City Council - Special Meeting

Alicia, you ready? Washington. Smith ready.

Uh, I was about to say neighbor. Good evening, Stone Crest, and welcome to this special call meeting. Today is Friday, April 3rd, 2026. The time is now 6:09. I now call this meeting to order. Madame City Clerk, can you be so kind and do the roll call for me, please? Yes, ma'am. Good evening, everyone. Mayor Jasmine Cabbell, Mayor Prom, Tara Graves here,

Council Member Terry Five present. Council member Alicia Washington here. Council member George Turner here. Council member Cara Smith present. We have a quorum.

Thank you, madam city clerk. I now have um council. I have an agenda before me. Do anyone have any objections? Okay. The first item on the agenda is to request for an extension to appoint a city manager. But before we move to that motion, I want to discuss it. Okay. So, pursuit to section 3.02 of the city charter, the mayor shall nominate an individual to serve as city manager within 60 days of the occurrence of the vacancy. Subject to confirmation by the city council. The use of the term shell established a mandatory duty, not a suggestion. The council accepted the resignation of the previous city manager on January the 8th. The 60-day deadline expired on March 9th. As of today, the mayor has failed to submit a nomination for a permanent city manager within the required time frame. The charter also provides a clear alternative if additional time is needed. Within that same 60-day period, the mayor may appoint an acting city manager. While one nomination for the acting city manager was presented, it was not confirmed. No additional

nominations has been brought forth. Further, the charter requires that if the initial nomination is not confirmed, the mayor shall submit a second nomination. That has not occurred. There has been no request for an extension, no successful appointment of an acting city manager, and no first or second nomination submitted for a permanent city manager. These are not optional steps. They are required under the charter. At this point, the mayor is in clear non-compliance with section 3.02. The 60-day mandate has been exceeded and the responsibility assigned to the mayor have not been fulfilled. The council will proceed under the governing provision of the charter. The authority to move this process forward now rests with this body. We will proceed with nominations through the mayor pro Tim who shall nominate an individual to serve as city manager subject to confirmation by the city council. The mayor pro Tim may continue to submit nominations as necessary until an appointment is confirmed. Council may proton.

Yes. Councilwoman Washington. Um, I would like to move to approve a 60-day extension for the appointment of the city manager with the appointment to be made by the mayor prom subject to approval by the council in accordance with the city charter. Unreiness. Yes, Councilman F. um legal. Would you be able to confirm this confirm this um circumstances? Point of order. Point of order. If there's no second, can there be an unreadiness?

If there's no second to the motion, can there be an unreadiness? If there's no second to the motion. Okay. How does Are you have to say it again? I say it again. No, just you can state your own readiness. Would like um legal would you be able to weigh in on you know what I withdraw? Do I have a second? Second.

I have an unwritteness. Just a matter of clarity. Um since the mayor had an option of appointing an acting city manager, will there be such an option with the um mayor prom to appoint to appoint an acting city manager? Is that silent by way of the charter? I saw it nowhere. I'm just trying to see if that was someplace else that that might have been addressed because we're not sure as to how long it might take to um for the mayor pro Tim to find a good nomination that would be accepted by council. Uh and I believe the way the charter is reading uh the expectation was to have a city manager in place within 60 days and if not then we'd have an acting in place but that did not happen under the mayor. Is that same right extended to the mayor prom?

According to the charter in section 3.07, uh the mayor is the individual that's given the authority to designate a active city manager. Um and the section that madame mayor prom read relating to appointing um a city manager is also specifically um made clear in the charter. So saying that to say if the authority to appoint an acting um was to be given to the mayor or the mayor prom I would think the charter would make that clear and right now it doesn't make that clear. Okay. Just wanted to have it on record. Thank you.

The attorney, do you have a resolution? I'm good. I yield.

Yes, madam. Mayor Roim. A resolution extending the appointment of the city manager. Um, I'm sorry. Extending the period of the appointment of the city manager for 60 days and acknowledging the mayor prom's duty to exercise appointing authority in accordance with the charter and for all other purposes. Thank you. The motion has been properly moved and second. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed, nay. Starting with district two. Nay. District three. Yay. District four, yay. District five, yay.

