This post speaks to the importance of public participation in our local governance. Over the last 22 months, on quite a few occasions, we have seen that great results can be achieved when enough citizens publicly engage. The Ebenezer rezoning was defeated because 1800 citizens signed a petition, 100s wrote letters to Council, and we achieved an overflow crowd at the rezoning hearing. I love the above graphic because it clearly demonstrates the importance of public engagement.
Daily, I speak with many citizens about the elections and city politics more generally. And much to my dismay, I find that many citizens are afraid—yes, afraid—to publicly participate in local politics. How is this possible in America, where politics are relatively tame, we have a tradition of peaceful elections, and rule of law is so strong? But then I remember the old saying that “all politics is local” (Tip O’Neill). And the reality in Milton is that some long-time politicians have created a culture of intimidation in our fine community. Citizens, and even some council members, are afraid of the consequences of “crossing” certain politicians. Some candidates are finding they have many closet supporters that are reluctant to make even a small political gesture, such as planting a campaign sign on their front lawn. Such is the climate in Milton. Of course, this poisonous culture has recently worsened because of spewing invective and even rage from some elected officials. And it is my belief that one objective of this bad behavior is to put people off from engaging in politics . . . make local politics so acrimonious that average citizens will disengage in disgust. Then politics is left only to the crazies and Special Interests. Average citizens are effectively disenfranchised. Good governance recedes.
So my point is a simple one . . . there is strength in numbers. No one needs to be especially courageous if enough of us engage in the political process. Regardless of which candidate you support, get out and participate in this election. Plant a sign in your yard. Attend a meet-the-candidate event. Sport a candidate magnet on your car. Proudly wear a campaign t-shirt. Endorse a candidate at their Facebook page. If enough of us participate, the culture of fear will recede, and a tide of good governance will wash over our wonderful city. But it will take small acts of political courage from all of us.
Ask yourself: Are Lusk, Thurman, and Kunz really the best we can do?
It’s hard to watch the news anymore. And no, I am not talking about the national news. I am talking about the local news. Over the last 4 months, Milton has gotten more than its fair share of negative press. And it is always the same 3 Council Members at the center of the dysfunction: Lusk, Thurman, and Kunz. Let me take you down Bad Memory Lane:
Chapter 1: Thurman’s Redistricting – A Scandal of “Biblical” Proportions (July 2017)
In July, Council Member Karen Thurman was at the center of the redistricting scandal. As you might recall, Ms. Thurman was moving outside of her district, but desperately wanted to keep her seat. So Thurman found a legislator willing to sponsor a bill to redraw her district lines to include her new home. The problem is that this change was made totally unbeknownst to Milton’s citizens. Zero transparency. Following is the story from the Milton Herald:
This story elicited two very bizarre political speeches from Ms. Thurman. In the first speech, Ms. Thurman descended from the council dais to deliver a speech to Council from the citizens’ podium. Wrapping herself in an armor of Bible scripture, she delivered a rambling, holier-than-thou attack on her critics . . . we were all haters.
Then, a few weeks later and after the scandal had broken, Ms. Thurman again attacked citizens—this time from her lofty perch on the council dais. Ms. Thurman cast aside her previous love-thy-neighbor theme in favor of Old Testament fire-and-brimstone. In rambling tirade, Ms. Thurman screamed at citizens and even threatened the Milton Herald. It was the epitome of a self-inflicted mortal wound. Ms. Thurman had dashed all hopes for re-election and withdrew from the race for her Council seat.
However, Mr. Lusk later carried on the fight for Ms. Thurman, delivering a quite nasty speech in her defense while also excoriating fellow Council Member Joe Longoria.
Chapter 2: Matt Kunz Meltdown – Heisman for Unsportsmanlike Behavior (August/Sept 2017)
Events in Milton got even stranger with Matt Kunz’s tirade against Joe Longoria prior to a special-called Council meeting. Mr. Kunz squared up with Mr. Longoria and was yelling at the top of his lungs. Longoria had the good sense to retreat to his seat. During the council meeting, Kunz then doubled down on his bad behavior when Kunz tagged-teamed with Bill Lusk to humiliate Joe Longoria, who was recused from the discussion. Following are stories from the Milton Herald and WSB:
At a later council meeting, Kunz later made matters even worse when he later issued a weeping non-apology apology for his previous bad behavior. See video.
