Planning Commission - Special Meeting

Okay.

I think.

Good evening, Stonecrest. And welcome to this special call meeting. Today is Thursday, July the 2nd, 2026. And the time is now 616. I will now call this meeting to order. Madam City Clerk, can you please be so kind to do roll call?

Yes, ma'am. Good evening, everyone. Mayor Jasmine Cobble.

Present.

Mayor Pro Tem Tara Graves. Here. Council Member Alicia Washington.

Here.

Council Member James Turner. Here. Council Member Karmisha Smith.

Present.

Neva Quam.

Thank you, Madam City Clerk. Before moving to the first agenda item, I would like to establish a few ground rules for today's meeting. I want to apologize for the delay, and we appreciate everyone for taking time here today. and we recognize that everybody's time is valuable. To ensure we conduct an effective and orderly meeting, all comments, response to questions and remarks made while you have the floor will be limited to a maximum of 5 minutes. I asked that the city clerk keep track of the time and notify us when the 5 minute limit has expired. The time limit will apply consistently and fairly to everyone including members of Council mayor staff and everyone responding to questions are recognized to speak. Additionally, if a speaker who has the floor will like another individual to provide comments or response to a question, they must first request permission from the chair before yelling the floor or inviting that person to speak. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance as we conduct today's meeting in an orderly, respectful and effective manner. Council.

Mayor Pro Tem, you're looking for the first item on the agenda?

No, I'm waiting for a motion.

Mayor Pro Tem, point of clarity, do we need a motion to ratify the five-minute rule? To the attorney.

Yes, ma'am. I would suggest that you all vote to ratify that five-minute rule.

I move that we allocate a maximum of 5 minutes per person per item on the agenda. Second.

Motion has been properly moved and second by Councilwoman Washington. Are you ready for the question?

I'm not ready. Mayor Pro Tem, this is a temporary rule you're putting in specifically for this call meeting?

Yes, sir.

Okay. That was the only concern. So it's temporary just for this call meeting. Thank you very much.

You're welcome. 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. I'm sorry, district three.

Yay.

District four.

Yay.

District five.

Yay.

District one is yay. Motion carries forward to zero. The maximum time allowed for each speaker is five minutes. The first item on the agenda is execution of the city manager employment agreement and authorization of signature. The governing body approved the appointment of our city manager. The purpose of this agenda item is to ensure that the employment agreement is properly executed so that council action can be carried out and the city of Stonecrest can move forward. Attorney Thompson, as of yesterday, my understanding was that the employment agreement had not yet been executed. Can you confirm for the record whether the agreement has been signed?

Madam Mayor Pro Tem, the employment agreement for Ms. Kathy Turner has not been signed.

Can you direct me? We're in the charter. or can you direct me why the execution of the contract or why the signature has not been stated on the contract as of today? Yes.

The agreement was presented to the mayor for signature as it is the responsibility of the mayor to sign all contracts of the city without discretion on the of the contract and or agreement in this case. And I was told that the or the mayor was the mayor told me that she would not sign the agreement. So as of As it stands right now, the agreement is not signed.

Can you show me in the charter? There is a choice.

So the language of the charter and specifically in Article three, Section 3.01, sorry, that speaks to the powers and duties of the mayor. What I was referencing was number A3, which says execute as a matter of form. So the mayor shall execute as a matter of form, but with no discretion in the matter, all contracts, deeds, and other obligations of the city... according to purchasing guidelines and policies within a level of authorization as established by the city council, provided that the city council may delegate contract signing authority to the city manager and to the extent allowed by law, allowed by law. So when you ask the question if if it's a if it is an action that can be refuted. It does say in this provision of the charter that the mayor will not have discretion on the matter, meaning that whether the mayor agreed with the action taken by counsel or not, the mayor is still to sign the contracts and deeds as they are brought before her.

Council do you have any questions.

Mayor does.

Are you except for the floor.

I'm stating that I have a question if you'll give me the floor I'd like to ask the question.

Mayor cobble.

The charter section that you're reading from indicating that the mayor signs, first of all, describes the ceremonial mayor that this city so graciously has. In those ceremonial duties, it certainly does say that the mayor does not have discretion in the matter. And as a matter of fact, as you all are aware, the mayor doesn't set the agenda, doesn't put the items on the agenda, doesn't vote, and doesn't, as you can see, chair the meetings. So you are correct in that the mayor simply signs documents with no discretion. There is a caveat in law that is not in your charter that does not require the signing of documents that are either illegal or improper and which violate policies and its charter. THE APPOINTMENT OF THE CITY MANAGER HAS A GLARING VIOLATION NOT ONLY IN ETHICS BUT ALSO IN THE REQUIREMENTS FOR QUALIFICATION TO HOLD SAID POSITION. SO YOU ALL HAVE VOTED FOR SUCH APPOINTMENT THAT DOES ACTUALLY DEVIATE FROM THE REQUIREMENTS AND QUALIFICATIONS SET IN YOUR CHARTER AND ALSO WITH ETHICAL VIOLATIONS. SO I AM CHOOSING NOT TO SIGN SAID CONTRACT. But you all, as I've instructed the attorneys, have all the legislative power to do so. You may sign the document yourselves. You've selected the city manager, you've deviated from the charter qualifications, and blindly moved forward with the very known ethical violation. So I will not sign the document, but that does not mean that the document is not valid. The council voted with a majority vote, and so all matters of the city council that have a majority vote stand. So the contract is valid, the appointment is made, the employment continued, and thus the city is operating. If we'd like to take that matter up through legal, we certainly can. But you have the ability, which you had in the last two meetings, to ratify the contract and Define it, define it valid and continue on as you have. You've onboarded the city manager. She's been working now two weeks and conducting business in said role. So the signing of the contract has not prohibited the employment opportunity nor stopped the city's operations.

Ms. Deck, are you complete?

How much time do I have left, Madam Clerk? I'll save my time, thank you.

Council?

May I put in?

Yes, Councilman Turner.

