Rick Mohrig and Helen Gordon were soundly routed in Milton’s recent municipal elections.  However, you must wonder if their margins of defeat might have been even larger if Milton’s election design was not so biased against District 3 voters.  Conversely, you must wonder if the margin of defeat might have been smaller if council members Mohrig, Moore, and Jacobus had succeeded in denying District 3 voters a day-of polling place.  Consider two statistics:

• 2 out of 3 of the (17) early voting days when District 3 votes comprised the highest proportion of total votes cast were Saturdays.
• District 3 had the lowest proportion of early votes (to total votes) at 46.5% (vs. 63.6% for District 1).

I will return to these statistics later, and hopefully Milton will conduct detailed analysis of the 2023 election statistics as it considers whether Milton should continue to conduct its municipal elections . . . and if so, what changes should be made.

Let me begin by stating that I am a staunch—but more importantly, principled—Conservative.  Real Conservatives despise a rigged game . . . unlike counterfeit conservatives.  Milton’s counterfeit conservatives regularly rant and rave about election integrity but continue to defend an indefensible election design and planning process that was riddled with dishonesty and lack of transparency . . . with predictable results . . . an unfair election design intended to advantage their counterfeit conservative candidates.  Real Conservatives care about maximizing liberty, which means ensuring equal opportunities (and rights) for all citizens . . . most especially equal opportunity at the ballot box.  If we err in one direction or another, we should err in providing more opportunity to the least advantaged in society . . . that is compassionate Conservatism.  Conversely, counterfeit conservatives are motivated to create and/or perpetuate unequal opportunities for their constituencies with the aim of achieving and/or maintaining unfair advantage . . . for example, biased election designs that favor their candidates.  To hell with the less fortunate in our society . . . “let them eat cake” (Marie Antoinette).

Let’s begin with a few reasonable premises.  District 3 is where Milton’s least well-off voters live.  All of Milton’s apartment housing is located here, along with many/most of Milton’s starter homes.  District 3 is the area where two-earner and single-parent families are concentrated:  first responders, teachers, nurses, tradespeople, etc.  These are families who have the least time to vote . . . and for whom Milton needs to make voting easiest (or equally easy) . . . but for whom Milton has made voting most difficult.  These are voters that the let-them-eat-cake Real Housewives of Milton—that regularly rant at council–don’t understand or care about.

These District 3 residents are voters that probably most took advantage of Fulton County’s early voting outside of Milton . . . voting close to their work where they could vote on their lunch hour or on their way to/from work.  These are voters who previously also early voted in heavy numbers in Alpharetta, which is convenient (to SE Milton) . . . again on their way to/from work . . . or as a part of their weekend routine.  These are voters that most take advantage of Sunday early voting, which Milton eliminated.  (Note:  When Fulton County ran Milton’s municipal elections, 40% of early voting occurred outside Milton . . . with 75% of the 40% occurring in Alpharetta.)

And let’s be honest.  District 3 is where Milton’s Democrats and black & brown voters are concentrated.  If the intent was to appeal to voters based on party affiliation, then you certainly want to make it difficult for District 3 voters to vote.  And as we know, Mohrig’s campaign was hyper-partisan (although important issues in Milton never break along party lines).  Mohrig’s counterfeit conservative canvassers touted Mohrig as “the Republican candidate” and labeled Cranmer as “the Democrat candidate.”  Mohrig was promoted at an extremist right-wing media site . . . where he even participated in a video interview.  And let’s truthfully talk about racial/ethnic intolerance.  Even if the election design intent was not discriminatory, the outcome—reducing the black and brown vote—was clearly discriminatory . . . and therefore the design was inherently discriminatory.  This is common-sense logic, except with the counterfeit conservative fringe element

So given those premises, how might one quash the opposition vote concentrated in District 3?  Easy . . . make it more difficult for District 3 citizens to vote.  By what means?

