Not. One. Word.

December 4, 2012 9:00 am

by Mike Hassinger · 32 comments

For some inexplicable reason, The Democrat Party of Georgia has decided to back Sandy Murray for Mayor of Brookhaven. Here’s an email from Rashad Richey, describing Sandy Murray as “a solid Democrat.”

A “solid Democrat?” Well, not quite as solid as Rashad, but solid enough. Rashad Richey has a criminal record, and Sandy Murray is currently violating State Ethics laws.

Here’s a link to Rashad’s mugshot. And here’s a picture of the unpaid fine from the State Ethics Commission Ms. Murray is refusing to pay: (The link is not available because the State Ethics Transparency Commission’s website is snafu -naturally.)

Here’s another picture of Sandy Murray, who not only can’t fill out forms but apparently can’t make a sign, either:

 No candidate is perfect, but really? Really? This is your image? A woman who looks cat-lady crazy with a sign against the city she now wants to be the Mayor of?

So, to sum up: Georgia Democrats, our State’s second-least influential organization, is paying a man with a criminal record to tell Democrats to vote for a candidate who is currently violating the disclosure laws of our State’s most poorly-funded agency.

If you wonder why nobody takes you Democrats seriously, this is why. In fact, if you don’t fix this, when the legislature starts up in 6 weeks, I don’t want to hear any of you Democrats saying a word about ethics reform, because you obviously aren’t adults to be trusted with anything sharp or important.

Not. One. Word.

saltycracker December 4, 2012 at 9:19 am

The real explanation for adding cities seems to be that we want our own local dysfunctional motivated incompetents to direct public business.

We are so blessed with an abundance of them desiring to hold public office and help us, so let’s get Buckhead going !

bgsmallz December 4, 2012 at 9:34 am

Sandy and her crew have violated numerous ‘little’ laws during both the ‘no city’ campaign and her mayoral campaign…they hired day laborers to drive through neighborhoods and pass-out, tape to the door/mailbox, or just throw on the driveway anonymous political materials and they have knowingly put signs in vacant home lots, the right-of-way, and other illegal locations. The fliers they have been handing out have gone from bad to worse in terms of lies and other garbage. I also think they have usurped email lists to use for political spam…CAN-Spam may not apply to political mailers, but the privacy policies and consents I give to other sites certainly govern whether or not they can pass out my email address.

I tried to point this out to Stefan yesterday…this is a terrible, terrible move for the Democratic party. She is a total nut-ball. My guess is that they are blindly following the money…Tom Cousins and Mary Ellen Imlay ‘happen’ to be major contributors to both the Democratic Party in GA and Sandy Murray’s campaign. They just better hope the juice is worth the squeeze…b/c they are killing the reputation of the party in the 30319 area code.

Stefan December 4, 2012 at 9:58 am

I don’t control what the Democratic Party does or does not do. As far as the flyers, I thought that was well handled in Charlie’s morning post yesterday. It is totally fair game to look at the political disclosures of those involved in the creation of new cities, and when they are heavily funded by those who will seek to benefit financially from getting contracts from the city that should be pointed out.

If the goal is to root out corruption, that’s a good place to start.

Mike Hassinger December 4, 2012 at 10:04 am

Apparently, NObody controls what the Democratic party does or does not do. But you know what else is “fair game?” Looking at the financial disclosures, required by law, of candidates for public office. Because “If the goal is to root out corruption, that’s a good place to start.”
Except Sandy Murray hasn’t filled one out. Is that corruption? Or merely incompetence?

drjay December 4, 2012 at 10:24 am

i don’t know anything about these people or this race–she may well not have done what she is supposed to do filing wise and actually owe the $125–but as a former candidate, i can speak to a fair amt. of inefficiency, confusion, and possibly even incompetence on the part of the transparency commission…for instance, they have me listed twice, and even though i have pointed this out numerous times, it has never been fixed, and one of my listings is shown as owing a fine even though all my disclosures have been timely and accurate, submitted under the “me” that i have a pin for…it would be worth a look to see if “sandra” is also listed as “sandy” before deciding if she is a ethics hooligan or not…

Mike Hassinger December 4, 2012 at 10:32 am

I have checked, and as soon as the transparency commission fixes their stupid website, I’ll link to it and let you decide for yourself.

