Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mayor Office topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
East Point council debates mayor’s authority to appoint executive assistant amid ordinance push
Summary
A rancorous April 6 council meeting focused on whether the mayor may appoint a direct executive assistant. Former mayor Ernestine Pitman urged immediate restoration of an on‑site mayor’s office; council directed the city attorney to draft an ordinance to clarify the mayoral appointee role and asked the city manager to consider a temporary assignment to staff the office.
Mayor Chapman and several council members clashed over authority to staff the mayor’s office as public testimony and legal opinion shaped a late‑night vote. Former Mayor Ernestine Pitman addressed the council, describing historical practice that the mayor’s office be staffed and that a mayoral executive assistant perform administrative and ceremonial duties such as keeping the mayor’s calendar, tracking signed ordinances, and coordinating public appearances. Pitman warned that indefinite closure of the mayor’s office undermines public service.
The exchange grew heated after Council Member Mitchell pressed for immediate authority for the mayor to appoint an executive assistant. The city attorney reviewed relevant charter language (Article 2—city manager form of government) and identified an ambiguity: the charter vests operational supervision of city employees in the city manager but does not explicitly address an unclassified mayoral appointee who reports only to the mayor. A motion to affirm the mayor’s “sole authority” to appoint an executive assistant failed on the council floor.
To resolve the legal gap and avoid protracted litigation or months‑long charter amendment procedures, the city attorney proposed an ordinance that would: (1) recognize the mayoral executive assistant/chief‑of‑staff position as an unclassified, at‑will mayoral appointee; (2) specify that the appointee reports directly to the mayor and does not exercise supervisory authority over other city departments; and (3) preserve the city manager’s charter authority over operational departments. Council directed the city attorney and city manager to prepare the ordinance for formal consideration and advertising under state law; they also asked the city manager to evaluate temporary staffing so the mayor’s office can be staffed while the ordinance and any required charter changes are processed.
The Council also debated personnel and civil‑service implications, including how a new classification would affect pensions and benefits if an existing classified employee were moved into the unclassified mayoral role. The city attorney committed to researching those questions. Council members on both sides said they wanted a quick, lawful solution that restores mayoral office services while protecting the city manager’s operational authority.
Next steps: the city attorney will draft the ordinance and the city manager will research personnel/benefits implications and the feasibility of a temporary assignment; the ordinance will be advertised and returned to council for a formal vote at subsequent meetings.
