Fourth Time’s the Charm? Gene Wu Faces Libertarian Challenger Lee Sharp Yet Again in District 137
In the political landscape of Texas, where power is often concentrated within entrenched party lines, the race for House District 137 is shaping up to be a curious exception. For the fourth time, incumbent Democrat Gene Wu will face off against Libertarian Lee Sharp in what has become a familiar contest in the heavily Democratic district west of Houston.
The absence of a Republican candidate underscores the deep blue character of District 137. The last time a Republican appeared on the ballot here was in 2016 when Kendall Baker took a shot at unseating Wu. Since then, the race has been a two-man show, with Wu and Sharp vying for the seat in every election cycle since 2018.
The Incumbent: Gene Wu
Gene Wu, a Chinese-American lawyer and politician, has represented District 137 since 2013. Wu, a former prosecutor for Harris County, has made a name for himself as one of the most liberal voices in the Texas House of Representatives. As a member of the Juvenile Justice and Family Issues Committee and the House Committee on Appropriations, Wu has aligned himself with the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, advocating for policies that reflect his strong support for environmental regulations, juvenile justice reform, and expanding government reach.
Wu’s tenure in the Texas House has been marked by his consistent focus on liberal causes. Following his first legislative session, he received accolades from organizations like the Sierra Club for his environmental advocacy, earning their New Leadership in Environmental Protection Award. However, his legislative record also highlights a disconnect between his priorities and the everyday concerns of his constituents.
In 2022, Wu secured 76% of the vote against Sharp’s 24%. This was a slight dip from his previous victories in 2020 and 2018, where he won 81.5% and 88.3% of the vote, respectively. Despite his dominant performance, these numbers reveal a growing, albeit modest, dissatisfaction among voters—a dissatisfaction that Lee Sharp is banking on.
The Challenger: Lee Sharp
Lee Sharp, an IT consultant with global experience, is the quintessential outsider candidate. Unlike Wu, Sharp is not a career politician. His background is in technology, not law or government. And this, according to Sharp, is precisely what makes him the better choice for District 137.
Sharp’s decision to run for office was born out of frustration with the status quo. As he told Ballotpedia, “One day when I was upset about what my elected officials were doing (which is not that unusual), I found out one of them was running unopposed. That just would not stand. What incentive would they have to care about our issues if no one even cared to run against him?”
Since entering the race, Sharp has positioned himself as the voice of change—a stark contrast to the “lifelong politicians” he criticizes. His campaign is built on three key messages: the need for representatives who understand the real-life challenges of their constituents, the elimination of government waste, and the promotion of unity in a diverse community.
A Campaign of Principle Over Popularity
Sharp’s campaign is far from conventional. With only 207 followers on his official Facebook page and no posts since October 2023, Sharp’s social media presence is minimal at best. His website, www.leewsharp.com, features little more than a splash page with non-functional “Sign Up” and “Donate” buttons. For a candidate who has run four times, this glaring lack of seriousness and professionalism raises questions about his commitment and capability to mount an effective campaign.
Sharp is passionate about several key policy areas, most notably government accountability and the elimination of wasteful spending. He is particularly critical of the current state of government housing, which he argues benefits wealthy investors like Warren Buffett rather than the people who truly need assistance. Sharp advocates for direct assistance to those in need, which he believes would create competition in the housing market and eliminate the persistent issue of slums in the district.
Another cornerstone of Sharp’s platform is the accountability of law enforcement and public officials. He calls for the end of qualified immunity, which he argues allows police officers to escape consequences for misconduct. Sharp proposes that officers carry individually paid malpractice insurance, similar to doctors, to ensure that only those fit to serve remain on the force. This, he argues, would not only improve the quality of policing but also restore public trust in law enforcement.
A New Kind of Representative
Sharp’s critique of career politicians extends to his views on the qualifications for public office. He questions the value of prior government experience, pointing out that in any other field, a history of failure would not be seen as an asset. “We need new people, and we need people who have other experience than government and law,” Sharp says. His vision for the Texas legislature includes professionals from diverse fields such as IT, medicine, and insurance—individuals who bring practical, real-world experience to the table.
The Road Ahead
The 2024 race for District 137 is shaping up to be another David vs. Goliath battle. Gene Wu, with his established political machine and strong ties to liberal advocacy groups, faces a determined opponent in Lee Sharp, who is running on a platform of principled change and government accountability.
For voters in District 137, the choice is clear: a continuation of the status quo under a politician who has been in office for over a decade, or a chance to elect a true outsider with a fresh perspective on governance.