In addition to his Heismann, Mr. Kunz recently won his merit badge for conflict of interest when it was revealed Kunz swore in the President of the Great Atlanta Homebuilders Association . . . the one and only Charlie Bostwick of Brightwater Homes . . . the developer whose project Kunz marketed in the Ebenezer rezoning.
Chapter 3: Bill Lusk Email Scandal: Political Limbo – How Low Can You Go! (October 2017)
Not to be outdone, Bill Lusk wins the Oscar for Malfeasance and Misbehavior with his misappropriation and misuse of the Memorial Markers list. Every major local news outlet covered that story. No surprise. After all, how often is a sitting council member reprimanded by the City Manager and City Attorney for a major ethics violation? Mr. Lusk set a new low in city politics. No matter how low the bar, Mr. Lusk somehow manages to shimmy his way under it . . . Lusk is a master of the political limbo dance.
After reading and watching these news stories, can you honestly say these Council Members (Thurman, Kunz, and Lusk) are the best we can do? Do we really want our city to continue to be mired in dysfunction brought on by this triumvirate? Citizens, with this election, let’s start a new chapter in City politics—one focused on smart land use, good governance, and listening to citizens. Let’s begin by electing Laura Bentley to City Council. Let’s leave behind the dysfunction of Lusk, Kunz, and Thurman.
Alice laughed. “There’s no use trying,” she said. “One can’t believe impossible things.”
“I daresay you haven’t had much practice,” said the Queen. “When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”
These days in Milton, Mr. Lusk seems to be taking on the role of the Queen of Hearts. Mr. Lusk wants us to believe impossible things . . . like traffic is not a problem in Milton. See his latest Facebook post below:
And of course, a photo with a horse should fool some Milton citizens into believing Mr. Lusk is an equestrian.
And we are supposed to believe that Mr. Lusk is no longer the most pro-developer member of Council. Why? Because he says so in a mailer.
Yes, Mr. Lusk would have citizens believe a lot of impossible things.
. . . Preserve Rural Milton’s Tax Exempt Status Has Been Revoked.
Excerpt From Laura Rencher’s campaign website
After pledging to run a positive campaign (see above excerpt from Ms. Rencher’s campaign website), in the closing days of the election, mayoral candidate Laura Rencher has launched a massive personal attack on Mayor Joe Lockwood. Ms. Rencher has made several negative allegations about Mr. Lockwood, including some allegations relating to the IRS. It is a desperation move.
You see, Ms. Rencher’s campaign has been stuck in neutral since it started. Wisely, Mr. Lockwood has mostly ignored Ms. Rencher. I have also mostly ignored Ms. Rencher at this blog, which drives Ms. Rencher and her small, unmerry band of followers crazy. They endlessly and incoherently rant and rave in a mostly empty room. To acknowledge Ms. Rencher is to undeservedly elevate and dignify her. I hope Mayor Lockwood will continue on the high road and ignore Ms. Rencher. However, Ms. Rencher’s hypocrisy in making IRS allegations compels me to respond. You see, Ms. Rencher has IRS issues of her own. She lives in the proverbial glass house . . . in her case, a virtual Biltmore mansion of a glass house. Oh, where to begin . . .
. . . perhaps at the beginning. Ms. Rencher co-founded an educational charity named Preserve Rural Milton (PRM). That’s right . . . an educational charity. Confused because PRM is clearly a political advocacy/lobbying group? Confused because a tax-exempt organization is not supposed to engage in political lobbying, which is what PRM mostly does? Did you give money to PRM under the false pretense that it was going toward educating citizens about land conservation? Following are excerpts from PRM’s IRS application for tax-exempt status designating PRM as an educational charity.
