Atlanta council members spar over inspector general office after abrupt resignation; calls for board appointments

Several Atlanta City Council members and public commenters pressed the mayor’s office on March 3 after the city’s inspector general (IG) resigned and city officials moved quickly to restrict the former IG’s access to the office.

The resigning IG’s treatment and whether the mayor can appoint an interim IG dominated public comment and council discussion. Former council president and current council members repeatedly asked for clarity and immediate steps to protect ongoing investigations and the confidentiality of complainants.

The issue surfaced during a lengthy public-comment block and again during council discussion. Former Atlanta mayoral candidate and Councilmember Felicia Moore, who authored the initial legislation creating the IG office, addressed the chamber and said the mayor lacked legal authority to appoint an interim IG and that executive-branch involvement risked compromising active investigations. "The mayor has no authority to appoint an interim IG," Moore said, urging the council to draft a resolution directing the executive branch not to onboard any interim or access investigative files.

Councilmember Michael Julian Bond defended the council’s work on the office while criticizing how the former IG’s team handled investigations. Bond said the IG's office had "trampled on the rights" of individuals by exceeding authority and that some investigative steps disregarded Georgia law. He also said the city should move to appoint a permanent IG and that the office should have the confidence of those it investigates. "The individuals who were in place abused their authority," Bond said.

Several speakers and council members warned that visits to the OIG office and changes to locks, along with executive-branch contact with confidential files, had already chilled reporting. Moore said the remaining OIG staff and complainants were vulnerable and that public confidence would fall if the executive branch assumed control of investigative files.

Council discussion centered on two paths: (1) quick appointments to the board that confirms an IG, and (2) drafting council measures to prevent executive access to confidential investigative materials while the appointment process proceeds. Council members asked staff to prepare draft resolutions and ordinances to create "guardrails" that protect both the IG’s independence and the rights of those named in investigations.

Council President Doug Shipman and committee chairs said they would request drafting support and urged appointing authorities to move quickly. Several council members argued it would be better to maintain a functioning investigative office, even temporarily, than to leave it vacant. Bond said the person named as interim had declined a permanent appointment, and cautioned the council to balance continuity with legal compliance.

The council did not adopt a final, binding ordinance on the floor that day but directed staff to prepare potential resolutions and noted the appointing agencies must fill vacant board seats to restore the office's independent oversight.

Why it matters: The inspector general’s office was created after earlier public-trust reviews to provide independent investigations of city operations. Council members said prompt, lawful steps are needed to protect confidential complainants and ongoing probes while restoring public confidence in the investigatory process.

What’s next: Council members asked staff to draft nonbinding council resolutions and proposed ordinances to define interim access rules and to accelerate appointments to the independent board that confirms IG candidates. At the meeting, some members signaled they would introduce follow-up measures at future meetings.