB 2504 (2019) -- HB 2504 requires that the application for nomination must now be accompanied by either a filing fee or a petition in lieu of filing fee (PDF), delivered to the Secretary of State (for a statewide or district office) or to the county judge (for a county or precinct office), in order for the applicant to qualify for nomination. The amount of the filing fee or the number of signatures required for the petition in lieu of a filing fee is the same amount that is required for a candidate seeking nomination by primary election under Sections 172.024 and 172.025. (NOTE: There are no extra requirements for judicial applicants.) The first day a candidate may submit a filing fee or petition in lieu of filing fee to the Secretary of State or County Judge, whichever is applicable, is November 9, 2019. Candidates should contact their party chairs for details on filing candidate applications. Additionally, though the effective date of the HB 2504 is September 1, 2019, candidates may begin collecting petition signatures immediately. Key dates for your party's precinct, county and district conventions are located on this website. See Section 162.015, Texas Election Code for more details about how primary voting or candidacy affects (or does not affect) candidacy in the general election. Public Office Sought File Application File with County Judge or SOS in 2020 with Party Chair (filing fee OR nominating petition) State County Filing fee %Signatures Number of a Signatures https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/candidates/guide/2020/lib-green-nom2020.shtml 1/4 8/17/2020 Nominees of Libertarian Party or Green Party in 2020 b President x - - United States Senator x - $5,000 United States Representative x - $3,125 Railroad Commissioner x - $3,750 5000 Chief Justice and Justice, Supreme Court x - $3,750 5000 Judge, Court of Criminal Appeals x - $3,750 5000 State Senator x - $1,250 2% 500 State Representative x - $750 2% 500 Member, State Board of Education x - $300 2% 500 Chief Justice and Justice, Court of Appeals x - 2% 500 District Judge x - 2% 500 Criminal District Judge x - 2% 500 Family District Judge x - 2% 500 District Attorney x - 2% 500 $2,500 / $1,875 c $2,500 / $1,500 d $2,500 / $1,500 d $2,500 / $1,500 d $1,250 https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/candidates/guide/2020/lib-green-nom2020.shtml - 5000 2% 500 2/4 8/17/2020 Nominees of Libertarian Party or Green Party in 2020 Criminal District Attorney x - County Judge - x Judge, County Courtat-Law - x Judge, County Criminal Court - x Judge, County Probate Court - x County Attorney - x Sheriff - x Tax-AssessorCollector - x County Commissioner - x Constable - x Justice of the Peace - x Source: Texas Election Code Section §§ 181.032; $1,250 $1,250 / $750 e $2,500 / $1,500 d $2,500 / $1,500 d $2,500 / $1,500 d $1,250 / $750 e $1,250 / $750 e 1,250 / $750 e $1,250 / $750 e $1,000 / $375 e $1,000 / $375 e §172.024 2% 500 2% 500 2% 500 2% 500 2% 500 2% 500 2% 500 2% 500 2% 500 2% 500 2% 500 §172.025 https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/candidates/guide/2020/lib-green-nom2020.shtml 3/4 8/17/2020 Nominees of Libertarian Party or Green Party in 2020 182.0041 a. Percentage of all votes for all gubernatorial candidates cast in the applicable territory in the 2018 general election. If number is less than 50, the required number of signatures is the lesser of (1) 50 or (2) 20% of all votes for all gubernatorial candidates cast in the applicable territory in the 2018 general election. b. The minimum number of signatures that must appear on a candidate’s petition for statewide office is 5000. The minimum number of signatures that must appear on a candidate’s petition for district, county or precinct office is the lesser of (1) 500 or (2) 2% of the total vote received in the district, county or precinct, as applicable, by all gubernatorial candidates in the 2018 general election, subject to (c) above. Section 172.025, Texas Election Code). c. Pay higher fee in Courts of Appeals Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 14. (Section 172.024(7), (8), Texas Election Code). d. Pay higher fee in Bexar, Dallas, Harris and Tarrant Counties. (Sections 172.024(10), (12), Texas Election Code). e. Pay higher fee if county has at least 200,000 inhabitants according to 2010 Census. https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/candidates/guide/2020/lib-green-nom2020.shtml 4/4 EXHIBIT AW2-8 Prescribed by Secretary of State Sections 141.031, 141.041, 172.024, 181.031, 181.032, Texas Election Code 8/2019 All fields MUST be completed UNLESS MARKED OPTIONAL.1 Failure to provide required information may result in rejection of application. APPLICATION FOR NOMINATION BY CONVENTION OF ___________________ PARTY TO: State/County Chair I request that my name be placed on the above-named convention as a candidate for nomination to the office indicated below. OFFICE SOUGHT (Include any place number or other distinguishing number, if any.) INDICATE TERM FULL UNEXPIRED PRINT NAME AS YOU WANT IT TO APPEAR ON THE BALLOT* FULL NAME (First, Middle, Last) PERMANENT RESIDENCE ADDRESS (Do not include a P.O. Box or Rural Route. If you do not have a residence address, describe location of residence.) PUBLIC MAILING ADDRESS (Address for which you receive campaign related correspondence, if available.) CITY CITY STATE PUBLIC EMAIL ADDRESS (If available) ZIP OCCUPATION (Do not leave blank) STATE DATE OF BIRTH ZIP VOTER REGISTRATION VUID NUMBER2 (Optional) / / LENGTH OF CONTINUOUS RESIDENCE AS OF DATE APPLICATION SWORN IN STATE IN TERRITORY/DISTRICT/PRECINCT FROM WHICH THE OFFICE SOUGHT IS ELECTED Work: _____ year(s) _____ year(s) Cell: _____ month(s) _____ month(s) *If using a nickname as part of your name to appear on the ballot, you are also signing and swearing to the following statements: I further swear that my nickname does not constitute a slogan or contain a title, nor does it indicate a political, economic, social, or religious view or affiliation. I have been commonly known by this nickname for at least three years prior to this election. TELEPHONE CONTACT INFORMATION (Optional) Home: Before me, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared (name of candidate)_____________________________________, who being by me here and now duly sworn, upon oath says: “I, (name of candidate) ___________________________________________, of ____________________________________ County, Texas, being a candidate for the office of ___________________________________________, swear that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States and of the State of Texas. I am a citizen of the United States eligible to hold such office under the constitution and laws of this state. I have not been finally convicted of a felony for which I have not been pardoned or had my full rights of citizenship restored by other official action. I have not been determined by a final judgment of a court exercising probate jurisdiction to be totally mentally incapacitated or partially mentally incapacitated without the right to vote. I am aware of the nepotism law, Chapter 573, Government Code. I further swear that the foregoing statements included in my application are in all things true and correct.” X ________________________ SIGNATURE OF CANDIDATE Sworn to and subscribed before me this the ____ day of ____________, ____________, by __________________________. Month Year Name of Candidate ______________________________________________ Signature of Officer Administering Oath3 TO BE COMPLETED BY CHAIR OR DESIGNEE: (See Section 1.007) ___________________ Voter Registration Status Verified Candidate submitted: (See Section 141.041) ___________________________________ Title of Officer Administering Oath Date Received _________________ _____________________________ Date Accepted  Petition in Lieu of a Filing Fee to Secretary of State/County Judge  Paid a filing fee to the Secretary of State/County Judge Signature of Chair or Designee SEAL AW2-8 Prescribed by Secretary of State Sections 141.031, 141.041, 172.024, 181.031, 181.032, Texas Election Code 8/2019 INSTRUCTIONS The application shall be filed with the state chair for all statewide offices and all district offices. The application shall be filed with the county chair for all county and precinct offices. (Section 181.032, Texas Election Code) The filing deadline is 6:00 p.m. on the second Monday in December of odd-numbered years. (Section 181.033, Texas Election Code). Candidates seeking nomination are also required to pay a filing fee or submit a completed Petition in Lieu of a Filing Fee, along with a copy of their application for nomination, to the Secretary of State’s office (for statewide or district offices) or the county judge (for county or precinct offices) by 6:00 p.m. on the second Monday in December of odd-numbered years. (Section 141.041, Texas Election Code). If a candidate does not complete the Petition in Lieu of a Filing Fee or pay the filing fee, they will not be eligible for nomination by the party convention process, even if they have completed and submitted their application