July 22, 2017

Excerpt from March 22, 2015 email from Council Member Thurman to Representative Jan Jones:

We are still hoping to be able to build another house. The soil is not good on the lot so we are waiting to see if we can get another plan drawn up that will include bringing in soil that will perc.

(Click here to get original e-mail:  20150322 Email From Thurman to Jones re building EAN Home)

These are probably the two most important sentences in the whole Redistricting Scandal.  Why?  Because these two sentences completely obliterate Ms. Thurman’s main argument that she did not intend to move when the bill (HB 570) to change the district lines was being drafted and introduced.  This email was sent just 3 months after Ms. Thurman bought her lot in EAN and just 4 days after HB 570 passed in the Georgia House of Representatives.  Does this sound like someone that is not intending to build herself a home on the purchased lot in EAN and move to that home?  Of course not.

Consider the following:

• Dec 18, 2014: Ms. Thurman buys a lot in the Estates at Atlanta National (EAN) for $115,500
• Jan 11, 2015 (or earlier):  By her own admission, Ms. Thurman lobbies Representative Jan Jones to change the district lines.
• March 9, 2015: A bill (HB 570) is introduced in the Georgia legislature to change District 1’s lines to include EAN
• March 18, 2015: HB 570 passes in the Georgia House of Representatives.
• March 22, 2015: Ms. Thurman sends the above email that refers building a home for herself on the purchased lot in EAN and specifically mentions that another plan will have to be drawn up to deal with septic issues.  So clearly Ms. Thurman had a previous plan drawn up for her home while HB 570 was being drafted and introduced.  (And obviously Ms. Thurman had spoken previously with Ms. Jones about the building of this home.)
• Early August, 2016: Thurman moves to new home on the purchased lot in EAN

It is no coincidence (as she implies) that Ms. Thurman lobbied Jan Jones to change District 1’s boundaries to include the lot where she built her new home.  Plainly, Ms. Thurman intended to move to EAN, which was outside of her district.  The first step in building a new home is to draw up a plan and clearly Ms. Thurman had drawn up a plan simultaneous with the introduction and passage of HB 570.  This is indisputable.

Ms. Thurman continues to assert that it was coincidental that she lobbied to change her district lines within a month of purchasing a lot at EAN.  On Monday night, Ms. Thurman argued no more than 5 times that she had no intent to move while HB 570 was being drafted and introduced.  She recited the same arguments repeatedly.  Most arguments were patently ridiculous.  For example, she asserts that she did not even know if the lot was buildable when it was purchased.  Who buys a lot for $115,500 assuming that it might not be buildable?  Ms. Thurman’s strategy on Monday night was to bury the audience in nonsensical arguments, hoping to sow doubt and confusion in listeners.  The strategy did not work.  Even Council members were plainly not buying her arguments.  Clearly, from the date of the purchase of her lot in EAN, Ms. Thurman set a goal of moving to EAN, established a plan for building a home, and successfully executed that plan.  She never deviated from her plan.

Following is the video of Ms. Thurman’s comments about the redistricting.  She is throwing everything against the wall, hoping something will stick.  Nothing does.

Note:  Ms. Thurman very often uses personal and company e-mail for City business.  This in non-transparent and makes us skeptical that we were provided all of the emails relating to this scandal.  If Ms. Thurman used her city-issued e-mail account, the City would be able to provide all of her e-mails, including her deleted emails.  When company and personal e-mail are used, Council Members are on the honor system to provide all of the emails being requested.  This issue of using non-City email has been broached several times, without any response from Ms. Thurman.  Such non-transparency seriously undermines Ms. Thurman’s credibility.

Advocating For Good Governance,

Tim Becker