District one is yay. Motion carries 4 to one. Councilman Fay. Next item on the agenda is a update to Lonia IGA. So, this IGA was approved at our last council meeting um with the mayor casting the deciding vote to break the tie. At this time, I am requesting that this council move to resend the IGA with Lthonia based on concerns of fairness and additional information presented by Major Baron with Dicap County. Given the significant of the information and its impact on this decision, it is both necessary and appropriate for council to resend its prior actions. Council is at this point Um, we our goal is to build relationships. So, we thank Lonier for their services. However, we just want to make sure we're doing things decent and in order. Um, so that's the reason I am requesting to resend the IGA for discussion. And at this point, I will yield to Councilwoman Smith so she can further elaborate on this concern. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tim. Um, before making my motion or addressing the motion that uh is on the floor, I need to enter a clear parliamentary um justification into the record. I have reviewed the city of Stone Crest charter and the Kota ordinance in full and I wanted to clearly state for the record that nowhere in our local law is there any provision addressing reconsideration, recall or reopening of a vote. Nowhere

that I've seen it. The ordinance is completely silent on this matter. Because of the silence, Robert's rules of order is the governing parliamentary authority and this council is obligated to follow it when local law provides no direction. Under Robert's rules, um, when a member is prevented from participating in a vote due to circumstances outside of their control, the appropriate procedural mechanism is a motion to resend or a motion to amend something previously adopted. This motion um these motions do not require the member to have vote voted at the time on the prevailing side or does it require that the member have been present. This exists specifically to correct actions taken without full participation or without full information. During the meeting where the IGA for Lythonia was voted on, I was unable to participate due to significant technical issues, meeting start delays, and unavoidable career related travel conflicts that were exasperated by unforeseen TSA inflicted travel requirements. My inability to participate was not voluntary and it was not due to negligence. The council took action without full participation and that alone is significant grounds under the Roberts rule to revisit the matter. At the same meeting, the major from the Cab County Police Department, which is our primary law enforcement agency, contracted to serve the city of Stonerrest, raised serious concerns about public safety and the

implications of involving another city in supporting roles at Stonerest facilities. Decap County Police are our contracted law enforcement agency and their concerns deserve full counsel discussion. These concerns are not speculative. They're documented in the Decab County Police offduty security program proposal that they prepared and sent over to us just a couple days before our meeting. um the rescending of the services um for always the cab county has always maintained a level of efficiency according to them. This is their quote. Efficiency in the performance and the rendering of our services and that supplementary safety operations with the cab county officers is a paramount is paramount to the level of consistency and reliability that makes up the quality of standards that the city of Stone Crest is known for. Um the do in the document it outlined a few things. The cab county officers having full authority within the city of Stone Crest. Um, it also outlined the Cap County offduty duty officers are coordinated directly with the Cap County units that are um on duty. The document also talks about Decap County's deep knowledge of Stone Crest's crime patterns, priorities, and environment environment. And um it speaks on the proposal to identify risk reductions and close the gap um that is being introduced that is there when introducing a city another city's police force. Um

it does not close that gap when another city's police force is introduced. The proposal outlines comprehensive dicap county tailor plan for specifically um stonerest facilities, parks, events and government operations. Lonia PD at the time has no such deployment model. So, um it also the proposal also provides community trust and continuity concerns by introducing another city's police force um to our community. it. Um, there were concerns raised as it relates to duplication of efforts when it comes to cities reporting things, our constituents reporting things to the city of Lthonia going getting confused with the Decap County and having to go back to um, Decap County to recreate an issue that they had already reported because the systems are not connected. These concerns are operational, legal, and safety critical, and they were raised by the very agency that's responsible for protecting Stone Crest. I also want to make it absolutely clear that this is not criticism of the city of Lthonia or Lthonia Police Department. We appreciate the service, the support, the partnership that Lthonia has provided to Stonerrest over the years. My comments today are not personal in any way, shape, or form. They are based solely on the jurisdictional, operational, and public safety considerations outlined by DICE County Police, which is the law enforcement agency contracted to serve our city. This is about ensuring the safety most re responsible outcome the safest and

most responsible outcomes for the Stone Crest residents. My goal is simply to ensure that the entire council has the opportunity to participate in the decision and that all public safety concerns are fully considered. This is about transparency due to process and making sure Stone Crest residents receive the safest and most reasonable outcomes. For this reason, given the circumstances of Robert's rules, it provides us clear, legitimate, and necessary pathways to revisit this action. And because of our ordinance containing no prohibition and no alternative procedures, um the council is required to rely on Robert's rules. And of course, I will lean on our attorney to confirm. Um so for this reason and to ensure um integrity of our process and the safety of our residents, I am exercising my right to bring forth a motion under Robert's rules so this matter can be addressed and fully full participation and full consideration of the public safety implications that were raised at the meeting um are addressed and considered. Mayor Proim, I yield.

