Council Member Thurman, District 1 Redistricting Scandal, Ethics, Good Governance, Milton City Council

Monday City Council Meeting: Stand Tall For Good Governance!

bigfishlittlefish

July 15, 2017

Citizens:

On Monday night, City Council will discuss a response to the redistricting scandal that was exposed by the Milton Herald this past week.  The City Council meeting will begin at 6 pm on July 17th (Monday) at the new City Hall in Crabapple.

Milton Herald Article: Milton Coalition Questions Motives Behind Redistricting

Explainer: What If An Election District Got Changed And No One Knew About It?

It is critical that citizens show up to this meeting and speak (if the spirit moves them).  This is the most important City Council meeting since I began advocating for citizens 20 months ago.  It is time for accountability at our City Council.  If citizens allow Council to dismiss or otherwise diminish the wrongdoing associated with this redistricting, then wrongdoing will supremely and forever reign in Milton.  In the redistricting, virtually every principle of good governance was violated:  transparency, honesty, democracy, fairness, citizen-participation, competence/rigor, and due process.  And it is this same bad governance that is resulting in the ruination of our quality of life in Milton, with developers exerting outsized influence in our local government.

It is time for our City Council to admit that Milton has governance issues and to commit to fixing those issues.  If City Council is going to pass a resolution or generate some other response to the redistricting scandal, it needs to reflect that admission and commitment, not obfuscation and denial.

This issue is quite simple.  Milton’s Charter, which our municipal Constitution, was changed without a single citizen knowing about it.  How can the City defend that?

And why was the Charter changed?  Because Councilor Thurman was moving outside her district and did not want to lose her seat.  The evidence of this is overwhelming.  She lobbied Representative Jones less than a month after buying a lot (where she built her home) outside of the district and then immediately set about drafting a plan for her home.  Emails obtained through an Open Records Request clearly show this.  Furthermore, the real reason for the district change was known to at least some other Council Members, who have admitted it off-the-record.  (Hopefully, on Monday night, they will go on the record.)

Vote-Denied

Why does this matter?  Quite simply, Ms. Thurman should have relinquished her District 1 seat when she moved.  A special election should have been held to fill the vacancy.  Ms. Thurman’s deception resulted in the disenfranchisement of Milton’s 20,000+ voters.  Furthermore, Ms. Thurman’s deception denied the 7,000+ voters in District 1 an opportunity to run for that seat (and their prospective appointees the opportunity to serve on various committees.)

And most importantly, this sort of corruption has a corrosive effect on the public’s trust and confidence.  It is this sort of wrongdoing that makes people cynical about government.  And this erosion in trust has many ill effects, including encouraging more wrongdoing.  The culture of wrongdoing at the top of our government surely percolates to the lower levels of government.  So yes, changing the district lines does matter.

And do not let Councilor Thurman fool you with her malarkey about needing to change the district boundaries so that she could “represent” residents of The Estates At Atlanta National.  In Milton, voting for Council Members is at-large.  This means that all voters vote for all 6 Council Members, not just the Councilors from their district.  Accordingly and more importantly, all 6 Council Members represent all voters.  That means you can go to any Council Member with a request or concern.  In fact, as often as not, citizens choose to go to a Councilor outside of their district based on a friendship, that Councilor’s advocacy on a particular issue, a referral from another citizen, or myriad other reasons.  By her own admission, before the district change, Councilor Thurman was legally and legitimately representing the residents of The Estates at Atlanta National, and according to Ms. Thurman they readily came to her with issues.  So applying Ms. Thurman’s own logic, a district change was not required.  This issue of representation was contrived to disguise the real reason for the district change:  Ms. Thurman’s future move outside of her district.

Document

Citizens, please attend Monday’s City Council meeting and consider speaking.  The future well-being of our City depends on it.  Never forget that it is your government.  Citizens are the masters; our elected officials are the servants.  On Monday night, we need to remind Council of that fact.  If you cannot attend for any reason, please express your opinions through emails to City Council and the City Manager.

19f0c701ce4abc910b423c9c54b2a3a2

Citizens, thank you for your support over the last 20 months.  Through your activism on behalf of good governance and smart land use, you have had a positive effect on Milton.  Your civic pride is encouraging candidates to come forward to challenge Councilors in Districts 1 and 2, the two districts affected by the district change.  Milton has not had competitive elections since 2011, which has fostered arrogance, disconnectedness, hostility, misbehavior, and a sense of entitlement in some elected representatives.  Competitive elections will ensure a proper debate about the issues facing Milton and give citizens a real choice for the first time in 6 years.

