“Every Facebook post, every door I knocked on...”

By Carolyn Reid

The regular meeting of the Falmouth City Council focused on the temporary agreement between the sheriff and the city for police protection while the police department was restaffed. In the January 3 meeting, Councilperson Luke Price had emphasized the word “temporary” as he made the motion for this agreement to be pursued, and he emphasized it again once the measure was introduced for approval at the regular meeting; furthermore, he included in his motion the idea of a “temporary stop-gap” until the full police department can be established.

In the words of City Attorney Brandon Voelker, “This is just the city buying more manpower to serve the city.”

After the unanimous vote to allow Pendleton County Fiscal Court to give the matter its attention, agreement was hard to find as the police department’s future was discussed.

Hiring process/bid from FC

Immediately following the vote, Councilperson Luke Price clarified the council was still able to discuss police matters based on the wording on the agenda, he cited Ordinance 32.03, which states in part, “The Council shall establish all appointive offices and the duties and responsibilities of those offices and codes, rules, and regulations for the public health, safety, and welfare.” He further clarified that the city is bound by ordinance to have a chief of police and a minimum of three city officers. (This is found in Ordinance 35, sections .02 and .03.)

Price continued, “We have to operate underneath that ordinance, which means the mayor has to put a police department back together with at least a chief and a minimum of three officers, if I read that correctly.” He asked Voelker if he was correct.

Voelker stated that the ordinance sets the minimum staffing levels, which the council would want to do. He was then halting in the rest of the response. “Now, do you have--just because it says that, if you don’t have police or police that  you feel comfortable with being police in your city, it’s kind of a give-and-take. I don’t know how many people you have applying. I don’t know about that stuff. I know you have an interim chief right appointed now.”

Price questioned further. “So if we do have people who have applied, we should look into those potential candidates and have an interview process to try to reestablish our police department under that ordinance.”

Voelker responded, “The hiring and firing lies solely with the mayor, so council wouldn’t interview. Council would ultimately vote to approve a chief, but no one else.”

Mayor Sebastian Ernst interjected, “I haven’t started the interview process because we already have the coverage we need; the sheriff’s department’s already providing it. Constable McCord can help them pick up the slack, as well. I just don’t think it would be fair to hire anybody right now while we’re having these conversations about long-term policing and obviously we want to make a decision on that, whether it is continuing doing what we are doing or doing something with the sheriff’s department. I just don’t think it would be fair to hire, especially since we will have the coverage.”

Councilperson Joyce Carson and other council members reminded Ernst the arrangement is temporary while Councilperson Sabrina Hazen questioned this scenario. Hazen, City Clerk Ramona Williams, Councilperson Darryl Ammerman, Carson, and Ernst met with Judge/Executive David Fields and Sheriff Jared Brewer Thursday, January 5 as part of a joint council to discuss the temporary measure. During that time, the committee had also discussed the idea that Sheriff Brewer would help guide interviews for the chief’s role in case the departments did merge so any hired officers could retain their jobs, and a committee would come together from both council and fiscal court to discuss a more permanent situation if that was needed.

Hazen continued. “I thought that was the understanding we all had; that was MY understanding, at least, when we left that meeting, so I am confused on why we are stalling on the hiring process at this point. I get that the ordinance says, and we establish the ordinances, and you enforce the ordinances, and it is on the books.”

Ernst replied, “I understand that, but we have a lot of ordinances on the books, and we can’t follow everything. We are starting the process. We are getting applications. We have two applications for chief. I would like to see more applications than that. The more you get to pick from, the better candidates you’re going to get. I think we can walk and chew gum at the same time.”

Ernst continued. "I think if we get with Jared to look at these applications to see who he would be comfortable with in the meantime to make sure he has that understanding that if there was a long-term agreement, he would take them on; but at the same time, I would like for us to request a proposal from the county on what that would look like. I know a lot of people have opinions on where they stand on the issue, but until we see it in black-and-white, there is really nothing to discuss. And the county, in the same reason they would like to see us vote on a temporary agreement, they would like for us to vote to solicit that bid because they don’t want to get involved in researching all this if council is not on board–open to the idea.”

Hazen responded she did not feel during the meeting the court was on board, and she did not want to stall out hiring a police chief. “We need to hire a police chief. This agreement with the sheriff’s office, Sheriff Brewer said it was temporary--very temporary; he didn’t want to burn his officers out. I just think we should stick with the plan we set in the meeting amongst everybody.”