for nomination. NEPOTISM LAW The candidate must sign this statement indicating his awareness of the nepotism law. The nepotism prohibitions of Chapter 573, Government Code, are summarized below: No officer may appoint, or vote for or confirm the appointment or employment of any person related within the second degree by affinity (marriage) or the third degree by consanguinity (blood) to himself, or to any other member of the governing body or court on which he serves when the compensation of that person is to be paid out of public funds or fees of office. However, nothing in the law prevents the appointment, voting for, or confirmation of anyone who has been continuously employed in the office or employment for the following period prior to the election or appointment of the officer or member related to the employee in the prohibited degree: one year, if the officer or member is elected at the general election for state and county officers. No candidate may take action to influence an employee of the office to which the candidate is seeking election or an employee or officer of the governmental body to which the candidate is seeking election regarding the appointment or employment of a person related to the candidate in a prohibited degree as noted above. This prohibition does not apply to a candidate’s actions with respect to a bona fide class or category of employees or prospective employees. Examples of relatives within the third degree of consanguinity are as follows: (1) First degree: parent, child; (2) Second degree: brother, sister, grandparent, grandchild; (3) Third degree: great-grandparent, great-grandchild, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece. These include relatives by blood, half-blood, and legal adoption. Examples of relatives within the second degree of affinity are as follows: (1) First degree: spouse, spouse’s parent, son-in-law, daughter-in-law; (2) Second degree: brother’s spouse, sister’s spouse, spouse’s brother, spouse’s sister, spouse’s grandparent. Persons related by affinity (marriage) include spouses of relatives by consanguinity, and, if married, the spouse and the spouse’s relatives by consanguinity. These examples are not all inclusive. FOOTNOTES 1 An application for a place on the ballot, including any accompanying petition, is public information immediately on its filing. (Section 141.035, Texas Election Code) 2 Inclusion of a candidate’s VUID is optional. However, many candidates are required to be registered voters in the territory from which the office is elected at the time of the filing deadline. 3 All oaths, affidavits, or affirmations made within this State may be administered and a certificate of the fact given by a judge, clerk, or commissioner of a court of record, a notary public, a justice of the peace, and the Secretary of State of Texas. See Chapter 602 of the Texas Government Code for the complete list. FILING FEE SCHEDULE AW2-8 Prescribed by Secretary of State Sections 141.031, 141.041, 172.024, 181.031, 181.032, Texas Election Code 8/2019 United States Senator $5,000 All Other Statewide Offices $3,750 United States Representative $3,125 State Senator $1,250 State Representative $750 Member, State Board of Education $300 Chief Justice or Justice, Court of Appeals $1,875 Chief Justice or Justice of a Court of Appeals that serves a Court of Appeals District in which a county with a population of more than one million is wholly or partly situated $2,500 District Judge or Judge specified by Sec. 52.092(d) for which this schedule does not otherwise prescribe a fee $1,500 District or Criminal District Judge of a court in a judicial district wholly contained in a county with a population of more than 1.5 million $2,500 Judge of a Statutory County Court (except as provided below) $1,500 Judge of a Statutory County Court in a county with a population of more than 1.5 million $2,500 District Attorney or Criminal District Attorney or County Attorney performing the duties of a District Attorney $1,250 County Judge, County Commissioner, District Clerk, County Clerk, Sheriff, County Tax-Assessor-Collector and County Treasurer County of 200,000 or more population County of under 200,000 population $1,250 $750 Justice of the Peace or Constable County of 200,000 or more population $1,000 County of under 200,000 population $375 County Surveyor, Public Weigher or Inspector of Hides and Animals $75 All County Offices not otherwise listed $750 AW2-8 Prescrito por la Secretaría de Estado Secciones 141.031, 141.041, 172.024, 181.031, 181.032, Texas Election Code 8/2019 Todos los campos DEBEN ser completados a MENOS QUE ESTÉN MARCADOS COMO OPCIONALES. 1 El no proporcionar la información requerida puede resultar en el rechazo de la solicitud. SOLICITUD DE NOMINACIÓN POR CONVENCIÓN DEL PARTIDO _____________________ A: Presidente Estatal del Partido/Presidente del Condado Solicito que mi nombre se coloque en la convención mencionada anteriormente como candidato(a) para la nominación para el cargo que se indica a continuación. CARGO OFICIAL SOLICITADO (Incluya cualquier número de cargo u otro número distintivo, INDIQUE TÉRMINO si el cargo lo tiene.) TÉRMINO COMPLETO TÉRMINO INCOMPLETO ESCRIBA SU NOMBRE COMO DESEA QUE APAREZCA EN LA BOLETA * NOMBRE COMPLETO (Primer Nombre, Segundo Nombre, Apellido) DIRECCIÓN RESIDENCIAL PERMANENTE (No incluya una casilla postal o una ruta rural. Si usted no tiene una dirección residencial, describa la ubicación de su residencia.) DIRECCIÓN POSTAL PÚBLICA (Dirección a la que recibirá correspondencia relacionada a su campaña, si está disponible.) CIUDAD CIUDAD ESTADO CÓDIGO POSTAL CORREO ELECTRÓNICO PÚBLICO (Si está disponible) OCUPACIÓN (No deje este espacio en blanco) ESTADO FECHA DE NACIMIENTO / / CÓDIGO POSTAL VUID – NÚMERO UNICO DE IDENTIFICACION DE VOTANTE2 (Opcional) INFORMACIÓN DE CONTACTO (Opcional) Tel. de Domicilio: DURACIÓN DE RESIDENCIA CONTINUA A PARTIR DE LA FECHA QUE USTED HAGA EL JURAMENTO DE ESTA SOLICITUD EN EL EN EL ESTADO Tel. de Oficina: TERRITORIO/DISTRITO/PRECINTO _____ año(s) POR EL CUAL SERIA ELECTO/A Tel. Celular: _____ año(s) _____ mes(es) _____ mes(es) *Si usted incluye un apodo como parte de su nombre en la boleta, usted también firma y jura lo siguiente: Yo también juro que mi apodo no constituye un lema o contiene un título, ni tampoco es una indicación de mis creencias o afiliaciones políticas, económicas, sociales o religiosas. He sido conocido comúnmente por este apodo por lo menos tres años antes de esta elección. Ante mí, la autoridad suscrita, apareció en persona este día (nombre del candidato)_____________________________________, quien habiendo aquí y ahora prestado juramento debido, bajo juramento dice: “Yo, (nombre del candidato)___________________________________________, del condado de ____________________________________, Texas, siendo candidato para el cargo oficial de ___________________________________________, solemnemente juro que apoyaré y defenderé la Constitución y las leyes de los Estados Unidos y del Estado de Texas. Soy ciudadano de los Estados Unidos elegible para ocupar tal cargo oficial bajo la Constitución y las leyes de este Estado. No he sido finalmente condenado por una felonía por la cual no he sido perdonado o por la cual no se me han restituido enteramente mis derechos de ciudadanía por medio de otra acción oficial. No se me ha determinado por un juicio final de una jurisdicción testamentaria tribunal que juzga, ser totalmente incapacitado mentalmente o parcialmente incapacitado sin el derecho de votar. Yo tengo conocimiento de la ley sobre el nepotismo según el Capítulo 573 del Código de Gobierno. Además juro que las anteriores declaraciones que incluyo en mi solicitud son verdaderas y son correctas en todo sentido.” X ________________________________ FIRMA DEL CANDIDATO Jurado y suscrito ante mí en ___________________, este día ______ de __________, por __________________________. Mes Año Nombre del Candidato ______________________________________________ Firma del oficial administrando el juramento3 ___________________________________ Título del oficial administrando el juramento TO BE COMPLETED BY CHAIR OR DESIGNEE: (See Section 1.007) ___________________ _________________ _____________________________ Voter Registration Status Verified Date Received Candidate submitted: (See Section 141.041) Date Accepted  Petition in Lieu of a Filing Fee to Secretary of State/County Judge ■ Paid a filing fee to the Secretary of State/County Judge  Signature of Chair or Designee SELLO AW2-8 Prescrito por la Secretaría de Estado Secciones 141.031, 141.041, 172.024, 181.031, 181.032, Código Electoral de Texas 8/2019 INSTRUCCIONES La solicitud deberá presentarse ante el presidente del estado para todas las oficinas estatales y todas las oficinas del distrito. La solicitud deberá presentarse ante el presidente del condado para todas las oficinas del condado y del precinto. (Sección 181.032, Código Electoral de Texas) La fecha límite de presentación es las 6:00 p.m. el segundo lunes de diciembre de años impares. (Sección 181.033, Código Electoral de Texas). Los candidatos que buscan