Today, despite the City of Milton’s efforts to contain the crisis, the Paul Moore Ethic Scandal has once again reared its ugly head.
So it is no surprise that with the Paul Moore ethics scandal, Milton is reaping what it has sown. The damage to the City is real and mounting. The damage is not just bad publicity, but also mounting legal costs (your tax dollars) for the City and a huge diversion of time and resources from important issues facing the City. The blame falls squarely on Mr. Moore, City Manager Krokoff, and City Council.
There are a few interesting aspects to the AJC article.
First, Paul Moore is now playing the victim. He claims that the his ethics conviction is doing him personal and professional “damage.” And this is perhaps true. However, this damage to Mr Moore is entirely self-inflicted. Paul Moore clearly had an inkling that he was treading on ethical thin ice when he waded into his HOA’s speeding issue. His doubts about the ethics of his participation prompted Mr. Moore to seek advice before the first White Columns hearing at City Council. Unfortunately, Mr. Moore sought advice from someone–the City Manager–who lacks expertise about conflict of interest and who himself is conflicted and admitted (at the White Columns hearing on traffic calming devices) that he might be “conflicted.” Furthermore, Paul Moore made the decision to drag his employer into this ethics matter by referencing his company in his court pleading, so that if a reader now searches on the names of Paul Moore’s employer and “Paul Moore,” the ethics case appears in the search results. (I have read Mr. Moore’s most recent affidavit in this matter and have to question his professional judgment in discussing sensitive company issues in his affidavit.) I believe Mr. Moore’s desperate appeal for sympathy is indicative of the weakness of his legal arguments in this matter.
If there is a victim here, it is Mr. Palazzo, president of the White Columns HOA. I am sure Mr. Palazzo never in his worst nightmares imagined that a routine matter of traffic calming devices (TCD), supported by 64% of White Columns residents, would be handled by the City in such a manner. In fact, this was a perfunctory matter that should have followed precedent and been consigned to a consent agenda, with no discussion or debate at Council. Rather, the TCD matter was moved to the regular agenda, but even so should have been handled as a routine matter . . . the only issue that should have been considered was the HOA’s cost and data sharing agreement with the City. Instead, indulged by his fellow council members, Mr. Moore derailed the May 2, 2022 City Council hearing and pursued a personal agenda against his HOA board that resulted in his motion (approved by Council) to erect further hurdles to approval of a routine data/cost-sharing agreement . . . hurdles that were easily cleared by the White Columns HOA board. Mr. Palazzo was clearly blindsided by Mr. Moore’s unmerciful and bullying beat-down at council. So it is ironic and hypocritical that Mr. Moore is now claiming to be the victim. The current ethics debacle is actually a David-vs.-Goliath struggle. Council and the city administration have clearly and consistently lined up behind Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore is on the inside, with all the advantages that provides. Conversely, Mr. Palazzo is on the outside looking in and is decidedly disadvantaged. Despite the City administration and City Council’s transparent efforts to defeat Mr. Palazzo (including turning its back on its own ethics panel) so far Mr. Palazzo has prevailed in his quest for justice and fairness. David is once again beating Goliath. This should cheer the hearts of average hard-working, tax-paying citizens to see politicians getting their deserved comeuppance.
A second interesting element of this sad saga is the City’s position on Mr. Moore’s lawsuit. Mr. Jarrard, the City Attorney, is quoted as stating “We are just bystanders.” However, this is not true. In its pleading to Superior Court, the City actually states (on behalf of itself and the ethics panel) that City and the panel “pray” for dismissal of Mr. Moore’s lawsuit and recovery of City’s associated legal fees. Following is a screenshot of the City’s response to Mr. Moore’s lawsuit:
Granted the City’s response is incredibly LAME, so for all intents and purposes, the City is a “bystander.” However, the City is a bystander by choice. Through its bland pleading, the City has turned its back on its own ethics process and its own ethics panel . . . and by extension, turned its back on ethics, good governance, and citizens. Milton’s ethics panel deserves a much stronger defense from the city.