Ernst replied, “I just personally don’t find it beneficial to hire officers. I don’t know who is going to apply for a position--we have the discussion, ongoing, about whether or not the department exists. And we need to have this discussion.”

Councilperson Joyce Carson questioned, “What difference does it make if Brewer is on board or not? He’s not part of the police department. We need to get on with the issue at hand and hire a police department.”

Ernst stated, “I’m more than happy to start that process, but at the same time, I would like council to vote possibly in favor of soliciting a bid from the county, because we need to do both.”

Councilperson Amy Hurst said, “There is a lot of research that goes into that. We went through this about two years ago, and we did a lot of research with it, and it is not something you can do overnight. There’s a lot.”

Hazen asked, “Who is giving the bid?” to which Ernst replied, “The county would let us know what they would need to take on the additional coverage and what that would cost us. I know people are saying this has been discussed in the past, but I have never seen any numbers or any proposal that was ever voted on or was ever brought before council, and I have been involved in city government for six years.”

Hurst stated, “I have been eight, and we have had this discussion before, and there is a lot more to go into that than just a proposal. There is more to research and discuss. When you look at other counties and cities that have done that, there are pros and cons. There are counties and cities within the state that have done this, and they said, ‘This does not work,’ and they go back.”

At this point, Ernst started talking around Hurst, saying Boone County has done this with success.

Hazen requested, “We all want time to look into that; we all want to have that discussion. We just feel that it is going to be a lengthy discussion to give us all time to really look into that. That’s what we’re saying. We’re worried we’re going to stall the hiring process, because in the end it might not--”

“I don’t think it will,” Ernst interrupted. “If you want to do a discussion, can we get a vote to at least start that and get that proposal? That will at least show you are willing to have the discussion. The county--”

“What are we asking for in a proposal?” Hurst wanted to have clarified. Ernst responded, “A request for bids to provide the coverage. I will ask the council: what kind of coverage do we want? Do we want to have 24/7 coverage; do we want an officer on duty at all times; do we want two officers on duty at all times? We need to request a bid from the county and set the standard of what kind of coverage we want.”

Hazen returned to her understanding of the January 5 meeting, unsure if that is what was needed to get the information.

Ernst interrupted her. “If council votes to request a bid from the sheriff’s department, I will start on the hiring process immediately. I don’t want to go hire all these officers if this is a legitimate discussion that will happen. It’s not going to take a year to find out what it’s going to cost.”

Both Carson and Hurst insisted the process would not happen overnight.

Ernst jumped in. “Well, in the next couple of months. That’s why we’re entering into an agreement with the current [temporary] contract.”

Hazen assured she was on board with looking into it, and Councilperson T.W. Morrison expressed interest in seeing what that would look like with Hazen’s agreement.

“Once we have that in our hands,” Morrison said, “and we’ve all had a chance to sit down and look at it and run all the numbers because we don’t know what all those costs are...but the big picture. I would like to see what that is, what that actually looks like.”

Hurst clarified she wanted to see 24/7 coverage for the citizens of Falmouth, “and the people that voted for us, since they are paying for our council to provide services for them, NOT to have an officer here or there. If we’re a city, that’s part of what a city service is--utilities, garbage, police, sewage...I mean if you look at what a service is, that’s what those things are, and if we start taking away services, then are we going to say, ‘Where’s my money going as a property taxpayer? What am I getting for my money? You took away service; you gave me service that I have to wait on for an hour and a half which has been happening...”

Ernst said, “We don’t have additional officers.”

Hurst returned, “That is why we have a police department. I don’t understand; we have applicants...”

Constable McCord, from the audience, suggested hiring a chief and three officers to comply with the ordinance, and to put a proviso into the hiring stating that they can go to the sheriff’s office in case the police department is turned over to the county.

Ernst agreed, and then said, “In my defense in the election, I ran on this issue, and people have a say if they want this looked at, and they voted for me and this is my main issue.”

Hurst responded that she has talked to people of the city and the county, and they do not want this. Carson affirmed Hurst.

Tammy Johnson, a member of the audience, asked, “How much of our tax dollars are going to the police department?”

Ernst replied that the current budget is $686,000.

