9. Oh, I guess I can't call it to order yet. Linda, are you doing invocation tonight? If you would go ahead, please.

Manager, Board, and Councilmembers, let's bow our head. Dear Heavenly Father, I praise you and thank you for who you are and for your love for this city and the people who dwell here. Your heart is for blessing and peace and for all things to be done decently and in order. In the name of Jesus, we bind any confusion, misunderstanding, anger, and chaos, and we lose order, understanding, and peace.

Let righteousness prevail here, for your word says in Isaiah 32, that the effect of righteousness will be peace, and the result of righteousness, quietness, and trust forever. My people will abide in a peaceful habitation, in secure dwellings, and in quiet resting places. Let it be so here tonight, according to your word. In Jesus' name, amen. Amen.

Okay, now that it is 610, I will call this meeting to order in the absence of Mayor Miller, Alderpersons present, Clem? Here. Monroe is absent, Simmons? Here. Parker? Here. Stacy? Here. Shadle? Here. Sanders? Here. And Sellers? Here. We do have a quorum, tonight's chairperson will be Alderpersons Shadle, could you lead the Pledge of Allegiance?

If you could join me, please.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

And item four would be approval of the agenda, but we would like to remove item eight to be brought back at a later date.

So move.

Second.

motion by Clemm second by Sellers voice votes fine yes all in favor aye opposed that opposed one opposed motion pass item five would be approval of the minutes from the committee of the whole meeting head on October 15 2024 so move Motion by Clemm, second by Parker, all in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries on that. Item six is public comments, if we could limit to three minutes, please. First on the list would be Josh Atkinson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess I'm going to be speaking to an empty chair here tonight. Thank you, Mr. Chair, council, city staff, my name is Joshua Atkinson.

I am here today to speak to agenda item number nine.

Each member here has been chosen by the people of Freeport to represent the residents in their wards.

You have the responsibility not only to speak on behalf of we the people, but also to hold this administration accountable.

As the mayor acknowledged last week, the current rules of council have been ignored and neglected for nearly a decade.

running meetings based on her to sit or her discretion rather than following the ordinances.

I commend the mayor for suddenly wanting efficient, respectful, and productive council meetings.

However, this attitude is eight years overdue. The mayor has failed to chair the council with respect to these rules.

Rather than owning and apologizing for this mistake or even finding herself, the administration is now attempting to silence not only our council members, but the people of Freeport themselves. Our elected officials, especially those backed by the Citizens Party, our local MAGA Republicans, often go unchallenged. Council has sat by while family members, friends, and campaign donors seem to be the only ones benefiting from our local leadership. This toe-the-party-line approach has left our historic city in a dire state.

To those in this chamber who prefer the status quo of compliance, this is a reality check. Local government, if done right, is hard work. It's frustrating. It's full of challenges, and that's exactly what you signed up for when you asked 23,000 people to trust you to represent them.

Serving the community is not a hobby. It's a full-time commitment, no matter the part-time title or the low pay. Many fear that after this last national election, those that continue to hide behind terms like citizens or People's Party would feel emboldened. Sadly, this seems to be coming true. As the administration attempts to reinforce policies that work against low-income families, young parents, marginalized communities, especially the Hispanic and Black populations. Every one of us deserve to have our voices heard. Mayor Miller, instead of attempting to silence those who disagree with you, consider a different path. In your final months, work to earn their trust and respect. Council, I urge you to stand up and stop this item from moving forward. And next year, we will work together to make Freeport a place where every resident has the opportunity for their voice to be heard. Thank you.

Thank you. Next is Diane Yochum.

My name is Diane Yochum, as stated, and thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the council.

I come here with a lot of questions as I look at the wording in this particular format that we have here in this ordinance, amending a good part of what is presently on the books as is.

