Reduced Transparency and Public Engagement in Avondale Estates
Several decisions by city leadership have steadily moved Avondale Estates away from open, participatory government. Transparency and public trust are the foundation of good governance—but recent trends suggest a shift toward limiting public oversight and resident engagement.
A Pattern of Reduced Transparency
BOMC meetings were moved from 7:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., in 2016 by a 4-1 vote. In 2021 it was changed to 5:30 and combined the work session and regular meeting, making it harder for working residents to attend and participate.
Rushed Ordinance Adoption
The number of required ordinance readings was reduced from three to two—with the option to adopt policy after just one reading. This shortens time for public review and input. There has been an attempt on at least 08/24/24, 9/25/24 and 08/13/25 to pass a zoning ordinance change with one vote. This gives minimal time for residents to be aware of the change or understand the impact
More Meetings, Less Deliberation
The city increased meeting frequency (from one work session and one regular meeting each month on different weeks to combined meetings twice a month). This eliminated dedicated work sessions where commissioners had robust discussions on policy. The change speeds up the process by passing policy and ordinance changes while reducing time for thoughtful public discussion.
Concerns with Public Process
Serial Meetings
Georgia’s Open Meetings Act prohibits “serial meetings,” where individual officials discuss the same policy topic in private to avoid public deliberation. The City Manager now holds individual private weekly meetings with a majority of the board members—raising concerns about compliance.
Public Question Avoidance
The city has been working on a communication policy that reduces the amount of time for residents to comment (from 3 minutes to 2 minutes) and discourages commissioners from answering public questions directly, despite residents’ clear interest in transparent, timely responses.
Financial Transparency Eroded
Reduced Financial Reporting
Monthly line-item financial reports were replaced with quarterly summaries, decreasing financial visibility and accountability. The quarterly reports are only posted on the website and not always updated timely
Bond Without Referendum
The city issued an $8.5 million bond for the construction of the park through a newly created Urban Redevelopment Agency (URA), avoiding a public vote. Though legal, these types of bonds are usually voted on by referendum with clear transparency to the public.
Insufficient Bond Disclosure
The city’s bond obligation is omitted from regular financial reports, appearing only in the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR). This is legal but contrary to Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) best practices.
Reduced Resident Communication/Participation
City E-News Lacks Operational Updates
Key updates from the City Manager, Chief of Police, and Public Works have been removed from the city newsletter—reducing visibility into daily operations and upcoming policy issues.
Reduction of Citizen Boards
Citizen-led boards have been reduced or consolidated, the Board of Appeals was eliminated, and the powers were transferred to the BOMC. This is legal but not generally practiced. They eliminated the Lake Board and included the responsibilities in the Greenspace Committee. Unfortunately, the Greenspace Committee does not have members with the expertise of those on the former Lake Board. There are several individuals on two boards reducing the opportunity for broader participation.
Why it Matters
These changes weaken public engagement, dilute commissioner and city manager accountability, and make it harder for residents to stay informed and involved. Good governance requires transparency, not just legality.
If we want a city that truly reflects the will of its residents, we must return to open processes, accessible information, and a culture that invites not avoids public participation.