In closing, below is a copy-and-paste of the byline from the AJC article. It is the perfect byline in that it captures the biggest danger that lurks in this ethics scandal. If Paul Moore prevails in his lawsuit to overturn the ethics panel’s decision of guilt, ethics as a guiding principle of good governance in Milton is DEAD. Citizens can expect the Wild West when it comes to misconduct in Milton’s government. Mr. Palazzo is an extreme rarity in Milton . . . a citizen with the means (he is spending tens of thousands of dollars), the courage, and tenacity to expose and challenge self-dealing and favors for friends & family that has become all too prevalent in Milton. If Mr. Palazzo loses in his quest for justice, Miltonites will be the true losers. Citizens will be (even more) afraid to speak against elected officials. Our fundamental right to free speech will be further attenuated. AJC byline:
(Don’t forget, I provide additional information at my Bits and Pieces page that is not emailed to my subscribers: https://wordpress.com/page/miltoncoalition.blog/3531)
Advocating for High Ethical Standards in Milton’s Government,
Tim
Note: I am not including the name of Mr. Moore’s employer as naming his employer does not comport with my rules of engagement. Furthermore, I will not (at this time) discuss sensitive issues about Mr. Moore’s company that Mr. Moore incomprehensibly and recklessly raises in his pleadings. Mr. Moore is doing enough damage to himself with his pleadings; he needs no further help from anyone else. Mr. Moore is his own worst enemy. He never learned the lesson that when you find yourself in a hole, you should stopping digging. Mr. Moore is on a path to seal his fate through his pleadings. I believe Mr. Moore will be soundly defeated in Superior Court; the ethics case seems open-and-shut to me. If Mr. Moore had been smart, once the ethics charges were levied against him, he would have sought accommodation with Mr. Palazzo. He did not seek rapprochement, but rather has consistently doubled down on a losing and increasingly incoherent and desperate strategy. Although Mr. Moore blames many people, including me, for his demise, Mr. Moore has only himself to blame.
I am interested in hearing from Mr. Moore on this matter. I am open to providing him an opportunity to plead his case at this forum, but I suspect Mr. Moore will not take me up on my offer.
A citizen advocacy organization in Milton has issued a scathing critique of the Georgia Interlocal Risk Management Agency (GIRMA) for its handling of the Chang v. Milton case, which resulted in a devastating financial burden for Milton taxpayers.
Planning Commission Chairman Kurt Nolte Planning Commission Members City of Milton 2006 Heritage Walk Milton, GA 30004 Re: RZ23-10 – Bethany Bend Dear Chairman Nolte and Planning Commission Members: On behalf of Milton Families First, I am writing in opposition to the above referenced item. Earlier this year, we created Milton Families First, in part, to protect the quality of life we have come to know and love in this community. During the most recent local elections, there was near unanimity across Milton on one thing: keeping density and overdevelopment at bay. The overwhelming majority of citizens – and every candidate -- expressed vocal opposition to new projects that would undermine Milton’s rural character. The Bethany Bend project is the antithesis of what we desire in Milton. It converts AG-1 land, which requires no more than one unit per acre, into much denser zoning. The project contemplates 13 single-family homes on 3.133 acres at a density of 4.15 units per acre. In addition, there is no sewer on site, meaning an extension to this parcel. Nothing about this development is consistent with Milton. A departure from one-acre minimum lot sizes, which AG-1 requires. Increased traffic on an already congested roadway. New sewer service, which is the third rail in our community. We strongly encourage you to reject this requested rezoning and help us protect the city of Milton. Sincerely, Adam Hollingsworth President
Milton is a special place because of our beautiful, equestrian landscape and strong sense of green space and community. We need to keep it that way! We do NOT need or support overdevelopment, higher density projects, or sewer extensions. Unfortunately, that’s exactly what Rick Mohrig has voted for time and time again. In 2016 Rick Mohrig voted FOR dozens of new homes to be built on smaller lots, more development on each lot and a sewer extension, all inconsistent with the character of our community. Milton’s Planning Commission opposed this intensive development. But Rick Mohrig voted YES on more development anyway. His vote is recorded here:
Milton Families First Statement on Paul Moore’s Decision Not to Run for Another Term on City Council