I have questions about what does city with the council being struck out mean? Does that mean one person gets to decide? Does that mean two people get to decide rather than the council gets to decide certain issues? And I find that some of these chances of has already been commented on restricting people's opportunity to speak their mind or to speak. And certainly it's already in the ordinance as it stands that they each have so many minutes Smith, and so forth, and I think it becomes more repressive and oppressive as I go on and read some of what's in this presently, because I do think it has a chance to squelch people's voices, and especially there might be people that certain ones aren't too happy with, and so you want to make sure that they are shut down as quickly as possible.

and another question, is an abstention vote or an abstain considered a violation of the vote? Is that considered part of a vote? And if someone abstains, do they then get fined for choosing to abstain from a vote? And so there are lots of pieces in here I questioned very much so. And I think this has been a punitive piece based on a knee-jerk reaction from last week's meeting.

and I'm not so sure so well thought through and I oppose it deeply and I think it does not represent us well. I don't think it represents all the people here well and I've seen the fingerprints of some of the language that seems to be a little more intense on some of these things that may have behind the scenes people who may be trying to pressure something to go through that does not need to go through and so So I really have serious concerns about this overall. Very, very serious concerns. And I am obviously very distressed to see this document. And personally, I think it needs to go into the waste bin right over there and not be voted upon. But I don't have that opportunity, nor do you. You have to vote. I ask you to vote against this document. You already have things on the record in the book that tells you what you can do.

Thank you. Thank you, Micaiah Stacy. Good evening. For the three months I've been back in Freeport, I've witnessed firsthand the amount of deception, silencing, and straight-up bullying by members of this council. Everyone in front of me was fairly elected by the people of Freeport, but not everyone here's goal to make Freeport a better city, which you've been justly called out on. These proposed ordinances are a direct punishment for anyone who speaks against Mayor Miller and City Manager Boyer.

You don't like being questioned, so the answer to that is to shut them up financially I understand the meetings would go faster if they are more orderly, but that's not the problem here The problem is your lies being questioned and no one likes being questioned, especially when they get caught up in the lie I personally suggest making topics on the agenda clearer with no personal motives being proposed And being prepared to answer valid questions about these topics You guys were elected to be the voice, not silence them Please do better for the citizens of Freeport Thank you. Marcus Signer.

Hello, everyone. I would like to say that I don't think that is a good idea. Everyone should be able to talk and say what's going on in the community. I can just see people getting fined if they don't, if the mayor doesn't like it or just alone if she don't like you or have conflict. I see it all over the city and I'm praying that doesn't go into effect. I understand that a lot of people are all one party and the other is the other.

there might be more people this way than the other, and then you guys vote. We've seen it when it was basically all Republicans in here. If he says he wants something, they're going to put on an image like five of them agree, and then two of their friends are going to say no to just put up an image. We're tired of it, you know, and I come today to ask you, can you be praying for this city? Can you guys please step it up with these young people getting killed out here? I'm seeing going past, what is that, Galena, where there's, they're like two cars deep in parking lots. If there's a lot in areas that need to be protected, why are we all partying together and talking that I feel like that is unnecessary. And like I said, I just pray for the city and you guys come up with the best option for us. And obviously that one ain't just not be able to talk or tell them what's on their mind. Or I could just imagine how we can have an officer like been happening. We come in here and tell you guys what's going on, but Jodi's friends with most of them, so we can just imagine what's going to happen. It's sad. And I feel like as a community, a lot of us should go out for other things, like why does a clerk get this job every year because no one goes for it? Let's start going for it, you know, instead of the same people getting in the office. Shouldn't be where I see Jodi Miller's friend who gives out tickets, he gets that job, or someone else, another city job, they get the job. It's sad. Let's just all get it together, please.

Thank you. Eddie York.