“You gave the scenario that we could save $190,000 to $200,000 and still have a police department,” Carson reminded Ernst. When Ernst said something about looking into a bid as others were trying to make their points, Carson continued. “We’re not interested in that yet.”

Hazen chimed in, “I wasn’t aware the fiscal court was going to give us a bid,” and Carson, who was also at the January 5 meeting with the judge/executive and the sheriff, said, “I wasn’t, either.”

Hazen continued. “I wasn’t aware that changed. I’m not sure that arrangement changed and everybody gave us a bid. I’m okay with looking at things, but...”

Hurst asked, “Do we have something that says they’re interested in doing this?”

Ernst said, “There is nothing to vote on. There’s nothing to show interest in at the moment. We have to look into it and ask them to submit a bid on what it would take to provide something WE want, and they would let us know what that cost would be. It would behoove us to determine what kind of coverage we want so they can do that bid based on where we want to go.”

Carson returned, “I don’t know why we’re even talking about it. We want to keep our police department here.”

Ernst argued, “I disagree. The people voted for me to do this, so I’m going to push for it.”

Carson asked, “The people voted for you to do away with the police department?”

Ernst replied, “Absolutely.”

Carson repeated, “They told you to do away with the police department?”

“Every Facebook post, every door I knocked on...”

Once again, as Hazen was questioning, Ernst spoke underneath her. “They can have a proposal?”

“The sheriff and I have already started on it, and we can have it to you before the next meeting.”

Several from the council asked for clarification, and Hazen asked, “Is that just coming from Sheriff Brewer? Is that coming with support from the fiscal court?”

Ernst diverted. “Out of the four fiscal court members, three of them have told me they would buy into it if the numbers make sense.”

Voelker said, “The ordinance applies for three officers and a chief--a department of four. The mayor hires and fires. It’s not a standard of any live body. You do have to have officers that have a certain level of standard.

I think that--if no action is taken at all, the mayor has told you he is taking applications--do we have applications for officers?”

Ernst replied there were four applicants, and two more had come that day.

Voelker continued. “There are officers to look at. He can place them in there if he believes they have applicable skills to do that. Who he hires or what, that is the sole province of the executive branch. As to whether or not he seeks a bid, certainly there is nothing that prohibits the mayor from asking the sheriff, “How much will you charge me to have 24/7 coverage–at least one officer assigned to Falmouth. He is well within his rights to do that. I think what he is asking from you all is--are you all on board. It doesn’t commit you one way or another.”

Voelker commented on the fact that delays of service have been mentioned many times by citizens, and the fact remains that no matter how the system runs, service will still be on a first-come, first-serve basis. He also reminded everyone that city officers have had to leave their jurisdiction to provide mutual aid to the county on several occasions. (Fifteen such runs were made by Falmouth police from January to November 2022.)

“So I think you have to decide what level of service you want, and then when you decide, you as a body need to decide what financially--and not just financially--what do you feel is the best level of service. If your concern is to ensure within the Falmouth boundaries you have one person at all times, then you need to tell the mayor, ‘I want you to direct the chief, “Do not leave the confines of the city.”’ “

He conceded that the community is tight-knit, and this may not be what they want for the community. He also mentioned that the city pays more proportionally more than the county for fire.

“Your analysis needs to focus on level of service and cost.”

He explained that the mayor was asking council to ask the sheriff what he would charge the city to have one more person on duty at all times, 24/7, and that Ernst wanted to know what the cost would be for the city to have an officer on duty at all times.

Ernst explained that the county does not have 24/7 coverage, and that Falmouth has had to pick up coverage during those times.

“What I’m proposing will give the entire county 24/7 coverage. If we can do that and give the same level of service to the county and the city for half the cost, we need to look into that.”

Hazen said she understood that those calls that were answered by the city were only for emergencies. She also said she believed the coverage focused on more than figures for a lot of people. “It’s about maintaining some form of control and authority...”

Ernst replied he “completely understood that,” but, “If us having control over it is what we’ve gotten the last few decades, maybe we shouldn’t have control over it. The body in here now with the previous mayor had six years. Now, I’m in the seat, everyone seems to be bringing up issues with the head of the department over the years.”

Carson asked if he brought it up, and he replied he had, and they could go back into any text, and all his posts for the last few years have been looking into the police situation. Carson responded she was not talking about posts; she was talking about meetings.

Ernst implied the response he was getting from council was the reason that prohibited the discussion before.