I don't want to get into a debate about the matter, but I do want to point out that all of these changes to the charter were created primarily by one person on the council, although the whole council approved the changes to the charter to remove that power from the mayor at the time. So the reason that it's in the position it's in now is because of that council member that put those requirements in place at the time. Be that as it may, the charter specifically says that the mayor is to sign all of these matters without any discretion in the matter. And I think it's very clear. The mayor was to appoint a city manager. That did not happen. and the charter is clear as to what shall take place next and the next is the city um mayor potem shall take the lead in selecting and finding an appointment for city manager that did in fact happen in fact that the mayor was not well the mayor was involved in it but the mayor did not make the selection Does that mean the mayor is no longer a party to a charter requirement that either the mayor appoints or the mayor pro tem appoints? And once the appointment is made, since it was not made by the mayor, the mayor gets to choose not to sign, I beg to differ. I say there is no discretion in the matter. the mayor's signature is a requirement whether she agrees with it or not that is charter requirement that was supported greatly by the person who now sits in the mayor's seat when they were on council so that's my comment mayor pro tem with my two minutes left yes mayor cobble

the Councilman Turner, the section I'm referring to in the charter, which is the violation of the appointment is not the Mayor Pro Tem and the Council making the appointment. That was and did take place properly. The section that I'm referring to in the charter violation refers to 3.02a. The city manager shall be appointed as provided in subsection B of this section without regard to political beliefs and solely on the basis, here we go, of his or her education and experience in the accepted competencies and practices of local government management. It is very specific to the qualifications of said person having competencies and practices of local government management. The city council selected an individual who had zero experience in local government management. Not a former employment opportunity, neither any education or background for practices of local government management. Additionally, the city manager appointment is the campaign manager of our Mayor Pro Tem, who also served as the treasurer for our Mayor Pro Tem. So there are ethical violations for the appointment and what I believe is a charter violation as again, the education and experience and the accepted competencies and practices of local government management do not exist in the employment history of the appointed city manager. It is not because the mayor did not appoint the city manager. That is not my dispute with the contract. My dispute is that it violates the charter and has ethical violations.

And put him yes, councilman turn.

I would hope that there is a forum to address all of that and I don't think it would be at this point in time. When it comes to signing the contract. Call redress grievances and if anyone wants to challenge what has been done, I would hope that there is a platform for such.

Also any other questions. Aaron now what you have to do yes, councilman Turner.

Just to be clear as to what we been asked to do here, I think I am just want to make it perfectly clear and that is to authorize And for Tim collectively, the council to sign this contract.

That is correct.

One of both all of the above.

All the above.

OK, thanks.

I entertain a motion.

And her pro tem.

Yes, Councilwoman Washington.

I move that the City Council authorize the Mayor Pro Tem to execute the City Manager employment agreement and any related documents necessary to implement the Council's previously approved appointment of the City Manager based on the Mayor's refusal to execute the agreement.

Second motion has been properly moved in 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 three.

Yay.

District four.

Yay.

District five.

Yay.

District one is yay. Motion carries four to zero. Next item on the agenda. is the resolution, this is for decision, the resolution ratifying emergency action taken by council prior to the city manager appointment. The purpose of this resolution is to formally acknowledge the record and the action that Council took during the declared state of emergency to ensure the continued operation of the city government and the uninterrupted delivery of essential services. These actions was taken in response to extraordinary circumstances and were intended to protect the city operation while the city manager position remained vacant. This resolution provides a clear legislative record of those emergency actions and affirmed that they were taken to preserve the continuity of the government and allow the city of Stonecrest to continue serving its residents until the city manager was appointed. Council, do you have any questions before the resolution is read?

May I point out?

Yes, Councilman Turner.

I think for the benefit of the public, we should probably delineate a few of the matters that had to be taken care of under the emergency agreement, emergency operation.

Say that one more time. I had a hard time hearing you.

Can you delineate a few of the activities that took place by council during this period of vacancy of the city manager that were executed under the emergency declaration? such as the payroll having to be met because there was no one in place to do it under the normal circumstances, because the city manager was out of place. There were some other matters with employment of personnel for the summer camp. Can we give an example of some of the others, or are we in order?

We are in order. However, those items are listed in a resolution for the record.

I understand. I'm just saying that the public, that's it. Just the only aid of you for the public's knowledge.

If you would like to do that, you have the floor.

Thank you. On January 2nd, the city council adopted a resolution for banking a signatory authority and operational continuity to expand the sign and authority of the city and to preserve the city's ability to meet its financial obligation. On January 8th, the city manager resigned, creating an unexpected vacancy of the city chief administrative officer and resulting in a period of organizational uncertainty requiring immediate legislative action to maintain government operation and ensure continuity of executive administration. And whereas the resignation of the city manager The mayor did not appoint an acting city manager, resulting in the absence of executive administrative leadership during a critical period of transition and requiring the city council to implement emergency measures to ensure continuity of government maintaining financial operations. and protect public interest, the public interest. And whereas on January 12, the city council adopted an emergency ordinance granting the deputy city manager authority to serve an authorized sign on the city's bank account in order to preserve access to municipal funds, facilitate the execution of financial transactions, and ensure timely payment of payroll and other lawful obligation. And there are some more whereas it's here, but I just want to give a few examples of some of the things that we had to do under this emergency declaration. So this will codify to make it into one.

Not codified, but it would put this on the record and ratify and kind of affirm the actions taken by the city council.

Okay. Thank you.

Mayor Pro Tem. If Councilman Turner is reading from an ordinance, an ordinance is not factually correct. In fact, in a meeting, the mayor did attempt to appoint an acting city manager and was the city council unanimously voted down. The mayor did not bring forth another recommendation as the city council had made it clear that the mayor's recommendations were not wanted. So your resolution is actually factually incorrect. It is on record that the mayor did attempt to make an acting city manager appointment. Should you move forward to adopt the resolution that was written, read it is actually factually incorrect i would ask that you include the date and time that the mayor's attempted acting city manager appointment was made and the vote the unanimous vote no otherwise you are adopting a an or a resolution that is not factually correct Councilman Turner read that the mayor did not appoint an acting city manager. Incorrect. The mayor made an attempt. The vote was voted down. Please do add that in your resolution so that all of the occurrences for said time are accurate and factual and documented correctly to be ratified, as you so legally put it.

I vote him. Again, I'm really trying to avoid any debate in the matter, but the fact of the matter is, when the mayor makes an appointment, it must be ratified by the council. If the council does not ratify it, then the mayor has an opportunity to make another appointment. And that's where the breakdown occurred. That was never an attempt. In fact, it was stated, that's all I have, was one attempt of an appointment. So the opportunity to appoint someone else never disappeared until the time expired. So I think it's factual. The mayor failed to move to the next level to appoint an acting city manager. The time was there, opportunity was there, and we were only given one candidate, which was rejected, which leaves it open to have another candidate put forth, of which it never came, not to my knowledge.