Hi, ladies and gentlemen, during the day. My name is Eddie York. I can honestly say that I am a product of Freeport. I've been here since 1986. And don't get me wrong, I done some good and bad things. But now that since I've been home, I'm on a positive note trying to do good. It's a lot of things that I see as far as our mayor is not stepping up, doing her responsibilities. She's neglecting a lot of things that I see. You know what I'm saying?

so it's more as like I don't really know how to talk to people but I'm going to do my best so it's like what I'm saying is that in my product, in my environment, where I come from, from Galena State, Carroll, Iroquois, Prospect, Benton, Liberty, we don't get the same privileges as y'all get. You know what I'm saying? It's like we got areas in our community where you step outside, you can't see your hand in front of you.

there's no stop, no light. But then when you call to ask for one to be put there, what can you do to get one? It's always you led to a whole nother subject. You know, and then when it comes to dealing with the properties, people trying to get properties like to buy to help Freeport. We don't get them, but Ms. Miller friends get them for pennies on a dollar. Why is that? I should have the same rights that her friends have. If my money not good, that there shouldn't be good either, especially if I'm doing something positive, if I'm trying to help the community.

Look how many young black kids have died in the last, I've been home now two years, look how many young black kids have died in the last two years, over 10, because we don't have nothing to give them.

I am the streets.

We have nothing to give.

If you have nothing to give a kid, it's like you have a temp tantrum.

I need something to do.

and they don't know what to do because you have immature older guys leading them astray.

So the first thing they do is pick up a gun and they want to go bang, bang, bang, not knowing you're shooting your best friend.

You're shooting a guy you ate with off the same spoon with.

You have no activity for kids to do.

Give a kid something to do.

Help the police force.

The police can't do all this by themselves.

And that's what y'all community, y'all council think.

They only one man, one body.

They can't do it all. Hire more police. Giving them more funding. That's why people don't trust police now because y'all don't give a crap. They need to be out there talking to us. They need to be out there communicating to us. You need to build a trust. They can't do that. When they try to do it, people bag up because it's like, okay, they're here for one minute. Then they go on the next minute. We don't see them again for another week. And then we get fined when we try to do something positive for kids, like open venues to throw little gigs for kids where there's none vitality.

I do security. I'm a licensed security officer now. What I do is I try to help my sister throw little get-togethers for kids to keep the kids off the street. I could bring 100 kids in here right now with one phone call and they'll tell you we have not had one fight, one disagreement, police have not been called, and I'm the only security guard there, period. Because I say what I say and I mean what I say. You come in here disrupting, fighting, acting crazy, get out, you can't come back.

Mr. York, the three minutes. Okay, but my thing is, can y'all please come together, man, and try to do something for this city, because you say y'all a council, prove it, be a council, help them, help the fire departments, people come out, have more celebrations, I went to Rockford and did their whole police thing in Rockford, and they had over a thousand people out, coming to represent the police. Thank you. We don't do that here in Freeport. Item number seven, discussion regarding ordinance amending part six general offenses chapter 694 weeds and grass of the codified ordinances by adding a new section 694.08 to be entitled vegetation and managed natural landscape and amending chapter 694.01 excuse me nuisance declared for the purpose of allowing planned natural landscaping while prohibiting uncontrolled growth of vegetation. Manager Boyer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This ordinance is a is kind of a cut and paste from recommended best practices from other communities. What this does is it gives our community code enforcement officer an opportunity to be more clear about the yards that are overgrown and take care of areas that are need to be mowed and that but it also gives the proper

property owner the opportunity to plant various pollinator species and to increase the ecosystem in their own little area. So city staff has just brought this before council. It's kind of a win-win. It helps our environment and also works well with our MS4 permit. It clarifies our ordinance on overgrown weeds and things like that, but it also doesn't kill off the idea of, hey, we want a garden here that still allows for people to to have gardens and to have little areas that are native plant species. So essentially it also eliminates native species from the parkways where they're not real appropriate. They tend to grow up, get overgrown. They sometimes can be a hindrance in terms of blocking the view of traffic to the pedestrians along the sidewalk and that. So this kind of clears up a lot of things and staff recommends moving this on for first reading.

Thank you. I'm recalling an email that came out earlier this summer kind of bringing this to the forefront as a request. It's nice to see that come through. Any discussion?

Alderman, Stacey.

I don't feel that this should even be considered. Not until the city properties are kept up to the same standards.

I have taken ride after ride through the east side of town and it looked like a freaking jungle. And then we're told that $5,000 was budgeted for this to do the mowing and to get the weeds cut down and to keep it looking nice for the 2024 budget year and not one penny.