Morrison asked if an agreement is put together if “there would be checks and balances.”

“Absolutely,” he said, and he explained that is why he wanted council’s help in the process because he needed help outlining the level of coverage the city needs, how many options the city wants, and if [officers] should live locally, if they want.

Hazen reminded him that at the conclusion of the January 5 meeting, the understanding was that Ernst would hire a chief, and the council and county would put a committee together to research what an agreement with the county means.

Ernst responded they could put a committee together at that moment, but he said the only thing the city could determine is what level of coverage they want. At that point, it will be in the fiscal court’s hands to find out what they would need to provide that type of coverage. “We can form a committee, but the only thing that committee can do is determine what kind of coverage we want.”

Hurst felt there was more to discuss than level of coverage, that other issues needed to be looked into, as well; meanwhile, Hazen said she felt Ernst was trying to force an answer before the council had had a chance to look at the facts. He reiterated he would just like to request a bid from the county, and he needed to know from the council what level of coverage they wanted so he could get that information. Hazen asked if the court was not going to put two people on the committee while council provided three as was arranged on the day of the joint meeting.

Ernst responded that he would love to do that, and he wanted council members to follow him to the discussions, “But what good would that do?” he asked.

Hazen asked if they get the bid and then the fiscal court turns down the proposal for services, but they still had not placed a police department, what happens. “We’ll be three months in and we still don’t have a chief.”

Ernst replied they already had a police chief, and the council reminded him Officer Couch was the interim police chief, with the emphasis on “interim.”

With the reminder of the motion to uphold the ordinance that is on the books, including not outsourcing law enforcement, on the floor, Voelker stated that they could not stop the mayor from looking into the matter. When he was asked if they could make a motion for the mayor to form a committee, and meanwhile, the mayor would be tasked with hiring a chief within 14 to 21 days, Voelker stated a legislative body does not have the authority to mandate employment actions, but council could vote to form a committee to make recommendations regarding level of service and things like that.

Price asked if the council had the ability to uphold the ordinance and make sure it is being followed, and asked what the ordinance was worth if the council cannot hold people accountable to the ordinances. He pointed out the city has been under this ordinance since May of 1999.

Voelker replied that the council would have to go into a court to  say that the mayor is not fulfilling the ordinance by not restaffing the police department. His argument would be that the department went from six to one essentially overnight, so a court would say he has not had enough time to replace the department. He went on to say to council, “My advice is you should all try to work together and cooperate because their job is not to impose [a ruling against the mayor at this time due to the limited number of days he has had in office].”

He acknowledged a shortage of police, as well, will limit the ability for them to staff in this short time frame. He then reiterated, “I think you guys should try to work together. If the mayor is telling you he has applicants, he is going to be interviewing them and all that...”

Hurst said, “I think that is what the people in the fiscal court meeting were trying to do. They discussed the committee looking into it, and I don’t know why that is not being done.”

Ernst invited them to make a motion at “right now” again.

When Price asked again about his motion, Voelker said they could pass it, but he didn’t “know what effect it would have.” Voelker said that Hazen mentioned forming a committee, and she said that is where they could possibly find some common ground. She was hoping Sheriff Brewer would offer some guidance in interviewing and hiring in case they would pursue the merge.

Ernst again insisted both could be done, and Hazen asked if that meant he was going to set interviews with the candidates that applied, “or when would you expect that to happen,” he responded, “If you all voted to do that  tonight, do both or we can request a bid from the county and start the interview process...”

Hazen wanted a motion to form a committee while Carson wanted to motion that the council was in favor of keeping the police department.

Ernst said he felt that was disingenuous and unfair because they had not looked into the alternative.

“That’s what I want, though,” responded Carson; meanwhile, Hazen was about to make a motion for the committee. An audience member once again reminded the council a motion was on the floor. Price rescinded his motion, and Voelker said he did not understand why the motion was on the floor in the first place. Carson said it showed their support, and Price said his “motion sets the precedent for where the council is.

“If we vote yes or no, it will let the mayor know where the council sits on this issue. Now if he chooses to continue down his road, that’s his choice, but at least he knows where the council sits. That’s all I’ll prove.”

Ernst stated he was trying to compromise by doing both at the same time. He told the council, “You are trying to force me to hire chiefs when we only have two applicants, you don’t want to rush that process.”