Excerpt from PRM application for tax-exempt status – designation as Educational Charity
And later in her application, Ms. Rencher affirms that PRM will not attempt to influence legislation. Of course, for the last 2+ years, PRM’s primary focus has been on political advocacy. This includes attempting to influence legislation—for example, PRM’s emails, Facebook postings, and petition advocating for passage of the so-called “Conservation” Subdivision Ordinance, or CSO. The IRS website states that a tax exempt organization: “may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities.” The IRS website further states:
“An organization will be regarded as attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation.”
Following are the conditions agreed to by Ms. Rencher to obtain tax-exempt status. Note the language relating to perjury in the signature section.
Excerpt from PRM’s application for tax-exempt status: Conditions For Approval
And Ms. Rencher also seems to have violated the IRS’s stipulation that tax-exempt organizations “not further non-exempt purposes (such as purposes that benefit private interests) more than insubstantially.” The IRS website states that a tax-exempt organization “must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests, such as the creator or the creator’s family, shareholders of the organization, other designated individuals, or persons controlled directly or indirectly by such private interests.” Following is the stipulation, agreed to by Ms. Rencher, in her application for tax-exempt status:
Excerpt from PRM application for tax-exempt status – personal enrichment condition
Preserve Rural Milton has advocated that the City of Milton acquire land adjoining the property where PRM’s President (Laura Rencher) lives. PRM has proposed that this property be converted to a passive-use park. PRM has developed and published (at PRM’s Facebook page) a plan for this park. The President of PRM, Ms. Rencher, would almost certainly benefit financially from such a park being established next to her property (vs. construction of a subdivision, for example). Following is a post from PRM’s Facebook page advocating for establishment of the park next to her property.
PRM Facebook posting (one of several) advocating for acquisition of land adjoining Laura Rencher’s property
Finally, it should be noted that PRM’s tax-exempt status has been revoked because PRM has not filed the required annual forms for 3 consecutive years. This revocation occurred on May 15, 2017. Following is a screen shot from the IRS’s website:
Revocation of PRM’s tax-exempt status – from IRS EO Select Check web page
So it is fair to say that Ms. Rencher and PRM are in deep kimchi with the IRS. And talk about lack of transparency . . . there are no annual forms for the public to inspect, which is a requirement for tax-exempt status. And the lack of reporting begs the question of how PRM has used the funds that it has raised.
(Note: PRM has taken down both its website and its Facebook page. However, I have extensive screenshots of both for public inspection.)
And it is interesting to note that both Ms. Rencher and her running mate Bill Lusk have misused the assets of tax-exempt charities to further their political aims. Not only have they run afoul of IRS rules for charities, Rencher-Lusk have also violated the public trust. They are 2 peas in pod. Citizens, we can do better than Rencher-Lusk . . . Vote Lockwood-Bentley! Vote for Integrity and Good Governance!
Bill Lusk probably regrets his latest mailer. It is yet another Whoops moment for Mr. Lusk. The mailer shows Lusk with Lynn Riley, the Georgia State Revenue Commissioner, who just a few days ago became Fulton County’s most unpopular government official. Read on . . .
This is Mr. Lusk’s third mailer. Lusk seems to be zig-zagging, trying to find a message that will resonate with voters. So far, without success. In his first mailer, Mr. Lusk highlighted his volunteerism, patriotism, and veteran’s status. However, this strategy blew up when it was discovered that Lusk was using his Memorial Markers veterans charity’s email list (generated by the city) for campaign solicitations. Reprehensible, to say the least. Mr. Lusk then manufactured a number of accomplishments that didn’t pass the smell test. Being for or against something is not an accomplishment. And if you have to stretch back 5 years or 12 years for an accomplishment, that only serves to underscore a lack of accomplishment. (In an earlier post, Mr. Lusk’s accomplishments were thoroughly debunked.)
Mr. Lusk’s latest strategy seems to be highlighting his relationships with various county and state officials. At meet-the-candidate events (e.g., at the Manor), Mr. Lusk intimates that he has, and can continue to, grease the skids with various government officials . . . hence, his photo with Lynn Riley, the Georgia State Revenue Commissioner. Mr. Lusk seems to be implying that he can leverage this relationship with Ms. Riley to achieve tax fairness for voters. But here’s the problem for Mr. Lusk. While his mailer was coursing its way through the U.S. postal system, Ms. Riley’s Department of Revenue rejected Fulton County’s tax digest.