nominación también están obligados a pagar una cuota de presentación o presentar una Petición Presentada en Sustitución del Pago de Derechos de Inscripción completa en lugar de pagar una cuota de presentación, junto con una copia de su solicitud de nominación, a la oficina de la Secretaría de Estado (para las oficinas estatales o de distrito) o al juez del condado (para las oficinas del condado o del precinto) antes de las 6:00 p.m. del segundo lunes de diciembre de años impares. (Sección 141.041, Código Electoral de Texas) Si un candidato no completa la Petición Presentada en Sustitución del Pago de Derechos de Inscripción o no paga la cuota de presentación, no será elegible para la nominación por el proceso de la convención del partido, incluso si ha completado y presentado su solicitud de nominación. LEY SOBRE EL NEPOTISMO El candidato deberá firmar esta declaración indicando que él/ella está enterado(a) de la ley sobre el nepotismo. Lo siguiente es un resumen de las prohibiciones del nepotismo de acuerdo al capítulo 573 de Código Gobierno: Ningún oficial podrá nombrar, o votar por o confirmar el nombramiento o empleo de alguna persona que está emparentada con él dentro del segundo grado por afinidad (matrimonio) o dentro del tercer grado por consanguinidad (sangre), o que está emparentada con cualesquier otro miembro del cuerpo directivo o corte en que él/ella celebra sesión cuando la compensación de esa persona estará pagada con fondos públicos o los honorarios del puesto oficial. Sin embargo, la ley no prohíbe el nombramiento, el votar por, o la confirmación de alguna persona que continuadamenta ha sido empleado de la oficina o ha sido empleado durante el siguiente plazo antes de la elección o el nombramiento del oficial o miembro que está emparentado con el empleado en el grado prohibido: un año, si el oficial o miembro está elegido en la elección general para oficiales del estado y del condado. Ningún candidato podrá obrar para influir a un empleado del puesto oficial al cual el candidato desea estar elegido o un empleado o oficial del cuerpo fiscal al cual el candidato desea estar elegido en cuanto al nombramiento o al empleo de una persona que está emparentada con el candidato en un grado prohibido como notado arriba. Esta restricción no se dirige a las acciones de un candidato respecto a una clase o categoría de buena fe de empleados o empleados anticipados. Los ejemplos de parientes dentro del tercer grado de consanguinidad son los siguientes: (1) (2) (3) Primer grado: padre, madre, hijo(a); Segundo grado: hermano(a), abuelo(a), nieto(a); Tercer grado: bisabuelo(a), bisnieto(a), tío(a), sobrino(a). Los siguientes incluyen parientes de linaje (sangre), medios hermanos, y adopción legal. Los ejemplos de parientes dentro del segundo grado de afinidad son los siguientes: (1) (2) Primer grado: esposo(a), suegro(a), yerno(a); Segundo grado: cuñado(a), abuelo(a) del esposo o esposa. Las personas que están emparentadas por afinidad (matrimonio) incluyen los esposos o esposas de parientes que están emparentados por consanguinidad, y, si casados, el esposo o esposa y los parientes del esposo o esposa por consanguinidad. No todos estos ejemplos son inclusivos. ANOTACIONES 1Una solicitud para un lugar en la boleta electoral, incluyendo cualquier petición adjunta, es información pública inmediatamente después de su presentación. (Sección 141.035, Código Electoral de Texas) 2La inclusión del número único de identificación de votante (VUID, por sus siglas en Ingles) es opcional. Sin embargo, para muchos candidatos, es un requisito estar registrados como votantes en el territorio por el cual serían electo/a a partir de la fecha límite de la solicitud. 3Todos los juramentos, declaraciones juradas o afirmaciones hechas dentro de este Estado pueden ser administrados y un certificado del hecho dado por un juez, secretario o comisionado de un tribunal de registro, un notario público, un juez de paz y el Secretario de Estado de Texas. Consulte el Capítulo 602 del Código del Gobierno de Texas para obtener la lista completa. AW2-8 Prescrito por la Secretaría de Estado Secciones 141.031, 141.041, 172.024, 181.031, 181.032, Código Electoral de Texas 8/2019 LISTA DE CUOTAS DE REGISTRO Senador de los Estados Unidos $5,000 Todos los ostros puestos oficiales representando todo el Estado $3,750 Representante de los Estados Unidos $3,125 Senador del Estado $1,250 Representante del Estado $750 Miembro, Junta de Educación Estatal $300 Juez Presidente o Juez, Corte de Apelación (excepto como provisto abajo)) $1,875 Juez presidente o juez de una corte de apelación que sirve una corte de apelación del distrito en el cual un condado con una población de más de un millón está situado total o parcialmente $2,500 Juez de Distrito o Juez mencionado específicamente por la Sec. 52.092(d) por el cual esta lista no prescribe de otro modo una gratificación $1,500 Juez de Distrito o Juez de Distrito Criminal de una corte en un distrito judicial situado completamente en un condado con una población de más de 1.5 millones $2,500 Juez de una Corte de Condado Estatutaria (excepto como provisto abajo) $1,500 Juez de una corte de condado estatutario en un condado con una población de más de $2,500 1.5 millones Fiscal de Distrito o Fiscal de Distrito Criminal o Procurador del Condado que cumple con las mismas obligaciones de un fiscal del distrito Juez de Condado, Comisionado del Condado, Secretario del Distrito, Secretario del Condado,Sherife, Asesor-Colector de Impuestos del Condado o Tesorero del Condado Un condado con una población de 200,000 habitantes o más Un condado con una población de menos de 200,000 habitantes $1,250 $1,250 $750 Juez de Paz o Agente de la policía Un condado con una población de 200,000 habitantes o más $1,000 Un condado con una población de menos de 200,000 habitantes $375 Agrimensor del Condado, Pesador Público o Inspector de Pieles y Animales $75 Todos los puestos oficiales del condado que no se han mencionado $750 EXHIBIT 8/17/2020 State Convention Confirms Nominees - Green Party of Texas  Home / News State Convention Confirms Nominees, National Delegates POSTED BY DAVID COLLINS 163.60SC ON APRIL 19, 2020 The Green Party of Texas held its Annual State Meeting and Nominating Convention via teleconference on Saturday 18 April. Among other activities, the 33 assembled delegates elected two members to the State Executive Committee, chose a slate of delegates to the Presidential Nominating Convention in July, and confirmed nominations of candidates for statewide office. Presidential Delegate Count Using approval voting, 50 delegates in eight counties cast their votes for the Green presidential nomination. Texas has an allotment of 26 delegates to the convention, scheduled to occur in Detroit, Michigan, this year but most likely to happen via the Internet due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The formula for distributing delegates based on votes at precinct conventions produced this result: Howie Hawkins (NY)—20 Dario Hunter (OH/CA)—3 Kent Mesplay (TX)—2 Susan Buchser-Lochocki (NY)—1 State Executive Committee Laura Palmer of Harris County will return to the role of co-chair for a two-year term. She was also co-chair from 2014 to 2018. Outgoing co-chair Janis Richards, elected last year to complete an unexpired term, stood for election as well, as did longtime Tarrant County Green Diane Wood. Palmer will serve alongside fellow Houston resident Alfred Molison, whose staggered two-year term expires in 2021. Travis Christal, CPA, will take over as treasurer, replacing Laura's husband Donald Palmer. www.txgreens.org/state_convention_confirms_nominees 1/7 8/17/2020 State Convention Confirms Nominees - Green Party of Texas The updated SEC roster can be found here. Statewide Nominations The convention confirmed the nominations of three candidates for statewide offices. The outcome of a pending lawsuit, Texans for Voter Choice et al v. Hughs, will determine whether the three will appear on Texas ballots; none of them paid the new filing fee imposed on candidates of all parties under 2019's HB 2504, nor did they submit the requisite petition signatures in lieu of the fee. (UPDATE: As of mid-June, with the litigation still pending, the Office of the Secretary of State has indicated that the candidates may appear on the ballot unless and until the federal court decides otherwise.) The new nominees are: David B. Collins (Harris County), US Senate katija gruene (Travis County), Texas Railroad Commission Charles Waterbury (Dallas County), State Supreme Court Position 1/Chief Justice HB 2504 also specifies that convention-nominating parties such as the Greens can retain ballot access for 10 years by earning 2% of the vote in a statewide race. Below is a list of the other candidates nominated for other offices. Names of candidates who paid the fees, thus attaining ballot access, appear in italics. As with the statewide candidates, the disposition of the lawsuit against the Secretary of State's Office will determine whether the others may appear on ballots in their respective districts. US House Tom Wakely (Bexar), CD-21 Hal