In re-launching the Milton Coalition blog, to support my conclusions and recommendations, I will be providing citizens with email correspondence, texts, voicemails, and even a few hand-written notes.  I have kept every scrap of documentation from my civic activities.  (This will prove decidedly inconvenient and uncomfortable for some city officials.)

Following is an email exchange with Steve Krokoff, the City Manager, which is typical of exchanges I’ve had with the City Attorney, Mayor, and most council members (especially Council Member Laura Bentley).  I provide this email because it concisely summarizes my reasons for getting into city politics, staying in city politics, and most importantly, my deep passion/care for good governance.  To sum up, how things get done in Milton is much more important than what things get done.  My long experience with my clients has taught me that good outcomes (i.e., what gets done) are inevitably the result of good processes (i.e., how things get done).  To achieve good outcomes, you have work hard to implement and consistently execute good processes.  Good processes are characterized by honesty, fairness, transparency, rigor, and accountability.  And mostly importantly, a good process upholds the rule of law.  If suboptimal outcomes occur, then processes should be revised . . . rather than circumvented.

There is danger, and ultimately failure, in ignoring or circumventing good governance to achieve so-called good outcomes,  which predictably usually promote the interests of politicians and their friends/family but not citizens’ interests.  Things have gone badly wrong in Milton because certain politicians—some of whom regretfully I supported—have ignored our laws and have abused/disregarded established city processes and good governance principles to promote their own personal agendas or friends/family’s agendas.  And what these politicians fundamentally do not understand is that the ultimate good outcome—and the basis for all other truly good outcomes–is trust and confidence in government.  Such trust is hard to gain and easy to lose . . . it takes but a few big lies (and some council members have told some whoppers).  In fact, big lies by some city council members in Milton have caused trust and confidence in local government to dramatically decline, causing increasing division among citizens.  Milton is doomed to divisiveness until we elect officials that are passionate about principles and process and act on that passion.

One glaring example of abuse of process (and a resulting loss of trust) is council’s practice of allowing developers to bastardize use permits with variances (exceptions to zoning laws) to put properties to use in ways contrary to the law, reasonable expectations of citizens, and Milton’s rural character.  Granting such variances sets legal precedents that ensure that Milton City Council’s poor decisions metastasize across the community.  In future posts, I will cite specific examples of process abuses (and their reverberations across the community) and call out particular politicians and government officials for their roles in eroding public trust.

Advocating For Good Governance,

Tim

***************************************************************************************************************

RE: Congratulations on Your Appointment

Steven Krokoff <Steven.Krokoff@cityofmiltonga.us>

Fri 7/15/2016 3:20 PM

To:  You

Thank you very much, Tim. Based on what you have said, I believe that we are very much like-minded. I have almost 25 years in public service with over a decade in top leadership roles. Much of the success that I have been a part of has been rooted in forming outstanding leadership teams and inspiring public trust and confidence. I am confident that we can achieve all of what you seek for Milton and more. I look forward to working with you as well. Have a great weekend.

Warmest Regards,

Steve Krokoff

Steven Krokoff

City Manager/Interim-Chief of Police

From: Tim Becker
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2016 7:15 PM
To: Steven Krokoff <Steven.Krokoff@cityofmiltonga.us>
Subject: Congratulations on Your Appointment

Steve:

Congratulations on your appointment to City Manager.  I think the City made a good and wise choice.

I look forward to working with you.  

Please understand that my primary interest is in City processes.  I strongly believe that if our processes are fair, rigorous, honest, and transparent, the City will achieve the right outcomes . . . which may not be the outcomes I would prefer.  If we get the process right, then citizens will have trust and confidence in our City government.  This is critical.  I know this to be true based on my 30+ years in the military and in business.

I wish you success in your new job.  Please do not hesitate to reach out to me if I can help you in any way.