• Eliminate their option to early vote anywhere but in Milton and create a single early voting location that is as inconvenient as possible.  And that is exactly what happened.  The Milton City Hall early location makes no sense considering Milton’s traffic patterns, which would strongly suggest District 3 as the most convenient early voting location for the largest number of potential voters.
• Reduce early voting days/hours.  Originally, the election feasibility committee suggested mirroring Fulton County’s days/hours . . . a total of 206 hours it was (incorrectly) calculated.  However, early voting days/hours were reduced.  Sunday voting was eliminated, and the eventual early voting hours totaled only 149.  And of course, it was made confusing by creating inconsistent voting hours that varied from day-to-day and did not mirror Fulton County’s hours that citizens were accustomed to.
• Make all the voting locations completely different from Fulton County’s voting locations . . . sow a lot of confusion particularly in District 3’s younger and newer voters that haven’t acclimated to the pattern of different odd- and even-year voting . . . perhaps they’ll give up.  Of course, a complex voting scheme makes it difficult for two-earner/single-parent families who have limited time to vote . . . what with picking up the kids from daycare, making dinner at home, etc.
• Deny District 3 voters a day-of voting location.  Let’s add insult to injury.  Why stop at making it most difficult for District 3 voters to early vote?  Let’s make day-of voting also most difficult for these voters?  And this almost happened, except for a popular revolt from average Milton citizens catalyzed by this blog (and the Milton Herald’s excellent reporting) that caused council to backtrack and add a third polling location in District 3.

In a nutshell, Milton’s election design created a confusing voting maze for District 3 voters.  More complexity and more hurdles mean fewer votes.  First, cut off the most convenient methods of early voting and then make it as inconvenient to early vote as possible, by sending District 3 voters clear across Milton to an area many have never ventured . . . and create inconsistent, unfamiliar, and reduced early voting days/hours.  And then on election day, again deny these District 3 voters a convenient polling place, by again sending them to unfamiliar areas of Milton where they must fight rush-hour traffic before/after work. (Fortunately, this second design element was eliminated due to overwhelming public pressure.)

Milton’s election design begs the question:  how many District 3 voters did not vote because Milton made voting more difficult for them?  The above statistics provide a clue.  District 3 voters voted in higher proportions on Saturdays . . . clearly Sunday voting (and longer/more consistent voting hours) would have meant proportionately more District 3 votes.  And District 3’s vs. District 1’s early voting compared to each district’s day-of voting strongly indicates that convenience is a critical factor . . . there was a 17+% difference between these two districts, with early votes respectively comprising only 46.5% of total District 3 votes vs. 63.6% of total District 1 votes. 

Fortunately, Milton’s always-sentient voters saw through the unfair election design and voted decidedly against Mohrig and Gordon.  And clearly the outcome would have been more lopsided but for Milton’s biased election design.  In part, Milton’s election was a referendum on Milton’s election design.  Hopefully, Milton’s new city council understands and considers this clarion message from its voters in its future decision-making about elections.  We can only hope . . .

Advocating For Equal Voting Opportunity For ALL Citizens,

Tim

Note 1: This analysis was applied to Milton’s three precincts, which roughly correspond to (but do not exactly mirror) Milton’s three Districts.

Note 2: Some design elements discussed above were clearly deliberate; however, others may have been inadvertent . . . chalk it up to incompetence . . . but nevertheless these elements had the effect of reducing District 3 voting and must be analyzed/revised.

Note 3: I had intended to provide a more detailed and comprehensive analysis of the 2023 election. However, given other priorities discussed in my previous post, I won’t be publishing such an analysis anytime soon. 🙂

The purpose of this post is to (eventually) discuss the future direction of the Milton Coalition Blog.  But first, thanks to my many readers.  I appreciate your trust, confidence, and respect . . . that is what has kept me blogging and advocating for citizens.  Thank you! 

Because of you, the MC Blog is more successful than ever.  I have the most ever email subscribers.  Adding a few subscribers here and there over 7+ years translates to a lot of readers.  More importantly, the number of non-subscribers coming directly to the blog has spiked . . . more than doubling previous highs set in run-up to the 2017 election.  Since July 1^st, the MC Blog has received around 14,500 views.  If blog post email opens are added, the number of views climbs to nearly 25,000 total views in the past 4+ months.  Election day alone saw 624 views of the blog, as voters sought candidate information.  This election season, I also sent three emails to my list of petition signers.  Open rates and click-through rates were stratospheric . . . in one case, nearly 72% and 22%, respectively.  I am humbled by this high level of engagement and trust.  Thank you.

Please understand that I also have my detractors . . . and some of them are vicious.  They have tried mightily to impugn my credibility and to smear me, but their cheap shots have done no harm but rather steeled my determination.  Their middle school name-calling and bush-league tactics have only increased the power of the blog.  Each time they mention my blog or my name, blog viewership trends upwards.  (I think they have finally realized this, so now just refer to me as The Alpharetta Blogger.)  These detractors often complain that my blog disseminates “disinformation,” “misinformation,” “false narratives,” etc.  However, NOT once have they written to me to dispute a single fact, despite multiple invitations to do so.  Neither has Council Member Rick Mohrig, who incessantly whines about “lies,” ever reached out.  This silence speaks for itself.