Thank you, Councilwoman Smith. Council, do you have any questions? Mayor Pro Tim. Yes, Councilman Fi.

Um, so while I'm pulling up Robert's rules, I know that Councilwoman Smith mentioned that these were circumstances beyond control that I have some difficulty under that I have some difficulty. Hold on. reading through um that I have some difficulty comprehending slash and I'm going to be honest believing we had a moment where and there have been circumstances where I have missed votes for my work and I have not been able to do motions to reconsider the discussion and pieces were brought to their concern and the duplication of surfaces and concerns on those pieces were brought to council in email prior to the meeting. We all knew, we all had bit different pieces for that and we all had different reasons as to why we voted on those pieces. I do not believe that is a substantial I don't think that's a substantial reasoning to be able to be allowed to do a motion reconsider to reconsider. And if I'm not mistaken, you have to be in the majority of the vote to in order to initiate a motion to reconsider. Now, I could be wrong, but I believe that's a part of Robert's rules. And legal, please correct me if I'm incorrect.

Legal, before you move forward, she's not reconsidering the motion because to reconsider the motion, you had to have voted on the action. We are resending, right? So it's So we're not reconsidering because Well, I couldn't reconsider because I voted against it. Yes, ma'am. Only vote. You can only reconsider if you vote in favor. So that's why she's she is reending the um the IGA and not reconsidering

based on fairness and also based on um not being able to vote on that item and her not being able to vote. She made it clear that she was leaving early. Mhm. She made it clear that she wanted to vote um and be a part of the meeting as she traveled to the airport, but because of the issues that we had that day, she wasn't able to connect and she had to leave early because of the issue with um with the uh TSA. So, she did have it in writing that she was participating in this meeting. Yes,

he was going to be present. However, the decision to leave the meeting is not an it's not a um Lord, what's the word? That's not an impro that's not a what's the word? What's the word that you use for recon for um rescend um unable to your your circumstances beyond your control? I don't I the choice to leave a and I hear what you're saying. The choice to leave a meeting is not a decision beyond your control. No, she made a decision to leave the meeting with theation of being able to connect via Zoom.

He was not able to provide that service because we didn't have we were having issues with our technology. Okay. Um so that meeting wasn't even recorded. it was only a um audio recording which again is still don't have the recording bit

and that's again an IT issue. I understand that but I don't think I think that's that's legally dubious. I don't I don't think that that's enough I don't think that's enough strength to be able to resend a motion. If you choose to be out of a the legislature just because you're outside of the room, you don't get the opportunity to rescend a motion. that's that's not what happens. In addition to that, and I understand I understand the contention of that particular vote, some of the pieces that we had on that and that's not the m that is not the reason of me raising this concern. I don't think that holds I based on fairness

fairness fairness in the decision that a council member made a council member made the decision to leave. That is a decision.

Unavoidable travel conflicts. A council member did not make a decision for TSA to have issues whereas you have to be at the airport extremely early. Respectfully, the decision to again that's a decision that you made to leave the meeting to leave a vote those have consequences. I have had to make that decision previously and I've had to suffer the consequences of my constituents. No, not my constituents, D3 constituents based on my absence from a vote. Respectfully, we're we're speaking about this incident at this time

and not what you've had to do in the past, Councilman Fi. So, at this point, I would ask Mayor Pro Tim, if we can get the perspective from legal on this. Um, I was prevented from participating due to significant technical difficulties and issues at that time and unavoidable travel conflicts, both of which that were communicated and I had no control over. So, if we can get legal to weigh in and allow me to put a motion on the table, I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you, Councilwoman Smith, and thank you, Councilwoman, I mean, Councilman Fi, Mayor Prom.

