Stonecrest commission directs city attorney to draft language affirming council–manager government, debates mayoral powers

The Stonecrest Charter Commission voted to direct the city attorney to draft language that would explicitly identify the city s a council nd—ity—ouncil nd—ity—ouncil s council nd—ity—ouncil—orm of government, and spent the remainder of its Sept. 30 meeting debating whether to reassign mayoral duties from an executive branch into the council and to tighten oversight of the city manager.

The motion to direct the city attorney to author the language passed without recorded opposition after debate; commissioners also approved a separate motion to carry select mayoral responsibilities from the earlier charter into the revised charter, with council confirmation required for appointments.

Why it matters: Commissioners said the change is intended to clarify the city—harter nd prevent future disputes about the distribution of authority between an elected mayor and the council. Several speakers described the current charter s leaving ambiguous whether Stonecrest is a council—ity—ouncil nd—ity—ouncil—orm and argued that explicit language would reduce confusion and limit the potential for a single official to concentrate power.

Discussion and votes: Public commenters and commissioners urged different approaches. A resident who identified himself as Marcus opened public comment by invoking a familiar aphorism: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," and cautioned against changing who sets meeting agendas because of the risk a future mayor could dominate council business. Dr. Diana Dona told the commission that the Georgia Municipal Association does not support reverting from the current charter and urged commissioners to consider GMA guidance.

Councilwoman Dolores Washington (District 3) urged retaining the council nd professional management balance that, she said, prompted Stonecrest nd she said, "I oppose changes to our government structure, charter, or mayoral powers. Our residents deserve a city government that reflects balance, professionalism, and accountability, not one that centralizes power or undermines oversight." Washington argued the charter should explicitly state a council—ity manager form of government and enumerate oversight responsibilities.

Commissioners discussed multiple, specific changes proposed for the charter text: moving the mayor from an "executive branch" heading into the article describing the legislative branch and elections; renaming the "executive branch" to "city administration"; removing any clause that would give a single official direct supervision or work control over the city manager; and clarifying that appointments by the mayor are subject to council confirmation. Several commissioners proposed striking mayoral powers in the older charter they considered to grant supervisory control of the city manager, the authority to reallocate appropriations without council approval, and the power to create or staff council committees under the mayor's supervision.

Commissioners also debated operational safeguards they want added or clarified in the charter: an annual, council-led evaluation of the city manager with objective measures; a requirement that city staff be informed of council communications (including an expectation that verbal communications be placed in writing within 24 hours); use of a search firm to produce qualified candidates for the city manager search, with mayoral recommendation limited to that qualified pool; and clearer rules for adding agenda items (for example, automatic placement of items when two council members request it before an agenda deadline).

Outcomes and next steps: The commission approved a motion directing the city attorney's office to draft language explicitly identifying Stonecrest as a council—ity manager form of government and to prepare revised text moving defined mayoral duties into the council sections of the charter where appropriate. Commissioners also approved a separate motion to extract selected mayoral responsibilities from the older charter and incorporate those responsibilities into the revised charter language while ensuring council confirmation for appointments. The city attorney will draft the language for later review; the commission scheduled additional meetings and requested more comparisons to other municipal charters (Brookhaven, Savannah and other cited models) to inform final drafting.

Context and remaining disputes: Commissioners voiced differing views on whether strengthening the mayor s a citywide political leader would help drive citywide initiatives (for instance, economic development) or risk concentrating local power in a four-year, citywide-elected official. Some members warned that a mayor with authority to control agendas, appoint committees, or supervise the city manager could replicate the very problems the revised charter sought to remedy; others said the mayor should have enough authority to provide a single, citywide point of accountability. The commission did not finalize language on those contested items and directed the city attorney to prepare draft text for future deliberation.

The commission also discussed charter provisions to prevent candidates who are ineligible from qualifying for office and raised the recent local issue involving a formerly convicted officeholder as an example of a gap they want addressed in the elections language.

The commission said it will meet again in October and expects public feedback and proposed draft language from the city attorney before further votes.