Carson asked Price if they could move on the motion to show how they feel about it. Ernst asked what they are voting on when they have not seen alternatives. “What are you voting on? You haven’t seen the alternative. Why do you keep saying ‘no’ to something you haven’t seen?”

Hurst said, “We haven’t said no to anything yet because we have nothing to see yet. It’s not what the motion says, correct?”

They clarified the motion, and Ernst cited the amount of turnover they have had in the department through the years. Price said he wanted council to make a vote so Ernst could see where “the support  is and where it isn’t.”

Morrison felt the council did not have enough information for either a yes or no vote, and Price said that each member gets a vote.

Ernst said he hoped this proved some people were not willing to look at a proposal, Hazen spoke up. “We’re offering a compromise. Let us form a committee, and in the interim, set up your interviews with the candidates you already have so you can see if they are qualified. If not, cast your net out further. We are doing both at the same time.”

Ernst said, “If we don’t request a bid from the county, we are not doing both at the same time.” Hazen responded he could have it, but they needed something to look at.

Price said, “If I’m allowed to have the motion, we should vote on it. That will get that motion off the floor.”

Hazen asked if they could still form a committee, and Voelker said they could on a separate vote. “Isn’t that conflicting with the first vote?” she asked.

With Voelker’s guidance, Price set his motion, “Council is not soliciting outside sourcing of the police department, but  wants to establish the police department as it says in the ordinance.” Then Voelker stated they could not re-establish the police department since it had not officially been dissolved which would have to be done by council.

After more discussion and clarifications by Voelker, Price set his motion. “The council does not solicit for any outsourcing of policing outside the city limits.”

Ernst said, “I thought we were looking at the numbers.”

Hazen asked if they were not going to solicit for outside sourcing, why would we make a motion to do what we just said we were not going to do, and Voelker said they could vote later to do just the opposite. Hazen said, “So, back to the compromise…”

Hazen asked, “After our meeting?” as Ernst continued. “Before they go in and start doing the legwork of researching what it’s going to cost us.”

Hazen asked, “Was that after the January 5 meeting? Because I hadn’t spoken to him since, and I wasn’t aware that the plan had changed.”

Ernst responded, “Yes. They would like for us to vote to request it before they do all the work to put it together….I think we need to follow the will of the people, and the people put me here to look into this issue.”

Hazen insisted, “You can’t say just because you got elected that every person that voted for you wanted this specific issue addressed…"

“I will start the hiring process if the council votes to request a bid from the county,” Ernst stated. “If you all aren’t willing to do that, not willing to compromise, I’m not willing to just staff the department…”

Council broke into an angry outburst, and Price could be heard saying, “I don’t think it is right to hold us hostage. If we don’t do what you want, then you're not going to do anything.”

Hazen finally got the attention of the mayor and council that he did not need their permission to get a bid because they could not tell him he could or he could not. “So go get the bid!” she said.

Ernst said, “The county is requesting the vote to start the process. If this is what they want to start the process…"

Hazen asked, “Who told you that? Who told you they need us to vote?”

“David Fields,” Ernst responded.

"You can’t just say they want you to look into it. Go look into it.”

Ernst replied, “It sounds like the motion is made–”

Hazen interrupted. “Because they wanted to start the hiring process at the same time.”

Ernst continued. “I’ve made it clear that if we’re not going to request that proposal from the county, then you are not acting in good favor, I feel, as a body, to look at that.” The motion being first and seconded, the motion carried four to two (with Hazen and Morrison voting “nay” in order to keep the council open to researching), meaning council is on record they will not solicit outside sourcing of law enforcement.

Then, Voelker directed them they could make a motion to form a committee, and Hazen at first said, due to the vote, she saw no reason since the council had voted to not have one. Ernst said, “The motion doesn’t really carry any weight; it’s just a symbolic motion,” to which Price answered, “It carries the weight so you know where council stands.”

Johnson interjected from the audience that the weight it carried for her is to show the council does not want to work together to show her what the $686,000 budget is going toward. “It’s our tax dollars that are spent in that department. We elected you all to look at where the money is going.” She argued the council needed to see where the money is going and how to protect the residents of the city.

Price said if they were looking at it from a budgetary standpoint, that was correct; “But I’m just making the point that we should reestablish the police department. We can do that and lower our budget. That’s been proven.”