We are now back to square 1 and potentially looking at paying inflated tax bills that caused so many of us to flood town hall meetings across Fulton County in June. So Mr. Lusk has unwittingly hitched his wagon to Fulton County’s most unpopular government official. Whoops!
Excerpt From Latest Lusk Mailer
It seems that Mr Lusk’s tall tales about his role in rolling back the 2017 property valuations are unraveling. The truth is that Mr. Lusk di little to oppose the huge property tax hikes in June. I was heavily involved with fighting the inflated tax assessments. And I can tell you that Mr. Lusk did NOT play a prominent role in opposing the property tax increases. I only saw him at one town hall meeting, where he was silent. Mr. Lusk did not attend nor speak at the all-important Fulton County Board of Assessors (BOA) meeting in downtown Atlanta. I did attend and speak, as did Commissioner Bob Ellis, Mayor Lockwood, and Council Member Matt Kunz. Mr. Lusk was nowhere to be found. Following is a link to the Fulton County BOA meeting. Scroll down and click on “Discussion 2017 of Property Values.” You can hear Mayor Lockwood speak at 30:30 and me speak at 37:00.
Furthermore, when the inflated tax appraisals were first broached at City Council, Mr. Lusk said NOTHING . . . not a peep.
In fact, Lusk’s actions in response to the tax increase were counterproductive. Mr. Lusk joined Council Members Thurman and Kunz in quickly surrendering on the tax increase and instead promoting a roll-back of Milton’s millage rates. This roll-back, which would have had little effect on overall property taxes, was a transparent attempt to curry favor with voters in advance of the election. At best, Lusk’s millage rate proposal was distraction from the main battle against the tax assessments; at worst, Mr. Lusk undermined efforts to rescind the tax assessments. Mr. Lusk only jumped on the opposition bandwagon once citizens’ ire became clear to him. His sole contribution was signing a letter opposing the tax increase that was signed by all 7 council members.
On October 11th, Council Member Bill Lusk sent an email inviting veterans to a cookout at Scottsdale Farms. The emails referenced Milton’s program for recognizing fallen veterans with markers on Memorial Day and Veterans Day. Immediately, I began receiving emails from concerned citizens who were not veterans, but had registered through the City government for markers for relatives who are deceased veterans. These citizens were concerned that their personal information had been compromised and was being used for political solicitations . . . and they were right.
On October 12th, I alerted both Mr. Lusk and the City about the issue. The problem is that Mr. Lusk was using a city-generated e-mail list that was provided to a veterans charity for the singular purpose of communicating with citizens about markers for their deceased relatives. It was never intended to be used for political solicitations, but that is exactly how Mr. Lusk used it. And his behavior is reprehensible.
Mr. Lusk claims that his use of the memorial markers list was an “honest oversight on my part.” However, Mr. Lusk’s later actions belie this explanation. Despite being made aware of the seriousness of this issue, Mr. Lusk continued to use the memorial markers email list. Four days after sending out his initial invitation to the cookout at Scottsdale Farms, Mr. Lusk sent another invitation on October 16th for a second event at Little River Farms. Honest oversight . . . I don’t think so. This story has now been reported in a number of new media outlets. Following are links to various stories on this email scandal:
These news stories are pretty damning in their assessment of the situation. However, the reporters failed to discern and report on certain key points that highlight the issue of Mr. Lusk’s integrity.
Mr. Lusk continued to use the veterans email list AFTER he was made aware of the privacy issue.
The initial invitation addressed recipients as VETERANS. The list used was not Mr. Lusk’s general contact list, as Lusk asserts. And in fact, citizens on his general contact list have confirmed that they did not receive an invitation.
Screen shot of Lusk’s invitation to Cookout. Note that it addresses veterans.
Citizens, this misappropriation and misuse of emails is a serious violation of the public trust by an elected official. It is so serious that the The City of Milton sent Mr. Lusk an admonition and cease-and-desist letter. Following is the letter:
Letter provided to me by the City in response to Open Records Request.