In a district where Republican candidates are a distant memory, Lee Sharp represents the only alternative to the progressive policies of Gene Wu. As election day approaches, it remains to be seen whether Sharp’s message will resonate with enough voters to finally break the Democratic stranglehold on District 137.
Councilman Mark Harper walks out of meeting before adjournment.
FATE, TX – The Fate City Council voted late Monday night to waive deliberative privilege, opening the door to the public release of secret audio recordings that may have driven a recall election against Councilwoman Codi Chinn. The decision came after hours of public criticism, procedural friction, and a lengthy executive session with legal counsel.
The meeting, held Monday, February 2, was streamed live by the city and is available on YouTube at: https://www.youtube.com/live/zQVN0i-d8C0 (Embedded Below)
(Source: City of Fate, official meeting broadcast)
Timeline for Readers
- 00:33:52 – Public comments begin, largely focused on the recall election of Councilwoman Codi Chinn.
- 00:56:10 – Councilman Harper interrupts public Comment.
- 00:57:00 – Councilman Harper interrupts public Comment.
- 00:58:00 – Councilman Harper interrupts public Comment.
- 02:21:00 – Executive Session – Council enters closed session to consult with legal counsel.
- 03:22:52 – Council reconvenes in open session.
- Primary motion – Council votes to “waive deliberative privilege”, allowing release of disputed audio recordings.
Public Comment and Visible Strain
Public comments began just after the 33 minute mark and quickly centered on the recall election. Speaker after speaker questioned the conduct of city officials and demanded transparency regarding audio recordings that have circulated privately but remained unavailable to the public.
During one speaker’s remarks, critical of Councilwoman Chinn, procedural tension became visible. Three separate times, Councilman Mark Harper interrupted to remind Mayor Andrew Greenberg that the speaker had exceeded the three-minute time limit. Each time, Mayor Greenberg thanked Harper for the reminder, then directed the speaker to continue.
The exchange stood out. While council rules clearly limit speakers to three minutes, the mayor’s repeated decision to allow the speaker to proceed suggested an effort to avoid the appearance of silencing criticism during a highly charged meeting.
Clarifying the Recordings
Contrary to some early assumptions, the audio recordings at issue were not recordings of executive sessions. Instead, they are one-party consent recordings, the existence of which has been previously reported and alluded to on Pipkins Reports. Their precise origin has not been publicly detailed, but their contents have been referenced repeatedly by both supporters and critics of the recall effort.
Behind Closed Doors
Following the public meeting, the council entered executive session to consult with legal counsel. After about an hour, members returned to open session at approximately 3:22:52 .
The primary motion coming out of that session was to “waive deliberative privilege“. The effect of the vote was to remove a legal obstacle to releasing the secret audio recordings that have been at the center of the controversy.
No excerpts were played, and no conclusions were announced. The council did not rule on the legality of the recordings, nor did it weigh in on the merits of the recall election itself.
Why the Vote Matters
The decision does not resolve the recall of Councilwoman Chinn. It does not validate or refute claims made by either side. What it does is shift the debate away from rumor and secondhand accounts.
According to guidance from the Texas Municipal League, governing bodies may waive certain privileges when transparency is deemed to serve the public interest, particularly when litigation risk is balanced against public trust (Texas Municipal League, Open Meetings Act resources).
Opinion and Perspective
The council’s action was a necessary step. Secret recordings, selectively referenced and strategically leaked, undermine confidence in local government. So does a refusal to confront them directly.
Transparency is not about protecting officials from embarrassment. It is NOT the job of the council to assist the city in concealing information that may be used against it in legal proceedings when the City Manager, or Councilmen, may have done bad things. It is about protecting citizens from manipulation. If the recordings exonerate those involved, their release will restore credibility. If they raise concerns, voters deserve to hear them unfiltered before making decisions in a recall election.
Monday night in Fate did not end the controversy. It ended the excuse for keeping the public in the dark.
ROCKWALL, TX — Texas State Sen. Bob Hall appeared before voters at Rockwall County’s Final Friday Night Forum, on Friday. The appearance renewed online criticism from supporters of his primary challenger which brought attention back to a decades-old allegation from a former marriage and also to social-media comments allegidily attributed to Hall’s wife.
The renewed discussion did not stem from new legal filings, court actions, or investigative reporting. Instead, it followed social-media posts by individuals publicly supporting Hall’s opponent, Jason Eddington, including Fate City Councilwoman Codi Chinn, whose sharply worded statements have drawn attention for both their substance and tone.