With deep civic pride,

Tim

Tim Becker

The Milton Coalition

After the 2017 Milton elections, I received a call from newly elected Council Member Laura Bentley (paraphrasing):  “OK Tim, you are the first one I am calling.  I wanted to (again) give you the opportunity to serve as one of my appointees to one of Milton’s committees.  You can choose any appointed position that you want.”  Laura’s offer was in recognition of my role—some would claim it was dispositive—in Laura’s historic landslide victory (she garnered 71% of the vote) over an 11-year incumbent who had served on City Council since the founding of the City of Milton.  In Laura’s words I had done the “very messy heavy lifting.”  (In future blog posts, I will relate some of tasks I performed.  Readers will clearly understand what Laura meant by “very messy heavy lifting” and they might be surprised by the role I played.)

I appreciated the call, but Laura knew my answer.  I told Laura:  “I have to decline.  I think I can best serve the community in my current role.  Some citizens need to remain outside of government and hold it accountable.  I think I need to continue what I have been doing.”  I wanted to continue to objectively blog about city politics, to speak freely before council, and to take other actions to keep our government accountable.  I felt a committee appointment might constrain me in these activities. Laura knew this, but I did appreciate her extending the courtesy of asking me one last time to serve on a committee.  (Laura and I did discuss other appointees for various appointed positions.  And I did convey to Laura that I would like to serve on the Charter Commission, which meets every 5 years to review Milton’s Charter; Milton’s Charter is roughly akin to the city’s constitution.  More about the Charter in another blog post.)

With the 2021 elections approaching, I strongly believe that holding Milton’s government accountable is now more important than ever.  Accordingly, in advance of the 2021 elections in Milton, I have decided to re-launch the Milton Coalition blog. My purpose is the same as always . . . to promote good governance in the local community.  I have always strongly believed that Milton deserves (to quote the title of a book from President Jimmy Carter) “a government as good as it’s people.” A key component of a good government is accountability, which ultimately is the job of ordinary citizens, like you and me.  I learned much from my experience of being steeped in City government and politics for 2 years.  I want to convey some of these lessons to Milton’s citizens so that they might better engage local government and demand greater accountability.  I believe good governance is strongly correlated with citizen engagement in our government.  (And that is why I primarily supported Laura Bentley because she made “shifting power to citizens” one of her 3 primary campaign promises.  More about this promise in future blog posts.)

My humble hope is that, in advance of the 2021 election, citizens will once again visit the Milton Coalition Blog.  It is during elections, particularly competitive races, that citizens are afforded their best opportunities to question government officials and flush out their stances on issues of greatest importance to citizens.  I hope my blog will help citizens to better formulate questions for the candidates and to better convey their concerns to these candidates.  Please let your friends and neighbors know about the blog and encourage them to subscribe.  And please reach out if you have specific questions or would like me to address a specific issue.

Advocating For Good Governance,

Tim

Dear Friends and Neighbors:

Your help is needed for a volunteer effort to spruce up Birmingham Park (750 Hickory Flat Road).  A work day has been scheduled for March 16th  (Saturday) from 9 am to 1 pm.  (The rain date is March 23rd.)  The goal is to clear fallen brush and trees from trails, making park trails safer for hikers and horseback riders.  This work day is being sponsored by the Milton Equestrian Committee.

Equipment is also needed.  Following is a list of tools that are needed.  If you have such tools and are willing to loan them to the effort, please bring them with you.  Gas-powered equipment is preferred.  However, battery-operated electric equipment is acceptable; please bring extra batteries, if you have them.

• • Power saws
  • Hedge trimmers
  • Pole saws

If you own safety gear (e.g., gloves, safety glasses, hard hats, safety vests), please bring that gear.  Trash bags for trash found along the trail are also needed.

Please consider contributing to this worthwhile effort.  There are plenty of opportunities to help regardless of your skill level—e.g., spotters for clearing teams, manual labor to deposit trimmings in the woods, etc.  At over 200 acres, Birmingham Park is a treasure to our hiking and equestrian communities and to citizens that just enjoy nature.  Unfortunately, the City has not had the resources to properly maintain the trails, requiring a volunteer effort to clear the trails to make them more usable for citizens.

The primary point of contact for this effort is Larry Covington.  He can be reached at larrywaynecovington@gmail.com or at 770-826-6288.  Please email Larry if you would like for volunteer for this worthwhile effort; he would like to get a good estimate of the number of volunteers.  However, if you cannot commit at this point, last-minute, walk-up volunteers will certainly be welcomed.