Councilman Turner, you are absolutely correct. However, your resolution does not read that. Your resolution reads as if there was not an attempt at all and as if the city council was never presented with an acting city manager. In fact, the city council was presented with an acting city manager, someone who, by the way, had already been a city manager before. So, no, I did not have anyone else to offer to you as I mentioned that in that meeting. I brought an offering. You all voted it down. I'm asking that your resolution reflect that the actions were taken to attempt to appoint an acting city manager as your attorney has written it today. It eludes to the fact that the mayor did not make any attempt at all, which is incorrect, which is not factually representing the occurrences of those events. It is certainly your pleasure to allow said resolution to incorrectly inform the steps and events of that procedure. But it is on record that I am saying it today, that your resolution does exclude, I find coincidentally, the actual in-person live meeting attempt to appoint an acting city manager and unanimously voted down. If you exclude that in your resolution, you are not telling or giving a factual representation of the events that occurred. Certainly, it is your pleasure.

Mayor Cobble, in this resolution, it is just stating that you did not appoint an acting city manager. We did not attempt. We did not put the attempt in this resolution. We just put the fact that you did not appoint an acting city manager. So I think the resolution is correct. Council, do you have any other questions? Madam City Clerk? Go ahead. Can you read it? No, just the beginning. The city attorney will read it. Thank you.

A resolution by the City Council of the City of Stonecrest, Georgia, acknowledging and ratifying certain actions taken to preserve the continuity of municipal government, protect public funds, maintain essential city services, ensure fiscal accountability and restore permanent administrative leadership following a period of executive and financial transition and for all other purposes.

Councilor entertain a motion.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Yes, Councilman Turner.

Move for approval of the resolution by the City Council for the City of Stonecrest, Georgia to acknowledge and ratify certain actions taken to preserve the continuity of the municipal government. 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 gay all those opposed may start with district 3. Yeah district for you district 5, yeah district one is yay the motion carries 4 to 0, the resolution ratifying the emergency action taken by Council prior to the city manage your appointment has been approved. Next item on the agenda is for discussion. Supplemental pay policy by our finance director, Mrs. Keisha Franklin, and also someone from the HR department, Mrs. Merlin Thompson. Thank you for being here. Thomas, thank you for being here today. Is Ms. Franklin online? Yes, ma'am.

Yes.

Mr. Graves is Miss Franklin.

Yes.

So we can hear her on the phone.

And everybody here, Miss Franklin. Do you want to start with the supplemental pay policy? And I believe everyone have a copy of that policy in the folder that was given out.

So supplemental pay, what is it? An employee may be placed in acting status when they are temporarily number one, reassigned to a position that Sorry, Ms. Thompson, I'm having a hard time hearing you.

Did you press the Hello? Is the green light on? Yes. All right. Maybe you just get a little closer to the mic for me. Thank you.

Supplemental pay. What is it? An employee may be placed in acting status when they are temporarily one reassigned to a position that is different from their regular position or two assigned significantly greater duties and responsibilities than those required in their regular position. In these situations, the department director may recommend to the director of human resources and the city manager that the employee receive a temporary salary increase. This increase would be at least 5% or a higher amount that appropriately reflects the additional duties and responsibilities. The supplemental pay will remain in effect only for the duration of the acting assignment. Employees placed in acting status must meet the minimum requirements for the position before the reassignment begins. An acting assignment may not exceed 12 consecutive months unless the city manager provides written approval for an extension. Requests to extend an acting assignment beyond 12 months must be submitted in writing to the city manager. Supplemental pay will end when the acting assignment concludes or when the employee is reassigned to a position that is not eligible for supplemental pay. The city manager may also approve supplemental pay for employees who earn additional or specialized degrees and or certifications when recommended by the department director.

Thank you. Counsel, do you have any questions for Miss Thomas? Yes, Councilwoman Smith.

I have a couple questions. In the policy, it says 5% above the, I mean, if you, there is a possibility to receive 5% above, or receive above the 5% standard, sorry. How is that determined? That's my question.

How is it determined whether you receive 5% or receive above?

Oh, that's out of my scope of work. I can't say that's out of my scope of work for that question to be answered. Okay.

My remaining questions, and you can let me know if this is outside of your scope, then I guess I'll have to wait for the person who can answer the question. They're about the decision-making and authority, so those questions are outside. That's correct. Okay. What about eligibility criteria? Outside, okay. Documentation that's required.

I do the PA form as the request is made. I do the paperwork to push it through for payroll processing.

Okay. So how are the additional duties documented for the acting status or the supplemental pay? Do you know how that's done? I have my scope of work. Okay. Okay. My next section of questions would be as it relates to budget and the financial impacts. And if supplemental pay causes an increase to someone's salary, the budget line for that salary, is a budget adjustment made and is that brought before the council? Okay.

That might be a question for Tisha.

Yes, that would be for the finance director.

There's a slight delay, don't forget.

Mayor and council. Can you put it closer to the mic? Mayor and council.

Tisha.

Hello.

That would be for the finance director.

Mayor and council. Hello. Hello.

Yes. Director, you can go ahead.

Mayor and council? Yes.

Hello? Yes. That would be for the finance director.

Mayor and council? Hello?

Yes.

I'm thinking she can't hear us.

Director, you can go ahead.

Yes. Hello?

Yes.

Finance Director.

Mayor and Council.

Hello.

I'm thinking she can't hear us.

Is there a reason why we can't hear her via Zoom?

That's where the glitch lies. So we couldn't find out why, what happened to the audio coming through.

Finance Director. Mayor and Council.

Madam Mayor Patel.

Yes, Attorney Thompson.

Just to make a general statement about budget adjustments or any type of budget amendments. In the city, the city's legal level of control for budgets is falling on the department level, meaning If there are expenses that exceed that budget for that particular department, that's typically when budget amendments or adjustments will come before council. However, if expenses align with the revenue that still sits within a particular department, departments typically can still operate without having to bring those budget adjustments before council. So that's the only time you typically should see an amendment of sorts if you're moving money from department to department. Or there is also a policy in place about moving money from the personnel line down to the operational line. That is something that council typically would have to approve as well. And then I'll let Ms. Franklin kind of. going to the specifics but that's typically when mayor council see budget adjustments yes councilman turner

So I'm glad this item is for discussion only. So the part that we missed, we can get at a later date in terms of the discussion. But the part that I wanted to make clear is when you are acting above your pay grade, then yes, there's an expectation of additional compensation. If you're acting in a lateral position, that's questionable. But if you're filling the position that might be below your pay grade, is there compensation for that other than overtime for those who qualify for overtime?