Yes, Councilwoman Washington. I just wanted to make sure because of what Councilman Fry, uh, Councilman Fi said. He said that the information that was given to us on that day, we had previously had it, which is not true. Everything that the uh, major talked about was something we received on that day. We did not have any of that information concerning the sid conflict between the city of uh Lethonia and the conflict between Dicab uh county police. So the information that was given by the major, I felt like it was very important that all of us as elected officials or representation of each one of our districts that we should have heard that and to be able to uh you know really weigh in on it and really chew on it for a little while longer than to vote expeditiously like we did that night. Mayor,

Councilwoman Washington, do you yield? I yield. I'm Thank you so much, Councilman F.

And thank you so much for Councilman Washington for making that perspective. We delayed that. We tabled that IGA twice. We had every single opportunity to be able to reach out to the Dicab count to Dicap County PD. In addition, Deputy City Manager McCoy also outlined the clear services and clear points where there may be some overlap in services. Again, this is I don't want to relitigate that vote. I respect the will of council and the will of majority to make that change should it make should it need to be made. My concern is primarily about the operations of this vote. Um I'm not sure even if well technically speaking I don't want well it and I'm not saying this to relitigate the vote but I don't know if physical quorum if if can we clarify a virtual quorum is allowed to vote. Are you able to proxy vote online?

Yes. As long as there is a quorum present um a member that is sitting on um the virtual meeting can vote. Yes. Okay. Okay. All right. I will I I still have my concerns about grow motions to resend, but if I am incorrect, I will yield and make the and we shall vote on that decision. Tim, yes, Councilman Turner. Uh just to be clear on the ask, I understand the ambiguity with Robert's rules of order, but are we asking to resend that at this meeting or to get it on an agenda for a rescion consideration?

And Madame Mayor Tam, if I may.

Yes. Um and thank you um Council Member Turner about uh for asking that question. And I wanted to provide some information that might clear that point. Um obviously um addressing whether uh the resend is authorized or not. It just really comes down to um the procedure around a motion to resend. And with um motions to resend, you either can do it two different ways. You can resend at your at the current meeting today, but you have to have a 2/3 vote, which is 66%. So, for a fivep person body, you would need four votes to resend the vote on on on the spot today. If you um wanted to resend with just the majority, as Mr. U Mayor Promeritus said you could give notice at this meeting and then in the next meeting the you would only need three people to have the motion to resend to go through fully. So if the council is going to resend the um IGA today, it would need four people. you could announce the notice at this meeting and then resending in the next meeting with three people.

And that and that is um Robert's rules and as um Miss um as council member Washington said it is in line with you know the rules that we practice here in the city of Stonerest. Then the other question is the manner in which the absent council member was denied I don't want to say denied but was unable to vote uh must be considered. Is that a valid consideration as to uh whether or not the shall be reopened? the discussion around ma why you know council member um Washington Smith was not able to um vote I think it's it's good conversation but it is it doesn't change whether she wants to put forward a motion to resend. So I think it's good conversation. It's good context um for you all moving forward with this motion and um however you know you all choose to um kind of you know add to that context and understand it is totally up to to the body. But um whether she had a reason or not she can put a motion to resend on the table. Council, Councilwoman Smith, how would you like to proceed?

Um, I have a question for the attorney. Um, so you said that if we put a motion to resend today, then we would need to have 66% of the vote. If we do not have 66% of the vote today, is there another motion to um submit or to raise in order to vote on this at the next meeting? If you don't have the 66% or the 2/3%, I wouldn't say you don't need to do another motion. you would just need to announce that you plan to resend the vote for the Lonia IGA at your next meeting and that should be s sufficient to satisfy the notice per um requirement.

Mayor Prom. Yes, Councilman F. Um, for the sake of efficiency, I will I will give my vote to resend if that motion is made today. We know um know the votes. I think we can keep our agenda efficient for next meeting.

Councilwoman Smith Pro Tim. Yes. Councilwoman Smith. I move that we resend the council's previous vote on the Latonia IGA. Second. The motion has been properly moved and second by Councilwoman Washington. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed, nay. Starting with district two, yay. District three. Yay. District four, yay. District five, yay. District 1 is yay. Motion carries five to zero.

