It’s Halloween, so it is time for TREATS and for TRICKS! The treats are email excerpts from Lisa Cauley praising me and the Milton Coalition. (Yes, I keep my powder dry until it is needed.) See one excerpt above and one excerpt at the bottom.
Unfortunately, politics is not all treats . . . in fact, what we are seeing from Rick Mohrig’s campaign is mostly TRICKERY . . . never more so than in the attached letter from Lisa Cauley. Ms. Cauley is a former member of Milton’s Election Feasibility Committee (EFC) and is a hardcore Rick Mohrig supporter.
It is with great pleasure that I provide Ms. Cauley’s letter to readers because her letter makes a better case for defeating Rick Mohrig than I can ever make. And if Milton is rid of Mohrig, there is a big bonus treat . . . Milton will also be rid of the hyper-partisan tricksters that have been disrupting Milton’s city government for 2+ years . . . Rick Mohrig’s puppet-masters.
I am the blogger referenced in Ms. Cauley’s letter. My opponents—most of them anyway—have smartened up. They have finally realized that every time they mention “Tim Becker” or “The Milton Coalition,” my readership increases. The more they try to impugn my credibility, the more my readership increases. So far this month, my posts have been viewed 5,600 times.
So let’s have some spooky fun and frightful laughs. Let’s analyze some elements of Ms. Cauley’s letter:
Ms. Cauley laments “low voter participation” in early voting. Really? Wasn’t that the intent of the EFC’s election design? To depress voting . . . at least for certain voters? After all, voters no longer have the option of early voting outside of Milton. In past elections, 40% of early voting occurred outside of Milton, especially in Alpharetta. Early voting days/hours have also been reduced, including elimination of Sunday voting. And if maximizing voter participation is the goal, then Milton’s early voting location in Crabapple makes absolutely no sense. Simple common sense would suggest an early voting location in SE Milton (yes, District 3) considering that most voters frequently travel through this area.
It is interesting (hypocritical?) that Ms. Cauley is touting Mr. Mohrig’s experience while at the same time supporting political neophyte Helen Gordon against two-term veteran Carol Cookerly, who has been on council for 5 years . . . longer than the three years that challenger Gordon has lived in Milton.
Ms. Cauley’s comments about staff are especially troubling. She states that staff’s role on the EFC was simply “to provide support and assistance.” This is nonsense. The assigned staff members were (supposed to be) equal participating members in the EFC . . . not servants. City staff should have been treated as equal and capable committee members, including having a say in and a vote on the final report. (BTW, citizens should have also been given an opportunity by the EFC to comment on the final report.) In her letter, Ms. Cauley makes several disconcerting claims without providing any substantiation. Why? Because the records (I’ve gathered) do not support her claims. I wrote an entire blog post on the manipulation of the EFC’s final report that generously references source materials, which are provided at the post. Click on the following link: Mohrig Excluded City Staff & Suppressed Elections Findings . . . Violating Committee Standards
Ms. Cauley continues to assert that Milton will save money by running its elections. I have written 3 blog posts (links provided below) on these mythical savings. The crux of Ms. Cauley’s argument is this: City staff are free. Not a cent of staff costs should be included in the elections business case. This is ridiculous. It is standard practice to include opportunity costs in any business case. And it is standard practice for competent organizations to allocate staff salaries to specific projects. This is Business 101. I am quite sure that the Cauley family business allocates its employees’ salaries to specific projects it executes for its customers. I do the same in my business as do my clients.
Exposing Exaggerated Elections Cost Savings Projections at Milton City Hall
Mohrig Can’t Substantiate Elections Cost Savings Claims . . . Milton Will Pay More For Much Less
Ms. Cauley asserts that I am “untruthful” and “spreading falsehoods and fabricating a misleading narrative.” However, despite my invitations to do so, Ms. Cauley has 1) never contacted about any factual errors at the blog nor 2) submitted an alternative narrative that I could publish. In fact, in the past, Ms. Cauley has had nothing but praise for me and the Milton Coalition blog. See excerpts of her emails to me and to citizens at the top and bottom of this blog post.
Ms. Cauley states that Rick Mohrig enjoys the “widespread respect, admiration, and a strong standing in Milton.” Again, I did an entire blog post about this newfound respect for Rick Mohrig. Only in the last few years has Rick Mohrig been esteemed by Paul Moore, Laura Bentley, etc. For over a decade, Mohrig was aligned with Milton’s other political faction . . . the Lusk/Kunz faction . . . and he was despised by the Moore-Bentley-Bailey faction. Following is a link to my blog post with a letter written by Moore blasting Mohrig: Paul Moore Blasts Mohrig: “WE WILL NOT TOLERATE YOUR BACKROOM POLITICS.” Moore’s criticisms largely mirror my posts about Mohrig over the past 6 months. So what changed? Well, Mohrig became Moore-Bentley’s patsy. They are supporting him because they need a puppet on council that they can control. That is the long-and-short of it. However, the Lusk-Kunz faction and Milton’s Lunatic Fringe also have their hooks in Mohrig. So the question becomes: Which of these three groups—Moore & Bentley, Lusk & Kunz, or the Lunatic Fringe—will control the malleable, lame-duck Mohrig if he is re-elected? He readily responds to treats but also easily falls for tricks.
Ms. Cauley’s letter mirrors the EFC’s poor-quality process and output. Ms. Cauley’s letter is just more of the same . . . assertions without substantiation . . . more bias, non-transparency, and poor analysis—for example, hyperlinks to anonymous posts heavy on innuendo and bereft of facts or sourcing. Please note that I am NOT including the hyperlinks that Ms. Cauley includes in her letter. Readers know that I adhere to strict publishing standards. I do not publish communications from untrusted, anonymous sources, especially if such communications make unsubstantiated, poorly sourced, and potentially libelous claims. Such communications assume voters are morons and can be easily duped. I hold the opposite opinion. I believe Milton voters are discerning and accordingly, most will readily reject these anonymous communications as poorly crafted propaganda . . . and nothing more.
Well voters, now that I have debunked all the trickery, it is time to leave you with one more treat (and there are plenty more where these came from) . . . one more email excerpt from Ms. Cauley . . . another email to friends praising me and my objectivity . . . and yes, please forward and share this post with whomever you wish. I encourage it.
Happy Halloween to All!
Advocating For More Treats and Less (Political) Tricks,
Tim
Milton Coalition 