I'm sorry, I can't answer that question out of my scope of work. That's out of my scope of work.

That's above your pay grade.

I apologize, but I can't answer that question.

Okay, I'm going to have to compensate you for it. Okay, so it's for discussion, and it needs to be made clear. We put these rules in place, and hopefully we have them 100% correct, but we don't know that until we actually try them out, and we've had a chance to give it a go, and we'll see how well it's working and we can evaluate it, and if we need to adjust it, we will adjust it, but we need to fully understand the... and if we are achieving the intent and uh without having to make any adjustments so i'm and we can get more discussion later on and fully understand what's going on and if we need to make some adjustments we can mayor pro tem

Thank you, Councilman Turner. I believe Mr. Graves said he had Ms. Franklin online now, but I will give the floor to Councilwoman Washington before moving forward.

Yes, I would ask, what is it that you do so we know how to direct our questions to you? Of course, of course.

So after the selection is made for this salary supplement, I get the paperwork ready. So I have the PA form signed, you have the signature signed off on the PA form, then I give it to payroll for processing. So I do the paperwork piece just to get it moving from my desk to payroll. So it's more of the personal action forms what I do. for signatures and payroll processing.

So you verify the process with the signatures that's on the form?

I put the person's name on the form, how much they're getting for their percentage, then I have signature lines, make sure that they're all signed off, and then I hand it over to payroll.

Okay, so you just verify the signatures are there?

Yes, that's correct, yes, yes.

So according to the supplement pay, it says that it shouldn't extend no more than 12 months. Then after, do you let them know when the 12 months is up since you are doing that part? No, I don't. I don't. That'd be like the HR director would do that. I mean, it's supposed to be turned over to HR and the city manager if it's supposed to exceed past 12 months, according to the charter. So you don't know when the 12 months is up?

I don't follow that piece, no. I just process it to get the payroll, and then, yeah.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Councilwoman Washington. Let me make sure I heard you correctly. So when you get the form, you see the signatures on the form, and then you enter that information into the system for approval?

Well, I start the form, so they'll tell me who the person is and how much to put on the form. So I put their name and how much percent they're gonna be getting for the supplemental pay, Then I have signature lines that go through the process of making sure who has to sign off on it. Once it's fully signed off on, then I give it to payroll to process in the system. So I don't do any processing. I just do the paperwork to get it to payroll. Is that clear enough? I just do the paperwork side. I don't really...

You don't do the approval. You just actually like data entry. You just actually just put in a system, but it's approved before it actually get to your desk. Yes. Yes, exactly. All right. Yes. Yes. Thank you. You did answer my question. Okay. I'm not sure if Ms. Franklin can hear the conversation, but do she want to add some content to it?

Yes, I can hear the conversation.

Do you have anything to add to that process?

That process is strictly on the payroll, on the HR side. We are not involved in that process on the finance side.

Okay. Council, do you have any other questions?

No, President.

Councilwoman Smith.

So, you said one thing that you may be able to answer for me, the signatures. Whose signature is required for supplementary repay?

It depends on the position, like the manager, then the director, then finance, and then HR. So, you know, it'll be like the manager first, then the department director, finance, and then it'll be city manager, and then HR. So, yeah.

Okay, thank you.

You're welcome.

Ayo.

Thank you, Councilwoman Smith. Okay, last question for me. If a signature is missing, what is that process?

It won't go through unless they're all signed off on. They have to all be signed off on before we'll put you through the payroll. They have to all be signed on the PA form before it'll get over to payroll. So I make sure that everybody has signed off on the PA form. And once it is signed off fully, then we process it through.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilwoman Smith.

So I have a number of questions on the supplemental pay policy. I've already stated the different categories for which those questions fall. We've had this on our agenda a couple of times at this point, and we haven't been able to address it. What would be our next steps? Because we still can't get the questions addressed that we need. I know it's above your payroll and outside, so nothing towards you. But we don't have the people here who should be speaking to this. And again, it's been on our agenda more than once. What would be our next steps in order to get the questions answered that we need to have answered? Do I direct that to our city manager?

Councilwoman Smith, how many, for the record, just read your questions and maybe the city manager can write them down and get the answers for us via email or at our next work session.

Okay, I'm not sure how many minutes I have left, but I will go ahead with my questions. In the decision-making category, I wanted to know, like I asked before, and I can pass these on to the city manager if need be, but I can read them.

You can read them for the record. And if you run out of time, you can pass it to the city manager.

OK. My question is, which I've already stated, is if there is an increase above the standard 5%, how is it determined? Who makes the decision to approve that increase above that 5%? And in what instances is a department director eligible to receive supplemental pay? can a department director be paid for taking responsibilities of their subordinate? And if that is yes, under what circumstances? I see that there is eligibility for a director and a city manager to recommend and approve supplemental pay for personnel. Is there anybody else who can recommend that's outside of those two? And who is eligible to recommend and approve supplemental pay for appointed personnel? Is there a such thing? When it comes to eligibility and the criteria surrounding that, what specific criteria determines eligibility for acting status or for supplemental pay? How and does HR verify that employees meet the minimum requirements of the acting position before it's approved? There is a call out for supplemental pay related to special degrees and certifications. Who qualifies as additional or special? Or what qualifies as additional or special? And who decides this eligibility? Is there a standard review process somewhere that exists? When it comes to documenting requirements, how are the additional duties documented for acting status or supplemental pay? Is there a standard form or justification requirement that accompanies the supplemental pay? And whose signatures are required on documentation to execute supplemental pay? And you just gave that to us. How is the start and the end of supplemental pay documented, and how is it communicated? When it comes to the financial impact surrounding it, if supplemental pay causes an increase, we've already heard that as long as it's in that department's budget that's approved, then it will not come before the council. As it relates to process workflows and timelines, what's the complete approval workflow for requests? to final approval. Is supplemental pay ever prorated? If there is a 12 month in place for the limit for supplemental pay, who's monitoring that and who's enforcing it? How is the supplemental pay entered and removed in payroll? And is the audit trail maintained? I'll pass the others along. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilwoman Smith. I wanted to know if, and I guess this question is, I guess it's maybe for Attorney Thompson, what is the process if the policy was not followed?

