The above screenshot is from the Election Consultant’s July Report.  In her monthly report, Milton’s elections consultant, Vernetta Nuriddan, states “I believe that the council erred when two incumbents on the November ballot were empowered to close Election Day polls in areas with high concentrations of people of color.”  The two incumbents in question are . . . I’ll give you one guess . . . yes, Rick Mohrig and Paul Moore.  (I am attaching the full consultant’s report. See page 4 to read above recommendation.)

Milton’s original election design (December 2022) called for only 2 polling locations in only Districts 1 and 3. However, later in a sneaky electoral sleight-of-hand, council members Jacobus, Mohrig, and Moore advocated for replacing the District 3 polling location with a District 2 polling location, which council then approved. Conveniently, there was no reference the original election design recommendations; however, Mr. Moore did insert his foot in his mouth and cited low voter turnout as a reason to deny District 3 a polling location. Later, council refused to add back the District 3 polling location.  District 3 has Milton’s highest concentration of Democratic voters and voters who are people of color.  (It is also the most logical location for a polling location due to traffic patterns in Milton.) In April 2023, Milton Elections Superintendent Steve Krokoff recommended adding a third polling location in District 3 (cost:  only around $4,500 per year for municipal elections after 2023).  Seeing the injustice in only 2 polling locations, Mayor Peyton Jamison made an impassioned plea for a District 3 polling location.  However, Jamison was voted down 4-3.  The four council members voting against a District 3 polling location (make a note of this when you vote) were Paul Moore, Rick Mohrig, Andrea Verhoff, and Jan Jacobus.

Over many months, Ms. Nuriddan has been consistent in her assertion (even before she was hired) that the City of Milton must be much more careful about council interference in elections.  Once the City is within the elections cycle (after February 1^st) and has named an Elections Superintendent, Ms. Nuriddan asserts that city council must butt out.  Nuriddan was even uncomfortable with Mohrig’s involvement in her hiring.  In emails and texts over many months, Ms. Nuriddan warned of elections interference from council members and from partisan activists.  Ms. Nuriddan was troubled by Milton’s general sloppiness in its elections planning and implementation.

Ms. Nuriddan cites state law (SB202) in supporting her position.  According to Ms. Nuriddan, SB202 defines the role of Election Superintendent, “which includes selecting and preparing polling locations.”  Ms. Nuriddan implies that Krokoff should be making all elections decisions and Council should no longer have any say-so.  It is common sense (except in Milton) that elected officials should be excluded from tampering with upcoming elections. Individual incumbent council members certainly should not be interfering behind the scenes in any way with election planning and execution.  However, emails and texts show that Moore, Mohrig and political partisans inserted themselves into Milton’s election planning and implementation.  There is rich irony in Moore and Mohrig’s strong-arming Krokoff into hiring Nuriddan, who in turn has criticized their meddling.  There is an instance of Mohrig actually assigning an election task to Republican activist Lisa Cauley.  (And communications show that Krokoff was also tasking Cauley with election action items.) 

In her report, Ms. Nuriddan recommends that if the city is committed to only 2 election day polling locations, then the city should consider shifting one of the polling locations to District 3.  Because Moore and Mohrig were “empowered to close election day polls in areas with high concentrations of people of color,” Nuriddan cites state law to warn that “an election contest could be made by a losing candidate on the grounds of misconduct, fraud, or irregularity by any primary or election official or officials sufficient to change or place in doubt the result.  O.C.G.A. 21-2-522.”  (Ms. Nuriddan underlined the above passage for emphasis.)

Citizens, this is as bad as it gets!  Ms. Nuriddan is the expert that Moore and Mohrig pressured Krokoff to hire!  I assume she knows what she is talking about.  In her report, Nuriddan clearly sounds the alarm that Milton, through council’s actions, has made itself vulnerable to legal challenges to its elections . . . challenges that will embarrass the City and cost taxpayers in legal bills.  Ms. Nuriddan asserts that Milton’s election design discriminates based on race and that such discrimination is a legitimate basis for legal challenges.  She also asserts that Milton erred in allowing incumbents Moore and Mohrig to “close election day polls in areas with high concentrations of people of color” . . . in advance of 2023 elections in which Moore and Mohrig would be running for re-election. You really can’t make this stuff up!

Citizens, none of this dysfunction at City Hall should surprise you.  It is exactly what you would expect from allowing sitting council members and political partisans with little elections experience/expertise to operate in secret to design and plan elections.  From the get-go, Milton’s elections initiative was poorly and dishonestly planned and executed, which is ironic considering the initial impetus for Milton’s elections initiative was concern about election integrity in the wake of the 2020 presidential elections.

Ms. Nurridan’s criticism does not stop at election disenfranchisement, illegal council interference, and possible legal challenges to election integrity.  Ms. Nuriddan also criticizes the city for taking risky shortcuts in its elections planning; limiting her ability to be effective/efficient; and recklessly skimping on legal resources/reviews.  I will address these issues in another blog post.

In closing, my sincere hope is that, in the 2023 elections, Milton’s voters, especially voters in District 3, will soundly reject Moore and Mohrig’s elections meddling and exile them forever to political Siberia.  My hope is also that Miltonites will reach out to the press.  This is an important story that needs to be broadcast much more broadly.

Advocating For Free, Fair, and Honest Elections,

Tim

Note 1:  I received Ms. Nurridan’s report through an Open Records Request.  Ms. Nuriddan was supposed to present her report at the July 17^th Milton City Council Working Session.  However, at the last minute, the working session was mysteriously cancelled due to lack of a quorum.  My understanding is that Ms. Nurridan was supposed to present at a rescheduled working session on Wednesday (July 19^th), but that session never was scheduled.  Rather, there was a Special Called Council Meeting on July 19^th where council went into Excecutive Session.  Folks, something funny is going on here.  The City needs to come clean about what seems like increasing confusion and dissension about city elections. The secrecy needs to stop.

Note:  I have long prided myself on keeping the Milton Coalition Blog strictly non-partisan.  In local politics and governance, I have always prioritized principles over party, politics, and partisanship.  I will continue to adhere to non-partisanship with my blog posts.  However, because of the partisan sensitivities around elections, I feel compelled to explain my political leanings to demonstrate my independence and objectivity.  I am an independent, Libertarian-leaning, Constitution-loving, patriotic, Ronald Reagan Conservative and proud of it.  (I proudly served my country as a US Navy nuclear submarine officer for nearly 8 years.) However, right is right.  Basic rights and fairness are at stake.  The election issues I am exposing transcend party and politics.  I refuse to stand by and let certain council members and political partisans destroy the fairness and integrity of Milton’s elections.