drjay December 4, 2012 at 11:05 am

i’m much to lazy to go looking myself, i just know from personal experience that “not filing” based on what that website says may not be an accurate reflection of whether filing had in fact occurred, and thought it would be fair to explore that before callng her an ethics hooligan…

bgsmallz December 4, 2012 at 11:12 am

My issue is that if Stefan really wanted to ‘root out corruption’ and not just follow the same old tired Democratic M.O. I’ve seen in Brookhaven, he wouldn’t have just asked the question, but instead, would have seeked an answer. However, that would require real ‘evidence’ rather than just FUD you can use to stir the waters. Meh.

There is one reason the Democratic Party is coming out for Sandy Murray. It’s because Mary Ellen Imlay has put $30,000 of her own money towards trying to prevent Brookhaven (Tom Cousins has thrown in $15,000 of his own, too) and my assumption is the Dems have been given slight nudges to help her out and keep those $25,000 checks coming to the party HQ each year. Go ahead and search the contributions. They are major donors to the state-wide Democratic machine…there can’t be many of those left, right?

http://media.ethics.ga.gov/search/Campaign/Campaign_ByContributionsearchresults.aspx?Contributor=imlay&Zip=&City=&ContTypeID=0&PAC=&Employer=&Occupation=&From=&To=&Cash=&InK=&Filer=&Candidate=&Committee=

Otherwise, it makes zero sense that someone as smart and savvy as Jason Carter would ever get near such a nut-job like Sandy Murray.

But you know, it only counts as ‘ethics’ if you are taking money from a business…jumping in a race behind a nut job who has no business being the mayor of one of the 15 largest cities in Georgia because that’s what a really large and wealthy donor wants you to do is completely ethical….durr.

bgsmallz December 4, 2012 at 11:16 am

Modify!

“jumping in a race behind a nut job who has no business being the mayor of one of the 15 largest cities in Georgia because that’s what a really large and wealthy donor wants you to do is completely ethical….durr.” —> not directed at a particular candidate, just at the Democratic party as a whole.

Stefan December 4, 2012 at 11:55 am

I asked you specifically about this in the other thread and you didn’t respond. But regardless, I am totally fine with pointing out that much of Sandy Murray’s support comes from two donors. I don’t see a potential conflict with Imaly. I will ask you again, what am I missing? Is the Imlay in question not the one I linked to, or is there some other reason to suspect that person would do business with the City of Brookhaven?

I don’t live in Brookhaven, I don’t have a dog in the fight, but I do think it is relevant if Calvin Giordano bankrolls city referendums and candidates and then gets paid back 1,000 fold as it has in Dunwoody.

Your point is that Sandy Murray makes terrible signs. I totally agree. However, she was great in Feds.

bgsmallz December 4, 2012 at 12:30 pm

I’m not asking a question of ‘will they do business with the City’…that’s the wrong question, period. Governments are going to do business with contractors. Calvin and Giordano know that and are giving money to help form new governments (aka new clients).

You linked to the right Imlay…just as I did above.

The real question is one of influence. Is the money Calvin and G giving to these cities giving them an unfair advantage? Is it buying them contracts? Are taxpayers not getting market rate services b/c politicians are selecting the contract that gave to the cause vs. a better provider that didn’t? There isn’t one single shred of evidence that Calvin and G didn’t win that RFP fair and square. There is no evidence that any influence has been gained by their donations. Not one shred.

On the flip side, you have a major donor that happens to finance most of the No City effort, the candidates that support that effort, and makes large gifts to the Democratic Party of Georgia. So…when I see Dems from other districts and areas that have no ‘dog in the fight’ coming to the rescue of nut-job Murray without having seemingly met her or realized how big of a liar she is, I have more questions about whether there is real influence over how people are behaving based upon the money being supplied by that donor…which raises questions not only about the Dems supporting her but also about the candidate herself.

Stefan December 4, 2012 at 1:23 pm

So the questions I ask about Calvin Giordano are unfair, but your suggestion that my blog post asking that question is somehow tied to an implied relationship I have with Imlay IS fair?

bgsmallz December 4, 2012 at 2:18 pm

No…something is getting lost in translation. In the words of Tupac, “I ain’t mad at cha”

The questions are fair. 100%.