Thank you, Madam Appleton. If there is a break from the policies here in the city, and it would depend on the policy, I'll say that. So obviously, if we're talking about some type of fleet policy, maybe that person loses privileges with their... that would allow them to drive cars. And here, if we're talking about a violation or maybe a break from the policy, the supplemental pay policy, I would say it also just depends on what the issue is. If we're talking about, you know, because again, if someone's not following this policy, could mean that they veered from approvals or maybe from the line of questioning that I'm hearing, maybe the amount of supplemental pay is a little unreasonable. So if there's a break from the policy, I think depending on... what the actual policy says about violations of said policy. That's one thing that the city should look to and should follow. Um, and depending on what type of issue it is, there are other mechanisms that serve as consequences for an individual who is not following the policy. And I'm sure within the city of Stonecrest that could lead up to termination. Um, And if again, we're talking about anything dealing with a fiduciary responsibility, it could lead to reporting of some sort to another agency.

Another agency. I need some content.

And so again, if we're talking about Again, this will all depend on what the issue is and what was violated and how it was violated. If it's a break from the policy, I would say we need to follow the terms and the wording of the personnel policy as it speaks to how violations are handled. If it's something that is, that falls on the city's ethics policy, for instance, it could be a claim, an ethics claim, possibly. Again, it depends on what the issue is. It could also be something that could be reported. to a state official. So it just depends on what it is.

Thank you. Council, any other questions?

This will appear on the next agenda that fits your pleasure, just so we can have an in-depth discussion about it with all the parties necessary to be present.

If all the parties Madam City Manager, you were shaking your head.

Mayor Pro Tem, right now, all the parties are not here. They don't leave. So unfortunately, we would not be able to give all the details to answer some of the questions that Councilman Smith is asking.

Thank you, Madam City Manager. Council, do you have any other questions?

You didn't answer my question.

Well, the City Manager just answered your questions. We would not have...

Okay.

You're saying we would not have anybody in HR to... No, I'm saying future meetings, not tonight.

I will make a recommendation to add it to one of our work sessions or to a council meeting, so I'll take care of it. No problem. I got it.

Thank you man, I mean thank you madam city manager and thank you councilman Turner. Next on the agenda. Discussion the consideration of a resolution to censure the mayor. A resolution to censor is a formal expression of the council disapproval regarding conduct. It does not remove an elected official from office nor does it oppose legal penalty. The purpose of this agenda item is to allow the council to consider the proposed resolution. Review the facts and hear from those involved. Engage in discussion and determine whether the proposed action is warranted. The proposed resolution stemmed from an incident that occurred on Thursday, June 25th, involving an elected official and an appointed staff member. Because this matter involved the conduct of an elected official, the council is considering it during the open public meeting to ensure transparency and to provide all parties with an opportunity to be heard. The appointed staff member voluntarily submitted a written statement to council regarding the incident. The statement was not requested by council. It was sent via email at 12 approximately 12 15 a.m. on June 26th. I myself did not prepare or submit a written statement, although I went to city hall after being notified of the incident around 9 55 AM on June 25th. As of today's meeting, no written statement had been submitted by the mayor. This agenda item is for discussion and consideration only. So we do have the appointed staff member, which is, um, our director of finance online, but we're having a hard time hearing her. So she wanted us to read the letter that she forwarded to council the day after, which is on the 26th. That's going to be read by our city manager.

notice of incident june twenty fifth twenty twenty six council i'm writing to formally notify you of a workplace incident that occurred on june twenty fifth at approximately ten a m at city hall upon my This note is from Director Keisha Franklin, I apologize. Upon my arrival at City Hall, I observed that Mayor Jasmine Caldwell had positioned a chair directly in front of my office door and was sitting there waiting for my arrival. As I approached my office, the mayor immediately confronted me regarding the payment of her hotel accommodations for the upcoming conference and directed me to print her a check immediately. I advise the mayor that I do not print checks on demand and the city follows established financial processes for ensuring payments. During the exchange, the mayor repeatedly yell, print the check or find another And out of respect, I'm just going to put initials, M effing job. She also stated that I printed the check on demand before, which I advise was not true. The mayor further stated words to the effect that she could do whatever she wanted because she was the mayor, that it was quote her city, quote that she ran the city. This interaction occurred in presence of city staff. Because the situation continued to escalate, I attempted to end the interaction by closing my office door. As the door was nearly closed, the mayor pushed the door toward me in an apparent effort to prevent it from closing. I pushed the door completely closed and it automatically locked. Immediately after, the mayor repeatedly manipulated the locked door handle while continuing to yell outside of my office. I remained inside my office as an effort to separate myself from the confrontation and de-escalate the situation. While inside my office, I heard the mayor stated that I had called the police and that she did not care because the police could not do anything to her because it was her city and she ran the city. A responding police officer who identified himself as Officer King arrived at my office door shortly thereafter because the mayor continued yelling nearby. I advised the officer that I intended to leave the building to remove myself from the situation. After I exit my office, the mayor stated that her check was the only check that had not been paid and that she could not leave for the conference without it. I responded that statement was false and that it was a lie. I further advised that her hotel reservations remained active, had not been canceled or otherwise affected, and that she was free to travel to check into her hotel. I then left City Hall to remove myself for the situation. I remained in my vehicle because I was visibly shaken by the incident. Shortly thereafter, I was instructed that I could return home for the remaining of the day. As a result of this incident, I was unable to continue to perform my duties that morning. I believe that it's important that the governing body be informed of these events and that they be documented as part of the city's official record. Director Keisha Franklin.

Thank you, Madam City Manager. Mayor Cobble, would you like to respond?

Oh, absolutely. Actually, I'd like my attorney to respond. Attorney Tyson, would you please come to the podium? As he's coming, I would also like to mention that the statement that you heard read just by the City Manager was only in the words of one individual. As we know, one side of the story is only that. So you'll hear from my attorney who will not only explain the procedural violations that this council and the city manager just violated, but also the continuation of the incorrect and infactually stated events that occurred, which we actually have evidence and proof of. Attorney Tyson, would you please?

Excuse me, Mayor Cobble. I actually gave you the floor. Are you asking... for your city attorney to come at some content, or would you like to respond?

My city attorney is going to respond on my behalf.

Okay.

The question is, did you... Mayor Pro Tem, are you refusing to let me share my side of the story through my legal counsel? No, absolutely not. Okay, some attorney will speak on my behalf. The question is...