However, the story gets even worse. Some city staff were also inappropriately sent campaign appeals from Council Member Lusk. Such solicitations to city staff are highly inappropriate, and I believe, unethical. City staff should be free to operate, free from any political pressure. Following is a letter sent by the City Manager to City Council alerting them to this issue.
Provided to me by City in response to an Open Records Request.
This issue was considered serious enough that the City Manager sent out the following to City Staff. This aspect of the story was also not covered by the local press.
Provided to me by the city in response to an Open Records Request.
And following is City Council’s discussion of the email controversy. Notice that Mr. Lusk says nothing . . . just like he avoided WSB’s cameras . . . hiding instead behind a prepared written statement. Mr. Lusk had a golden opportunity to explain his actions, but said nothing. No apology . . . no explanation . . . silence.
Citizens, this data breach was NOT an “honest oversight”. This misuse of your personal information fits into a pattern of misbehavior and malfeasance from Mr. Lusk that many of us have witnessed over the past 2 years. Citizens, we deserve better than Mr. Lusk. We deserve elected representatives that will serve citizens with integrity.
First, thank you for your expressions of solidarity with my efforts to achieve good governance in Milton. Over the past few days, your incredible outpouring of support has been both humbling and encouraging. As you might imagine, taking on Milton’s deeply entrenched politicians and Special Interests is tough work.
Second, I want to thank the Milton city government for its swift and serious response to the misappropriation and misuse of citizens’ personal data. The City Manager, City Attorney, and Communications Director seem to be taking the right steps to reassure citizens and to make necessary changes to ensure there are no future data breaches or misuse of citizens’ personal information.
Over the past few days, several news organizations have been covering the data breach scandal in Milton. My understanding is that WSB will air a story on Monday and the Milton Herald will likely run a story in next week’s newspaper. Articles have already run in Saturday’s Atlanta Journal-Constitution (front page of Local section B) and in The Alpharetta-Milton Patch. Both articles are excellent. Following are links to those articles:
Please take careful note of Mr. Lusk’s responses in these articles. Lusk’s strategy seems to be one of deceive, diminish, and dismiss.
Deceive – Mr. Lusk doubles down on his deception by telling more lies to excuse his behavior.
Diminish – Lusk contends that compromising the personal data of hundreds of citizens is no big deal.
Dismiss – Lusk contends this controversy is all about scoring cheap political points.
Let’s start with the deception. Mr. Lusk states that his use of the city-generated veterans email list was “honest oversight on my part” and “I used my complete contact list to send out invitations to my campaign events.” This is a lie . . . plain and simple. Here’s the truth:
Mr. Lusk began his e-mail solicitation with “Hello Fellow Veteran”. Following is a screenshot of part of the actual invitation.
In the next paragraph, Mr. Lusk explicitly references being a veteran and the veterans’ memorial marker initiative. See the following screenshot of the next paragraph of his invitation:
The above paragraphs make it very clear that Mr. Lusk was using a specific e-mail list—i.e., the city-generated memorial markers list—to send invitations, NOT his “complete contact list” (which he claims incidentally had memorial markers e-mail addresses mixed in). It is not coincidental that Mr. Lusk even references the memorial markers initiative.
It is incredible that Mr. Lusk claims his misuse was an “honest oversight” when Lusk used the same e-mail distribution list after—that’s right . . . after—the City alerted him to the issue of his use of a City-generated e-mail list. The City alerted Mr. Lusk about the issue on October 13, 2017. Nevertheless, using the same distribution list, Mr. Lusk blasted out another campaign email invitation on October 16, 2017 to a second event at Little River Farms.
Why would Mr. Lusk continue use the city-generated veterans list even after he was made aware of the seriousness of the issue? Arrogance and desperation. Arrogance, because Mr. Lusk has typically gotten away with such acts in the past. He did not expect the City to issue such a strong response . . . he was wrong. Desperation, because his opponent, Laura Bentley, is running a very strong campaign against him and has Mr. Lusk worried. At this point, Mr. Lusk seems willing to break any and all rules to win.That is why he planted many dozens of illegal signs in Crabapple the night before early voting. And that is why he took a risk in using a city-generated email list.Fortunately, both schemes have backfired on him, with citizens increasingly disposed to vote against him. Mr. Lusk cannot get out of his own way.
