[{"_1":2,"_98":-5,"_99":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},"mediaId",6214284,"mediaKeyId","3670844-72441aa313099fc39f1c477ef7913eb7","parentId",3670844,"title","Commission debates giving the mayor formal role as presiding officer; stops short of adding powers","audioSeconds",1378,"startMs",5332000,"endMs",6710000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3670844-72441aa313099fc39f1c477ef7913eb7&start=5332&end=6710","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3670844-72441aa313099fc39f1c477ef7913eb7/thumbnail_5332000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6214284/Stonecrest/DeKalb-County/Georgia/Commission-debates-giving-the-mayor-formal-role-as-presiding-officer-stops-short-of-adding-powers","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6214284-a4f05ba966e1988021dedac36c9780d2/orig.mp4?Expires=1770486517&Signature=C1VbuaeopaclBEIuTILeiImRsMuAv-HGuJ-aHazur15WV4qg-5d~Tbt9o7ORVd4SSE0LzB8zvSyCR1Z4f6KhLHeFWL4y4Nix2tg7~rNCRH8fzGNxYykSsLpQI1cy6BUcqgELmbvq94ERepLFzo9GA~OkEZp2iHr8qePe42o4safFuqwWVnyf3mxJO-9A3mi3zaTqiUeLSYvffCfTnJb4xQRQnDHWuGN59FJ8iRQdIEjDGBeOf3Gg8Jnmn3d72UpmLAK8z0xjQ8fBKLe8otAQTGPpBCd78BYY3dVHPaodIIjrHQ6D9E7CBeAq6Tkh1ih5da7AYbqudWDZQXEK-EMQCQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-06-05T00:46:36Z","article","Commissioners discussed whether to change the charter so the mayor — elected citywide — would serve as the presiding officer of the city council, with the ability to propose citywide initiatives but not to exercise executive authority over administration.

Joel Thibodeaux proposed that because the mayor is elected citywide, the mayor should “serve as the presiding officer of city council,” removing the mayor from the executive branch while leaving the mayor without a vote or independent executive power. Thibodeaux said such a change would allow the mayor to “drive the conversation” at council meetings and propose citywide initiatives without giving the mayor separate supervisory authority over the city manager.

Supporters said the change would create a single, citywide spokesperson who could articulate citywide priorities. One commissioner summarized the intent: “The only thing basically would change would be the mayor presides over the meeting and that the mayor basically can drive the conversation.”

Opponents and cautionary voices raised two problems: low citywide turnout could mean a mayor’s mandate is weak or geographically concentrated, and any added role risks unintended consequences if a future mayor misuses influence. Commissioners noted past experience, where a mayor’s actions led to governance problems, and urged caution. “We can write the perfect charter,” one commissioner said, “but the charter cannot make up for the deficiencies of the people that are elected to office.”

The commission did not take a drafting vote on the mayor’s role at this meeting. Members asked staff to research how other council–manager cities define the mayor’s presiding duties and to prepare options for the commission to review. The item will return to a future agenda for focused drafting and legal analysis.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Charter Commission 6:00 PM 06-04-2025","oneSentenceSummary","Members debated whether to designate the mayor as the citywide presiding officer with authority to set and drive council discussion, while keeping the mayor’s lack of managerial authority intact; the commission asked members to consider options ahead of future drafting.","taxTitle","Stonecrest, DeKalb County, Georgia","taxId",4249,"location","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6214289,"Commission authorizes draft revisions to millage cap, audits, property tax exemptions and executive branch",456,4789000,5245000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3670844-72441aa313099fc39f1c477ef7913eb7&start=4789&end=5245","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3670844-72441aa313099fc39f1c477ef7913eb7/thumbnail_4789000.jpg","/articles/6214289/Stonecrest/DeKalb-County/Georgia/Commission-authorizes-draft-revisions-to-millage-cap-audits-property-tax-exemptions-and-executive-branch","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6214289-ebb4c1b4b22529428b7208e329d27eb8/orig.mp4?Expires=1770486517&Signature=BtiKhqkEpIxWdwdSJ9PAQ7j6YVzSueHWatM4btBxEAh5lEnvfbqmeswpNhbEsKJqTA8Z~2lHgomUT6rI1Nwmuq90YEI9L9BYHkRgwMOJoY6mx4ipWh3XfJ-NgIbF9DpSJ-G3BwYrPtd-OZryJAyD6KZAqf3aO4XP9M9VuSSoJsifZEuMQhobOMsxlIGR~FzNYei0H8UU4UBs8TXZVCdOVRE34HeUX3FcbhG9i85h9jYNH2nOKnTrMr59lId45q~gZchQrqB8CrRSA9vNlpxVh-indiTXW~LfvJOoeN~qp8LQcP8xSAnu-3v5s8QQtmbfeYzWFBWb6GrD6hSMaxI0Rg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Stonebridge Charter Commission voted on June 4 to authorize staff to draft proposed charter revisions for several sections of the draft charter, including a potential change to the city’s millage rate cap, audit procedures, multiple property tax exemptions, and the executive branch sections governing the city manager.

The commission approved motions to prepare revision drafts for Article 1 (creation and corporate powers / millage rate cap), Article 5 (fiscal and audit provisions, including section 5.07 on audits), property tax exemption provisions (sections 5.08 and 5.12), and Article 3 (executive branch, sections 3.02–3.06).