My eight-year political journey has often been arduous and sometimes lonely.  I have invested over $15,000 and 3,000+ hours in my good governance efforts.  I have posted 2 petitions, spoken over 100 times before Milton City Council, and published around 370 blog posts.  I supported Laura Bentley’s bid for council in 2017.  I believe my support was dispositive in her election.  However, once in office, Bentley quickly turned her back on her supporters.  We weren’t needed anymore.  Bentley betrayed her hardline zoning stances to support the granting of 28 variances at Birmingham Crossroads.  Worse, while in office, Bentley employed the same political tactics she had criticized in her 2017 opponent.  Belatedly, I realized there was not a dime’s worth of difference between Bentley and her predecessor Bill Lusk.  Most troubling, Bentley did not deliver on her campaign commitments—especially her promise to shift power to citizens.  Sadly, Laura became just another dissembling politician. 

My endorsement of Bentley hurt the Milton Coalition brand and for several years, I was exiled to a sort of political wilderness.  However, I continued to engage when I sensed opportunities to regain citizen trust.  I stuck to my principles, believing that when citizens were presented with the facts and with logic, they would continue to seek out the blog . . . and my brand would be restored stronger than ever . . . and it has been.  And I had confidence that, untethered from ethics and sound advice, Bentley and Moore would ultimately commit self-destruction that I would catalyze by exposing their misdeeds . . . and self-destruct they did and in quite dramatic fashion.  Please understand that my goal was not revenge, but rather redemption (for myself).  Thankfully, my faith in Miltonites (to see through the thick fog of dishonesty and distraction) was confirmed in your unwavering support and more importantly in your sage voting at election time.

My endorsement of Bentley was my biggest blunder, but also led me to my most important insight about Milton’s politics . . . that huge damage was being done to good governance because of factionalism in Milton.  My goal became defeating this factionalism and convincing citizens to leave behind the destructive politics of the past.  Since the founding of the city, two factions have been battling each other for supremacy:  the Bailey-Bentley-Moore faction and the Lusk-Kunz-Mohrig faction.  In truth, these political cliques differ little in their policy positions and neither cares much about principled governance.  Often, their disputes were positively juvenile and got so bad at one point that an organizational psychologist was engaged . . . but to no avail.  Policy and principles took a back seat to personality politics, with both sides competing to be the coolest kids in city government.  Citizens were the losers.  However, with the 2023 elections, these fractious factions have finally been exorcised from city government.  By the 2023 campaign, Milton’s two political sects found themselves so weakened that they loosely allied to jointly promote Mohrig, enlisting the aid of Milton’s Lunatic Fringe.  Nevertheless, they could barely muster 40% of votes for Mohrig . . . a testament not only to their impotence but also to the wisdom of Milton’s voters.  Citizens have chosen a new path that leaves behind Milton’s long-damaging sectarian politics and its more recent spasm of hyper-partisanship to focus on a better and less fractious future for Milton.  I am pleased about the small role I played in the demise of Milton’s two political factions.  Good riddance!

My political journey has also been an intensely personal journey.  While sometimes difficult, traveling the political high road has been also enlightening.  I have learned a lot about myself and my fellow humans.  I have made many lifelong friendships.  My political sojourn has increased my self-awareness and made me a better person.  My faith in principled leadership has been fortified.  I have made some mistakes, but I have no regrets.  Mistakes are inevitable. What is important is to admit those mistakes, to learn from them, and to soldier on.  That is why I continued my advocacy in the wake of my misjudgments about Bentley (and Moore) and the resulting damage to my reputation and the Milton Coalition brand. 

This brings me to my purpose with this post.  Although now living in Alpharetta, I had unfinished business in Milton.  That business is concluded.  I have been instrumental in defeating both of Milton’s long-warring factions.  Six of Milton’s factional candidates (Mohrig, Bentley, Lusk, Moore, Thurman, and Kunz) have been defeated outright or wisely chosen not to run in the face of certain defeat.  A few other candidates put up by one faction or the other have been defeated.  The Lunatic Fringe has been largely neutered.  With Moore and Mohrig gone, their venom has no outlet . . .  Milton’s radicals have been defanged . . . only their loud, annoying, but harmless, hissing remains.