Councilwoman Smith. Mayor Pro Tim. Um, now that the previous action has been rescended, I move to place the Lonia Intergovernmental Agreement back before the council for full deliberation so that all members may participate and the public safety concerns that were raised by the Cap County Police may be fully addressed. Do I have a second? Unreiness. I second. Councilman F. Um, are you saying for this meeting or for next meeting? For next meeting. Are you asking to put that on the agenda?

And I'm And I apologize. I'm trying not to be obnoxious. Um, I I'm trying. I'm trying. You're succeeding. Yes. We are going to put it on the agenda for the next meeting. Thank you, Council Me. That's the motion. Councilwoman Smith, you referring to the work session or the council meeting? Council meeting. Either one. The motion has been properly moved and second by Councilwoman Washington. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed, nay. Starting with district two. Nay. District three. Yay. District four, yay. District five, yay.

District 1 is yay. Motion carries 4 to one. Council Councilman Fi, the IGA will be on the next agenda for discussion. Next on the agenda is the 2026 street resurfacing contract by Mr. Harry, our city engineer.

Um, good evening um, council. U this this is a contract that uh for 2026 uh streets resurfacing and um I have provided you with the list of streets and the three parks uh parking lot paving into that contract. Um um the city finance department uh uh put out the the ITB on December 30th, 2025 and the bids were closed on February 17, the 2026 and the city received um 11 um response responsive bids and uh our team has evaluated uh the bids and uh recommending approval of a contract with DCBC LLC for the amount of 3 million $40,580.98 and um we are recommending the council approve this u contract. Um just to give you a um perspective on this, all the other cities have already started paving. Um you know, we had about a good month of warm weather. So uh we just need to get this started as soon as possible so that uh we can finish our roads and the parks before uh the cold weather set in in um end of October, November. And I'm here to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you, Tim. Council, do you have any questions for Mr. Harry? Mayor Tim. Yes, Councilman Turner. Thank you. Um Harry, um if this is approved tonight, how soon can we get started? That's a very good uh question. U council member Turner, we have a little bit of work to do on this. The reason we are trying to bring this here today is we want to gain some days on this to get this contract worked out and everything. So, we just want to get this council approval out of the way. So, uh we have to work with our legal to get this uh we have the contract but need to be reviewed and we'll get that signed and then we want to move on with this thing.

We've had discussions about this in the tips committee and at the work session. Anything new to add? No sir. We just want to get this approved by the council so that it is out of the way. That's all. Okay. Concur. Any Thank you. Any other questions? Mr. Harry, can you repeat that total for me? Uh, yes, ma'am. It is 3 million $40,580.98.

April Tim. Yes, Councilman Turner. Move for approval of the 2026 street resurfacing contract. Unreiness. Are we do we have to have a resolution for spending for this? Yes, we do need to have a resolution prepared for this matter. Um, so we can have one ready um within 10 days of the meeting and I'll provide it to the city clerk. Is it so we can vote today, record that vote in that resolution because it's council's intent? I know we talk about this every meeting, but I just

Yeah, I mean it I would uh of course best practice is to have the resolution at the meeting. Um so I would I wouldn't say that um we do it, you know, on a normal basis, but we do have there is a 10-day period that allows um updates to legislation after a meeting. So we can have one prepared um to address this agenda item if if the council um wants to move forward in that manner, but it is best practice to have the resolution date of. Yes.

For the sake of my for my political life, I'm just not going to delay the pavement of streets. I withdraw. Council, any other questions? I don't believe we got a second. We had a second. Second. The motion has been properly moved and second by Councilman Fi. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond yay. All those opposed, nay. Starting with district two. Yay. District three. Yay. District four. Yay. District five, yay.

District one, yay. Motion carries five to zero. Harry, you've been approved for the 2026 street resurfacing contract. Thank you, ma'am. Next on the agenda is sidewalks, sidewalk design services.