Ernst stated, “Just so everyone is clear, they’re not willing to look at that before even having a vote, and that’s very concerning. We should be looking at every tax dollar we have. When people wonder why we don’t have the funds to fix blighted issues, to buy some of these properties and fix them up, and to have events and put on shows and things like that. The money’s not there, and we have to free up some of that.”

He asked Carson specifically why she was willing to put $60,000 to $70,000 of city money into tearing the Ruhl building down when they could put that money  into preserving it. “We need to look at that. We can’t just keep tearing things down.”

When the audience expressed concerns the city council and mayor were not working together to find the best solution, Ernst agreed. “Working together. That is why I’m trying to do. We do the same thing now with fire protection. It does make sense to put our resources together to provide better coverage.”

After some audience comments, one from someone in the county who expressed concerns for the former city police department, Morrison said the council should be able to vote to get the numbers, to actually see the numbers from fiscal court  so they could form a committee, sit down with Ernst, and look at the overall picture. He acknowledged that he came on the council to take care of everyone. “We’ve got to vote [to get the numbers] because that’s what fiscal court wants. I want to take a vote to get the numbers to see what it’s going to be.”

Morrison made a motion to get the numbers, and Voelker asked, “Do you have a level of service you want them to quote?”

Hazen stated she wanted a quote for coverage 24/7, and Voelker noted one officer for 24/7. Hazen stated she did not know when the highest volumes of calls come in; she did not have anything to refer to to decide, but two was the recommended number.

Voelker figured they need a department of 8.4 people–nine allowing for vacation– to take on that responsibility, and their proposal request should reflect that by saying, “Council supports the mayor seeking a proposal for 24/7 at least one person coverage in Falmouth in addition to what the sheriff has.” Hazen was concerned the officers designated for Falmouth would be pulled to the county if he has a shortage, and Ernst replied that would be delineated.

Ernst commented that the department has historically had issues, and it was due less to the officers and more with the mayors who were over them, and he referred to Ron Stinson. “Even with a strong, capable man, the department was lacking.”

His concern, he said, was they could restock the department and they come in and destroy it all, and Carson stated the same could happen in the sheriff’s office.

Hazen shared she was concerned the city would pay for 24/7 coverage for the county. She wanted to be sure there was control and were stipulations and to fill expectations the city has. Ernst said that could be lined out in the bid.

After other clarifications, Voelker stated that the coverage mentioned led to 4.2 officers, so he recommended five officers to cover vacations and such, and at the rate of pay that is currently available to city police, that led to under $600,000. Hazen stated they were going on manpower and not vehicles and other needs. Ernst said they could go off what the city is paying at the moment, but “we have a whole fleet.” The sheriff, he said, would only need a couple more vehicles. Hazen told him he did not really know. “That has to come from Jared,” she said, and he responded, “I’ve worked with Jared. I know what the numbers are going to look like, but until we get the fiscal court to support that proposal, it means nothing.”

The motion for the mayor to get the bids was first and seconded, a motion to support the mayor seeking a proposal from the fiscal court for the sheriff to provide 24/7 one officer at all times service to the city of Falmouth.

Hurst asked, “So you’re saying if we don’t vote for this, you won’t start the hiring process,” and Voelker defended Ernst saying that is not what he really meant. “The hiring process will begin, correct? That should happen regardless of this motion; that’s what’s got me.”

Ernst replied, “What’s got me is you’re not willing to look at a proposal unless the ordinance is followed.”

Hurst retorted, “I was willing to look at a proposal, but there wasn’t a proposal to look at!”

The vote fell four to two with Price and Carson voting no.

Voelker told Hazen that now was the time for her committee motion. “Sabrina, why don’t you make a motion that council establish a committee to examine the city’s pay plan for officers, the level of service…because at the end of the day, no matter what you do, you have to find out what the true cost is.” He explained that by law they had to set a pay plan, so if they think their pay plan is not conducive to finding officers, they need to start looking at that.

Price said the research has already been done. “The mayor has already given us the numbers of what it would look like at $20 an hour.”

The motion that council establish a committee that will examine policing needs as to pay, numbers, level of service regardless of who would provide it. The vote to approve the motion was five to one with Price being the sole nay.

Voelker advised the council when the committee meets, it should be advertised as an open meeting.

Ernst expressed he was happy to see an audience. “I know this is messy, but this needs to happen.”