What isn’t fair, in my opinion, is asking the question with regards to only one candidate while implying an answer… that there must be something amiss …while hiding from the clear and necessary missing steps (i.e. applying the question evenly and examining past practices) under the guise of ‘rooting out corruption.’

And I’m not trying to say you have an implied relationship with Imlay. I’m saying that Imlay has an actual relationship with the powers that be in the GA Democratic party and with the No City Brookhaven clan. No implication necessary. And my guess is that her influence is being used to pull others that really shouldn’t have any business schilling for Sandy Murray into the fray through the Democratic party network.

So when I see an article that mirrors the b.s. pay-for-play line in both subject matter (with the exception of Mary Gross) and tone that has been used extensively by the No City opponents in the same manner since February…

And within 10 minutes of that article being posted, I’m seeing links to it from the Brookhaven Patch by the same anonymous posters that have been peddling that same argument all year under real and fake names and who happen to be supporters and officers in the No City movement….

Number 1, it’s a great chance for me to point out the clear and obvious missing pieces that are being purposefully ignored by the folks perpetuating that argument. (maybe you didn’t purposefully ignore it, but the folks peddling it in my area like Sandy Murray sure are)

Number 2, I can point out that the post struck me as odd for someone that ‘doesn’t have a dog in that fight’ because there is a lot of ‘inside baseball’ of Brookhaven politics in there and it became even more strange when I started seeing links to it pop up in the Brookhaven Patch within minutes of the post being put on the front page.

Do I think someone from the Murray camp/Democratic party gave you the subject matter for the post? That’s my opinion. Am I claiming that you have a relationship with Imlay? Nope. But I’m almost sure that the person that gave you the subject matter of this post does, either directly or indirectly.

Which brings me back to my question…if we are trying to root out corruption, shouldn’t we focus on those who may be actually exercising influence?

Maybe I’m wrong and frankly, it probably doesn’t matter. What does matter is that Sandy Murray is a nut-ball and you should do nothing that helps her get elected.

GabrielSterling December 4, 2012 at 11:04 am

Here is the link to her outstanding “fines”. These are two fines for failing to file her personal financial disclosure properly and on time. She still has only filed one of the two she is required to file. They are months old and she still refuses to pay them:

http://media.ethics.ga.gov/search/Late/Late_Details.aspx?NameID=25726&FirstName=s&LastName=murray&City=&FirstNameSearch=1&LastNameSearch=1&CitySearch=1&OfficeID=&FOName=

Stefan December 4, 2012 at 11:46 am

I’d go with incompetence, unless I am missing something.

Andre December 4, 2012 at 10:05 am

Be careful, Mike.

Telling the truth might get you sued.

Rick Day December 4, 2012 at 11:00 am

Mike, question: are you a Democrat?

More questions: have you given to the GDP recently? Do you live in the city in question?

Do you hate cats? Or just hate the fact that your ‘party’ lost another local office to another ‘minority’? Where are the good old boys when you need them? Oh..right…off being appointed willy-nilly by Saint Guv™.

It’s not very manly to stand on the sidelines of life, throwing rocks at the passerby’s. It also draws attention to the mess within your glass house.

Everything you allege would be heartily endorsed as ‘fair and above board’ by your bookend political field marshals (Atwater and Rove)…..unless D’s did it. Then….we get your post.

Mike Hassinger December 4, 2012 at 11:59 am

Sandy Murray, according to the now-functioning State Ethics website, has not one, not two, but THREE outstanding fines for failure to file 2 personal financial disclosures and one campaign finance report. See them here: http://tinyurl.com/ags6hzu
She’s run her entire campaign attacking J. Max Davis for everything she can think up or make up. And the Democrat party calls her a “solid Democrat,” either in spite of -or maybe because of- her deliberate flouting of the ethics laws of Georgia. Hell no, I’m not a Democrat, I’m sane and honest.
So you can take your “I know you are but what am I” comments and shove ‘em.

Toxic Avenger December 4, 2012 at 9:25 pm

Perhaps they call her a solid Democrat because 1) she is listed as a Solid Democrat in the state voter files and 2) she ran for State Rep as a Democrat before, and almost ran for it again this year?