The Forum and the Race
The forum was hosted by Blue Ribbon News in partnership with the Rockwall County Republican Party, and held at the Rockwall County Courthouse. It marked the final event in a series intended to give Republican voters an opportunity to hear directly from candidates ahead of the March primary.
Other candidates in attendance included:
- Rockwall County Judge
- Frank New
- Scott Muckensturm
- County Commissioner, Precinct 4
- John Stacy
- James Branch
- Lorne Megyesi
- Justice of the Peace, Precinct 2
- Victor Carrillo
- Chris Florance
Pipkins Reports could find no official transcript or video of the forum. According to available coverage, the event proceeded without public discussion of personal controversies, and no candidate addressed the matter from the stage.
Background on the Allegations
The most damaging allegations currently being recirculated date back to divorce proceedings in Florida in the early 1990s, during which Hall’s former wife, Jane Hall, made claims in court filings alleging physical, verbal, and sexual abuse during their marriage.
The allegations, raised during a contested divorce, as they often do. Bob Hall has denied the allegations. No criminal charges were filed. No court ruled against Hall or issued a finding of abuse. The filings did not result in convictions, injunctions, or adverse judgments.
The allegations became publicly discussed during Hall’s first Senate campaign in 2014 and have resurfaced intermittently during contested elections. Their latest reappearance coincides with the current Republican primary and has been driven by individuals openly advocating for Hall’s opponent.
Explicit Attribution and Political Context
Following the January 30 forum, Fate City Councilwoman Codi Chinn, who has publicly endorsed Jason Eddington, posted a statement on social media criticizing Hall and urging Republican voters to support Eddington.
In her post, Chinn wrote:
“Senator Bob Hall I expect you will be making a statement issuing an apology on behalf of your wife for body shaming a woman simply because you don’t ideologically agree with her. These comments are shameful and your silence is deafening. Being Republican shouldn’t mean being small minded. I hope Republican Primary voters will pick the true Conservative Jason Eddington, Candidate for Texas Senate, District 2!”
Critics of Chinn, including some local Republican activists, say the post reflects what they describe as a pattern of caustic and confrontational rhetoric directed at individuals she opposes politically. It’s ironic that Chinn requests accountability for language of others, while she herself asks for forgiveness of her digressions in her bid to not be recalled. Supporters of Chinn, by contrast, characterize her comments as blunt advocacy and a willingness to publicly challenge those with whom she disagrees.
Amplification by a Political Social Media Page
On January 31 at 10:57 p.m., the Facebook page Rockwall County News First published a post calling on the Rockwall County Republican Party to condemn comments attributed to Hall’s wife. The page credited Codi Crimson Chinn as the source of screenshots included in the post.
The post stated:
“We hope that Rockwall County Republican Party will join us in condemning Senator Bob Hall’s wife in her comments.”
The screenshots included in the post purport to show comments written by Kay Hall, Senator Hall’s wife. The screenshots have not been independently authenticated by this publication. According to the screenshots, the comments attributed to Kay Hall read:
“Oh, yes, so disgusting to see Jill get up an speak. She and all of the TFRW little people are in their element. Wish I had recorded her speech, or even more wish I had stood up in the room to tell everyone how she got the Democrats to vote for her in the election. The pictures are very flattering to her because she has gained weight and really looked aged. I am sitting across from Bob near the podium. too, close!!!”
As of publication, neither Senator Hall nor his wife has publicly confirmed the authenticity of the screenshots or issued a statement regarding the comments.
Hall’s Position and Current Status
Hall has not publicly addressed the social-media posts and did not respond to our request for comment. He has previously stated, during earlier campaigns, that efforts to revive allegations from his former marriage are politically motivated and unrelated to any legal findings or his conduct in office.
Hall is currently married to Sarah Kay Smith Hall, with whom he has three children. There are no legal actions or criminal allegations involving his current marriage. The current controversy centers on online posts circulated by political opponents and their supporters.
Conclusion
The Final Friday Night Forum was intended to focus voter attention on policy differences among Republican candidates. In the days following the event, however, the race shifted toward personal disputes fueled by online posts from supporters of Hall’s challenger, including commentary that some observers describe as emblematic of an increasingly sharp-edged political style.
As the March primary approaches, voters in Senate District 2 must weigh not only policy and legislative records, but also the motivations and methods used by campaigns and their advocates. Whether the renewed criticism is viewed as relevant scrutiny or as opposition-driven escalation remains a question for the electorate to decide.
The dispute began publicly in Fate, Texas, when I was accused by Councilwoman Codi Chinn’s husband, William Marcus Chinn, of concealing material facts. WM Chinn asserted that I “knew” that Mayor Andrew Greenberg was responsible for placing Chief of DPS Lyle Lombard into executive session long before a controversial letter ever surfaced, and (he asserts) that I was deliberately lying to protect him … as well as shedding false light on his wife.