Finally, note that Mr. Lusk had a golden opportunity to explain himself at last Monday’s City Council meeting. However, he said nothing. No explanation. No apology. Nothing . . . stone cold silence.
And Mr. Lusk has yet to apologize for the data breach that compromised the personal data of hundreds of Milton citizens and has shaken confidence in our local government. Mr. Lusk thinks he has nothing to apologize for. Mr. Lusk thinks the data breach issue is minor and being exploited for political purposes. This contention highlights the other part of his strategy: diminish and dismiss . . . more about that tomorrow.
In one fell swoop, Council Member Bill Lusk has managed to disgrace the City (and a tax-exempt charitable organization) while also taking politics in the City to a new low. How did Mr. Lusk manage to accomplish such an incredible feat? Mr. Lusk misappropriated a city-generated database containing personal information of citizens, including email addresses. This database was provided to a charitable organization, Milton Veterans Memorial Markers, that honors fallen veterans . . . the markers (mostly white crosses) that you see planted along roads on Memorial Day and Veterans Day. Mr. Lusk misappropriated this information for political purposes: to create an email distribution list for political solicitations.
This is a data breach not unlike the data breaches that have become all too common these days—the most recent being the Equifax data breach. However, in this case, the hacker was not a gang of North Korean, Chinese, or Russian cyber-criminals. Rather, the “hacker” was our own Council Member Bill Lusk.
Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. This fits into a pattern of bad behavior from Mr. Lusk that I have witnessed over the past 23 months of my involvement in City government. This is the same Bill Lusk that promoted a developer’s project and re-zoning in advance of a judicial hearing on that developer’s re-zoning application. It is the same Bill Lusk that planted dozens of illegal signs (that he refuses to take down) all over Crabapple on the night before early voting at the Milton City Library. Citizens have been witness to such reprehensible acts from Mr. Lusk on a regular basis.
To its credit, in this matter, the City has taken swift and decisive action.
First, the City issued an email to potentially affected citizens about the unauthorized use of their personal information by Mr. Lusk. The City took responsibility for the lapse, apologized, and committed to taking corrective action to ensure citizens’ personal information is protected in the future. I applaud the City for its leadership in this matter.
Second, the City issued an unequivocal reprimand and cease-and-desist order to Mr. Lusk. In no uncertain terms, the City expressed its displeasure with Mr. Lusk and directed him to refrain from all uses of the city-provided e-mail addresses. Following is the letter issued to Mr. Lusk.
In the coming days, I will provide additional information on this scandal, including additional documentation.
I want to make clear that this violation of the public trust is a very personal issue for me. I am a veteran, having served nearly 8 years as a nuclear submarine officer in the U.S. Navy. My wife is also a veteran, having served nearly 12 years as an officer in the U.S. Navy. My grandfather, father, and brother all served in the armed forces. We are saddened and troubled to see such a noble initiative to honor fallen veterans sullied in this fashion.
Given the serious nature of this ethics violation, I am calling upon Mr. Lusk 1) to immediately resign from City Council and 2) to withdraw from the race for the District 2 Council seat. Resignation and withdrawal is the honorable course of action. Mr. Lusk would spare the City and citizens from having to endure long, painful, and expensive ethics hearings on this matter, which seem inevitable. Following are 1) my comments before Council this past Monday night and 2) Council Member Longoria’s subsequent comments on the matter.
Council Member Longoria’s comments follow. Joe gets it. Notice Mr. Lusk’s feigned disengagement from the discussion. And notice Thurman and Kunz’s lack of any contribution to the discussion. Do they care about ethics? (Rhetorical question.)
Sign Placed on Alpharetta Government Property On Night Before Early Voting
October 17, 2017
Yesterday, I published a post about Mr. Lusk’s assault on Crabapple under the cover of darkness. On the night before early voting, Mr. Lusk plastered Crabapple with many dozens of illegal signs. Let’s be blunt . . . this is cheating pure and simple.