One penny was used. Why is that, city manager, Boyer? Why? When the east side was just a jungle, areas that we own, the city owns, not taken care of all summer long. And now you want to talk about planting some flowers? When are we going to do what we're supposed to do as a city for for all areas of the city, for all the property, not just the property that the city owns here and there, but there also, help me understand.

Major Boyer.

Just to answer your question, when lots are called in for overgrowth, the city comes in and mows them, weather. It doesn't have to be a city lot. We had excellent work from our summer mowers. They did a fantastic job. There was really three of them total. One of them was at the cemetery almost the entire time. And two of our summer helpers pretty much maintained every city-owned lot out there outside of the utility. In the past, we have people that don't maintain their properties. When it grows up, people call it in. We come out, we mow it within seven days. That's been the policy.

All this is is the opportunity to provide the residents an opportunity to kind of expand their gardening skills, plant natural native species in their yard, and then to also, it removes those from the parkway. We have some residents that are planting native species in the parkway, and we really don't have a tool to deal with that, and this kind of revises and corrects all of that.

So to answer your question, we have to do it both. We have to mow and we also have to take care of some of these natural naturescapes that people have planted. So they don't, you know, maybe they feel like they don't want to mow the parkway. They plant naturescape in there and there's no recourse. This allows us to make sure that's in the appropriate locations.

Alderman Sellers.

I think also the misunderstanding is a lot of the properties that are on the east side, they are under the flood mitigation grant. Is that correct?

That is correct.

So that's wetlands. So they will get like that and they will be like that. That's what it is. So that's why I know there I had a phone call from someone that wanted their lawns mowed.

and because that is considered because of the grant wetlands it's going to grow up like weeds and stuff because that's what it is right now isn't that is that correct am I correct with that well I worked with city manager Boyer and basically what happens is there's city-owned properties which is the east side properties that we're talking about and you also have city lots that have been bought over the years from houses that were demolished and essentially what happens is exactly what city manager Boyer said is that we're going out we're mowing our own properties and then we're also mowing properties where people do not mow them they get a violation so the city has to go out and mow those properties and then the property owner is fined so I think the answer to your question is yes those properties that the city owns are being mowed however it's at a schedule that Manager, Boyer, has kind of put together to make sure that they're mowed in a timely fashion, and yes, there are going to be some properties that are going to be wooded, that are going to be in wetland areas that are not necessarily going to be mowed. I don't know if that answers your question, because we're talking about quite a bit of properties, but I hope it's shed some light for you.

Alderman Sanders.

Are you saying that even though they're considered in places where considered wetland while growing wild and on companies on city property and things like that, we cannot maintain these areas is what we're saying?

I'm not saying that.

Well, that's the inference that I'm getting is that we cannot go in and do any form of maintenance or attempt because we have not done an assessment nor or survey to if we have not, if we don't, if we're not trying to get in a position to maintain these properties, then we cannot, we cannot balance the difference between residents and city.

I don't care how much construction or maintenance city has to take care of, but we're expecting the citizens of Freeport to maintain their property to a standard because what happens is violations start to come into play. And if that's the case, who is taking care of city structure and making sure that they are in appliance with all the things that our residents are going to do?

We don't want to see a double standard taking place here. What we want to see is that the city is doing their part without excuses, without being complete about it. And if we got money in the budget to maintain these kinds of things, then we should see something happening and not come to council talking about this and that and not talking about the main issues.

and so that's that's where I'm at right now. All right. Is there a particular lot you have an issue with that you need us to look at? Would you like to respond? Yeah, I like to respond. No, there. Well, it's your job to do your job, not me to do your job. And the fact that if we're doing this, the surveys to determine what areas should we get involved in and maintaining, then it is nothing that We should be looking at is something that your job is already in place to do.

All right. Sounds like I've done my job since you don't have a lot. That's just a problem.

So there is no such lots.

Alderman, Sanders.

I'm sorry. I'm sorry.

All right. We are extremely and far off topic.