J. Ridley, Jr. (Orange), CD-36 Texas Legislature Julián Villarreal (Bexar), SD-26 katija gruene (Travis), HD-51 Brody-Andrew Mulligan (Tarrant), HD-92 Antonio Padrón (Bexar), HD-119 NOTE: The Secretary of State's Office did not accept the request to place katija gruene on the ballot for two offices. Other Agenda The delegates discussed and voted on adopting intra-party resolutions presented by the delegations from Bexar, Harris, and Tarrant Counties. They also compiled a slate of 38 Electors for the Electoral College vote following the presidential election. Two resolutions were approved: Green Party of Texas Advocates the Termination of the Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) 287(g) Program www.txgreens.org/state_convention_confirms_nominees 2/7 8/17/2020 State Convention Confirms Nominees - Green Party of Texas The 287g agreement promotes factors of institutional and systematic racism by the means of encouraging racial profiling by deputized officials to any person that they suspect is undocumented ICE has stated that the goal of the 287(g) program is to remove undocumented persons “who are involved in violent and serious crimes.” However, studies show that over 50% of all noncitizens identified via the 287(g) program were arrested for simple traffic violations or low-level misdemeanors. [1]https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/reports/2018/10/09/459098/rapidly- expanding-287g-program-suffers-lack-transparency/[1] https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2018-09/OIG-18-77-Sep18.pdf[1] https://leitf.org/2017/09/local-law-enforcement-role-in-immigration-enforcement-%C2%A7-287gagreements/[1] https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/delegation-and-divergence-287gstate-and-local-immigration-enforcement 287(g) leads to the breakdown of trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities. It hinders cooperation between local police and immigrant residents, and it risks the safety of undocumented residents of Texas, making the more vulnerable to becoming targets and victims of a crime. 287(g) is costly for counties and taxpayers, and is a misallocation of resources. Under 287(g), ICE only covers the cost of training deputized officers, leaving local governments to front most of the costs, including travel, salaries, overtime, and costs of detention. Among the several counties that have terminated their 287(g) agreements: Orange County, El Paso County, and Harris County cited costs and the need to prioritize law enforcement in other areas as their primary motivations. Other 287(g) participants have spent millions on the program; countless other law enforcement entities have opted to avoid this by never adopting 287(g) to begin with. [1] https://www.governing.com/topics/public-justice-safety/gov-undocumented-immigrants- crime-pew.html [1] https://www.policylink.org/sites/default/files/INSECURE_COMMUNITIES_REPORT_FINAL.PDF [1] https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2018/05/08/450439/287g- agreements-harm-public-safety/ [1] U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; See also https://www.migrationpolicy.org/data/unauthorized-immigrant-population/county/48439 [1] https://www.acluofnorthcarolina.org/en/news/north-carolina-sheriff-known-racial-profiling[1] partners-ice http://www.law.unc.edu/documents/clinicalprograms/thecostoficespoliciesandpractices.pdf [1]https://www.opportunityagenda.org/explore/resources-publications/immigration-policy- solutions-due-process-and-fair-treatment-under www.txgreens.org/state_convention_confirms_nominees 3/7 8/17/2020 State Convention Confirms Nominees - Green Party of Texas [1] https://www.themarshallproject.org/2019/05/13/is-there-a-connection-between- undocumented-immigrants-andcrime [1] http://www.ncsl.org/research/immigration/state-criminal-alien-assistance-program.aspx 287(g) leads to an increase in family separation and irreversible damage to immigrant individuals, families and communities. The constant fear of deportation can cause stress and inflict an enormous emotional toll on the undocumented, and separation can drastically destabilize immigrant families. The detention of a family member can result in a family losing most, if not all of their income, as well as negatively impact the social, emotional, educational, and overall well-being of the family. Persons detained in jails and detention centers who have been processed through the 287(g) are exposed to the coronavirus due to preventive conditions not practiced in adherence to the national Communicable Disease Control (CDC) guidelines. Incarcerated persons are unable to adhere to “social distancing”, and are potentially exposed daily to persons who may have the disease but are not exhibiting symptoms. These exposures affect not only those who are incarcerated and the employees of the facilities, but all persons who live in the community, which results in unnecessary deaths to all persons in the community. The virus does not discriminate. 287(g) exposes counties to legal liability for the prolonged detention of individuals Given these multiple hazards to all persons in our communities, the Green Party of Texas advocates the immediate termination of the ICE 287(g) program and the release of all persons who have not committed violent offenses. Bexar County - Delay Vista Ridge, Avert Groundwater & Ratepayer Crisis Whereas, urban and rural Texans alike now face an unfolding economic crisis due to the coronavirus pandemic, which is expected to have disproportionate effects on poverty level and lower middle class residents; Whereas, 60 percent of the state’s freshwater supply is groundwater, and its value to the state economy and the security of the nation’s food supply cannot be overstated, especially in times of economic crisis; Whereas, we need sufficient, affordable and cost-effective water supplies that also are sustainable, for Texas to remain economically competitive; Whereas, groundwater in the Simsboro formation of the Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer in Bastrop, Lee, Burleson, and Milam counties has been targeted for more than two decades by irresponsible private and public water marketers, including the municipally owned San Antonio Water System (SAWS) - a public utility; Whereas, mega-permits have been obtained or are being sought from local groundwater conservation districts to pump and export hundreds of thousands of acre feet of Simsboro groundwater annually for real estate development along the I-35 corridor; www.txgreens.org/state_convention_confirms_nominees 4/7 8/17/2020 State Convention Confirms Nominees - Green Party of Texas Whereas, SAWS has admitted that the Vista Ridge contract is for 30% more water than San Antonio can use and there is no plan to market the excess 15,000 annual acre-feet; Whereas, California has experienced serious consequences to its aquifers from decades of subsidizing mass conveyance of groundwater for real estate development in areas without adequate local supply; Whereas, the most recent failure of our state’s water policy is the $3.4 billion SAWS/Vista Ridge project to pump huge quantities of Burleson County groundwater 142 miles to San Antonio, starting in April 2020; Whereas, Vista Ridge will endanger the Edwards Aquifer and the Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer, the two major aquifers serving millions of central Texans, and the rivers, streams, springs and ecosystems that depend on groundwater; Whereas, the huge cost of Vista Ridge will impact rural economies who lose access to their water, as well as cause rates to skyrocket for SAWS’ ratepayers, who are among the poorest in the nation; Whereas, the devastating environmental and economic costs of Vista Ridge pumping on both ends of the pipeline, undoubtedly will be exacerbated by the coronavirus crisis; Whereas, the unaccountability of SAWS is so problematic, a volunteer citizens municipal petition drive for the “SAWS Accountability Act” was launched on February 17, was endorsed by the Bexar County Green Party at its 2020 precinct conventions, and is now on hold due to the coronavirus pandemic in Texas; THEREFORE, the Texas Green Party resolves to demand local and state official intervention to put the commencement of Vista Ridge pumping on hold until an independent performance audit of the Vista Ridge project is accomplished as follows: The performance audit shall conform to Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS) for performance audits and shall include: (1) a management audit; and (2) an economic impact audit. The management audit shall determine the extent to which the project’s governance and management structure creates risks to the City, SAWS, or SAWS ratepayers, and the extent to which these risks have been mitigated by insurance, bonds or other means. The economic impact audit shall include findings regarding the costs and benefits associated with the project, including without limitation long-term environmental impacts, reliability of the particular source of supply, and impacts on communities that depend upon that supply. Independent auditors shall not have direct or indirect ties, financial or otherwise, to any entity controlled directly or indirectly by the City of San Antonio or the County of Bexar.  