Before you invite anybody to speak, I gave you the floor.

Yes, you gave me the floor. And in you giving me the floor, I am having my attorney to speak. So you're having your attorney speak. Which I can do. You're having your attorney speak. If the floor is mine, then I may proceed with having the floor. And having the floor includes having my attorney speak. Again, would you like me to request from you personally to invite someone to the floor?

Can we ask legal, is that the right procedure, that he can come and speak on her behalf? I'd just like to hear it from legal.

Please legally explain that I need permission to indulge in the floor in a meeting where I'm rightfully a member of the governing body.

I would recommend if the mayor wants to give a statement or if you want to speak right now and address the matter that's on the floor that you directly speak because we have not opened a public comment of any sort. And so right now we're having a meeting for the members of this body.

Correct. We're having a meeting for the members of this body of which I am a part of. And so there's no law that says that as a part of my own discussion, I cannot bring others into it. As a matter of fact, you just had more than one person speaking on another item right before this. So with the body. with the body, right? So I am a part of this governing body. There are no stipulations in law that state that as I have the floor, I may not involve multiple parties in my presentation. As a matter of fact, council just involved multiple parties in their presentation. So if you can find law that says that I must get permission when I have the floor to include multiple parties then we may have a legal argument. Otherwise, if the Mayor Pro Tem would like me to ask personal permission for my attorney to speak on a personnel matter on my behalf, I will oblige.

So I'll say this, Madam Mayor Pro Tem. I'll leave it to the approval of the body to decide whether... A member from the public can speak on this agenda item.

This is not a member of the public. This is my legal counsel. You're talking about a legal matter, a personnel matter, in which you've allowed the city manager to read one statement from one person to create, again, the theme of this meeting, a misrepresentation. And then you're now trying to take the right from me to give my side of the story so that at least the representation is equitable. This is not a member of the public. This is my legal counsel. The counsel has already gone into a personnel matter publicly, which violates our charter, our human resource policies, and many others. And so now you want to add to that by restricting the mayor from allowing her legal counsel to speak when I have the floor. Counsel, please.

Mayor Cabo, are you saying you're personnel?

Absolutely, I'm personnel, per your personnel policy and your charter.

Mayor Cabo, I guess you had stepped out of the meeting when I read the... No, I sat right here. So do you remember what was said?

Yes, absolutely. Just because you said it doesn't make it lawful. Just because you said it doesn't mean there's law to support what you said. Just because you said it doesn't mean you get to take the rights from the mayor to have the floor. You gave me the floor. You do not get to dictate how I use said floor. I am a part of this governing body as everyone else is. You have invited multiple people in all of your items before this to have participation in you having the floor. But if you'd like me to ask you, may I invite someone to the floor you've given me? I certainly shall.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Yes, Councilwoman Smith.

According to Robert's rules, can a person give the floor to someone else? They may yield to ask, allow them to make a comment. They may briefly yield for them to provide a bit of clarity. But I don't think they can actually give the floor to someone else.

Would you like me to use the word yield? Versus give.

Yield for a question or a comment.

Would you like me to use the words yield for a comment?

Not for a statement. So now we're going to define comments and statements. I would like to find out, according to Robert's rules, that we utilize here, if that is allowable. To my understanding, it is not.

And I believe Madam City Council Member Smith is correct because the Mayor's Attorney here is almost acting as our proxy and we haven't, We haven't established that here. A proxy to what? To speak on your behalf.

I've never needed permission to bring anyone to a podium to speak on an item. Never. Not one council meeting, not one work session, not one community meeting, not one commission meeting, not a single one has the city council had the authority under no circumstances to dictate how any member of council, which includes me, uses the opportunity in front of the microphone. Never. Not one time. But have no fear. Attorney Tyson, please stand there. I will read As the city manager read, I will read. I would like to make note before I begin reading this that we find it not coincidental at all that the city council would allow the statement of the staff member to be read with no interruption to misrepresent an event and then find ways using its legal counsel to suppress my abilities and my authority. Certainly this is newsworthy. I'll read. I understand that one or more of the members of the city council intends to bring forward a resolution or proposal to censure Mayor Cobble in connection with an alleged incident involving the city's finance director. As of this writing, no one has spoken with the mayor about the matter. No written complaint has been furnished to her and no factual inquiry of any kind appears to have occurred. I am writing to raise three specific concerns under the charter. Raise one under its personnel policies and request that your office advise the council accordingly. Clearly they did not. First, the charter supplies the appropriate mechanism for examining a matter of this kind, and it has not been invoked. Section 2.08 authorizes the council to make inquiries and investigations into the affairs of the city, including the power to take testimony and require the production of evidence. No such inquiry has been undertaken. The mayor has not been interviewed, asked to respond, or even shown what is alleged. In fact, the mayor and her staff possess relevant information, including a recording that has not been requested or reviewed. Not only does the council proceeding with this center without conducting an investigation violate basic principles of due process, it cannot withstand the slightest scrutiny. Second, because the city council's failure to invoke the formal investigative process in the charter, the council is already in violation of Section 3.03B6, which provides the mayor and the council shall not discuss in public the performance of or complaints against any city officer or employee unless acting pursuant to a duly... authorized investigation. It is our understanding that mayors of council discussed the alleged incident between the mayor and the finance director in an open council meeting in Savannah on June 28th. Further, it is our understanding that the open discussion led to an open records request, an open records act request that contains specific information about the incident based on public comments. As you know, without a properly authorized Section 2.08 inquiry, a public airing of this matter violates Section 3.3B6 and is also inconsistent with the city's broader obligations regarding confidential personnel information in its Personnel Policies Manual. If the Council continues with a public discussion at the meeting tomorrow evening, it will further violate the terms of the Charter and the policies. Third, I note the posture in which this situation presents your office. Section 3.08B of the city charter provides that in a conflict between the mayor and council, the city attorney shall arrange separate outside representation for each and shall not represent the interests of one against the other. The course the council appears posed to take would create precisely such a conflict. I raise this not to be adversarial, but so that your office can take steps that take the steps that charter requires and provide counsel to the council on the proper path forward before any action is taken. We are prepared to be appointed as the mayor's representatives. Finally, it also appears the city's personnel policies have not been followed. We are unaware of any complaint filed against the mayor under those policies, and even if a complaint had been filed, it must be kept confidential. Further, to the extent any witness statements exist, the mayor has not been provided with them, although we are aware that one report Although we are aware of one report that includes information only from the finance director that is inconsistent with the evidence in the possession of the mayor. If the city wishes to pursue complaints against the mayor or anyone else, it should follow its own personnel policy manual rather than proceeding with a center resolution without all of the facts. On behalf of the mayor, I respectfully represent that any resolution or proposal related to the alleged incident not be presented, discussed publicly, or brought to a vote unless until, one, the specific allegations are reduced to writing and provided to the mayor. Two, the council determines through a proper Section 2.08 process where the factual basis for any action exists. And three, the mayor is afforded a meaningful notice and opportunity to be heard. The mayor is prepared to participate fully and in good faith. I welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you directly. Please contact me by email. All of the mayor's rights under the charter and applicable law are expressly reserved. So seeing that some of these things have already taken place and have already been violated, my attorney's office is prepared to represent the mayor's office in these egregious violations. Also, because you have refused to allow him to even speak. Thank you.