For Immediate Release August 21, 2023 Milton, GA — Following the launch of Milton Families First’s successful launch and announcement to engage in the upcoming elections, Paul Moore announced yesterday that he won’t seek another term. This represents a significant win for Milton Families First and the entire city of Milton. Following this news, Milton Families First President Adam Hollingsworth issued the following statement: “Paul Moore’s decision to step aside opens the door for new leadership and fresh thinking on the Milton City Council. We wish him and his family well in the days ahead. There is a new reality in Milton — and it’s called citizens’ demand for ethical, transparent, and accountable government. To that end, we encourage Milton residents and families to vote for Doug Hene on November 7. Doug is an honest, hardworking and exemplary community leader who will do a fantastic job serving every citizen on the City Council. Milton Families First will continue to serve as relentless advocates for our community, hold our elected officials accountable, and support candidates and causes that promote government accountability, public safety, and responsible growth.” To learn more about our mission and join our grassroots movement, click here.
This story originally appeared in the AJC: The city of Milton is cutting its voting locations from eight to three, a reduction in access since the city took control of this year’s local elections from Fulton County. The changes prompted a political action committee called Milton Families First to ask the State Election Board on Wednesday to intervene in what it called a “mismanaged” process. READ THE LETTER HERE City officials say they have responded to residents’ concerns by voting to add a third election day polling place in southeast Milton after initially planning just two. They say voters will continue to have adequate opportunities to cast ballots this November, with lower costs to taxpayers. The dispute over voting locations follows Milton’s decision to run its own municipal elections this fall after a feasibility study conducted by one of Georgia’s fake presidential electors, the president of a Republican Party group and city officials. Milton Families First questioned whether it was legal for the City Council to set polling places while its members are eligible for reelection. State law gives the election superintendent — in this case, the city manager — authority to set voting locations, according to the group. “ This process has been, at best, mismanaged — and, at worst, could be unethical and in violation of state statutes,” states the letter by Milton Families First, which is opposing the reelection of Councilmen Paul Moore and Rick Mohrig. “While our strong preference would be that Milton run its own elections, the City Council has lost the ability to avoid a real and perceived conflict of interest.” State Election Board Chairman Bill Duffey said he will look into whether the board has authority over the matter. Milton’s election consultant, Vernetta Nuriddin, said the city’s three election day precincts and one early voting site will be able to serve the city’s voters in this year’s municipal elections, when turnout is expected to be lower than in general elections. There are over 30,000 registered voters in Milton, and about 3,800 turned out for city elections two years ago. Fulton County will continue to operate Milton elections when federal and state candidates are on the ballot, including next year’s presidential elections. “We can handle it with the three locations, especially with three weeks of early voting,” said Nuriddin, a former vice chairwoman for the Fulton election board. “It’s going to be a light lift for the city if we can maximize the early vote.” Several voting rights groups have urged the city to add voting locations. “While we appreciate the limited resources the city has to manage elections, self-administering elections separate from Fulton County was a conscious decision made by the council, and as such, it is incumbent on you that your decision does not result in discriminatory and exclusionary access to the ballot,” states a May letter from Fair Fight Action, the New Georgia Project Action Fund, the Represent GA Network, Common Cause Georgia and All Voting is Local Action Georgia. In at least three other Georgia counties, polling locations have recently been closed or moved. Lincoln County reduced the number of voting sites from seven to three last month, and Floyd County last week decided on 19 election day precincts, down from 25. Troup County officials approved moving four voting locations currently housed in schools. Statewide, county election boards closed 214 precincts between 2012 and 2018, which amounted to nearly 8% of Georgia’s polling places, according to a count by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
From the AJC: MILTON DRAMA. Don’t let the manicured lawns and million-dollar farmhouses fool you: There’s plenty in Milton that isn’t picture perfect. Let’s start with an ethics scandal and allegations of election mismanagement and voter suppression by some members of the Milton City Council. Now add a new political action committee called Milton Families First, which advocates “for government transparency and accountability, strengthening public safety, and promoting responsible growth.” With a municipal election looming, the PAC is also designed to unseat the members of the council at the center of those dramas: Paul Moore and Rick Mohrig. The PAC is funded in part by Tony Palazzo, the Milton businessman who filed an ethics complaint against Moore. That charge led Moore to sue Palazzo for filing the ethics complaint in the first place. PACs are commonplace in statewide and congressional races, but they’re unusual at the city council level. So continue to watch this space. We have a feeling this isn’t over. Read the original story here.