homepage Do you like this post? www.txgreens.org/state_convention_confirms_nominees 5/7 8/17/2020 State Convention Confirms Nominees - Green Party of Texas Like 21 people like this. Sign Up to see what your friends like. Tweet Showing 3 reactions Sign in with Or sign in with email Email Address Password Remember me Post your comment or Create an account David Collins commented 3 months ago Chris, what’s your home county? We’ll try to match you up with others in your county or region. It may not happen right away, but we’re working on it. Chris commented 3 months ago I would like to talk with you all. Going green this election if Bernie isnt nominated… please leave message if no answer as im in office most of the time… 830-499-8451 David Collins published this page in News 3 months ago www.txgreens.org/state_convention_confirms_nominees 6/7 8/17/2020 State Convention Confirms Nominees - Green Party of Texas  Sign in with Facebook  Sign in with Twitter  Sign in with Email Email address Join Volunteer Donate TeXas Greens - G… Like Page Be the first of your friends to like this Follow @TXGreens  Subscribe with RSS Contact us. Paid for by the Green Party of Texas Sign in with Facebook, Twitter or email. Created with NationBuilder www.txgreens.org/state_convention_confirms_nominees 7/7 EXHIBIT 8/17/2020 David Bruce Collins for US Senate—the Official Site - David B. Collins--Author & Green Activist David Bruce Collins for US Senate—the Official Site Index Blog Biography Writing Politics Web Links Not Just a Green New Deal, but a Green Revolution! The 1% have been stealing your wealth and your power for decades. * It's time to take it back. * It's time to create a new societal order built on compassion. * It's time for the new era of Peace, Justice, Democracy, and Sustainability! Go Green! DONATE TODAY!—TO SOMEBODY ELSE For several reasons, this campaign is not accepting monetary contributions at this time. To show your $upport for the Green Movement, please donate to one of the following: Hawkins/Walker 2020 is getting federal matching funds for all donations up to $250 through 27 August. Lisa Savage is running as a Green Independent for the US Senate seat currently occupied by Susan Collins; Maine has Ranked Choice Voting for elections at all levels. Two Green candidates in Texas actually paid the newly required filing fees when they applied last December to run for office. Hal J. Ridley, Jr., US House TX-36 doesn't have a Donate page on his site. Brody Mulligan, Texas House District 92, totally does. 2020 GREEN PARTY SENATORIAL NOMINEE Thank you, delegates to the Green Party of Texas convention, for confirming my nomination on 18 April. This nomination comes with a major asterisk: My name may not appear on Texas ballots, because I submitted my application to run without the $5,000 filing fee (or 5,000 signatures in lieu thereof). A federal lawsuit currently pending may overturn the new filing fee provision. For more than 30 years, I have participated in various activities with dozens of groups established to promote peace, social justice, economic justice, and environmentally sound policies. Most of my activist work has been within the Green Parties of Texas and Harris County. Currently, I am serving as co-chair of a new organization, Green Party Houston, which focuses on spreading the Green Movement throughout the Houston metropolitan area. As a practicing Green, I am painfully aware that these ideals of peace, justice, and ecology are connected. We need an intersectional, www.dbcgreentx.net 1/2 8/17/2020 David Bruce Collins for US Senate—the Official Site - David B. Collins--Author & Green Activist big-picture approach to retool our society to serve actual humans, not corporate "persons." The Preamble to the Constitution implies that our government's main purpose is to protect the People from stupidity and greed. Unfortunately, the forces of stupidity and greed have bought the government, and they will not allow our elected representatives to legislate them back into Pandora's box. Perpetual war, gross social injustices, and fossil fuel foolishness continue because they are profitable for the wealthiest 1%. The only way restore power to the People is through revolution, preferably by nonviolent means. AUTHOR ...of three novels: The Earthworm That Blows No Trumpet—2015 A Small Town for Its Size—2000 Eastern Daylight—1997, in its original format, as a free online novel! You can also download each chapter as a separate PDF. Most of the productive or meaningful writing I have done since 2015 has been in my blog. Proudly powered by Weebly www.dbcgreentx.net 2/2 EXHIBIT CAUSE NO. _________________________ DSCC; DCCC; and MARY JENNINGS HEGAR, Plaintiffs, v. RUTH HUGHS, in her official capacity as Texas Secretary of State; GREEN PARTYY OF TEXAS; DAVID B. COLLINS; THOMAS WAKELY; ALFRED MOLISON; and LAURA PALMER, Defendants. § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS ___________ JUDICIAL DISTRICT DECLARATION OF JUSTIN BARASKY Pursuant to Section 132.001 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Justin Barasky declares: 1. “My name is Justin Barasky, I am of sound mind and capable of making this declaration. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein because of my review of the documents attached hereto and related correspondence, and my personal knowledge of certain factual occurrences described herein. Those facts are true and correct. 2. I am employed by the DSCC, which is the national senatorial committee of the Democratic Party. DSCC’s mission is to elect candidates of the Democratic Party to the U.S. Senate, including in and from Texas. I currently hold the title of Senior Advisor at DSCC. 3. It is my understanding that, under the Texas Election Code, a candidate nominated by a convention must either pay a filing fee or submit a petition in lieu of a filing fee in order “to be eligible to be placed on the ballot for the general election . . .” Tex. Elec. Code § 141.041(a). Page 1 of 5 4. However, defendants the Green Party of Texas, David B. Collins, and Thomas Wakely have openly, publicly, and repeatedly admitted that neither Mr. Collins nor Mr. Wakely paid the statutorily required fee or submitted the required petition in lieu of a fee. 5. The Green Party of Texas’s official website, a true and correct copy of portions of which as they appeared as of August 16, 2020 is attached hereto as Exhibit 1, explicitly indicates that “[n]one of the statewide nominees,” including Mr. Collins (who is the apparent Green Party nominee for United States Senate) “paid the new filing fees imposed on candidates under 2019’s HB 2504, nor did they submit the requisite petition signatures in lieu of the fee.” That official website also indicates that Mr. Wakely (who is the apparent Green Party Nominee in the race to represent Texas’s 21st Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives) also did not pay the required fee. Id. 6. Mr. Collins’s official website, a true and correct copy of portions of which as they appeared as of August 16, 2020 is attached hereto as Exhibit 2, confirms that Mr. Collins did not pay the required filling fee or, in the alternative, collect and submit the required number of signatures. See Ex. 2 (“This nomination comes with a major asterisk: My name may not appear on Texas ballots, because I submitted my application to run without the $5,000 filing fee (or 5,000 signatures in lieu thereof).”). 7. Records provided by defendant Texas Secretary of State Ruth Hughs’ (the Secretary) office on August 12, 2020, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 3, further confirm that, not only did Mr. Collins and Mr. Wakely fail to pay the required fee, but also that the Secretary is aware that Mr. Collins and Mr. Wakely did not pay the required fee. 8. Despite the ineligibility of Mr. Collins and Mr. Wakely to appear on the ballot, upon information and belief, the Green Party of Texas has unlawfully certified Mr. Collins and Page 2 of 5 Mr. Wakely to the Secretary as candidates for the United States Senate and to represent Texas’s 21st Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives, respectively. 