But while we are there, I will say that this past summer, the lots that of city or houses that were torn down, they were on what seemed to be a schedule to get cut they have been cut that is a stipulation of the grant they can't they still have to give city services in that area until everyone is gone so that'll be done um the lots that you're talking about with all the cars and stuff that's for we've been talking about that that's for a totally different conversation I think if I'm right this conversation is just to let homeowners plant different types of grass in their yards as an option. What you're saying is definitely a kind and you too is a conversation we need to have and we need to bring that up as as an agenda item to request action for things that we want done but right now in their grass.

But I do want to commend city manager on that. The lots of houses that were torn down over there around by the projects, it took a few phone calls, but they had been put on a schedule to get cut. So I do want to commend them for at least that. Thank you, Alderman Simmons. Point taken as well. Alderman Stacy. Yes, I just want to say there are a couple lots already on the east side of town that's been sprinkled with seeds and flowers are there and they're housing a lot of rodents. So that's how I feel about it. Mr. Chair, Alderman Clem. Yeah, if I could, I think as Alderman Simmons says, we're mixing up about two, three things here, but I would like to have more discussion on this.

privately because of I understand the whole gardening thing and I understand that. I understand the different prairie grasses, all that kind of stuff. One of the things I see, I'll talk to you about a house that currently has that and it just sticks out in the neighborhood like a sore thumb, you know, because they can say I don't have to mow it, it's prairie grass.

you know that's the way it's supposed to be so I understand what you're trying to do and I understand the not getting stuff done but I will say that the guys that I have talked to and dealt with on the city lots have done a great job but keep in mind one other thing that we've got here in the city of Freeport that we have to deal with is the lots that the county owns from property sales that aren't sold and they only I believe the minimum once every six weeks or once every two months. So that creates a problem for us.

that creates a problem for us it makes the city look bad but it also gives our guys more work to do in the same sense thank you did you have anything else director duckman no okay um were you looking for this to get moved on to next uh first reading of an ordinance yes bring it up for discussion at the next council meeting I would make a motion to move move it forward for discussion because we can always discuss it. You can always lay it over. We can always have discussions with the city manager or with Mr. Duckman on what we believe should be happening. Second. We have a motion by Clem and a second by Sellers to move this on. Do we need a... Moistful should be fine unless we're really split. Would you like a roll call, attorney?

Could we just do a roll call, please, just so Okay, sure I'll start with Shadle Aye Sanders Repeat the, which one it is The motion The motion for the ordinance that we've been discussing regarding vegetation and natural landscape has been proposed to be moved to the November 11th meeting for further discussion November 11th?

No, it can't be Yes, next, the next council Did you mean council or council?

Next council meeting. Next council. So the 18th. All right. Yes. Sellers. Aye. Clem. Aye. Simmons. No. Parker. Aye. And Stacy. No. The motion passes five to two. And that brings us to item nine discussion regarding revisions to ordinance chapter 220 council section two.

220.10 Rules of Council, presented by Attorney Zito. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So in all of your meeting packets is the proposed ordinance there. So this ordinance proposes changes to basically the rules of councils. They're going through the ordinance there. The first change is to the section that defines when there is a quorum. There currently right now, a quorum is comprised of a Majority of all the aldermen. The proposed change is to change it to a majority of the city council. The difference there practically is the fact that city council is defined in our code to mean all eight aldermen plus the mayor. So quorum can be determined by counting the mayor's presence towards determining whether or not we have a quorum there. This section also then the proposed changes go on to say that in the event that there's a lack of quorum, then those that therefore you'll not enough people showed up, right, so you can't have a meeting. Those that did show up, though, then can compel the absence of those that weren't there to show up at the next meeting, and it provides that there's a potential fine for those that purposely did not show up to the meeting there, and that's a fine of when currently our ordinance says that it's a $20 fine. This proposed change raises it to a $100 fine.