Please forward this information to others that might be interested in helping.  This might include hiking/equestrian organizations and school environmental/equestrian/agricultural clubs.

Following is a link to a pdf with more information.  BirminghamParkWorkDay

Thank you.

***********************************************************************************

As many of you know, long-time and beloved Milton City Arborist Mark Law recently passed away.  A roundabout equestrian statue has been proposed to memorialize Mark Law.  A GoFundMe page has been established by the Milton Arts Council to raise money for this memorial to Mark.  So far, $5,770 of the needed $6,900 has been raised in just 4 days.  Please consider contributing.  Attached is a link to the GoFundMe page:

GoFundMe Link for Mark Law Memorial Equestrian Statue

November 4, 2018

First, I want to thank all of you that have come to the blog and have reached out to me over the last few days.  Over 150 visitors have come to the blog and at least 2 dozen of you have reached out to me by email with messages of support.  I appreciate your support.  I urge you to reach out to our city council and request denial of the zoning modification for the SE corner of the Crossroads.

I remind citizens that the plan for the SE is virtually identical to the plan rejected by all 6 of the current council members.  So when you communicate with council members, ask them directly what is different about this proposal that they would even consider voting to approve it.  I suspect that the only answer you will hear is that staff is now recommending approval.  However, staff’s rationale for reversing its previous recommendation for denial and ignoring Milton’s 4-part variance test is that their commitment “is to ultimately deliver the best possible development for the community” and to “deliver a high quality project for the community.”  Unfortunately, this “commitment” is directly contradicted by the City Attorney when he advised Council on April 23rd on the SE corner.  Listen to this short video clip:

So it should be clear to citizens that this argument that Milton can ignore its variance ordinance or somehow change it without enacting a new ordinance is just plain wrong.  The City is obligated to apply the 4-part test and only the 4-part test.  And the truth is that requested variance fails the 4-part test; therefore, the zoning modification should be denied.

*********************************************************************************

I am also including in this post an email sent by Julie Bailey to citizens urging denial of the zoning modification.  Julie was advocating for smart land use long before Milton was a city and long before any of the current members of Council even lived in Milton.  Julie was a chief architect of the Birmingham Master Plan.  No one is more of an authority on the Crossroads than Julie.  She has more credibility on this issue than anyone in this community, bar none.  And Julie has clearly stated that this variance is not justified and does not meet either the letter or the spirit of the law.  Julie is an unsung hero in our community.  Please read Julie’s letter and heed her call to contact City Council.  Thank you.