My work is done.  I have achieved the redemption that I sought.  Other priorities call.  Family, friends, work . . . and my health.  A week from now, I undergo open heart surgery.  Accordingly, I will focus on recovery and not Milton politics . . . and not the blog.  And when I return, I will blog at a much lower volume.  And my focus will shift to 1) political lessons learned and 2) profiling Milton businesses, community service organizations, and difference-making Milton citizens.  If I absolutely must re-direct my blog to Milton politics, I will.  However, I am confident that Milton’s current council will get back to the business of the people and to Milton’s strategic objectives.  I believe that 2023 was likely my last Milton election.  I am happy to advise others, including council members, on politics and governance . . . if they seek me out.  However, I believe my destiny lies elsewhere and my role in Milton will recede . . . that is my wish . . . we’ll see.  My hope is that other ordinary citizens will take up the mantle of good governance.

In closing, thanks again to my many readers.  Thanks for your trust, confidence, and respect.  It is more appreciated than you realize . . . it has been sustaining.

Advocating (as always) For Clean, Competent, Courageous, and Citizen-centric Government,

Tim

Note:  Time permitting before my surgery, I still plan to publish a post “Reflections on Elections.”

(Revised November 9, 2023 to reflect updated vote totals . . . Cranmer and Cookerly did even better than I originally reported, with Cranmer and Cookerly respectively garnering about 1% and 2% more votes than originally reported.)

Yesterday, Miltonites definitively rejected the dishonesty and dysfunction that has plagued Milton city government for the past two years.  Both Phil Cranmer and Carol Cookerly decisively defeated their opponents.  Doug Hene, who ran unopposed on a platform of restoring trust and confidence in city government, will join Cranmer and Cookerly on council.  Cranmer, Cookerly, and Hene were supported in their candidacies by Mayor Jamison and Council Members Verhoff and Johnson.

Even though Milton’s long-warring factions combined forces, their candidates nevertheless fared poorly in both races, with Mohrig capturing only 40% of the vote and Gordon capturing only 35%.  Voters sent a clear message that integrity and accountability matter . . . and that council must focus on citizens’ prerogatives and strategic objectives.  With their vote, Miltonites also resoundingly embraced non-partisanship in Milton’s politics. 

I have always trusted the wisdom of Milton’s voters and once again those voters rose to the occasion.  The election results are provided below.  Clearly, these results are a mandate for change in Milton.  Congratulations to Cranmer, Cookerly, and Hene . . . and best wishes to Rick Mohrig and Helen Gordon.

Advocating for Good Governance and for ALL Citizens,

Tim

Voters, today is Election Day.  I strongly recommend voting for Phil Cranmer and Carol Cookerly. 

I have thoroughly vetted all the candidates.  Cranmer and Cookerly were the clear winners.  Both are committed to ethical and accountable government.  Both are committed to strictly enforcing Milton’s zoning ordinances . . . and that includes NEVER voting to extend sewer (as Rick Mohrig has done twice).  Both are committed to keeping council focused on strategic issues and not delving into petty HOA issues or other minutiae.   Both are committed to honoring council members’ oath to uphold the rule of law.  Both are committed to citizen-centric government.  Let’s bring back sanity to City Hall.  Vote for Phil Cranmer and Carol Cookerly.  It’s not a difficult choice.

Advocating for Good Governance (as always),

Tim

Note: Later today, I will be providing my election analysis and predictions at Bit & Pieces. Click on the following link: Bits & Pieces

Citizens, I know that many of you are coming to the Milton Coalition Blog in advance of voting tomorrow.  Thank you for your trust and confidence in me and my blog.  Please forward this post or the post URL to friends and neighbors. This election is critical to returning some semblance of sanity to Milton’s city government.

My last two blog posts have focused on alleged recent trespassing by Council Member Rick Mohrig.  Following are links to my two blog posts:

Mohrig Trespasses on Citizen’s Property to Conduct “Investigation” . . . Trampling on Basic Rights . . . Express Your Dissatisfaction with Your Vote

2023 Elections Have Become Referendum on Whether Government Protects Our Fundamental Rights . . . Or Tramples Those Rights

Right now, the city seems to be doing what it usually does . . . nothing.  Open Records Requests have so far gone unanswered.  The city’s lack of response prompted me to write the below letter to Police Chief Austin.

Voters, please read my letter and my previous blog posts and ask yourself the following question.  Do I want City Council members coming onto my property and violating my property rights to conduct unauthorized private investigations that violate my basic Constitutional rights, such as protection from unreasonable search (Fourth Amendment), protection from arbitrary or discriminatory governmental actions (Fourteenth Amendment), and right to privacy (established by the Supreme Court in Griswold vs. Connecticut)?  If your answer is NO, then vote for Phil Cranmer and Carol Cookerly for Milton City Council.