So cheaters never prosper, right? Well, I would like to think so, but that is not always the case, particularly with the campaign signs. The City of Milton will certainly remove signs on city property (and there were some) and signs in the right-of-way. However, signs that are properly located on private property are off-limits . . . the city has no way of knowing whether the sign placement was authorized by the property owner or not. And Mr. Lusk knows this . . . and accordingly he will continue with his cheating . . . that is, unless we can change the calculus. The calculus? Yes, calculus.
You see, Mr. Lusk is an engineer. To Lusk, politics is an equation . . . benefits on one side and costs on the other. (BTW, integrity counts for nothing in this calculus.) Every decision he makes is based on benefits vs. costs . . . to Mr. Lusk (not to you, the citizens). The benefit of illegal signs are more votes. The cost of illegal signs is perhaps—a big perhaps—a penalty (mostly likely a small fine) from the city. This is a no-brainer for Mr. Lusk. The benefits, more votes, outweigh the costs, a small fine (that is, if you can prove the infraction . . . a big IF).
Fortunately for citizens, Mr. Lusk has made many miscalculations over the past 2 years. He has often gotten the calculus wrong. The costs of many of his decisions have exceeded the benefits. Why? Because Mr. Lusk left out one critical variable in his cost-benefit analysis. It is Milton’s X-factor. What is that X-factor? It is you . . . citizens.Long ago, Mr. Lusk forgot about you and cast his lot with Milton’s Special Interests, aka developers. Mr. Lusk became arrogant and entitled. However, for the past 2 years, more and more of you have been showing up, standing up, and speaking out. And that has made all the difference. The citizen X-factor has turned Mr. Lusk’s calculus upside-down. Mr. Lusk has increasingly found himself on the losing side of many issues.
So citizens, let’s turn Mr. Lusk’s yard-sign cheating to our advantage. Let’s take the high road and leave Mr. Lusk stranded on the low road. Here’s the plan:
Do NOT uproot Lusk’s signs. Leave that to the City and to private property owners.
Do NOT erect illegal signs—e.g., put signs on city property, in the right-of-way, or on private property without the property owner’s permission.
Report immediately any sign violations to City code enforcement.
If you see any Lusk crews erecting illegal signs on private property (also known as trespassing), immediately contact the Milton police. Ensure that Milton police trespass the perpetrators.
If you live in a subdivision where Mr. Lusk has planted signs on your subdivision’s borders (usually at the front entrance), immediately contact your HOA to request expeditious sign removal. HOAs should lodge a complaint with the City, so that Mr. Lusk is cited for a violation. HOAs should also contact Mr. Lusk and demand that he cease-and-desist from illegal sign placements on HOA property. Lusk’s city e-mail is bill.lusk@cityofmiltonga.us
Ensure your own yard signs are in good shape—that is, erect and perpendicular to the road. Those displaying signs on the open road should ensure their signs are out of the right-of-way.
If you don’t have a Bentley sign, get one.
Email Mr. Lusk to express your dissatisfaction with his blatant disregard of Milton’s sign ordinances. Here is Mr. Lusk’s e-mail address: lusk@cityofmiltonga.us
Most importantly, educate your neighbors, friends, and family about Mr. Lusk’s attempts to subvert democracy in Milton.
If enough citizens take the above actions, we will once again upend Mr. Lusk’s political calculus. He will stop the illegal sign placement. Citizens, you are the X-factor in City politics. If enough citizens are informed and engaged, we will oust Mr. Lusk and usher in an era of good governance in Milton.