Today, Milton Families First, an Independent Expenditure Committee, announced its official grassroots launch, with a mission of advocating for Milton families, taxpayers, and businesses at the ballot box and beyond.
This story originally appeared on AppenMedia.com MILTON, Ga. — An ethics panel determined Aug. 30 that Milton City Councilman Paul Moore committed three out of seven ethics violations when he voted to defer a decision to provide city funding for traffic calming devices inside his neighborhood. The ethics panel, consisting of local attorneys Samuel Pierce, Charles Pollack and Ron Debranski, found that Moore violated sections in the city code dealing with ethics for city officials and department directors, disclosure of interest and abstention to avoid conflicts of interest. The attorneys cleared Moore of allegations he violated the code of ethics for municipal service generally, conflict of interest transactions, withholding of information, and political recrimination and activity. The decision wraps up nearly four months of back and forth between Moore and Tony Palazzo, who serves as the president of the White Columns Homeowners Association but filed the ethics complaint against the councilman in his individual capacity as a resident of Milton. In their recommendation to the mayor and City Council, the attorneys stated Moore should be given a written censure or reprimand outlining the ethics violations he committed and that they be publicly announced at one of their regular meetings and included in the official minutes. At an initial ethics panel meeting in June, the attorneys agreed there was sufficient evidence to proceed with a formal hearing. Then on Aug. 2, both parties presented several hours of testimony, but the hearing ended with the attorneys asking for additional time to render a decision. About a dozen Milton residents attended the final hearing on Aug. 30 in support of Moore. His wife and other city officials were also in attendance. During the May 2 City Council meeting, Palazzo said the reason the HOA had preemptively installed traffic calming devices in the Golf neighborhood of the 440-plus home community was to address ongoing “speeding problem,” adding that there was a need to make the streets safer for children and residents. Palazzo said the HOA had purchased and installed four radar feedback signs earlier this year for a total of $13,706. But it wasn’t until later that the HOA learned it could recoup half of its costs, or $6,853, through the city’s Traffic Calming program. Moore was one of five council members who voted to defer a decision on the matter on May 2, requiring the city to collect more data about speeding in White Columns and for the HOA to collect additional neighborhood input. Then, in a 4-1 vote at an Aug. 1 meeting, council members approved the cost-share agreement. The accord included a caveat that the Public Works Department examine and reevaluate one of the sign locations. Councilman Rick Mohrig cast the dissenting vote. Moore did not vote on the matter on Aug. 1 “out of an abundance of caution,” but made clear he was not recusing himself to avoid appearing like he was admitting to any wrongdoing. Moore maintained his innocence throughout the entire affair over the past couple of months. However, after reaching a verdict, Pollack said the ethics panel agreed that Moore had an interest in the matter and that he had not properly announced it at the beginning of the May 2 meeting or abstained from voting. “The interest did not need to be unique,” Pollack said. “There was a lot of testimony and evidence that Council member Moore’s home was one of 28 affected by these traffic calming devices. … The council member did ultimately disclose that he lived in the neighborhood and never really hid that fact, so I don’t think there was any withholding of information.” Pollack said the panel thought Moore most likely did not realize at the outset that he had an interest that could be subject to the ethics code but questioned why he didn’t ask the city attorney instead of the city manager before the meeting. “I don't think there was an intent to commit an ethics violation…,” Pollack said. “It probably would have been beneficial to side on the safe side in a case where there was a close call. I think that probably should have happened here.” See more at AppenMedia.com