Counsel, do you have any other questions? Yes, Councilman Turner.

This item is listed for discussion only. No decision has been made, nor are we proposing to make a decision this evening. And that being the case, from what was read to us, I cannot imagine this happened without there being other witnesses to it. And their statements would be important for us to make a decision as to whether or not we go forward with this suggested resolution. This is not a hearing. This is us responding to a letter we got that we will simply not ignore because the accusation is very serious. And we treat it as such. And we will not be intimidated by the lawyers coming before us or anything else. And I think that was part of the allegation in the beginning, that there was intimidation, but which has not been validated. And that would take a hearing to get to the bottom of it. And is there enough evidence to raise this to the next level? In my opinion, it is. And I'm going to suggest that at some point we conduct an investigation to see if this is warranted for offering a censure. A censure is no light undertaken. It's not, and I don't take it such. But at the same time, Our conduct speaks volume about how we treat our staff and constituents. It must be with due respect at all times. And if we get out of control, we must pull ourselves in line. And these allegations need to be looked at. And that would involve anyone who might have been a witness to or might have evidence to support or refute what has been alleged here. So just my comments on the discussion phase of this.

And Mayor Pro Tem, may I comment?

Absolutely.

I first want to say that as much as we have to protect our staff and our constituents, the elected officials are also included in the respect and treatment, just as the staff and the constituents. elected officials should not be verbally abused or physically assaulted. It is not just the responsibility of the electeds to ensure that there's respect only given. There also should be respect giving back to the electeds. I'm sure that through your investigation, you will see that respect is mutual. Violations happen when multiple people decide to disrespect or even physically interact with both the electeds and the staff. It would be irresponsible for the city council to simply take the word of one and to not openly discuss with all people involved, including the mayor. You see, there's some kind of theme here that I am excluded from rightful treatment. But in fact, when I am disrespected, when I am physically assaulted, I also have rights. It is imperative that respect is mutual, but it's also imperative that Action on both sides are taken, not just on the side of the elected. It's also actions to be taken on the side of the staff. When staff is incorrect and when electives are incorrect, each one should have, first of all, its due process, and second of all, meaningful action to correct the behavior. So I do not want anyone to leave here believing that I am not a victim. Because I am. It will come out through this investigation, and I hope the council does take it very seriously. As I also have rights, not just as an elected official, but also as a citizen.

Council, any other questions?

Mayor Pro Tem, I have a statement. Yes, Madam City Manager. This is a statement that occurred at City Hall on Wednesday, June 24th. On Wednesday, June 24th, around 4.30 p.m., I was approached by the executive assistant of the mayor regarding she was waiting for the hotel that was booked by the GMA conference on the mayor's personal credit card to receive a city check to pay for her room versus her using her personal credit card to pay for her travel. She stated the mayor would not be willing to allow the charges to her personal credit card. Without clear assurance that the check had been applied to her reservation, she would remain in Stonecrest. She was also checking with the hotel to see if the check had been posted to her account. I did remind her of the travel policy where the city of Stonecrest reimbursed travel for reasonable and necessary expenses that's actually occurred in connection with approved travel. We went back and forth from Wednesday afternoon about 4.30 p.m. to about 12.42 a.m. Thursday morning and again from 9.19 a.m. to 2.26 p.m. on Thursday. We pretty much went back and forth on the same issue that the room had not received a check to pay for the mayor's room and then what we were going to do about it. On Thursday morning, the day of traveling to the GMA conference, I received a voicemail from my executive assistant stating the mayor wanted me to call her. Because I couldn't call her, she called me back again saying the mayor was going off on Director Franklin and that Director Franklin was calling for security and that I needed to call her as if she didn't have her check, she was going to go off on people. I text my executive assistant that I was on a call right then, but I was working on a solution with Director Franklin and would call her back. I also called Mayor Pro Tem to make her aware of what was going on with the checks on the room payment and also what was going on at City Hall. While I was talking with Director Franklin, I heard the mayor in the background yelling, and Director Franklin said the mayor had blocked her door with a chair and threatened her. Because I heard the word threatened, I told her to hang up the phone and call security and the police. I called Mayor Pro Tem back to alert her of the employee threat and the security was alerted. Mayor Pro Tem stated she was headed to City Hall. I called back to see if Director Franklin was okay and she was very shaken up and emotional and was told by Mayor Pro Tem to go home. I tried to calm her down and ask her did she have someone who could be with her or did I need to come where she was located because she appeared to be a nervous wreck on the phone. She told me no, she would be okay. She was really shaken up. I asked her was she okay to drive and she said yes, she were. I immediately changed my attire because I was headed to City Hall because I was originally getting ready to head to Savannah for the GMA Conference. I called the Mayor back and she stated Finance walked out the building without giving her her check for her hotel room and she was not putting on her credit card. A solution was, she said, to use the P-card, which is what was done in the past. She stated she did not harass Director Franklin or touch her. She did put a chair in the front of her door. She said Director Franklin could use the credit card authorization form, and she said y'all can have the city. The check should have been sent via UPS or FedEx. Who puts a check in the effing mail where you can track it? where you can't track it. My apologies if this word was used inappropriately. This is what I'm saying to say this in front of everybody in this meeting. She said her room was not paid. I told her mine was not either. She said, so you are new. I said, it's the same policies and procedures. I asked her, let me to get a solution, and I would circle back. once i arrived at city hall was told by employees and security of the of the various profanity that was used by the mayor such as effing check or director franklin would be fired if she didn't bring her check she was overheated find a solution or find another job and they would bring and why did they bring your stupid a back with a chair blocking director franklin's door One employee stated no one came and checked on them until the city manager came and addressed the issues, and she considered the incident to be extremely hostile, and she was upset. I asked the employees of Stonecrest from the finance department to come in the conference room. I did apologize on behalf of the mayor of what they had just witnessed and observed. They reminded me just the day before at our all staff meeting that I told them that we would not tolerate people being disrespected, unprofessionalism, or unacceptable conduct at City Hall by anyone, including myself. I again apologized for what they experienced. I asked them why I was fresh on their mind if they would put a statement in writing of what they observed. I told them it would not be used against them nor would it impact their job. I was told by their director of finance that they would not put a statement in writing as they had been previously managed by fear and intimidation, but I asked for her permission if it was okay to talk to her employees and ask them to do so. Director Frankton told me yes. Some of the employees ask if they could go in their work area and type their statement and datement. I need to, I apologize, but others have been given. Can I finish?