On the record, a motion to authorize a revision draft for Article 1 (section 1.03 subsections) was moved by Mr. Burby and seconded by Mr. Shumley; the commission recorded the vote as in favor and the motion passed. The motion to authorize drafting revisions for Article 5 audit language — to clarify remedies if audits are not completed — was also moved and seconded and passed by the commission. Commissioners discussed the property tax items with specific reference to re‑implementing a freeze exemption (to avoid opting in to state House Bill 581) and to clarify homestead exemptions, then moved and approved a drafting motion for the applicable sections.

The commission also voted to author a revision for Article 3 (the executive branch) covering city manager language and related subsections; that motion passed by a recorded 4–1 vote. Commissioners said that vote was to authorize staff drafting, not to adopt any final charter language.

Why it matters: those authorized drafts set the agenda for the commission’s next review cycle and will determine whether changes such as a new referendum threshold for millage increases or reenactment of a tax “freeze” exemption will be proposed to voters. As with other drafting decisions, the commission emphasized that specific language and legal review will follow prior to any public hearing or final vote.

Next steps: staff will prepare the draft language on the specified sections and circulate it to the commission for revision; future meetings will include formal review and, if approved for placement on the charter, will require the supermajority vote threshold the commission discussed.

","The Stonebridge Charter Commission voted to author draft revisions for multiple charter sections, including the millage rate cap, audit procedures, property tax exemptions and the city manager/executive branch.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6214295,"Charter commissioners clarify council oversight, add 24‑hour notification for direct staff contact",1571,199000,1770000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3670844-72441aa313099fc39f1c477ef7913eb7&start=199&end=1770","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3670844-72441aa313099fc39f1c477ef7913eb7/thumbnail_199000.jpg","/articles/6214295/Stonecrest/DeKalb-County/Georgia/Charter-commissioners-clarify-council-oversight-add-24hour-notification-for-direct-staff-contact","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6214295-50c782a6519949ad99506e3b4fed0ee9/orig.mp4?Expires=1770486517&Signature=ol51tSCvmiVncGzPsSauAbagXLPS3EMYLeODrBDHClysJ9TEvEl9NkIC3bRICLVi9M7KBn2shzoQv6yyIdj1q5rfMMHVAg5F4iSsLUyJjyEfqwyX59yYKVpsGypxNVvu37k5DaNgoUza9K1aTgc2FOpSVB5MmV8cNwVgMEu3UA2pqYesVfo0cNhIKAOdgGX218llbVyhqJv61POzvzxDqOevJREJoxuluexUCBcpWxNLb76-2jp5ImAMf~da3Rmlw-EnkVROFCZYvlhZ~QRCZhbjLSV0HYKFgX9PK249WP8ndH1zbkUrFOhUYvR6iwGGRrvMiOvs5GWJRwDUB2DBaw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Commissioners at the Stonebridge Charter Commission meeting on June 4 debated how to draw the line between legitimate oversight and improper interference with city administration and agreed on two clarifications: council members must channel directives through the city manager, and any direct contact with subordinate employees must be copied to the city manager in writing within 24 hours.

The issue arrived during discussion of Article 3 (executive branch) and related sections. Joel Thibodeaux, a commission member, summarized the council’s role and the commission’s concern about council members bypassing the city manager: “The mayor, mayor pro tem, and city council shall not give directives to any city officers or employees other than the city manager and or officers appointed by the city council regarding any matters including, but not limited to, constituents complaints.”

Why it matters: commissioners said the rule protects the chain of command while preserving the council’s oversight role. Kirby Clemons, the city attorney, and other commissioners emphasized that the charter must prevent council members from issuing orders to department staff while allowing them to raise constituent complaints. Clemons recommended specific textual guards and encouraged drafting language used in other city charters to prevent accidental micromanagement.

Most speakers supported adding an explicit, short timeframe for follow‑up after any direct contact with a subordinate employee so the city manager is aware. Lashonda Walker urged a prompt written follow‑up, saying that without a written copy “Jim [the city manager] will be sitting here freaking out.” Commissioners agreed that written notification should arrive within a short period; the group settled on a 24‑hour window for transmitting the substance of any verbal or direct communication to the city manager so the manager can respond and staff have record of the contact.

The commission also discussed language to avoid unintentionally narrowing the council’s oversight to budget items. Several members worried that placing budget administration language in the same paragraph that establishes oversight could be read as limiting oversight to financial matters. As a compromise, commissioners directed staff to add qualifying language — for example, “including but not limited to” before the budget example — so that oversight is not construed to be strictly financial.

On judicial independence and municipal court contacts, commissioners agreed the municipal judge’s adjudicatory functions must remain independent. Thibodeaux said the commission should make clear that council oversight of judges is limited to budgetary and administrative matters and does not extend to judicial decision‑making: “I would prefer to have that little bulwark there just to make it clear that the oversight as to the judicial branch extend only to budgetary and nonjudicial function.”

Discussion vs. formal direction: the commission did not adopt final charter language at this meeting. They agreed to draft revisions that will: (1) state clearly that council members may not give orders to employees who report to the city manager; (2) require that any council contact with subordinate employees be copied to the city manager in writing within 24 hours; and (3) add language to avoid limiting oversight to budget reporting alone.

Next steps: staff were asked to draft the precise charter text reflecting those decisions for future review and a formal vote.

","The Stonebridge Charter Commission debated and clarified limits on city council oversight of administration, agreed language to prevent council members from bypassing the city manager, and proposed a 24‑hour written notification rule when council members contact city employees.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commission debates giving the mayor formal role as presiding officer; stops short of adding powers

Commission authorizes draft revisions to millage cap, audits, property tax exemptions and executive branch

Charter commissioners clarify council oversight, add 24‑hour notification for direct staff contact