See you on Monday night.

Advocating For Citizens,

The Milton Coalition – Advocating for clean, competent, courageous, and citizen-centric government

Postscript:  Over 300 of you have viewed the video of Ms. Thurman’s Monday night speech and have been returning or sending others to watch it.  (You can scroll down to find it.)  Clearly, Ms. Thurman was trying to insulate herself from citizen outrage over the redistricting in advance of the Milton Herald’s article.  If you don’t like the message, make yourself out to be the victim and do everything you can to discredit the messenger, including citizens and the Milton Herald, which is being accused of creating Fake News .  That seems to be the playbook here.

Council Member Thurman, District 1 Redistricting Scandal, Ethics, Good Governance, Milton City Council

Emails Shine Bright Light on Milton Redistricting . . . But Questions Remain . . .

Picture1

July 14, 2017

Following is perhaps the most important email stream obtained through Open Records Requests, as it 1) sheds light on the behind-the-scenes machinations to change the district lines and 2) refers to a specific address as the impetus for the district change.  These e-mails are provided in chronological order.  At the bottom of this blog post is a pdf of the original source e-mails obtained through an Open Records Request, which includes Ms. Thurman’s letter to Representative Jones.  If you refer to the source document, you will need to read the e-mails in reverse order to understand the chronology.  This e-mail stream is important for the following reasons:

  • It shows that Thurman was working with Representative Jones on changing the district lines well before she broached the issue with anyone on Council or anyone from the City. (The original request to change the district lines was made some time before the start of the legislative session on January 12, 2015–according to Ms. Thurman.)
  • It is clear that the impetus for the redistricting was a specific address. (See Jan. 27th e-mail from Gina Wright.)  What was this address?
  • It shows that Thurman circumvented a transparent, deliberative, and democratic process to effect the district change. Over time, the threshold for obtaining support from Council ratcheted downward from an official letter from Council, requiring discussion and a vote, to a single letter from one Council Member (Bill Lusk) that was provided after the bill had already been introduced; at this point, the change was a fait accompli.
  • This e-mail chain is indicative of Thurman’s use of personal and company email to conduct city business. This is an obvious example of non-transparency.  And it begs the question of whether there are other personal/company emails related to this matter that have not been provided?  And was there more to this email exchange than was provided by Ms. Thurman?  Where is the e-mail that provides the specifics (house number and street name or parcel number) for the statement “To take in that address . . . “?

Following is a synopsis of the e-mails, followed by the e-mails themselves (in chronological order) with some commentary.

  • January 27, 2015: Gina Wright provides update on redistricting and refers to a specific address as the impetus for the redistricting.
  • Feb. 12: Initially, Ms. Jones suggests a letter of approval from City Council.
  • Feb 26: Ms. Thurman cautions that “something official” would need to be put on a City Council agenda.  Ms. Thurman suggests “something from individual council members” as an alternative, which would avoid discussion and debate at Council and passage of a resolution.
  • March 4: Jones replies that letters from individual council members would be fine.
  • March 4: Thurman lowers the threshold even more stating she will get “at least a couple of the other council members to get her a letter also.”
  • March 4: Jones suggests that Thurman write the letters for Council members.
  • March 9: Thurman still has not gotten any letters to Ms. Jones.  She states her intention to take letters to Council that Council members can sign.  Instead, Ms. Thurman emails a form letter to Council Members that she asks them to customize and send to Representative Jones.  Note:  On this date, HB 570 is introduced into the Georgia General Assembly, without any documented support from Council members.

Following are the e-mails (in chronological order).  Comments for each e-mail are provided in red.  Note that Beth Green is Representative Jones’ Administrative Assistant.  Messages from Rep. Jones are sometimes conveyed through her.

**************************************************************************

From: Wright, Gina

Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 10:24 AM

To: ‘Jan Jones’

Cc: Green, Beth

Subject: RE: Milton boundary adjustment

I made the change as you requested- it ends up moving a total of 182 people. The deviations are still under 2% so it’s fine to go this way if they prefer. Although it’s only 35 homes, the census block that contains that neighborhood also picks up the neighborhood further down New Providence Road that runs off of Gates Mill Way. This is all part of a single census block. This does not add any area to District 2.

I’m attaching an adjusted map and stat sheet for you to see. To take in that address, this is as minimal change as we could go.

Let me know if you have further questions.

