Clayton ‘chief of staff’ position refuses to die
March 17, 2009 at 11:46 am by Thomas Wheatley in News
Bell
Tonight in Clayton County, things might get a little testy.
In early December, the Clayton County Commission voted to create a “chief of staff” position and appointed Fire Chief Alex Cohilas — who is also the county’s interim community development director — to the spot, which came with a $15,000 salary increase. This, in addition to his other duties.
Chairman Eldrin Bell opposed the commission’s move, calling it an attempted usurpation of his elected powers. In January, he filed a lawsuit on the grounds that it was unlawful. If the commission wanted to add a chief of staff to the county payroll, he argued, it needed to follow the proper legal channels. That very well could mean legislation filed not in downtown Jonesboro, but the Gold Dome.
Sounds like some humdrum small-county soap opera that’s not worth your time, huh? Keep your eyes open. Things could get heated in that beleaguered little county just south of Atlanta.
On Friday, Superior Court Judge Deborah Benefield ruled that the commission did indeed unlawfully create the chief of staff position.
The ruling did not address the commissioners’ authority to create the position, but declared the action null and void because it was enacted on Dec. 9, during a “Special Called Meeting,” and therefore, was “not in compliance with the provisions of the Georgia Constitution.”
Benefield’s ruling said “a county may amend or repeal the local acts by a resolution or ordinance duly adopted at two regular consecutive meetings of the county governing authority.”
According to Clayton Daily News and the AJC, all sides are playing nice, mumbling platitudes and saying they look forward to working together. Commissioner Michael Edmondson, who the Daily News says championed the chief of staff concept, says the judge’s verdict only points out a “technicality.”
“There is no question that the chief of staff has been positive for the county,” said Edmondson. “It has provided structure, organization; it has taken issues off the desk and has moved them forward. I have personally received many calls praising the new position and the personality we put into this position. I have no problem voting on [Cohilas] again. … the judge pointed out a technicality, it can be easily remedied.”
And according to a schedule of tonight’s commission meeting, the governing body is ready tonight to “remedy” the situation.
From today’s Daily News:
If approved, the proposed ordinance would strip Bell of the ability to appoint a chief administrator entirely, and allow him to only appoint administrative assistants, who are subordinate to the chief of staff.
“This is new,” Bell said. “The attempt to remove [the chief administrator] is one thing. Removing it violates the form of government that we currently have.
“I wish they would do what the judge has asked them to do,” he continued. “If they [the board] are truly interested in changing the form of government, they should go to the General Assembly and ask them to do that.”
Some folks in the county are chattering about a variety of topics: Why appoint a person — already wearing two hats, mind you — to a position where he’d have to deal directly with the departments he already manages? Second, why the rush? And while I’m not an attorney, and can’t say I entirely understand the Voting Rights Act, does this move tiptoe near that murky realm?
There are some other chin scratchers, too. Even conspiracy theories, which are always a lot of fun!
More on all of this as it develops.
(Photo by Joeff Davis)
Leave a Reply