November 4, 2018 Dear Milton Friends, Neighbors and Citizens: Upcoming Zoning Modification – City Council Meeting, Monday, November 5, 2018 at 6:00 p.m. SE Quadrant of the Birmingham Crossroads – Zoning Modification requesting variances to build commercial and high-density housing.  This email is intended to inform you about the upcoming zoning issue at the Birmingham Crossroads in the City of Milton.  This zoning modification is time sensitive as it goes to the Council Monday (tomorrow) night for a final vote.  Your involvement is critical. ZM18-02/ VC18-08 / Southeast quadrant of Birmingham Hwy and Birmingham Road / OHC Birmingham LLC 22.12 acres in 2/2, Land Lots 379, 380, 413, and 414: 1) Request to modify ZM14-06 Condition 2.a. to the revised site plan received on September 18, 2018. 2) Request to modify ZM14-03 – To delete Condition 6.c., the reference to the village green. 3) A Concurrent Variance to delete the 75- foot undisturbed buffer and 10-foot improvement setback along the south property line of the MIX zoning district adjacent to AG-1 – Sec. 64-1142 (a) (3.) b. The developer is returning to the Mayor and Council with a plan for the SE Quadrant that is nearly the same as the plan denied by Council in the spring.  This Zoning Modification includes variances that are not supported with required hardships. Specifically, the applicant wants to delete the required 75- foot buffer and 10-foot improvement setback 1) to accommodate more commercial development along Birmingham Highway than would otherwise be possible and 2) to allow him to build homes in the buffer area that he is seeking to eliminate. Despite staff’s original recommendation of denial, staff have changed the criteria by which they judge variances to now recommend approval.  It is critical to note is that this recommended approval is in direct conflict with the direction the City Attorney gave to City Council and Staff at the April 23, 2018 zoning hearing when virtually the same zoning modification was unanimously denied. The reasons found in staff’s analysis as a basis for approval are troubling as they are in direct conflict with the legal requirements that any variance approved meet the four criteria outlined by zoning policies and law.  None of those four legal requirements are met by this zoning request.  As such, the zoning modification should be denied.  The 75- foot buffer and 10- foot improvement setbacks are requirements of the Birmingham Crossroads Overlay and Zoning Requirements for this quadrant of the Birmingham Crossroads.  To allow variances to be approved when there is no demonstrated hardship sets a very dangerous legal precedent. Use this link to read staff’s analysis and to see the developer’s application and variance requests. Also, please use this link to the Milton Coalition blog to read more about concerns tied to the City of Milton effectively ignoring and/or diluting the legal requirements for a variance to be approved. Additionally, this link speaks to these changes being made without a legislative process and action that would require public hearings and public input. Your input is critical.  This is your community. Please play a part in protecting all the things that make Milton special. Please consider attending Monday night’s meeting and voicing your opinions.  Please consider writing emails and letters to the Mayor and Council, the City Manager, the City Attorney and staff. Your voice makes all the difference.  Please scroll down to find email addresses of all those you should contact regarding this and other zonings issues as well as other issues of concern to you, your families and neighbors. Thank you for being involved. It matters. My best, Julie Zahner Bailey

November 23, 2017

Over the past 2 years, citizens have achieved much in Milton.  Starting with the defeat of the CSO in December 2015 and ending with landslide electoral victories this month, Milton’s fortunes have turned around.  We should be proud of, and thankful for, the accomplishments of the past two years.  Citizens are once again at the center of our local government.  I am confident that our new City Council, who will take their oath of office in January, will listen to and respect their constituents.  Citizens prerogatives will prevail.

Milton’s citizens once again demonstrated why Milton is such a special place.  Time and time again, when we needed you, citizens answered the call.  You wrote emails to council members.  You signed petitions.  And you attended council meetings in droves and spoke passionately.  Nothing could have been accomplished without you.  Your support is appreciated and humbling.  Thank you.

I am most thankful for the many friendships that I have formed over the past two years.  Those friendships have been the real blessing for me personally.  Thank you.

Happy Thanksgiving,

Tim

Citizens:

Mr. Lusk is circulating a rebuttal to claims that I have made regarding his voting record and his conduct as a Council Member.  He is correct in that I have made all 13 assertions, and I stick by all 13.  Below, I have included Mr. Lusk’s rebuttals in their entirety.  My counter-rebuttal is in red.  I also urge readers to peruse my blog posts over the last 2 years.  I have covered most of these topics in detail.  Not once has Mr. Lusk, who is obviously a regular reader of my blog, ever contacted me to dispute either my facts or my findings.

1. Claim: Lusk voted against the Comprehensive Plan

To be clear, there are two Comprehensive Plans. I supported one for good reason and did not support the other.  (meaning he voted against it.)

• In August 2011 I voted with a unanimous Council to support the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. It was a good plan. My opponent campaigned against it. She did not use the actual language of the Comprehensive Plan.  I don’t think she actually read the entire 110 page document. If you’d like to read it, here is the link:  https://www.cityofmiltonga.us/lib/file/manager/Comp_Plan_Final.pdf
• The 2035 Comprehensive Plan had some serious problems. It was too ambiguous and took away individual rights. My opponent supported the 2035 plan. These arguments were never made by Mr. Lusk during the city council hearings.  Watch the video at the City website.

If we are to have an honest discussion, let’s talk about the differences between the two plans and stop throwing darts.