It also then currently provides that you have to be upon conviction by the council as to whether or not that fine is going to be imposed. It's proposed to change that to the city. There was brought up a comment there. Because this talks about a fine and conviction, I believe that most proper it would be to take this through the city's administrative hearing process in order to provide due process rather than just have the council be the body that determines whether or not the fine should be levied.

there. Our administrative hearing process is available. We use it for any code enforcement, any code violations there, and there's an independent judge that's appointed to serve and hear those cases. That's why it's recommended here to say by conviction by the city, i.e. our administrative hearing process, instead of just having the council be the body to determine whether or not someone should be fined the $100 there.

The next proposed change then is to the section about frequency of speaking.

Our code currently does have language in there that says that no member of the council shall speak more than twice on the same general question.

This clarifies a little bit that no person shall speak more than twice to the same agenda item number, so that's just a clarification, and that if they want to speak more than twice, currently it says that you have to have the unanimous vote of the council.

this changes it to just a majority vote of the council to allow for someone to speak more than twice as as currently provided that no one can speak more than once until every other member of the council has a chance to speak once so you can't speak a second time unless until everyone else has spoken that's currently in our code now so that's not changing it does add new that no member shall be allowed to speak more than a total of 10 minutes per agenda item so each council member shall be allowed to speak for 10 minutes, and that it says that that timing, you know, how many minutes each person has spoken is supposed to be timed by the clerk. So that's the next proposed change. The next section that is being proposed to be changed is to voting. Currently, it provides, our code provides that when each member that's present, when a question is stated and a vote is called for, that they're going to vote on it unless they have a conflict there. This clarifies that when a vote is taken that you're going to vote unless you have a conflict, in which case then you're going to abstain. So that's just a clarification item. New language that's being proposed to be added to this section, it says that any member who's present when their name is called to vote and who doesn't have a conflict and yet still refuses to vote, then that they're going to forfeit $100 of their compensation there. And again, that's unless they, you know, if they have a conflict, then that's fine. They don't, they, they're allowed to not vote or to abstain. But if you don't have a conflict, then this is basically saying that an older person needs to vote one way or the other, yes or no, an item. The next proposed change is to the section regarding enforcement of decorum. Currently, it says that the sergeant at arms

of the meetings, which is either the chief of police or the fire department. It currently says that the sergeant at arms shall place any person who violates the requirement of maintaining decorum at a meeting under arrest and shall cause him or her to be prosecuted under the provisions of these codes.

That's what it currently says. The proposed change is to say that the sergeant at arms will remove any person who violates decorum at a meeting. It takes out the language of being placed on under arrest and being prosecuted there. It just says that if someone's being unruly and doesn't maintain decorum, that they'll just be removed from the meeting there. But there's not anything about being placed under arrest or anything like that. And then the last proposed change under this ordinance has to do with the chairperson at Committee of the Whole meetings. They're currently right now, our ordinance says that every other person is going to take a turn and you'll serving as the chairperson of the committee of the whole meeting. Nothing there is changing. It does add the proposed new language. It says that any older person who neglects or refuses to serve as the chair of the committee of the whole or is willfully absent, meaning that they don't have a reason or reason for being absent. They just decide they don't want to be there at the meeting that night when it's their turn to serve as the chairperson.

person, that that person could be subject to a fine of not more than $100 there upon conviction by the city and again it uses the term city meaning that it would be determined by the administrative hearing process and not just by the city council there. So those are the proposed changes to the current code of ordinances and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Alderman Simmons. Under what direction did you prompted you to make these changes to this ordinance and bring this before council? My office was requested specifically the mayor was the one who reached out to me but my understanding is that there were additional older persons that were in support of these proposed changes. Alderman Sellers. I would just like to say that I know that there was some conflict on a lot of what was said in this ordinance and what I'm feeling is that a lot of times our meetings are three and four hours, which is, that's long for our council meetings to take place and that's because it has been said from because it has been said from the floor and from different people saying that we're not coming prepared and I think that's what's holding our meeting. We're not saying you can't answer the questions. You have time to go in and ask the questions at any time, but coming and asking a lot of the questions here and not doing it when you can go and get it before you come to the meeting and come and prepare, knowing what we're going through will make our meetings go a little faster. So I do feel that our meetings are just way too long, and I've been on quite a few boards my own life, and this one is just the longest, you know, repeating the conversations that you should know a lot of these things before you come here and or understand. I understand if you got an extra question, because I have them sometimes, but I just, the three and four hour meetings are just, they're getting