My problem with your post, sir, is not that she is a terrible sign maker, or even that Rashad Richey has a rap sheet. My problem is your overt implication that being a solid Democrat means that you are some sort of criminal, or vice versa. You can make your point without resorting to baseless ad hominem attacks. It’s beneath you.

Mike Hassinger December 4, 2012 at 10:29 pm

Whew, for a minute there I thought I was being too subtle.
Thanks for understanding.

benevolus December 4, 2012 at 3:53 pm

I would like to thank Peach Pundit for making it so easy to know which threads to not read.

filltheshill December 4, 2012 at 3:54 pm

This is interesting. Look at case number 89C56102 (criminal) and 91A40851 (civil) on OJS DeKalb. See anyone you know?

Looks like J. Max Davis his DUI and his resulting personal injury case!

http://www.ojs.dekalbga.org/servlet/page?_pageid=60&_dad=portal30&_schema=PORTAL30

GabrielSterling December 4, 2012 at 4:10 pm

Over 20 years ago…?

filltheshill December 4, 2012 at 6:41 pm

Talk to the guy thay drunk J. Max Davis hit. Ask him if anything has changed for twenty years. I guess you are OK with that? Maybe J. Max should have been given a pass. You would prefer that.

SquireThompson December 4, 2012 at 6:16 pm

‘tards, attacking the man in his grave. Old J. Max would have probably used his golden glove left jab and right hook to take care of my fellow Dem’s, with a salty word or two thrown in to boot.

Now that everyone keeps bringing him up, how about a retrospective about the man who was the only conservative around while all you johnny come lately neo cons were still in shorty pants?

filltheshill December 4, 2012 at 6:48 pm

No one attacked the elder Mr. Davis.

There was five years between his death and the younger Mr. Davis’s tax problems. The younger Mr. Davis clearly has a problem if he cannot pay his personal and business property taxes on time from 2007 to 2012.

filltheshill December 4, 2012 at 4:02 pm

J. Max Davis will be successful in his run for Brookhaven’s first mayor. Apparently, citizens in district one, his major source of support, find nothing wrong with “pay to play” politics and Mr. Davis taking campaign contributions from potential city vendors. Plus, his father had been dead for five years before he started having problems paying taxes on his business and personal property. The next couple of years will be real interesting. Especially when Mr. Davis is unable to live up to all of the promises he has made.

bgsmallz December 4, 2012 at 5:08 pm

Sandy Murray lives in district 1, too. I wonder why her neighbors don’t support her? Hmmm….

So your basic premise is that candidate that has the support of his immediate neighbors will be more susceptible to outside influences because he took a small amount as a candidate from businesses that will have to go through an open and transparent RFP process and council vote is more likely to be subject to outside influence than someone that doesn’t have the support of her neighbors and is relying on the deep pockets of a very few influential donors (she has received close to $7,000 from two donors… totaling more than half of all of her contributions) to pay for her b.s. fliers in an attempt to drum up support in the districts south of Peachtree?

I’ll choose J. Max’s optimism over Murray and her No City lies any day, thanks.

filltheshill December 4, 2012 at 7:14 pm

Silly man . . . Take your focus off Sandy Murray. J. Max Davis will win and that will be when the fun will begin!

You should really be focusing on our new city and its success as sold. By now you have heard that the new city is budget deficient. That is why no budget has been released and the people previously associated with Brookhaven Yes are laying the ground work to prepare the citizens of Brookhaven for a new city just capable of taking on three services. These folks are scrambling to figure out how they can live up to their promises and what there alternatives are to explain why they are unable to do so. The city you thought you were going to have has escaped you because of a well planned marketing plan with a poor business plan. Since Mike Jacobs has been intimately involved from the start to date, you can thank him.

bgsmallz December 4, 2012 at 8:17 pm

Silly man? Hmmmmm….where have I seem that phrase before? Oh right, from the idiot anonymous posters on the Patch. Nice trolling.

filltheshill December 5, 2012 at 7:22 am

Like your speech is unique! Looks like us trolls hang together!

GabrielSterling December 5, 2012 at 12:15 am

J. Max Davis won every district and 11 out of 12 precincts. That is pretty broad based support. 66% of the vote isn’t just District 1. The voters rejected Sandy Murray’s negative campaign tactics pretty resoundingly.

Comments on this entry are closed.