Wrong.  There is only 1 Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP).  The CLUP is updated every 5 years. The current CLUP was approved in October, 2016 and replaced the 2011 plan.  Only Lusk and Kunz voted against the 2016 CLUP.  The reason they cited was that the CSO was not included . . . the same CSO that citizens overwhelmingly opposed and which Lusk never mentions anymore.  The CLUP was written and unanimously approved by a 17-member committee that channeled the desires of citizens expressed at workshops and other meetings.  The drafting of the CLUP followed a rigorous process that encompassed nearly a year and was facilitated by consultants.  The Planning Commission approved the CLUP 7 to nothing.  If you do not believe me (that there is only 1 CLUP), then call the Community Development department at City Hall and talk to Cathy Field or Robyn McDonald.

2. Claim: Lusk promoted the so-called conservation subdivision ordinance

I supported the 2030 Comprehensive Plan which the Council unanimously approved in August 2011which stipulated that the city should consider using conservation design to achieve our objectives.

• When Councilman Bert Hewitt introduced the motion in August 2011, he actually asked to strengthen the language regarding conservation design.
• I agreed that it was a tool that the city could use to avoid AG1 sprawl.
• My opponent opposed the 2030 Comprehensive Plan in spite of the wishes of the Council. Even worse, she maintained that the conservation design was not in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. This is false.  Watch the video. 

 I see this as an issue of integrity. We must have honest discussions about all the tools available to us. Platitudes and misstatements are not the answer.

The 2011 CLUP only specified that the City CONSIDER Conservation Subdivisions.  The City did and rejected them as unworkable for Milton.  All conservation subdivision language was expunged from the CLUP by the 17-member Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee.  That is why Mr. Lusk and Mr. Kunz voted against the CLUP.

3. Claim: Lusk voted 4 times to extend sewer in Milton

Sewer has been a divisive issue in Milton since the beginning. Some people believe that new sewers lead to overdevelopment, while others believe that sewers are more efficient and effective than individual septic tanks. Constitutional issues also come into play.

• This issue was basically resolved during the last election and the worst-case scenarios are behind us.  (How was it resolved?)
• If we constantly deny a property owner the right to decide whether to have sewer or septic, a landowner will still have the right to sell his or her property to someone who might make the situation worse or the landowner might take the city to court.
• We will continue to make good decisions regarding land-use, so that what goes above the ground is within the vision of a Comprehensive Plan.

Lusk’s gives a non-answer . . . a series of non sequiturs. 

We have a sewer map that shows where sewer can go and cannot go.  A lot of work went into developing the sewer map; it should be followed.  This is not complicated.  Each time sewer was extended, it was to allow higher density housing; that is a fact.

4. Claim: Lusk has voted three times for zonings that resulted in higher density

When I assumed office, I promised that I would protect the rights of all Milton citizens.

The Ebenezer Road development is one example where rights became an issue, whether 31 or 48 homes would be built on that parcel. The landowners had rights for 48 homes, and they will be close to that number when it’s built out.  (Empirically not true.)

• My vote was based on my promise to defend Milton’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan to preserve greenspace. The idea was supported by the Fulton County Health Department, the city staff, and two independent licensed engineers
• The Ebenezer property would have preserved 35 acres of greenspace, two miles of walking trails, sold 700K+ homes, and would have been the first subdivision that would have added a horse pasture in Milton unlike all the AG1 properties that take them away.
• Unfortunately, the equestrian pasture that I fought to defend will be developed to more AG1 homes.
• If you want to read the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, here’s the link: https://www.cityofmiltonga.us/lib/file/manager/Comp_Plan_Final.pdf

Brightwater homes bought the most attractive 38 acres and is building 21 homes on it.  It is doubtful that the remaining land (which is less attractive or unbuildable) will support more than 9 more homes and who knows when that will happen.  So <30 homes will be built where 55 were originally proposed (and 48 were sought by Mr. Lusk).

Much of Brightwater’s “greenspace” was unbuildable and 14 acres were going to have septic drip lines.  And Mr. Lusk makes no mention of the HOA operated/maintained community septic system–aka community septic. 

NINETY PERCENT of Ebenezer Road residents opposed the development; yet Mr. Lusk still wanted to cram it down their throats.  Will he do the same to Wood Road residents one day?  Or neighbors near a future rezoning that he votes to approve.

The property across from Cambridge High School, was another fractious issue. Few people know the history of the property.

