Conyers council divided over proposal to fund part‑time mayoral assistant

The Conyers City Council spent much of its work session debating whether to fund a part‑time assistant for the mayor, a proposal that drew both public comment and extended council discussion.

Residents who spoke during the meeting took opposing positions. Monette Lowe said the mayor’s office was overwhelmed during recent local emergencies and that a dedicated assistant would improve communications and response. Gail Owens told the council she had obtained the job description through an open‑records request and worried the duties largely duplicate existing staff work; she urged delaying any taxpayer funding until more transparency is provided.

The council’s debate focused on several logistical and fiscal questions: the assistant was described in public comment as a contract position costing about $8,000 for the remainder of the fiscal quarter (roughly $26,000–$32,000 annually for 20 hours a week at $25–$30 per hour), but council members asked whether the apparent quarter‑period cost would lead to ongoing salary, benefits, mileage, training or workers‑compensation obligations. One member summarized the stakes this way: "That $8,000 only gets us through the current fiscal year that ends June 30. This is an expense that will add more than $30,000 of additional tax burden to residents' tax bills." (Council member)

Several council members suggested compromise options: make the position strictly contract and probationary (three to six months) with a required report documenting tasks, hours and measurable benefits; explore nonpay alternatives such as virtual assistants or volunteer support; or allow limited shared access by council members. Opponents argued the assistant could create an inequitable arrangement if one elected official gained paid staff support while others did not.

Mayor Alsabrook defended the request as operationally necessary rather than political, saying the assistant would not direct department heads, would report to the mayor (and a named executive counterpart), and would be limited to up to 20 hours per week. She offered a six‑month report on the position’s work and reiterated that the assistant would not replace the city manager or existing staff. "She is not coming on to be the city manager," the mayor said; "she's coming on to assist me with the other duties that I cannot give to the staff." (Mayor Alsabrook)

The council also addressed tone and equity issues during the exchange: Councilwoman Washington argued that higher expectations are sometimes imposed on a first Black woman in office; another member disputed that assessment and later apologized for the tone of his remarks. After the extended discussion the mayor accepted a motion to end debate and directed staff to compile additional details so the council could decide at the upcoming voting session.

Next steps: the council requested written answers to the list of operational and fiscal questions raised (hiring authority, reporting lines, benefits, maximum hours, cost‑controls and proposed performance metrics) and indicated they will consider those details at the next meeting before any formal vote.