9. In so doing, the Green Party of Texas, Mr. Collins, Mr. Wakely, and defendants Alfred Molison and Laura Palmer (the co-chairs of the Green Party of Texas) have collectively violated numerous provisions of the Texas Election Code, including, without limitation: " Section 141.041, which required Defendants Collins and Wakely to either pay a filing fee or submit a petition in lieu of a fee in order “to be eligible to be placed on the ballot for the general election”; " Section 141.032(a), which required the Green Party Defendants to review all applications for nomination for compliance with law; " Section 141.032(e), which required the Green Party Defendants to reject any applications that do not comply with applicable requirements; " Section181.068(c), which prohibited the Green Party Defendants from delivering to the Secretary any certifications of ineligible candidates; " Section 145.003(b)(1), which permitted the Green Party Defendants to make an administrative declaration of their candidates’ ineligibility, even after improperly seeking certification, which they have not done; and " Section 145.035, which requires, in general, that a “candidate’s name shall be omitted from the ballot if the candidate withdraws, dies, or is declared ineligible on or before the 74th day before election day.” 10. On August 8th, 2020, DSCC first became aware that the Secretary’s office intended to certify for the general election ballot Green Party candidates, including Mr. Collins and Mr. Wakely, who did not either pay the fee or submit the petition in lieu of a fee as required by Section 141.041(a). The Secretary’s office intended to do so despite the clear statutory requirement that payment of the fee or submission of a petition is required “to be eligible to be placed on the ballot for the general election.” Id. Another page of the Green Party of Texas’s official website, a true and correct copy of portions of which as they appeared as of August 16, 2020 is attached hereto as Exhibit 4, further indicates that “the Office of the Secretary of State has indicated that the Page 3 of 5 candidates may appear on the ballot unless and until the federal court decides otherwise.” Ex. 1 at 2. 11. Therefore, absent a court order, the Secretary has allegedly indicated to the Green Party of Texas, as noted on their website, that—notwithstanding her awareness that Mr. Collins and Mr. Wakely are both ineligible based on their failure to comply with Section 141.041(a)—she nevertheless intends to certify Mr. Collins and Mr. Wakely for inclusion on the November 2020 General Election Ballot. 12. In so doing, the Secretary will also violate various provisions of Texas law, including, without limitation: " Section 161.008(c), which prohibits the Secretary from certifying to the authority responsible for preparing the general ballot in each county the names of any candidates who are ineligible, “if, before delivering the certification, the secretary of state learns that the name is to be omitted from the ballot under Section 145.035”; and " Section 145.035, which requires, in general, that a “candidate’s name shall be omitted from the ballot if the candidate withdraws, dies, or is declared ineligible on or before the 74th day before election day.” 13. It is my understanding that Section 161.008(b) requires the Secretary to certify the candidates for the ballot by the 68th day before election day, which (given a state holiday on Thursday, August 27, 2020) falls this year on August 28, 2020. But that is the deadline for the Secretary to certify candidates for the ballot: Plaintiffs are not aware of any restrictions that prevent the Secretary from acting before that deadline, which means she is free to certify candidates at any point before that date. Therefore, time is of the essence, and temporary, emergency relief is necessary to protect the status quo. 14. Without immediate relief, Plaintiffs will suffer imminent and irreparable harm, which will be the direct and proximate result of the acts of Defendants. Page 4 of 5 15. Specifically, Plaintiffs DSCC and DCCC will suffer probable, imminent, and irreparable injury absent a temporary restraining order and injunctive and declaratory relief because allowing the inclusion of statutorily ineligible candidates on the ballot will require DSCC and DCCC to expend additional funds and resources to persuade voters not to support those ineligible candidates. If those ineligible candidates were not on the ballot, those diverted resources could instead be spent promoting DSCC’s and DCCC’s core missions and engaging in other mission-critical activities, including to encourage turnout and to educate and persuade voters to support plaintiffs M.J. Hegar and Wendy Davis. DSCC and DCCC will also be harmed because Ms. Hegar and Ms. Davis will be forced to compete with candidates who have failed to legally qualify for the ballot, a competitive harm that inures not just to the candidates, but also to DSCC and DCCC specifically, as the official committees dedicated to electing Democrats to the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives. 16. Similarly, Ms. Hegar and Ms. Davis will suffer probable, imminent, and irreparable injury absent a temporary restraining order and injunctive and declaratory relief because allowing the inclusion of their statutorily ineligible opponents on the ballot will require them to compete against Mr. Collins and Mr. Wakely, both of whom have been unlawfully certified to the Secretary’s office by the Green Party Defendants and who will, within a matter of days, be unlawfully certified for inclusion on the ballot absent immediate court action.” Jurat My name is Justin Barasky, my date of birth is October 9, 1981, and my office address is 120 Maryland Ave NE, Washington, DC 20002. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in the District of Columbia, on August 17, 2020. ____________________________________ JUSTIN BARASKY Page 5 of 5 EXHIBIT 1 8/16/2020 2020 Candidates - Green Party of Texas  Home / 2020 Nominees Donate to GPTX Donate to Hawkins/Walker 2020 David B. Collins, 2020 GPTX nominee for US Senate On 18 April 2020, the Green Party of Texas Convention confirmed GPTX candidate nominations to the general election ballot. There are now seven nominees in total, two of whom are participating in statewide races. They join the Green Party US presidential ticket of Howie Hawkins and Angela Walker. Statewide Nominees David B. Collins (Harris County), US Senate: Web Twitter Facebook katija gruene (Travis County), Texas Railroad Commission: Twitter Facebook HB 2504, passed and signed in 2019, specifies that convention-nominating parties such as the Greens can retain ballot access for 10 years by earning 2% of the vote in a statewide race. If either of these two, or the Green presidential ticket, should garner a 2% share of the vote, that guarantees GPTX ballot access through 2030. www.txgreens.org/2020_candidates 1/4 8/16/2020 2020 Candidates - Green Party of Texas Tom Wakely, 2020 Green nominee for US House from Texas's 21st District Below is a list of the other candidates nominated for non-statewide offices. Names of candidates who paid the newly imposed filing fees (HB 2504 again), appear in italics. US House Tom Wakely (Bexar), CD-21: Twitter Facebook Hal J. Ridley, Jr. (Orange), CD-36: Web Twitter Texas Legislature Julián Villarreal (Bexar), SD-26: Twitter Brody-Andrew Mulligan (Tarrant), HD-92: Web Twitter Antonio Padron (Bexar), HD-119 Twitter The outcome of a pending lawsuit against the Texas Secretary of State's Office will determine whether all seven GPTX nominees will appear on Texas ballots. Neither of the statewide nominees paid filing fee, nor did either of them submit the requisite petition signatures in lieu of the fee. Do you like this page? Like 3 people like this. Be the first of your friends. Tweet Showing 1 reaction Sign in with Or sign in with email www.txgreens.org/2020_candidates 2/4 8/16/2020 2020 Candidates - Green Party of Texas Email Address Password Remember me Post your comment or Create an account David Collins published this page in About 3 months ago  Sign in with Facebook  Sign in with Twitter  Sign in with Email Email address Join Volunteer Donate TeXas Greens - G… Like Page Be the first of your friends to like this Follow @TXGreens Contact us. www.txgreens.org/2020_candidates Paid for by the Green Party of Texas 3/4 8/16/2020 2020 Candidates - Green Party of Texas Sign in with Facebook, Twitter or email. Created with NationBuilder www.txgreens.org/2020_candidates 4/4 EXHIBIT 2 8/16/2020 David Bruce Collins for US Senate—the Official Site - David B. Collins--Author & Green Activist David Bruce Collins for US Senate—the Official Site Index Blog Biography Writing Politics Web Links Not Just a Green New Deal, but a Green Revolution! The 1% have been stealing your wealth and your power for decades. * It's time to take it back. * It's time to create a new societal order built on compassion. * It's time for the new era of Peace, Justice, Democracy, and Sustainability! Go Green! DONATE TODAY!