(Before I get to main story below, please go to Bits & Pieces for latest threatening texts to Mayor Jamison sent on September 21st. Following is a link: Bits & Pieces.)
The Milton Herald has published an excellent and detailed exposé on the latest scandal swirling around and sucking down Council Member Rick Mohrig. I previously reported on this story on September 17th; the links are provided at the end of this post. However, reporter Amber Perry informatively extends the story, providing new information and quotes from Mayor Jamison, City Manager Krokoff, and Rick Mohrig. Citizens, this is as BAD as it gets. Following is a link to the Milton Herald story, followed by my explanation and commentary:
Milton Herald: Email Hack Inquiry Sparks City Interest to Launch 2nd Probe
Readers will remember that an email invitation was sent on September 5th from Council Member Rick Mohrig’s city email account referencing a September 7th “strategic planning” meeting at the home of two Milton poll workers in Crooked Creek. Such meetings are legal, but the optics (including lack of transparency) are absolutely awful . . . and lying about such meetings and diverting city resources for fake investigations is a much more serious and maybe even criminal issue. Sometimes, the cover-up really is worse than the crime. Read on . . .
Upon being questioned about the meeting, Mohrig claimed his email had been hacked. Mohrig even filed a police report on September 14th. From the get-go, Mohrig’s story was fishy. And no surprise . . . the City’s IT professionals and the city’s network vendor “concluded there had been no unauthorized access” (Milton Herald). Furthermore, as City Manager Krokoff has pointed out, the hacking did not fit any normal hacking patterns. I would conclude from these findings that Mohrig filed a false police report, which is a serious misdemeanor carrying up to $1000 in fines or up to one year in jail or both (O.S.G.A. §16-10-26). And I wonder if perjury charges might also eventually come into play. Perjury is a felony punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000.00 or by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than ten years, or both (O.C.G.A. § 16-10-70).
Suspicion has only grown with Mohrig’s refusal to directly answer a simple yes/no question about whether the subject meeting occurred, giving instead blatantly evasive non-answers. The answer to this question is dispositive in this matter. Afterall, if the meeting really occurred, why would anyone hack into a single email account to send a single email about a meeting that actually occurred? That makes absolutely no sense.
Here is where events get interesting. It has been verified by the City Manager that Mohrig DID ATTEND the meeting that was the subject of the email invitation. In Perry’s article, City Manager Krokoff revealed that he surveilled Crooked Creek where the meeting occurred and witnessed the meeting. In an email to City Council (on September 22nd), Krokoff stated that he was an eye-witness to the meeting. See following passage from Milton Herald:
So what was Mohrig’s response? Surely, he realized the jig was up and he fessed up, right? NO. Rather Mohrig doubled down on deceit. When asked if he had organized a meeting with poll workers, in typical fashion, Mohrig gave yet another carefully parsed and stereotypical politican’s non-answer:
Mohrig clearly and transparently dodges the question. Even though Perry asks whether he organized a meeting “involving Milton poll workers,” Mohrig deflects the question with the word “specifically,” thereby responding to a question that was not asked . . . a typical politician’s trick answer. This is the cat-and-mouse game that has so infuriated Council Member Cookerly. In his deflection, Mohrig implies others were present at the meeting, raising more questions . . . who were these other people? Now that there is an active police investigation . . . it seems prudent to interview these people. I suspect this could get uncomfortable for certain local partisan activists and politicians that like to operate in secrecy.
When pressed further, Mohrig had the audacity to argue that “there are no restrictions on poll workers supporting any candidate.” Yes, Mr. Mohrig, but this goes beyond plain support . . . and in any case, the optics of a candidate meeting with poll workers to engage in “strategic planning” during an election campaign are horrific . . . especially a Council Member who made “election integrity” the primary argument for Milton self-managing municipal elections. Mohrig concludes his lame defense by doing what he always does . . . he plays the victim, whining that that the allegations against him are “purely driven by political motives.” This is a laughable charge, as it is Mohrig who is playing politics with his evasive and parsed non-answers to reasonable questions. The poll workers that hosted the “strategic planning” meeting have subsequently resigned.