Advocating For Your Constitutional Rights,

Tim

Yesterday, I broke the story of Council Member Rick Mohrig’s trespass on the property of a private citizen to conduct an unauthorized “investigation.”  Today, I sent a letter to Milton City Council requesting Rick Mohrig’s resignation . . . and failing that, action by council to discipline Mr. Mohrig.

Voters, the 2023 municipal elections have shifted from electing representatives to council to a more fundamental purpose . . . a referendum on government protecting citizens’ basic Constitutional rights.  The rights at stake include:  protection from unreasonable search; the right to privacy; property rights; and freedom from government threats to one’s safety and security.

When voting tomorrow, ask yourself a simple question:  Would I want Rick Mohrig coming onto my property without permission (or even notification) to conduct unauthorized investigations of me and/or my family members?  If you are fine with such illegal intrusions on your basic liberties, then you should vote for Rick Mohrig.  However, if your answer is NO, then vote for Phil Cranmer and Carol Cookerly . . . both are committed to upholding your fundamental Constitutional rights.

Advocating For Protection of Citizens’ Fundamental Constitutional Rights,

Tim

Stay tuned . . . I will soon be publishing a post debunking Mohrig’s assertion that he has taken $0 from developers for his campaign.  Mohrig has taken money from an individual who recently came to council with a development proposal and plans to return with a revised proposal.  One hint about my future post . . . a rose by any other name is still a rose . . . and a developer by any other name is still a developer.  And it doesn’t matter if development is not their primary occupation but instead a secondary/part-time occupation.

This is as bad as it gets . . .

Yesterday (November 1^st), Rick Mohrig trespassed on a Milton resident’s property to conduct an “investigation.”  He allegedly drove 400 feet onto the subject property with another older male who has not yet been identified.  Attached is a letter from the impacted Milton resident to the mayor providing the specifics of the trespass.  (I highlighted certain passages for emphasis.)  As you read this letter, ask yourself:

• Would you want a city official, especially an elected official, trespassing onto your property to conduct an “investigation” without your consent (or even notification)?
• Why is an elected official even conducting an investigation?  Under what authority?  Can elected officials just launch their own personal/private investigations of citizens? 
• Should elected officials be allowed to circumvent the city manager (in violation of the city charter) to conduct such investigations?
• Why does Mohrig believe he is above the law . . . or maybe more accurately why does Mohrig believe he IS the LAW?
• Who is this other person that Mohrig is bringing onto the property?  Is this standard practice . . . for an elected official to trespass and bring other individuals along as investigators?

Voters, let me be direct.  Rick Mohrig is out-of-control.  For many months, I have been warning citizens and city officials that Mohrig is unfit for office . . . that he poses a serious threat to Milton . . . that he has created such a toxic political environment that death threats are being made against the mayor and his family . . . threats dismissed by his radical supporters as a hoax.  This criminal trespass is just more of the same. 

Through my blog, I have cataloged numerous incidents of misconduct.  This criminal trespass is just the latest chapter in Mohrig’s long saga of misconduct.  However, with this criminal trespass, Mohrig has gone too far and is trampling on citizens’ fundamental rights.   Is the city going hold Mohrig accountable or continue to ignore his misbehavior?  Is criminal trespass sufficient to hold Mohrig accountable?  Is violating a citizen’s right to privacy sufficient?  Is causing legitimate safety concerns sufficient?  Is violating a citizen’s property rights sufficient?  Does this intrusion by a government official constitute a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable government searches?

Citizens, brace yourself for the Lunatic Fringe’s response to Mohrig’s latest scandal.  First, they are going to dismiss the whole incident as “political.”  Second, the craziest of the crazies will gin up some sort of wild conspiracy theory.  Perhaps, Mohrig’s brain—just like his computer–was somehow hacked by his political opponents.

Voters, you have a stark choice to make in the 2023 municipal elections.  You can vote for continued dishonesty, dysfunction, and non-transparency that has permeated city government for the past two years . . . and is incarnated in Rick Mohrig.  Or you can put the city on a path to integrity, accountability, and responsiveness . . . as represented by Phil Cranmer and Carol Cookerly.  It is NOT a difficult choice. 

Voters, please send a clear message to Rick Mohrig that citizens are no longer going to tolerate Mohrig’s assaults on our fundamental rights:  our right to privacy; our right to enjoy our property; our right to feel safe and secure in our homes; our right against unlawful search and seizure; and our right to equal voting access.  Enough is enough!

Advocating For a Return to Political Sanity in Milton,

Tim

Note:  I will continue to provide updates on this latest Mohrig scandal enveloping the city.