to me because it's a lot of time that we're wasting because we're not going getting ourselves prepared when we come and sit down and understand what's on the agenda so that we know why this is this and this is that. And I know I have to do it. I know I don't like taking time out of my life on a Wednesday or Thursday morning to run and understand each thing and getting. And I ask my questions. I ask my questions. I don't have to a lot here because I've asked I ask my questions and I understand, so that's my biggest thing is that these long meetings are just really, and I think it's a disrespect to a lot of our people that sit out there and want to say something to add to the agenda that it's discussed public comments at the end, they're so long that they leave and they're not able to ask a lot of questions that they would like to ask that's not on the Agenda. So that was my biggest thing. So I have to say that I do have that. So that's just me.

Chairperson?

Is anybody else before we go back for a second?

Yes, I would like to say something.

Alderman Stacy.

You know, there's more to this council than the mayor and three people, and that's who came up with these changes.

not all of us were included and this is the crap that continues to happen. You pick and choose who you can get on your side to agree with you to make changes that you want excluding the other five of us and it's just not right.

It happens time and time again.

All eight of us have input that needs to be considered.

And I would just like to make a motion that this be moved to the December, Kyle.

So just maybe that can happen.

And the discussion from all of us that need to come forth can come forth.

No, City Manager Boyer, I don't come to your office and meet with you on a regular because I don't work for you. I work for the people. And it's important to me that the people hear how I feel and what I got to say and not that it's kept behind closed doors.

I would like to see this move to the call and maybe the other five of us who have some input can be granted that right.

This meeting have not ran properly in over a decade and then out of nowhere last week you're held to two questions, no follow-up.

It was like a joke. Like, really. It was funny to some, like, it's not funny. It's not funny. We sat here, we didn't have a finance meeting, and we could have been instructed. The meeting has never ran right, but it's going to run right tonight. But no, let's just see whose face we can break and get off.

just stop right is right and wrong is wrong and this process has not been done right I'd just like to interject that it is on the floor tonight so any input that you have is open for discussion well so hang on one sec so we have a motion right now to to move this to the December cow.

So there would need to be a second right now.

We need to see if there's a second to that motion.

I'll second it.

Okay.

Although I think the motion should have been to table, but I will second it.

Okay.

I didn't hear what you said.

Your motion should have been to table it.

I would have hopped at that, but I will agree to move it.

Okay.

I'll second that.

So there's a motion on the table now to move this agenda item to the December cow for further discussion. And so, Mr. Chair, then there's if there's discussion on the motion to lay it over to December.

Any discussion on the motion?

Yes, Mr. Chair.

I agree with this and it would be a good idea however I wish all of us would take into between this period of time and now in the December cow to think about how many finance meetings we've missed so far to think how many people have not come prepared not read their stuff and the meetings could run a whole lot smoother than that every time everybody said that the city manager the department heads are a available if you have any questions. Let's start using them like we should and be prepared when we come to the meetings.

Take roll on the motion or? Right. So what's before them right now is just the motion to move this to the December cow for further discussion. That's the motion that you guys are voting on if you're ready to vote.

Madam Clerk, please.

Shadle. Aye.

Sanders. Aye.

Sellers. Aye.

Clem. Aye.

Simmons. Aye.

Parker. Aye.

and Stacy. Aye. The motion passes 7 to 0. And item 10, Discussion and Explanation of Chapter 216, Public Meetings, Section 216.04, Executive Session of the Codified Ordinances, presented by Alderperson Stacy and Sanders.