• The property was supposed to be a church, with far less traffic, and far less use.  Because that was denied, the developer explored other options. I would have preferred a church, as it was initially proposed, but the City Council voted 5-2 for a compromise for transitional housing.

The church story is a red herring.  The land was zoned AG-1, meaning it should have been built out with 7-8 homes.  Plain and simple.  Instead, 27 townhouses are going to be built . . . more than 3 times the density under AG-1 zoning.

A third issue involved rezoning of a property on Hopewell Road.

• The property was originally zoned for low density housing. My opponent continues to hide from this fact. See the 2030 Comprehensive Plan in the 2030 Future Land Use Map: https://www.cityofmiltonga.us/lib/file/manager/Comp_Plan_Final.pdf
• A Sewer main runs directly through the property. 
• A developer was prepared to challenge that zoning in court.

The best solution was a compromise because a court could have decided in favor of a far higher density. I could not let that happen in the city of Milton.

Again, the property was zoned AG-1 and should have been built with 1+acre lots.  End of story.  Milton’s sewer map was violated; in fact, a second vote was needed to extend sewer.  Do you know how many times the City has been sued by a developer that won?  ZERO times.  This is a tired and disingenuous response that is always used by Lusk, etc. to justify their votes for higher density.  Developers ALWAYS THREATEN TO SUE.  Let the developer sue!  Let’s defend AG-1.

5. Claim: Lusk promoted the Ebenezer property which is a violation of his oath of office (Well, actually I stated that his promotion of the rezoning was a violation of his duty of judicial impartiality, as a rezoning is a quasi-judicial matter.)

This is a false and misleading claim. I did not “promote” the project.

• The Ebenezer project was based on “conservation design,” one of the tools included in our 2030 Comprehensive Plan. That plan referenced conservation design 8 times.

My opponent apparently does not know this, but the people behind her candidacy surely do and choose to not tell the truth.  When I vote to do something, I give my word, and I tell the truth.  I talk to people and listen. I research. And then I make a decision in the best interest of the city, not for a selected few.

This is a blatant lie.  Lusk co-led tours of the property.  On the night of the second hearing, the Ebenezer proponents put out the word to wear green shirts, which both Lusk and Kunz wore.  I met with Lusk shortly before the 1st Ebenezer meeting and he offered to broker a meeting between me and the developer!  There are Facebook postings, etc. of Lusk and Kunz promoting the Ebenezer development.  Ask the residents of Ebenezer Road whether Lusk and Kunz were promoting Brightwater’s project.  Or watch the meeting video.

6. Claim: Lusk routinely lashes out at citizen critics

This claim is a Saul Alinsky tactic to ridicule just for the sake of divisiveness. (Alinsky wrote the book Rules for Radicals). It is an attempt to intimidate and silence elected officials.

• If anybody has a question about where I stand, they can meet with me and we can talk, something I’ve done with citizens many times in my 11 years on the Council.
• This charge comes from one disgruntled individual who spends an inordinate amount of time lashing out at fellow citizens.  Plus, this individual publicly disclosed that he’s under an ethics investigation by the state of Georgia.
• When citizens hear these claims, they should consider the source. 

Watch the videos at the Milton Coalition blog.  In fact, many citizens have witnessed these attacks from the dais.  

I disclosed that a complaint was lodged against me, after citizens told me that Lusk, Kunz, and Thurman were telling citizens that I was “under investigation.”  The complaint is false and frivolous and I expect it to be dismissed in the near future.  A complaint was lodged, I responded, and the ethics committee staff are making a determination whether or not to dismiss the complaint.

I have never lashed out at individual citizens.  Mr. Lusk often makes assertions with no proof.  I provide proof at my blog of any assertions I make, including video.  I challenge Mr. Lusk to provide 1 instance where “I lashed out at fellow citizens.”

7. Claim: Lusk was the chief accomplice in the redistricting of District 1

This charge is a fabrication. Every member on Council, including the Mayor, knew the redistricting was happening and that is was consistent with State law.  Not a single member voiced any concern with it.

This charge is nothing more than a political attempt to influence the elections. That could be why the individual who makes this claim is under an ethics investigation by the state of Georgia. 