Yes, ma'am. This is um we have four sidewalks in this uh package. Um um Salem Road, uh Ferington Road, and Phillips Road and Irish Drive are the four sidewalks. This is an RFP. Uh the city published the RFP on September 10th, 2025. And uh uh we received or the closed the RFP on October 31st, 2025. And uh we received eight proposals and uh we uh set up a uh evaluation committee and evaluation committee reviewed all the proposals and u and then ranked them uh provided points and ranked them and u uh the recommended uh firm is Kleinfeld uh incorporated. The amount of the contract will be $104,900. And uh the reason we're trying to get this to the council is um you know we we had the proposals uh went out uh the the bid RFP went out in September and it's been about 5 months now and uh one of the roads uh Salem road is funded by 2026 um CDBG grant and uh we need to be building uh the sidewalk at this point but we are still uh our design is pending So, uh, as soon as the council approved this, uh, we'll have, um, uh, the notice of proceed and things like that to get the design started. Uh, we'll prioritize Salem Road design because we don't want to lose the money, uh, CDBG grant. So, we want to get that uh, out of the way and start uh, you know, getting the uh, bid prepared and bring it to the council. It's going to take some time, but we wanted to get this moving. And the other three uh sidewalks also have been disc we have been discussing those three for a long time now. So we want to get these

designed and then um just to let you know that uh the 2026 uh CDBG grant is u um the the request have been out uh the deadline is u Monday and then we are proposing one of these sidewalks to be funded. We're requesting funding for Irish Drive from the 2026 um grant and then um I have prepared the the the request letter for Irish Drive. The mayor has signed that letter and I have shipped that letter this morning. So our application for 2026 um funding CDBG funding to construct Iris Drive also uh in the motion now. So, we want to get these design done.

Council Aro Tim. Yes, Councilwoman Smith. Quick question, Mr. Harry. Um, so these this is is this the start of the list? I don't see on this list. I don't see any of um the Browns Mill sidewalk or anything as it relates to Klondike. So, is this the beginning? Are we planning to do more sidewalks this year? Uh yes ma'am. So um every year we select a se uh a group of roads for design and then these uh roads were selected last year in 25. Got it.

And then um you know what what I'm planning to do is to bring the sidewalk list to our next um scheduled tips committee meeting and uh solicit input from the council uh to go for the design services for those sidewalks. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? I entertain a motion. Is that resolution for a design service? It is a We will read the resolution for both items C and D at the next um at the work session.

Tim. Yes. Councilman Turner. Move for approval of sidewalk design services with the resolution to be read at the next uh work session. A second. Motion has been properly moved and second by Councilwoman Washington. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed, nay. Starting with district two, yay. District three. Yay. District four. Yay. District five, yay. District one is yay. Motion carries five. to zero. Mr. Harry, your sidewalk design services has been approved. Thank you.

We have Is there any need for executive session? Mayor Pro Tim. Yes, Councilman F. I would like to move to executive session to discuss personnel. Just personnel. I got places to be. It's good Friday personnel. Councilman Fi, can we also discuss litigation? I will I I will accept the friendly amendment. I'm just doing a lot of compromising tonight. Second.

Let me make sure I'm clear. We're going into executive session for personnel litigation, real estate and cyber security. Y'all pushing that friendly amendment. How? Okay. Mayor Pro Tim, I move to go into executive session to discuss personnel, litigation, real estate, and cyber security. Second. The motion has been properly moved in second. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed, nay. Starting with district two. Yay. District three. Yay. District four. Yay. District five. Yay. District 1 is yay. We are now adjourned to executive session. Have a minute.

Thank you. Council, I entertain a motion. Mayor Prom. Yes. Councilman F. I moved for the city council to come out of the executive session. Second. The motion has been properly moved and second by Councilman Turner. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond yay. All those opposed, nay. Starting with district two, yay. District three. Yay. District four, yay. District five, yay. District one is yay. The motion carries 5 to zero. We are now return I mean we are now back in our regular city council I mean special call meeting. Mayor Pro Tim. Yes. Councilman F.

Move to approve the minutes coming out of executive session. Second. The motion has been properly moved by Councilwoman Smith. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed, nay. Starting with district two, yay. District three. Yay. District four, yay. District five, yay. District one is yay. The minutes from the executive session is now approved. That has exhausted our special call meeting agenda. I will entertain a motion. Mayor Prom. Yes. Councilman F. I move to adjourn this meeting. Second.

The motion has been properly moved and second by Councilwoman Smith. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed, nay. Starting with district two. Yay. District three. Yes. Four. Yay. Five. Yay. One is yay. This meeting is now adjourned.