They ask if they go in their work. I apologize. I was interrupted and was not able to finish mine. So. I'm almost finished. I was almost, that is, I was interrupted.

Madam City Manager, you time. You've reached your limits. But thank you for your statement. Council, do you have any other questions? This agenda has been concluded.

I have more to say. I would like the floor. Are you asking? Yes, I would like the floor. Mayor Cobble. Thank you. Again, Stonecrest, what you're hearing are statements, one, that I have not been given, two, that are coming from a one-sided story, that I have proof and evidence is actually not true. Through an investigation, you will come to find that there are some people who will speak with integrity and some who will not. As you can see, we're a smart city. This has been crafted so that one side of the story is what's prevalent, and you can see that there is an attempt to suppress the other side. I do want to really quickly, in my short period of time, state that my executive assistant, who was also not only in the city manager's statement, but also on the telephone with me, as supposedly the city manager was on the telephone with the finance director, my assistant was on the phone with me, and yet she has not been asked for a statement. and yet no one has given her an opportunity to speak. So you can see the theory and the theme that's going on here. Additionally, the reason why there was even a discussion is because both the city manager and the finance director lied to my assistant and to me the day before. I have and which will come out, although this is not a hearing, apparently, but the city council has has planted statements throughout this evening where on Wednesday, the city manager tells my assistant that the finance director had spoken with the hotel directly and that the check for my hotel had been delivered. Then the next day sends a text message saying, the check for your hotel arrived today, Thursday at noon. So Wednesday, the city manager says, the check is there. We've confirmed it with the hotel. My assistant calls the hotel. The hotel says, absolutely not. We have nothing. The next day at noon, the city manager says, your check arrived today. Well, how did it arrive yesterday and also today? So in between yesterday and the next day is when I approached the finance director to inquire about a payment solution. Again, we have all the evidence that we need that includes audio of the verbal exchanges. So all of these words that the city manager is choosing not to share that's making it seem like I use all kind of explicatives, the audio will prove that the conversation, I was not the aggressor. The audio and the video will also prove that I was physically assaulted, that I was the victim of insubordination. But you cannot forget that up until now, only the people who support the one side have been asked for statements, Those statements were collected by the city manager and in her possession only. The statements of those who were taken don't even have a copy of it themselves. Our HR policies say that the HR department conducts these kind of statements. We have staff members willing to actually say that they were demanded to give statements and could not leave their workspace until doing so. and that they were told not to email it to themselves or anyone else, but to simply print it and hand it to the city manager. And the city manager today is still in possession of those solely. So yes, an investigation needs to happen. Process and procedure, charters and policies, all of which need to be had. Y'all, this was a heated debate, a heated argument between the mayor and a staff member who reports to mayor and council. whom when the city manager and the finance director did not tell the truth, I sought the answer. I sought the answer so that I could attend a conference like everyone else. This will come out. It's unfortunate that it has to play out here, but this is the choice that the city council took. So Attorney Tyson, who will represent me in this investigation, I'm sure will prevail again as we have with Stonecrest three times in the past. Yet another black city in public.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilwoman Smith.

I would just like to state for the record something that is incorrect that the mayor just stated. City Council has planted statements. I, Carmisha Washington Smith, am a part of the City Council, and I have planted no statements that is untrue. Mayor Pro Tem.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilman Turner.

Just to be clear, we are going to direct the city manager to initiate the investigation so that we can get all questions answered before we address this question again of possible censure or not to censure. So I just want to be clear that that is the direction we're going in.

Councilman Turner, asking the city manager to initiate the investigation is a policy and charter violation. The charter and the policy dictates whom shall conduct the investigation. So if you are directing someone outside of the policy.

Madam City, Mayor Pro Tem.

Yes, Councilman Turner.

The question is still there. Are we going to direct the city manager or whomever to initiate this investigation so that we can get all questions answered before moving forward with this idea of a censure? Is that our conclusion?

Our conclusion is to have it investigated, but I believe we're going to ask for assistance from GMA. because our finance, our HR director is currently, or would not be in the office. So we're going to ask for GMA to come in to assist with this matter. And I also want to make a comment. Nothing here was planned from city council. I was actually at the building myself that day. And I can say I experienced some of that as well. I did not make a statement. Actually doing this agenda item was difficult because we are a team. We're supposed to work together as a team. So when I entered City Hall, my goal was to see if I can get some type of resolution to the matter. But at the end of the day, we have to make sure we respect our staff, we respect our colleagues, and it's not about a check. Let me be clear. If the check wasn't at the location, that was okay. Because when you go to anybody know when you check in a hotel, you do not pay for it up front. You just pay for it when you check out. And we was expecting our director to actually be in Savannah also at the retreat. So if all fails and the payment was not there, she could have taken care of it in Savannah. So let me be clear. This situation and what we're talking about is not about a check and a date it was arrived. It's about making sure that we show our colleagues that. our staff members because we are the leaders of the city. We shouldn't come up here going back and forth. We should be able to talk to each other with respect. But because we are elected officials, we were trying to be transparent with our city and let them know what is currently going on because I received a lot of calls that day in regards to the incident. Of course I didn't make any comments. because again, I think this is a situation that I thought we could have control among ourself. I tried to reach out to talk to Mayor Cobble. You called me that day, we talked. You asked me not to call you back. So at the end of the day, we are a team. We should work as such, but we wanted to come in here and discuss. So this meeting, is there any need for executive session? So that has concluded this agenda. So this meeting is now adjourned. Thank you so much for coming out today.