Council members were only made aware of the change as a bill was about to be introduced into the Georgia Assembly.  Citizens were never notified of the change or give a chance for input.  Thurman requested letters of support from Council AFTER the bill was introduced; ONLY Lusk provided a letter.  Lusk’s support of the change kept Thurman from running against him and kept a Lusk ally on Council.

8. Claim: Lusk and Kunz engage in private conversations during Council meetings

The issue here is my challenge of the Mayor for his practice of texting during City Council meetings. Texting during Public meetings is a violation of the State Open Meetings Act.  The charge comes from an individual who supported the mayor’s texting and seeks to distort the real issue which is that City Council members should not exchange texts with advisors in the audience and elsewhere during discussion of issues that will be voted on during the meeting.

Texting is NOT a violation of the State Open Meeting Act.  The State Attorney General has been very clear about this.  And texts are always subject to open records requests.  However, Mr. Lusk and Mr. Kunz routinely engage in conversations about strategy that are not heard by the public.  And unlike texts, there are no records of these conversations.  Several Council members, including Mr. Lusk, also use private and personal email to conduct City business, which is not transparent (although not against the law—similar to texting).  Having said that, I do have concerns about texting in Council meetings, particularly zoning hearings.

9. Claim: Lusk successfully lobbied to reinstate a subdivision plat that had been rejected by Council

The fact here is the subdivision plat was required to come before Council for ratification. While the Council initially rejected the plat due to some legal confusion, the staff brought it back because those legal concerns needed to be understood and reconsidered. There was no lobbying involved. When you govern, you have to consider all aspects of the law. That was done in this instance.

Wrong.  Staff did not bring it back.  Mr. Lusk specifically requested that the subdivision platting be put back on the council agenda.  And I have an email from the city government stating this.  A developer essentially got a second day in court–a developer who is a friend and political patron of Mr. Lusk’s.

10. Claim: Lusk routinely circumvents the city manager

This is silly.  I don’t circumvent anybody. Just ask the City Manager.

Mr. Lusk is constantly involved in the day-to-day operations of the city.  Many citizens have been witness to his meeting one-on-one with staff, without the participation of the City Manager. 

11. Claim: Lusk recently attempted to throw city Council elections into disarray

This absurd charge concerns one city council member who failed to file his election qualifying paperwork on time. As a result, we had to have special council meeting to extend the election process. I voted for that extension, but I believe the difficulty could have been avoided.  Qualifying ended two days after it should have, but it’s done now.

Watch the video at the Milton Coalition blog.  Mr. Lusk and Mr. Kunz trash Joe Longoria, who cannot speak because he is recused.  Mr. Lusk argues against the extension.  When he realizes that he does not have the votes, Mr. Lusk tries to disqualify Mr. Mohrig from voting.  Watch the video.  Mr. Lusk also tried to recruit candidates to run against Mr. Longoria.  Mr. Lusk voted for the extension only after he realized he did not have the votes to stop it.

12. Claim: Lusk asserts that development of Milton should be entrusted to developers

This is an outright lie. I supported the 2030 Comprehensive Plan that, through conservation design, would allow citizens to determine where homes ought to go in every subdivision. Current AG1 housing gives citizens no right to decide where homes should go. My opponent doesn’t want you to have that right.

• Since our city’s inception, over 53 AG1 subdivisions have sprawled throughout the Milton landscape, eating away at our horse pastures and rural character.
• Unless your Council deals with AG1, citizens will continue to have no say where future homes will go.

My opponent continues to advocate for more AG1 housing subdivisions.

Watch the two 2-minute videos at my blog where Lusk states “leave it to the professionals”, let’s not put any additional “hurdles” in the way of developers, “we have pretty good control” over development, etc.  Lusk is hoping you will not watch the videos at the Milton Coalition website.  The title of the post is “Must-See Video:  Mr. Lusk’s Views on Development in His Own Words”

13. Claim: Lusk has promoted residential community septic

Our laws have allowed community septic. We have it already in our city in some places. It is a technology that could help us achieve the goals of our 2030 Comprehensive Plan and stop AG1 sprawl.