So I did what journalists are supposed to do when confronted with claims that purport to be factual. I pulled the records.
What those records show is not a cover-up or collusion, but a collapse of a narrative. Click here for further information regarding the timeline of events.
The Claim
Mr. Chinn asserted that Mayor Greenberg initiated an executive session involving Chief Lombard on or before November 10, 2025, well before later events that have since become the subject of political dispute. He further claimed the mayor supported Lombard’s firing, and accused me of knowingly concealing those facts.
Those are serious allegations against a sitting mayor and a journalist. They are also verifiable.
The Records
On January 15, 2026, I filed an open records request with the City of Fate seeking all emails from Mayor Greenberg calling for an executive session to discuss Lyle Lombard prior to November 11, 2025. The City of Fate Public Records Office acknowledged the request and produced responsive documents through its public records portal.
The emails produced do not support the accusations made by Mr. Chinn.
Instead, the correspondence shows a discussion in late September 2025, specifically September 22 and 23, between City Manager Michael Kovacs, Councilman Mark Harper, and Mayor Greenberg. The topic was not the discipline, termination, or performance of Chief Lombard. It was regarding the DPS as a whole, and whether or not it should be separated into distinct divisions.
The email exchange centered on “Executive Session Meeting for DPS“, not Lyle Lombard. Under Texas law, such matters are commonly discussed in executive session due to personnel and strategic considerations. Kovacs even goes further to include that “IF” the discussion moves into discussing Lombard, they will have to make changes to the forum.
There is no evidence in the records that Mayor Greenberg sought to discuss Lombard personally, or that he anticipated the executive session would involve anything beyond the DPS split.
On the Record Confirmation
To remove any ambiguity, I spoke directly with Mayor Greenberg, on the record. He confirmed that his sole interest in the executive session discussion was the potential separation of the DPS into standalone Police and Fire departments. He stated he did not believe, at the time, that the executive session would be used to address Chief Lombard personally.
His statement aligns with the documentary evidence.
What Changed, and Who Changed It
Email we received on November 25, 2025 from Shelbi Stofer, PIO Officer for the City of Fate, states the facts, “Below you will see the press release regarding our leadership change at the City of Fate. Additionally, you asked about the councilmembers that [sic: who] asked for the agenda item and they were Councilmember Chinn and Councilmember Kelley (2nd).” Referring to the councilmen who requested that the chief be placed into executive session.
The email concluded with the public “Announcement of Leadership Transition” (Lyle Lombard)
The records show no mayoral email initiating an executive session for the purpose of discussing Lombard. The testimony and sources indicate the executive session was desired by Councilwoman Chinn, seconded by Councilman Kelley. The records reviewed do not substantiate the accusations made by WM Chinn or Councilwoman Codi Chinn that the Mayor had any involvement. By association, Pipkins Reports can’t have had any other knowledge to the contrary.
The Rhetoric Behind the Scenes
Politics is rarely polite, and Fate is no exception.
According to sources, after the council meeting in October 2025, Councilman Mark Harper referred to Mayor Greenberg as a “sellout” during internal discussions, a remark that reflects political frustration rather than documented fact. Separately, in a later recorded conversation with Pipkins Reports, Councilwoman Chinn referred to the mayor as a “Ken Doll,” adding a crude remark and referencing the doll’s genitalia as a metaphor regarding the mayor’s lack of courage. (We are paraphrasing, of course.)
Those statements are not evidence of wrongdoing. They are evidence of animus against the Mayor for his desire not to be involved with an employee dispute, which falls under the purview of the City Manager.
Opinion and Analysis
Here is where interpretation belongs.
What this episode reveals is not a secret scheme, but a familiar tactic. Make a claim forcefully enough, shout it into a microphone in a city hall meeting, and hope the accusation itself becomes the evidence. When challenged, attack the journalist. When records contradict the story, change the subject.
Texas open records law exists to protect the public from exactly this kind of political fog. When the documents are pulled, narratives either stand or fall. In this case, they fell.
No evidence has emerged showing Mayor Andrew Greenberg initiated an executive session to target Chief Lombard. No records show he supported Lombard’s termination prior to the events already publicly known. Those facts matter, regardless of personal grievances or political alliances.
If Councilwoman Chinn, her husband, or anyone else possesses documentary evidence to the contrary, it should be produced. Until then, accusations remain accusations, and the record remains clear.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login