This story originally appeared on WSB-TV MILTON, Ga. — A Milton man is having to defend himself in court after filing an ethics complaint against a city council member. “I’m a citizen of Milton. I thought wrongdoing occurred with a government official, so I came forward and filed an ethics complaint,” Tony Palazzo told Channel 2 consumer investigator Justin Gray. A formal ethics panel ruled that Milton City Councilman Paul Moore did in fact violate city ethics rules by not recusing himself from a vote related to the subdivision where he lived. But for Palazzo, who filed that ethics complaint, that was just the beginning. He’s named as a defendant along with the city and the ethics board in a writ of certiorari filed in Fulton Superior Court by Moore. The legal petition demands the decision by the ethics board be overturned and that Moore’s legal fees be paid. Palazzo said he was forced to hire legal counsel of his own, worried he could be on the hook for those legal fees. “I thought it was a simple process. Never in my wildest dreams did I think I’d have to retain legal counsel, go to evidentiary hearings, and now fight in superior court over the findings of a three-attorney ethics panel,” Palazzo said. Last fall, the Milton City Council declined to formally punish Moore for the ethics panel’s findings. The ethics panel had recommended a written censure or reprimand. “I believe Councilman Moore has been sufficiently sanctioned,” Milton Mayor Peyton Jamison said at an October council meeting. Moore told Channel 2 Action News in a written statement: “My petition in Fulton Superior Court is nothing more than an appeal of his complaint, and it was filed in the format required under an old state law….it is ironic that, having started this process by filing a complaint against me, Mr. Palazzo is now complaining that he finds himself in court. The only reason that has happened is because I have refused to lay down, and I am continuing to defend myself against his charges.” “It’s very chilly, it’s frightening,” said Richard T. Griffiths with the Georgia First Amendment Foundation. “While it may not technically be a lawsuit, it is nevertheless the kind of thing you may have to spend money defending yourself against.” Palazzo said he’s already spent about $30,000 in legal fees and worries about what message this sends to others. “If you’re in fear of financial ruin, why in the world would you come forward and subject yourself to this,” Palazzo said. “In this case, a legitimate complaint to the ethics commission was upheld and now that citizen is facing legal repercussions that are scary and potentially expensive and that’s not right,” Griffiths said. In his statement to Channel 2 Action News, Moore wrote: “As to attorney’s fees, the City Code of Ethics provides that an elected official has a right to recover fees he spent defending himself if a complaint against him is eventually dismissed by a court. I assume that Mr. Palazzo was aware of that when he chose to file his complaint against me.” A hearing on all this is set for May. Milton City Attorney Ken Jarrard told Gray, “Council member Paul Moore has taken advantage of his appellate rights under the City’s ethics code. The City of Milton will respect and honor any decision of the court.” Read more at WSB Action 2 News
This story originally appeared at AJC.com A Fulton County Superior Court judge has dismissed the lawsuit filed on behalf of Milton Councilman Paul Moore against a resident who filed an ethics complaint against him. Moore’s attorney, Doug Chalmers, says the legal fight is not over. “We respectfully disagree with the judge’s decision and we plan to appeal,” the attorney said. Moore sued neighbor Tony Palazzo in February for attorney’s fees the councilman incurred during an ethics investigation, which found he violated the code. Moore also wanted the court to reverse the ethics panel’s decision. Judge Thomas A. Cox dismissed the case May 18, stating in his decision that Moore’s appeal of the ethics panel findings was filed too late. READ MORE at AJC.com