• My opponent doesn’t have a plan to stop AG1 sprawl which is a major threat to what’s left of our rural character.
• I seek to utilize all the technology and other tools available to protect and preserve our rural character. 

Community septic is private sewer.  Think about the issues associated with an HOA operating and maintaining a sewer system.  This technology is not proven and has had many problems, including at The Manor.  Forsyth County had issues with community septic and banned it.

Tim Becker

Following is a link to a letter to the editor that was published today in the Milton Herald.  

Milton Citizens Must Remain Vigilant

It has become clear that positive change in Milton will only come through replacing some members of City Council.  In particular, Council Members Matt Kunz and Bill Lusk are at the center of the dysfunction in Milton city government.

Council member Kunz has taken thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the development community in Milton.  Council member Bill Lusk, whose construction company has benefited from Milton’s construction boom, also contributed $1000 to Kunz’s campaign.  It was the best $1000 he ever spent, as Kunz has become his second vote on Council.

There is not a dime’s worth of difference between Lusk and Kunz.  Both are strong and unapologetic advocates for developers in Milton, as their voting records clearly demonstrate.  For example, Lusk made the motion to approve the rezoning that allowed the abominable town home development across from Cambridge High School.  Kunz seconded the motion, (wrongly) asserting that 50% of land would be conserved as greenspace.  Both Lusk and Kunz also actively promoted a developer’s rezoning and subdivision on Ebenezer Road, in violation of Milton’s rules against Council members taking even an indirect interest in a matter before Council.  In doing so, Lusk and Kunz supported cluster housing (homes on 1/4 acre lots) in unsewered areas of Milton.

Recently, Kunz and Lusk (and Council Member Rick Mohrig) reversed their opposition to (and their votes against) a subdivision platting when a developer and major campaign contributor weighed in on the platting.  Lusk was responsible for the developer-applicant getting a second hearing, where Council ‘s earlier denial of the platting was reversed.  It was another obvious example of Lusk and Kunz bowing to the will of their political patrons and special interests.

Both Lusk and Kunz were also caught using private e-mail for City business, which is prohibited and a violation of open government laws.  Both have also circumvented the City Manager and city processes in their effort to pass an ordinance to allow cluster housing in rural parts of Milton.  This was revealed in e-mails obtained through an open records request.

Following is the text of the Letter to the Editor.

Milton citizens must remain vigilant

The City of Milton will soon be celebrating its 10th birthday. I voted for the creation of the city and have seen some positive changes over the years. However, all is not well in Milton. Over the past year, as a private citizen, I have attended nearly every City Council meeting and dozens of other city government meetings. And I have been dismayed by what I have witnessed. The city has not had a competitive election since 2011 and it shows. Lack of electoral accountability has led to complacency and arrogance in some elected officials. It has led to the increasing influence of special interests.

Who are these special interests? They are land investors and developers. Many of them live outside of our community; they care nothing about Milton. They have time, money, knowledge and highly paid attorneys. They know all the tricks, loopholes and angles. They are generous with their campaign contributions. And unfortunately, they have their agents within the city government.

To advocate for citizens, a small group of Miltonites formed the Milton Coalition in November 2015. We had no money, no organization and no name recognition. We only have a strong love for our community and a strong desire for good governance. We exercised our voice through petitions, blogs, flyers and speaking before the City Council. And the fine citizens of Milton are heeding our call. Our last petition advocating for smart land use and good governance garnered nearly 1800 signatures. One City Council meeting was so packed with supporters that a holding room had to be established. Over the past year, citizens have won a number of victories. However, securing and building upon these successes will require changes at the ballot box. Competitive elections are needed to fix what ails Milton. Some City Council members will try to distract citizens by highlighting their volunteerism and patriotism. Don’t be fooled. These politicians have long voting records that clearly reveal their allegiances.

Citizens, to mark the 10th anniversary of Milton’s founding, please consider attending a City Council meeting. Witness firsthand your government in action. I am convinced you will get it. As someone who has attended several dozen of these meetings, I know that you will grasp the need for new leadership. The most effective tool in our campaign for clean, competent, courageous, and citizen-centric government is citizen participation. See you at a future City Council meeting.