Lusk Signs on backside of Alpharetta’s St. Michelle Subdivision. Note Milton Library in Background
The above photo shows some of Mr. Lusk’s signs on Mayfield Road. Note the Milton Library in the background. This is the sole location for early voting in Milton. These 4 signs were placed on the night before early voting, along with dozens of other illegal signs in both Milton and Alpharetta. The four signs in the photo are actually in Alpharetta. The board fence is on the backside of Alpharetta’s St. Michelle neighborhood. It is doubtful that the residents provided permission for these signs . . . or even know about them. Code enforcement in Alpharetta will not remove these signs. Removal requires tracking down the property owner and convincing him to take down the signs. This example of Mr. Lusk’s sign placement is a metaphor for his record on Council . . . always bending, breaking, and changing the rules to his advantage and the advantage of his patrons. Milton, we deserve better.
Last night’s mass deployment of unauthorized/illegal signs by the Lusk campaign is yet another example of how Mr. Lusk has operated for 12 years as a Council Member . . . bending, breaking, and flaunting the rules for himself and the Special Interests he represents. It is yet another egregious example of dirty politics perpetrated by Mr. Lusk in our City.
For weeks, this blog’s readers have been urging me to weigh in on the issue of campaign signs. With some justification, readers have contended that the Lusk campaign is breaking/skirting Milton’s sign ordinances. Lusk’s placement of signs around last week’s Crabapple Fest were especially egregious, prompting some citizen complaints to the City. However, I decided to steer clear of this fight, as I believe—or believed—that the election focus needs to be on substantive issues of policy and how candidates comport themselves in the conduct of government business. My sense was that the Lusk campaign was baiting its opponents on the sign issue—that is, creating a distraction from substantive issues and attempting to drag Ms. Bentley’s campaign into the mud. However, last night, the Lusk campaign crossed a line and made sign placement a substantive campaign issue . . .
Last night, many of dozens of signs were plastered on properties in and around the Crabapple area. As you know, early voting for city elections begins today. The signs were placed to cover all approaches to the Milton City library, which is Milton’s only polling location for early voting.
All of these new signs seem to have been installed by a single group of individuals, as they all appeared last night and all seem to have been installed in similar fashion–deeply planted and perfectly perpendicular to the road.
Most/all of these signs appear to be unauthorized/illegal–i.e., were installed without property owners’ permission. Given the timing (on the evening before early voting), the rapid deployment, the large quantity of signs, and the clearly illegal placement of the signs (discussed below), these signs represent a serious threat to the integrity of our local elections.
I cite as evidence of illegal/unauthorized sign placement:
Signs are placed on the property line between 2 homes, making it ambiguous if either homeowner (and likely neither) authorized/placed the signs. (We have seen such suspicious placements elsewhere in the City.)
Many signs are clearly and purposely in the right-of-way
Signs are placed on city property–Alpharetta (e.g., Alpharetta Government Center) and Milton (e.g., Broadwell Pavilion)
Signs are placed on HOA property (e.g., Kensington Farms and Six Hills). It has been confirmed that at least one of these placements was unauthorized.
Placements are generally not in front of homes/businesses, but along the fence lines of neighborhoods, on empty lots, etc.
Concerned citizens have verified with one property owner that placement of a Lusk sign on her property was not authorized. Concerned citizens are currently verifying other unauthorized placements.
I hope and trust that the City is going to take prompt and meaningful corrective action regarding this situation. Expeditious sign removal and resolution of this matter are needed to ensure the integrity of our local elections. Given the magnitude of this sign deployment the night before early voting and previous infractions, the Lusk campaign should be made to provide an explanation.
Given that this is not the Lusk campaign’s first sign offense, it concerns me that the Lusk campaign is showing a pattern of disregard for local regulations about placement of campaign signs. Lusk has been in office for 12 years. He knows the rules and is purposely flaunting them. Lusk has obviously calculated that the ramifications of this breach of Milton’s sign laws are outweighed by the benefits of exposure conferred by such a large deployment of signs on the first day of early voting. This is the Bill Lusk that I have come to know over the past two years. Lusk holds himself up as a paragon of virtue while shamelessly flaunting the rules. Lusk’s callous disregard for principles of good governance has caused much dysfunction in our City. Citizens, Mr. Lusk has given us yet another reason—as if there weren’t enough—to unceremoniously remove him from office. Milton deserves much better than this. Early voting begins today . . . Vote Today For Bentley. And please forward this post to your friends, neighbors, and family.
Milton Coalition 