—TO SOMEBODY ELSE For several reasons, this campaign is not accepting monetary contributions at this time. To show your $upport for the Green Movement, please donate to one of the following: Hawkins/Walker 2020 is getting federal matching funds for all donations up to $250 through 27 August. Lisa Savage is running as a Green Independent for the US Senate seat currently occupied by Susan Collins; Maine has Ranked Choice Voting for elections at all levels. Two Green candidates in Texas actually paid the newly required filing fees when they applied last December to run for office. Hal J. Ridley, Jr., US House TX-36 doesn't have a Donate page on his site. Brody Mulligan, Texas House District 92, totally does. 2020 GREEN PARTY SENATORIAL NOMINEE Thank you, delegates to the Green Party of Texas convention, for confirming my nomination on 18 April. This nomination comes with a major asterisk: My name may not appear on Texas ballots, because I submitted my application to run without the $5,000 filing fee (or 5,000 signatures in lieu thereof). A federal lawsuit currently pending may overturn the new filing fee provision. For more than 30 years, I have participated in various activities with dozens of groups established to promote peace, social justice, economic justice, and environmentally sound policies. Most of my activist work has been within the Green Parties of Texas and Harris County. Currently, I am serving as co-chair of a new organization, Green Party Houston, which focuses on spreading the Green Movement throughout the Houston metropolitan area. As a practicing Green, I am painfully aware that these ideals of peace, justice, and ecology are connected. We need an intersectional, www.dbcgreentx.net 1/2 8/16/2020 David Bruce Collins for US Senate—the Official Site - David B. Collins--Author & Green Activist big-picture approach to retool our society to serve actual humans, not corporate "persons." The Preamble to the Constitution implies that our government's main purpose is to protect the People from stupidity and greed. Unfortunately, the forces of stupidity and greed have bought the government, and they will not allow our elected representatives to legislate them back into Pandora's box. Perpetual war, gross social injustices, and fossil fuel foolishness continue because they are profitable for the wealthiest 1%. The only way restore power to the People is through revolution, preferably by nonviolent means. AUTHOR ...of three novels: The Earthworm That Blows No Trumpet—2015 A Small Town for Its Size—2000 Eastern Daylight—1997, in its original format, as a free online novel! You can also download each chapter as a separate PDF. Most of the productive or meaningful writing I have done since 2015 has been in my blog. Proudly powered by Weebly www.dbcgreentx.net 2/2 EXHIBIT 3 ELECTION DATE CANDIDATE NAME PARTY CANDIDATE STATUS OFFICE TITLE 11/3/2020 ANTONIO PADRON GREEN CANDIDATE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION STATE REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT 119 11/3/2020 BRODY MULLIGAN GREEN CANDIDATE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION STATE REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT 92 11/3/2020 CHARLES E. WATERBURY GREEN CANDIDATE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION CHIEF JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT 11/3/2020 DAVID B. COLLINS GREEN CANDIDATE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION U. S. SENATOR 11/3/2020 HAL J. RIDLEY JR GREEN CANDIDATE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION U. S. REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT 36 11/3/2020 JULIÁ N VILLARREAL GREEN CANDIDATE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION STATE SENATOR, DISTRICT 26 11/3/2020 KATIJA "KAT" GRUENE GREEN CANDIDATE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION RAILROAD COMMISSIONER 11/3/2020 TOMMY WAKELY GREEN CANDIDATE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION U. S. REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT 21 11/3/2020 HOWIE HAWKINS/ANGELA WALKER GREEN CANDIDATE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION PRESIDENT/VICE PRESIDENT COUNTY MAILING ADDRESS 3026 MARS SAN ANTONIO, TX 78226 539 W. COMMERCE STREET 169 DALLAS, TX 75208 3800 MAPLE DRIVE 380 DALLAS, TX 75219 3560 DIXIE DRIVE 1111 HOUSTON, TX 77021 P.O. BOX 1277 BRIDGE CITY, TX 77611 P.O. BOX 15523 SAN ANTONIO, TX 78212 1712 EAST RIVERSIDE DRIVE 42 AUSTIN, TX 78721 16406 LEDGE POINT STREET SAN ANTONIO, TX 78232 P.O. BOX 562  SYRACUSE, NY 13205 OCCUPATION FILING FEE PUBLIC TRANSIT DRIVER Not Received TEACHER Paid LAWYER Not Received INFO TECH TRAINER Not Received TRUCK DRIVER Paid SCIENTIST Not Received DISABLED Not Received HOSPICE CHAPLAIN TRADE UNIONISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL Not Received PHONE NUMBER EXHIBIT 4 8/16/2020 State Convention Confirms Nominees - Green Party of Texas  Home / News State Convention Confirms Nominees, National Delegates POSTED BY DAVID COLLINS 163.60SC ON APRIL 19, 2020 The Green Party of Texas held its Annual State Meeting and Nominating Convention via teleconference on Saturday 18 April. Among other activities, the 33 assembled delegates elected two members to the State Executive Committee, chose a slate of delegates to the Presidential Nominating Convention in July, and confirmed nominations of candidates for statewide office. Presidential Delegate Count Using approval voting, 50 delegates in eight counties cast their votes for the Green presidential nomination. Texas has an allotment of 26 delegates to the convention, scheduled to occur in Detroit, Michigan, this year but most likely to happen via the Internet due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The formula for distributing delegates based on votes at precinct conventions produced this result: Howie Hawkins (NY)—20 Dario Hunter (OH/CA)—3 Kent Mesplay (TX)—2 Susan Buchser-Lochocki (NY)—1 State Executive Committee Laura Palmer of Harris County will return to the role of co-chair for a two-year term. She was also co-chair from 2014 to 2018. Outgoing co-chair Janis Richards, elected last year to complete an unexpired term, stood for election as well, as did longtime Tarrant County Green Diane Wood. Palmer will serve alongside fellow Houston resident Alfred Molison, whose staggered two-year term expires in 2021. Travis Christal, CPA, will take over as treasurer, replacing Laura's husband Donald Palmer. www.txgreens.org/state_convention_confirms_nominees 1/7 8/16/2020 State Convention Confirms Nominees - Green Party of Texas The updated SEC roster can be found here. Statewide Nominations The convention confirmed the nominations of three candidates for statewide offices. The outcome of a pending lawsuit, Texans for Voter Choice et al v. Hughs, will determine whether the three will appear on Texas ballots; none of them paid the new filing fee imposed on candidates of all parties under 2019's HB 2504, nor did they submit the requisite petition signatures in lieu of the fee. (UPDATE: As of mid-June, with the litigation still pending, the Office of the Secretary of State has indicated that the candidates may appear on the ballot unless and until the federal court decides otherwise.) The new nominees are: David B. Collins (Harris County), US Senate katija gruene (Travis County), Texas Railroad Commission Charles Waterbury (Dallas County), State Supreme Court Position 1/Chief Justice HB 2504 also specifies that convention-nominating parties such as the Greens can retain ballot access for 10 years by earning 2% of the vote in a statewide race. Below is a list of the other candidates nominated for other offices. Names of candidates who paid the fees, thus attaining ballot access, appear in italics. As with the statewide candidates, the disposition of the lawsuit against the Secretary of State's Office will determine whether the others may appear on ballots in their respective districts. US House Tom Wakely (Bexar), CD-21 Hal J. Ridley, Jr. (Orange), CD-36 Texas Legislature Julián Villarreal (Bexar), SD-26 katija gruene (Travis), HD-51 Brody-Andrew Mulligan (Tarrant), HD-92 Antonio Padrón (Bexar), HD-119 NOTE: The Secretary of State's Office did not accept the request to place katija gruene on the ballot for two offices. Other Agenda The delegates discussed and voted on adopting intra-party resolutions presented by the delegations from Bexar, Harris, and Tarrant Counties. They also compiled a slate of 38 Electors for the Electoral College vote following the presidential election. Two resolutions were approved: Green Party of Texas Advocates the Termination of the Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) 287(g) Program www.txgreens.org/state_convention_confirms_nominees 2/7 8/16/2020 State Convention Confirms Nominees - Green Party of Texas The 287g agreement promotes factors of institutional and systematic racism by the means of encouraging racial profiling by deputized officials to any person that they suspect is undocumented ICE has stated that the goal of the 287(g) program is to remove undocumented persons “who are involved in violent and serious crimes.” However, studies show that over 50% of all noncitizens identified via the 287(g) program were arrested for simple traffic violations or low-level misdemeanors. [1]https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/reports/2018/10/09/459098/rapidly- expanding-287g-program-suffers-lack-transparency/[1] https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2018-09/OIG-18-77-Sep18.pdf[1] https://leitf.org/2017/09/local-law-enforcement-role-in-immigration-enforcement-%C2%A7-287gagreements/[1] https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/delegation-and-divergence-287gstate-and-local-immigration-enforcement 287(g) leads to the breakdown of trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities. It hinders cooperation between local police and immigrant residents, and it risks the safety of undocumented residents of Texas, making the more vulnerable to becoming targets and victims of a crime. 