When once again asked whether he attended the subject meeting, Mohrig slunk back into his bunker, issuing yet another deceptive and deflective answer. Mohrig lamely and unconvincingly implies that the police hacking investigation somehow prohibits him from answering this question . . . it does not. I am relatively certain that Milton investigators would have no concerns about Mohrig compromising their investigation by answering a simple yes/no question about his meeting attendance . . . in fact, the answer to this dispositive question has already been answered by Krokoff, so Mohrig’s refusal to answer is seemingly driven by other motives . . . perhaps fear of criminality. Filing a false police report? Perjury? His refusal to answer just seems Mohrig’s indirect way of pleading the Fifth Amendment right to remain silent and not self-incriminate. I think it might be time for Mohrig to lawyer up . . .
Mohrig is clever by half. With each dissembling answer and unconvincing denial, Mohrig is digging a deeper hole for himself with both city council and citizens. Council is clearly fed up with Mohrig’s non-stop and dishonest interference in Milton’s elections. A tipping point has been reached. City Council is now considering an investigation not just into the incredulous hacking incident, but more broadly into Mohrig’s elections actions over many months. Mayor Jamison says the latest incident was just the “last straw.”
Krokoff went even further (than the mayor) stating that an investigation would address “the totality,” and further stating “I don’t think it begins and ends with Rick.” This is encouraging. It seems Krokoff is advocating a broad-based investigation of elections design, planning, and preparations over the past two years . . . and that such an investigation might include more bad actors (than just Mohrig). Readers might recall that Krokoff pulled no punches in a recent email (to the mayor) about Milton’s dysfunctional and dishonest elections project. He was particularly dismayed by disrespectful treatment of his staff by Council Members Moore and Mohrig and the Election Feasibility Committee’s (EFC) appointed partisan members. (Following is a link to my article about Krokoff’s highly critical assessment of Milton’s elections project: Elections Interference (Part 5): City Manager’s Insider Perspective Reveals a More Deeply Flawed, Biased, and Dishonest Process Than Milton Coalition Investigation Uncovered)
The conclusion of Ms. Perry’s article provides some interesting insights into Milton’s steadily rising elections costs. The following is from the EFC’s final report:
Note the EFC estimate of 2023 costs: $72,254. Krokoff is now asserting that legal costs are driving costs even higher than the revised elections budget of $102,000 + 10% contingency. Three separate entities have issued complaints about Milton’s upcoming elections with the Georgia State Elections Board. Recall that the EFC removed all discussion of risks (including legal risks) from its final report. Costs will certainly exceed $112,200 . . . how much more is unclear. However, these higher costs do not yet include the cost of additional poll workers that are needed based on a mock election exercise that was recently conducted. Actual costs will be >55% higher than EFC estimates ($72,254) . . . probably much higher. And it gets even worse . . . staff costs are inexplicably not yet included in the 2023 elections budget. I have estimated these costs to be at least $100,000. Accordingly, it is likely the Milton’s election costs could easily exceed $220,000. Compare this to Fulton County’s estimated cost of $215,000 to run Milton’s election. It is now likely that it will cost Milton MORE to run its 2023 elections than under Fulton County!!!!!!!!
However, it is even worse than it appears . . . remember that Milton will offer much lower service levels than under Fulton County. Polling locations were reduced from 8 to 3. Voting hours, which were supposed to mirror Fulton County, were inexplicably reduced from the EFC’s recommended 208 hours to 149 hours. Voters can NO longer early-vote outside Milton; the only early voting option will be Milton City Hall, which does not fit well with traffic patterns in Milton and is especially inconvenient for voters in east Milton—notably District 3. IT IS BECOMING CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT MILTON TAX PAYERS WILL PAY MORE FOR MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS (than under Fulton County) FOR MUCH LOWER SERVICE LEVELS. IT IS BECOMING CLEAR THAT COUNCIL AND MILTON TAX PAYERS WERE SCAMMED BY A HIGHLY BIASED ELECTIONS FEASIBILITY COMMITTEE. Council Member Rick Mohrig must be held responsible for Milton’s ethical and fiscal elections disaster. Election integrity and fiscal accountability demand it.
Advocating For Election Integrity,
Tim
Note: Following are links to my two posts about Mohrig’s meeting with poll workers and his computer hacking cover-up story:
Election Interference (Part 6): Mohrig Alleges Computer Hack . . . Cover-up For Meeting With Poll Workers and His Misuse of City Resources? Mohrig Dodging Questions . . . What a Tangled Web He Weaves . . .
Note: I am in no way criticizing the poll workers hosting the Crooked Creek meeting. Council Member Mohrig is 100% responsible for the serious problems exposed by my investigation.
Milton Coalition 