Tucker council postpones vote on creating city marshal's office, seeks fuller policies

City of Tucker council postponed a second reading on creating a City Marshal's Office after staff described duties, certification and proposed operational policies and several councilmembers said they needed more detail before approving the ordinance.

City staff presented Ordinance O2025-06-14 as a second read, describing marshals’ primary duties as courtroom security, bailiff duties, prisoner transport and facility security. The presenter said marshals would be recognized under Georgia POST (Peace Officers Standards and Training) and would be required to recertify annually with training that includes firearms requalification, de-escalation, crisis intervention and other topics. Staff also said roughly 150 pages of proposed operational policies — covering use of force, firearms policy, arrest procedures and body-worn cameras — were under review by the city attorney and would be routed to the city manager for implementation.

Mayor Pro Tem opened council discussion and members pressed staff for specifics about how marshals would interact with community members at city facilities such as the Tucker Recreation Center, how deployments and hours would be determined, and whether policies would adequately protect vulnerable users. Council Member Alexis said the distinction between ordinance-level authority and operational policy is important and asked for clearer written guidance: “I think it’s striking what the city attorney said in that the ordinance is the policy,” she said, urging council to see the operational rules before voting. A staff presenter emphasized that marshals would not be a patrol police force and described their role as a deterrent and a court/facility-focused security function: “We’re not dispatching on patrol…this is not a lead in to a Tucker police force,” the presenter said.

Responding to repeated council requests for clarity, Alexis moved to postpone the second read until the council’s next regular business meeting and asked staff to provide policy briefings and written operational rules that plainly describe deployment criteria, times, facility coverage and how officers would engage with the public. The motion to postpone carried, with the clerk counting six votes in favor.

Next steps: staff will finalize the city attorney’s review of the proposed policies, produce clearer deployment guidance and return the ordinance for a later council vote. The postponement delays any hiring tied to the ordinance until the council takes final action.