Thanks,

Gina

Gina Harbin Wright

Executive Director

Legislative and Congressional Reapportionment Office

Georgia General Assembly

 

This email provides evidence that the redistricting was driven by a specific address:  “To take in that address, this is as minimal a change as we could go.”  What is this address?  It seems that part of the email chain (i.e., earlier emails) was not provided and would answer this question.  Where is the rest of this email chain?  Ms. Thurman or Ms. Jones needs to reveal the address (house number and street name) referred to above.  It is reasonable to assume the address corresponds to the lot purchased a month earlier in The Estates At Atlanta National by the LLC owned by Ms. Thurman’s husband.

*********************************************************************

From: Green, Beth [mailto:Beth.Green@house.ga.govl

Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 1:30 PM

To: Thurman, Karen

Subject: FW: Milton boundary adjustment

Karen: Please see that attached from our Reapportionment Office. If acceptable, Jan is requesting a letter of approval from the City Council. Please let me know if you have any questions. Beth

Originally, Representative Jones requested a letter of approval from the City.  This would have been the correct way to effect the district change.  It would have required the matter to be put on a City Council agenda and a resolution passed by Council.  The public would have been able to provide input.

************************************************************************

From: Thurman, Karen [mailto:Karen.Thurman@frazierdeeter.com)

Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 2:04 PM

To: Green, Beth

Cc: Jones, Jan /

Subject: RE: Milton boundary adjustment

Beth,

I have spoken with City Manager Chris Lagerbloom and with the Mayor and all Council members but Joe Longoria. I hope to speak with Joe on Monday. What type of letter of approval is Jan looking for? If it is something official from the city then we will need to reflect it on a Council Agenda to discuss. If something from individual council members will suffice, all that I have spoken to have no objection and I believe they would be happy to send something to Jan.

Just let me know.

Thanks,

Karen

Karen Thurman, CPA I Partner

Frazier & Deeter

This is a critical e-mail.  In this e-mail, Ms. Thurman steers the discussion away from a transparent, deliberative, and democratic process.  As an alternative to an official letter of approval from Council, she suggests “something from individual council members.”  It would seem that Ms. Thurman wants to avoid a public and deliberative process that might expose the real reasons (i.e., her future move to The Estates at Atlanta National) and/or run the risk of public or Council opposition.  This district change very well might have prompted some citizens to speak out against the change. 

*************************************************************************

From: Green, Beth [mailto:Beth.Green@house.ga.gov)

Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 3:58 PM

To: Thurman, Karen

Subject: RE: Milton boundary adjustment

Karen: She doesn’t need an official resolution from the city but letters from individual council members would be fine. It has been advertised and will be introduced on Monday. Beth

Representative Jones agrees to accept letters from council members—we assume from all 7 of them.

*****************************************************************************

From: Thurman, Karen [mailto:Karen.Thurman@frazierdeeter.com]

Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 06: 19 PM

To: Green, Beth

Subject: RE: Milton boundary adjustment

Beth,

Thanks! I have been very busy at work but will get Jan something this weekend. I have now spoken with all of the council members and there was no objection. I will get at least a couple of the other council members to get her a letter also.

Thanks,

Karen

Note that Ms. Thurman further lowers the threshold for gaining Council support by promising to get “at least a couple” of letters from council members.

************************************************************************

From: Green, Beth [mailto:Beth.Green@house.ga.govl

Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 7:31 PM

To: Thurman, Karen

Subject: Re: Milton boundary adjustment

P.S. Jan suggested you write the letter for them to sign … 😉

The suggestion to provide form letters speaks to a lack of rigor and seriousness around this matter.

************************************************************************

From: Thurman, Karen

Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 10: 10 AM

To: ‘Green, Beth’

Subject: RE: Milton boundary adjustment

Beth,

Please find attached the letter to Jan. We have a Council worksession tonight and I will get additional letters from other council members signed at the worksession. I will forward them to you tomorrow morning. Do you want me to put the originals in the mail?

Thank you,

Karen

It does not seem that these letters were actually provided at the work session.  Rather, Ms. Thurman sent an e-mail on March 10, 2015 soliciting letters from Council Members.  Only Bill Lusk complied, with a letter sent to Ms. Jones on March 10, 2015.  Since the bill had already been introduced into the Georgia General Assembly on March 9, 2015, the solicitation of these letters seems pointless and only intended to provide a veneer of legitimacy to the district change.  The district change was essentially effected through the joint efforts of Ms. Thurman and Ms. Jones, with virtually no input or involvement from Council . . . and no input or involvement from citizens.

**************************************************************************

Following is a pdf of the source file for the e-mails provided and discussed above.  It includes Thurman’s request for the district change, dated March 6, 2015 but sent on March 9th–the same day HB570 was introduced into the Georgia General Assembly.

Thurman-Jones Email Exchange #1