Atlantans get the chance this week to share their thoughts on a heated debate taking place both in public and behind closed doors at City Hall: How should the city’s Office of Inspector General operate?
Council members will hold a work session Thursday at 10 a.m. in the council chamber at City Hall. The legislation being worked on would overhaul how the office operates and is managed during probes into misconduct and illegal activity.
Mayor Andre Dickens' administration and the city’s inspector general have spent the better part of a year arguing over the level of authority the watchdog office has to conduct investigations.
Critics of the changes, including Inspector General Shannon Manigault herself, say that if passed as is, the measure would gut the office’s political independence. But the mayor’s office argues that city employees’ rights are being trampled during investigations.
Atlanta’s inspector general position was created in the wake of a massive federal investigation that rattled City Hall during former Mayor Kasim Reed’s administration. But the watchdog office made headlines when Manigault took to the podium during public comment last May and testified that her investigations were being blocked internally by top city officials.
Legislation introduced by City Council this month raised eyebrows by suggesting the mayor’s office be given the authority to appoint all members to the inspector general’s governing board. It also struck the word “corruption” from the government watchdog’s mission, essentially barring the investigative office from launching probes into illegal activity within City Hall.
Council members on the finance committee opted to strike some of the Dickens administration’s suggestions, but advocacy groups still think the legislation goes too far. In a letter sent last week, the Southern Center for Human Rights, NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Women on the Rise Georgia, Center for Civic Innovation and Working Families Power Georgia all urged City Council members to host a public work session.
“This legislation was drafted on an expedited and rushed timeline, and it has already changed significantly without enough time for Council, let alone the public, to review,” the organizations wrote. “In some cases, the changes have only created further confusion and concern.”
Although the finance committee moved the legislation forward, the committee on council opted to press pause and gave itself a 10-day timeline to hold the meeting. Council member Antonio Lewis questioned whether the scheduled work session is enough notice for residents. “I’ve been bombarded with questions from my constituents,” Lewis said last week. “I think that this is such a huge change to the city of Atlanta, I think we have to be as intentional as possible about this and I don’t want to rush.”
Eshé Collins, chair of the committee on council and newest council member, said last week that the meeting would include input from the Office of Inspector General, the city law department and the ethics office. “There are a lot of portions of this legislation that all entities have agreed upon,” she said. “But there are some key issues that we do need to enter into a work session to understand.”
About the Author
