Fulton commissioners squabble over staff use

Fulton County Commissioner Bridget Thorne, District 1, speaks during the North Fulton Municipal Association meets at the North Fulton Chamber of Commerce office inside the Avalon complex, Thursday, February 9, 2023, in Alpharetta, Ga.. Cities in North Fulton are attempting to take control of local elections from the Fulton County.
Jason Getz / Jason.Getz@ajc.com)

Credit: Jason Getz / Jason.Getz@ajc.com

Credit: Jason Getz / Jason.Getz@ajc.com

Fulton County Commissioner Bridget Thorne, District 1, speaks during the North Fulton Municipal Association meets at the North Fulton Chamber of Commerce office inside the Avalon complex, Thursday, February 9, 2023, in Alpharetta, Ga.. Cities in North Fulton are attempting to take control of local elections from the Fulton County. Jason Getz / Jason.Getz@ajc.com)

A proposal to limit Fulton County commissioners’ demands on county staff, sponsored by Commissioner Bridget Thorne, faltered Wednesday on accusations of playing election-year politics. It also generated public acrimony between commissioners and led to several minutes of confusion over exactly what they were voting on.

Thorne said her proposal applied only to events sponsored and held by commissioners themselves, not general county events, public health or voter outreach efforts.

“The problem is that certain commissioners are demanding that staff come to certain events,” she said. Departmental personnel should be at some public functions, but “we just need to reel it in a bit,” Thorne said.

She didn’t name any other commissioners as guilty of overusing county staff.

Commissioners should prioritize using their own staff at events, and avoid the appearance of using county staff for campaign functions, Thorne said. Her proposal would limit commissioners to using county staff at one event per month on weekends, holidays and after normal work hours, and required them to schedule events at least two weeks in advance.

Thorne said she surveyed county departments to ask how commissioners could serve them better.

Commissioner Marvin Arrington Jr. said the move smacked of “political season.” Three of the commission’s seven seats are up for grabs in the May 21 primary and Nov. 5 general election.

District 2 incumbent Bob Ellis doesn’t have an opponent in the Republican primary, but Democrats Megan Rue Harris and Jennifer Phillipi are competing to face him in the November general election. District 4 Commissioner Natalie Hall has two Democratic primary opponents: Moraima “Mo” Ivory and Sonya Ofchus. And District 6 Commissioner Khadijah Abdur-Rahman is facing off with Ali Carter in the May Democratic primary.

Commissioner Dana Barrett said at a commission retreat earlier this year that Thorne and Hall were asked to work together on use of county resources such as staff time. But Thorne didn’t collaborate with Hall, presenting this resolution on her own, Barrett said. Hall confirmed that she hadn’t worked with Thorne on it.

Barrett said Thorne’s wording had numerous problems and loopholes.

“This whole thing is just not thought through,” she said.

Commissioner Khadijah Abdur-Rahman said she knows staff have felt pressured to work multiple commissioners’ events on short notice, but said Thorne’s wording needed “tweaking.” She moved to hold the resolution for revision.

Clerks recorded the vote as 4-1, and Chair Robb Pitts declared it held; but Hall said she intended to vote no, making the vote 3-1 — and thus a failure. But Pitts ruled that the original tally stood.

“The chairman cannot vote for me,” Hall said; but Pitts ignored her.

That’s when order broke down, with Pitts arguing with Barrett, who tried to keep speaking; and both Pitts and Hall repeatedly calling down Abdur-Rahman for talking out of order.

A motion to reconsider the original vote failed 3-1, opposed by Pitts.

“Point of order, Mr. Chair — what are we reconsidering?” Arrington said.

Pitts, backed by County Attorney Y. Soo Jo as parliamentarian, said since the motion to reconsider failed, his original declaration that the resolution was held for revision would stand.