Tuesday, March 02, 2010

Ethics Board Votes To Do Nothing.

By Tim Enloe /

After having watched the D'Aversa / O'brien Ethics ordeal play
out over four hours in front of a crowd of an estimated
25 plus people at city hall, I will say that my memory at this
1am hour is in need of a rest.

That being said, however, you want to know what happened.
Bottom line is this: The ethics board did find that D'Aversa
was in violation of articles 3.8 & 4.8 of the Milton GA Code of Ethics.

While it would be nice to find the definition of each article
and share them with you, I have searched the city website
over the last hour and cannot find the Board of Ethics
information or code.

In addition, they chose to only focus on one of the articles
which relayed she was guilty of bribery via email.
Vote on this decision was 4 to 2 in favor of.

After which, the decision was what to do to punish her.
They debated about suggesting a written warning.
Keep in mind that whatever the ethics board decided
was a recommendation to city council. Only
council could decide to impose said punishment.

Finally, one member made a "recommendation to have no
recommendation to council."
This motion was carried 5 to 1 in
favor of. They also agreed to not send a letter to Fulton County
or the Governor's Office regarding the decision.

Some highlights of the evening include:

1. Former City Attorney and O'Brien Council Mark Scott
made a request that Mayor Lockwood's ethics board
appointment Lisa Cauley recuse herself from the
proceedings due to having supported D'Aversa

in the 09 election. Cauley was prepared and read a
statement relaying that other acting ethics board
members had passed relationships that could be

called into conflict. Chair Clint Johnson agreed
with Cauley stating that in a small town, it is hard to
not know somebody who knew about the case and had voted.

2. Council Member Joe Longoria and D'Aversa's testimony
mirrored one another the majority of the time. The big
debate between the two was whether or not Longoria was
open to taking a board position in exchange for stepping
down. He stated he had always planned on running.
D'Aversa stated she was only trying to help a constituent
find a board to be a part of as she claimed he had stated
that was one of the reasons he was running.

3. Ethics Board members Clint Johnson and Lisa Cauley
butted heads often. In one instance, Johnson told Cauley
he didn't like the way she was referring to something and
wanted her to stop. Regardless, Cauley continued her
diligence in asking questions she found necessary to the case.

4. Mayor Joe Lockwood & City Manager Chris Lagerbloom
were called to testify. Both stated that while they were
copied on the email regarding this issue, they did not
report it to the city attorney as they did not find it to be
problematic. Each also stated that they believed D'Aversa's
reputation within the city was good.

5. D'Aversa's attorney called Neal O'brien to the stand
but was shot down by Chairman Johnson stating that he
had not given prior notice. O'brien sat in the front row
the whole evening and did not say a word.

6. Chairman Clint Johnson did not allow D'Aversa's attorney
to question her in a manner that would show that the charge
was politically motivated. He was warned three times.
Some in the audience found such questioning relavent.

That is it for now. Later today, we will post some video
from the beginning of the evening.


Anonymous said...

Tina is naive and maybe not the smartest person, but she is a very committed community servant and her silly e-mail doesn't constitute a major ethics violation. It may be a minor violation considering our City's tighlty written ordinance, but in the real world it's not uncommon.

It's tiime for our City to move forward from this issue and also to stop using ethics charges at the drop of a hat. As a community, we are losing credibility because of these constant ethics complaints.

Also, it looks like Chairman Johnson did the best he could to keep the session organized and on focus.

P.S. I do not know Tina, O'Brien or Chairman Johnson and I supported Joe for the council seat.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the writer above but I do want to add that this was and is politics working its magic in the City of Milton, it's the one skill they adapted to from the beginning of the formation of this City. Do the other cities laugh at us... ah yes, be assured we are the topic of conversation around many a water cooler.

Anonymous said...

She los the election

It's over

Move on.

Who cares.

Anonymous said...

what a complete joke this seems to have been as i read this. did they really need attornys and does mark scott qualify as attorny since he such a snake. i love the mony wasted by both partys having lawyers there like she was gonna be arrested or face jaletime

Anonymous said...

Tina is NOT naive and yes, she isn't the smartest person. Rest assured that everything she does is for a calculated reason. She is very shrewd. She is a committed community servant only when it meets her conditions to look good on her resume.

P.S. I have known her for about 9 years starting in Alpharetta.

Anonymous said...

I like to think of myself as a reasonably intelligent person, so someone please explain why this was necessary?

She lost the election! This is typical small town politics...move on. I am sure there issues that need the attention of the City more than this.

Anonymous said...

I think it is important that the Ethics Board said "we do not think it ethical to offer a board position in exchange for your withdrawal from the race". It is just a reminder for people going forward that it is not okay to benefit your poitical cause using your political power.

But I agree, it's done let's move forward.

Anonymous said...

How come ethics complaints only appear right before elections in this town?

Regardless of what the Board found, the timing and motivation politically couldn't stink any more then it does.

Anonymous said...

3 things:

1) This happend right before the election because the "act" occurred right before the election.

2) Tina was found guilty of two counts. Not exactly scott free

3) This now goes to the State Ethic Board. They may not be as nice.

Fat lady maybe warming up, but it is not over.

Anonymous said...

The act occurred on Sept. 3rd, 2 months before the election, hardly close to 13 days prior to, which is when the complaint was made.

It does not go to state board. It now goes before City Council.

Who was in the audience, anybody we know???

Tim Enloe said...

There were numerous people in the audience that you might know. Ask me and I will tell you.

Tim Enloe
770 6530 552

Anonymous said...

a complaint was filed at both the city and state levels, these are 2 completely different complaints. last night was for the complaint filed to the city, the action for the complaint filed at state is yet to come and has nothing to do with what was addressed last night you need to pull your head out into the light

Anonymous said...

Is Travis Allen posting anonymously now?

Anonymous said...

She will run again once she gets the subdivison to back her.
Look for:
Crooked Creek VS Fairmont

Travis Allen said...

No, this is my first posting on this issue.

I wasn't there, so don't have much to say about what happened. Maybe after I read about it in the Beacon and Herald.

Anonymous said...

To one of the above posters, you are right, this will go to the City Council; but the State Board will also hear it regardless of what happens in Milton.

Anonymous said...

Travis, why not read it in AJC. You do know Doug Nurse no longer covers Milton, right ?

Anonymous said...

Johnson WAS the Biased on on the Board.
What is the role of the Chair? Anyone? To be Judge?

Just what is the chairperson's job description according to Milton's ordinances on this particular Board?


And is it okay to act like an A-- to the other members because you have the title of Chair?

Is he always like that?

Anonymous said...

Only during waking hours.