287(g) is costly for counties and taxpayers, and is a misallocation of resources. Under 287(g), ICE only covers the cost of training deputized officers, leaving local governments to front most of the costs, including travel, salaries, overtime, and costs of detention. Among the several counties that have terminated their 287(g) agreements: Orange County, El Paso County, and Harris County cited costs and the need to prioritize law enforcement in other areas as their primary motivations. Other 287(g) participants have spent millions on the program; countless other law enforcement entities have opted to avoid this by never adopting 287(g) to begin with. [1] https://www.governing.com/topics/public-justice-safety/gov-undocumented-immigrants- crime-pew.html [1] https://www.policylink.org/sites/default/files/INSECURE_COMMUNITIES_REPORT_FINAL.PDF [1] https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2018/05/08/450439/287g- agreements-harm-public-safety/ [1] U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; See also https://www.migrationpolicy.org/data/unauthorized-immigrant-population/county/48439 [1] https://www.acluofnorthcarolina.org/en/news/north-carolina-sheriff-known-racial-profiling[1] partners-ice http://www.law.unc.edu/documents/clinicalprograms/thecostoficespoliciesandpractices.pdf [1]https://www.opportunityagenda.org/explore/resources-publications/immigration-policy- solutions-due-process-and-fair-treatment-under www.txgreens.org/state_convention_confirms_nominees 3/7 8/16/2020 State Convention Confirms Nominees - Green Party of Texas [1] https://www.themarshallproject.org/2019/05/13/is-there-a-connection-between- undocumented-immigrants-andcrime [1] http://www.ncsl.org/research/immigration/state-criminal-alien-assistance-program.aspx 287(g) leads to an increase in family separation and irreversible damage to immigrant individuals, families and communities. The constant fear of deportation can cause stress and inflict an enormous emotional toll on the undocumented, and separation can drastically destabilize immigrant families. The detention of a family member can result in a family losing most, if not all of their income, as well as negatively impact the social, emotional, educational, and overall well-being of the family. Persons detained in jails and detention centers who have been processed through the 287(g) are exposed to the coronavirus due to preventive conditions not practiced in adherence to the national Communicable Disease Control (CDC) guidelines. Incarcerated persons are unable to adhere to “social distancing”, and are potentially exposed daily to persons who may have the disease but are not exhibiting symptoms. These exposures affect not only those who are incarcerated and the employees of the facilities, but all persons who live in the community, which results in unnecessary deaths to all persons in the community. The virus does not discriminate. 287(g) exposes counties to legal liability for the prolonged detention of individuals Given these multiple hazards to all persons in our communities, the Green Party of Texas advocates the immediate termination of the ICE 287(g) program and the release of all persons who have not committed violent offenses. Bexar County - Delay Vista Ridge, Avert Groundwater & Ratepayer Crisis Whereas, urban and rural Texans alike now face an unfolding economic crisis due to the coronavirus pandemic, which is expected to have disproportionate effects on poverty level and lower middle class residents; Whereas, 60 percent of the state’s freshwater supply is groundwater, and its value to the state economy and the security of the nation’s food supply cannot be overstated, especially in times of economic crisis; Whereas, we need sufficient, affordable and cost-effective water supplies that also are sustainable, for Texas to remain economically competitive; Whereas, groundwater in the Simsboro formation of the Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer in Bastrop, Lee, Burleson, and Milam counties has been targeted for more than two decades by irresponsible private and public water marketers, including the municipally owned San Antonio Water System (SAWS) - a public utility; Whereas, mega-permits have been obtained or are being sought from local groundwater conservation districts to pump and export hundreds of thousands of acre feet of Simsboro groundwater annually for real estate development along the I-35 corridor; www.txgreens.org/state_convention_confirms_nominees 4/7 8/16/2020 State Convention Confirms Nominees - Green Party of Texas Whereas, SAWS has admitted that the Vista Ridge contract is for 30% more water than San Antonio can use and there is no plan to market the excess 15,000 annual acre-feet; Whereas, California has experienced serious consequences to its aquifers from decades of subsidizing mass conveyance of groundwater for real estate development in areas without adequate local supply; Whereas, the most recent failure of our state’s water policy is the $3.4 billion SAWS/Vista Ridge project to pump huge quantities of Burleson County groundwater 142 miles to San Antonio, starting in April 2020; Whereas, Vista Ridge will endanger the Edwards Aquifer and the Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer, the two major aquifers serving millions of central Texans, and the rivers, streams, springs and ecosystems that depend on groundwater; Whereas, the huge cost of Vista Ridge will impact rural economies who lose access to their water, as well as cause rates to skyrocket for SAWS’ ratepayers, who are among the poorest in the nation; Whereas, the devastating environmental and economic costs of Vista Ridge pumping on both ends of the pipeline, undoubtedly will be exacerbated by the coronavirus crisis; Whereas, the unaccountability of SAWS is so problematic, a volunteer citizens municipal petition drive for the “SAWS Accountability Act” was launched on February 17, was endorsed by the Bexar County Green Party at its 2020 precinct conventions, and is now on hold due to the coronavirus pandemic in Texas; THEREFORE, the Texas Green Party resolves to demand local and state official intervention to put the commencement of Vista Ridge pumping on hold until an independent performance audit of the Vista Ridge project is accomplished as follows: The performance audit shall conform to Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS) for performance audits and shall include: (1) a management audit; and (2) an economic impact audit. The management audit shall determine the extent to which the project’s governance and management structure creates risks to the City, SAWS, or SAWS ratepayers, and the extent to which these risks have been mitigated by insurance, bonds or other means. The economic impact audit shall include findings regarding the costs and benefits associated with the project, including without limitation long-term environmental impacts, reliability of the particular source of supply, and impacts on communities that depend upon that supply. Independent auditors shall not have direct or indirect ties, financial or otherwise, to any entity controlled directly or indirectly by the City of San Antonio or the County of Bexar.  homepage Do you like this post? www.txgreens.org/state_convention_confirms_nominees 5/7 8/16/2020 State Convention Confirms Nominees - Green Party of Texas Like 21 people like this. Sign Up to see what your friends like. Tweet Showing 3 reactions Sign in with Or sign in with email Email Address Password Remember me Post your comment or Create an account David Collins commented 3 months ago Chris, what’s your home county? We’ll try to match you up with others in your county or region. It may not happen right away, but we’re working on it. Chris commented 3 months ago I would like to talk with you all. Going green this election if Bernie isnt nominated… please leave message if no answer as im in office most of the time… 830-499-8451 David Collins published this page in News 3 months ago www.txgreens.org/state_convention_confirms_nominees 6/7 8/16/2020 State Convention Confirms Nominees - Green Party of Texas  Sign in with Facebook  Sign in with Twitter  Sign in with Email Email address Join Volunteer Donate TeXas Greens - G… Like Page Be the first of your friends to like this Follow @TXGreens  Subscribe with RSS Contact us. Paid for by the Green Party of Texas Sign in with Facebook, Twitter or email. Created with NationBuilder www.txgreens.org/state_convention_confirms_nominees 7/7 Automated Certificate of eService This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system. The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules. James Hatchitt on behalf of Randy Howry Bar No. 10121690 jhatchitt@howrybreen.com Envelope ID: 45457857 Status as of 8/18/2020 10:11 AM CST Case Contacts Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status James Hatchitt jhatchitt@howrybreen.com 8/17/2020 11:17:24 PM SENT Jena Tyree jtyree@howrybreen.com 8/17/2020 11:17:24 PM SENT Randy Howry rhowry@howrybreen.com 8/17/2020 11:17:24 PM SENT