Well, since this meeting haven't been run properly for a decade, I have begun to feel that maybe the mayor didn't know how to run the meeting. Rather than to think something was purposely being done, I just thought maybe she didn't know how to run the meeting.

and so not knowing that number nine was going to be on the agenda and I had received enlightenment on how the council meeting should be run, I wanted the mayor to explain how executive session are ran, but I came in here today to a piece of paper on my desk and no mayor, so I guess I could have asked for number 10 to be removed like number 8 because she's not here to explain. We can move this to the cow in December as well.

in December as well. And then just maybe attorneys, you know, I was just going to ask Stacey, is there something, is there, if there's a question that you had about it that maybe could I answer it or is it specific that you want to ask the mayor? She the one that runs it, I want to hear it from her. Oh, okay. I just want to throw out there if there was like a interpretation question or something like that. To save time, I can just make a motion that this be moved to the December cow as well. I'll second it. We have a motion by Stacy to move this item to the December cow, seconded by Simmons. Any discussion? I guess I have, of course, is it just because you want an understanding of this that she left? She left this? I don't know who left that. I did. Chair? Chair? Yes. Alderman. Alderman, Stacey, since you asked to have it on the agenda, I shared it with everybody so we had it in front of us for discussion. Thank you. Madam Clerk, you take the roll. Shadle. No. Sanders. Yes. Sellers. No. Clem. No. Simmons. Aye. Parker. No. And Stacy. Aye. We have a vote of four to three. The motion fails. I'm sorry. Three to four. Three to four.

You are correct. Thank you for the correction. And item 11 is public. Say three to one. Three to four. Three to four. Item 11 is public comments on agenda or non-agenda item. Tommy? I want to tell Ashley, he's doing a good job of the Freeport Library. Thank you, Tommy.

and during Dickman, you got an update about the Lincoln School.

Yep, that's right, Tommy.

When they're going to.

Soon, Tommy, soon.

Coming soon.

Anyone else?

Diane?

Again, going back to item number nine on the agenda, I can say one thing that I do like is where you took out that people were going to be arrested and prosecuted. So I do appreciate that much in this ordinance.

I would say you could add that much, but as for the rest, not so sure. So anyway, I just have concerns and I know time is of the issue and so forth with everyone, but I still think this has been extra punitive in ways that it does not need to be. And that's what I'm going to say. Anyone else? Mr. Atkinson.

Thank you, Alderman. That last bit of conversation just really struck me hard. Alderman Sellers, and for the rest of you, if you don't like three-hour meetings, work together. Talk to each other. I know that aldermen in this room, no more than two at a time, sit down and talk and try to understand things.

And how is it possible that you vote no on moving that forward when your fellow alderman is just trying to get clarification on something?

That is what is going to prevent you from having three-hour meetings is clarification so each one of you understand how these council meetings are supposed to run.

But then you vote no because you don't want that clarification next time? That doesn't make any sense.

You are the Alderman at large for this city. Act like it.

Let me be quiet. Okay. Yes, ma'am. Okay.

I just want to say I've been a part of Freeport for a while now. The most thing that I...

Your name, please.

Y'all know me. I'm a kid. The most thing I've ever heard the community scream out is that they want a good, good communication, you know, good leadership and all that. This so proves even to have number nine even on the table talked about that you guys don't want to have people understand things and communicate with people, right, is diabolical. It proves that you guys don't want to work with each other. You want to control other people. And there is no control. God has control. That's all I got to say.

Yes, you do.

Thank you.

Yes.

My name's Marcus.

I just wanted to say I'm hearing a lot of complaining about how the meeting's taking so long.

How about let's put the community first.

How about we have our comments first and then let's see how long it really takes us in a meeting and see if the city council gots it together and try to be have less time in the meetings.

Let's let the community go first.

Let's see that.

We never tried that.

Let's try it.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Seeing no more comments, I would entertain a motion for adjournment So moved Going back to the budget?

Yes, we'll be going back to the committee to hold. Do we have a second for the adjournment?

Tommy, Tommy, Tommy, what's going on?

Motion by Sellers, second by Clem All in favor?

Aye Opposed?

Thank you. Let's take about three minutes and we'll reconvene the committee of the whole finance.

Two months He said something to the wrong Lord. He definitely said something to the wrong Lord.