The regular council meeting for Tuesday, November 18th, is called to order at 7:03 p.m. Let's have a moment of silent meditation followed by a pledge of allegiance. Americ call, please. >> Roll call. Mayor Nickerson >> here.
>> Vice Mayor Martin will not be in tonight. Council person Bomb >> present. >> Council person Lifewood Ward. >> Council person Winters >> present. >> Also present. For the record, Janisa Kobe village clerk. Um, Joseph Gutter is running a little late. >> All right. Thank you. I appreciate that.
Um, do I have a motion to approve the agenda? Vice Mayor Martins uh said she wanted her item G2 to be pulled. Do I have a motion to approve uh the agenda with the new agenda?
>> Do you have a motion? >> Motion approve agenda. >> Thank you very much. Do I have a second? >> All in favor say I. >> I. Say nay. Hearing none. So the one item now is G1 attorney Geller is not here. Um
inter manager inter manager you have uh any report to report. Uh you guys see my mayor's report there. It's always there if you guys have any questions or comments. Let's go to good and welfare. Um before
we get attorney Gella put on G1. So we need him for G1 the agenda item. So let's go to the first good and welfare. If anybody wants to come up and say any words. If you guys want to come up and say any
words, I'll allow you guys to say anything at all. Um let's make note let's make note that we are following the rules from now on when it comes to our meeting procedures. Let's make note that our meeting procedures are one time
per item three minutes limit and we can change that. That is the rules and regulations as Elbert's always been. I've been very lenient with those rules where I allow people to come up over and over and over and over and talk for as long as possible. But uh that seems to have led to nothing but disrespect for
me. So we're sticking to the rules from now on. Um, Albert rules are the meeting procedures one time per item plus you have the good and welfare three minute limit as it's always been. >> Say your name for the record. The floor is yours. This is good and welfare right
now. >> Oh, thank you. >> Thank you. I want to thank uh the mayor regarding the westside traffic circle. Um it's coming around. Get it? All right. Okay. So, uh yes. So, I want to thank
the mayor and Councilman Wyinners for their involvement here. Uh I also want to thank um uh Frankie from roadway construction. So, you know, they were able to figure out a way to not hurt our safety wall and to put in that sidewalk and they're working on the swell. thing
is is that um I do think the council along with the village attorney and I spoke to attorney Geller, he basically concurs. You know, it's it's great that Mr. Rubio is saying that, oh well, this was the county and this was the state and this was FOT, but but no one really
believes that anymore. Okay. Like I think there are some some what I would say uh aesthetic improvements that could be made to the circle that would fit within FDOT and safety regulations that can be done. Okay. I think some foliage can be put in uh especially in the main
circle. I think uh the splitter islands don't have to be just filled in with concrete. I think there's some opportunities there. I know we're sort of at the you know the adnauseium of all this thing but like hey we we got standards here in Alport aesthetic standards. We got an urban planner. We
have a charet. We, you know, we hear about houses all the time, but this is something that affects everyone's property values in the area, but we want kids to be safe, but we want things to look good like Elportal does. So, uh, that's I think that covers it. >> Yeah, there's more to be and we'll be
>> Yeah. more to be more to more to follow, but thanks a lot. Okay. Thank you. >> More to fix. Thank you very much. >> Good and welfare, you guys. Greg Steer, 120 Northwest 86th Street. I just want to follow up on a couple things from the last meeting which
weren't addressed or resolved. Uh, which happens a lot. I think that's one of the reasons so few people attend these meetings. They get a little frustrated that their voices aren't being heard. Uh, a lot of us thought that the last special counsel meeting was about the budget
uh on November 10th. Um, and I brought that up and I was told that we actually haven't picked a budget meeting, but they were going to do that tonight. So, I'm hoping that's the case. Uh, fiscal year started October 1st. We're almost into the final month of the calendar
year. So, I don't know that anything has been revised or updated from the budget that we adopted way back in September, uh, like two months ago. I don't know if it takes into account the revenue shortfall from the anticipated Barington Brothers money
when they changed from a market rate complex to an affordable housing complex. um and in doing so qualified themselves for a huge tax reduction and a shortfall for the village. By the way, there's been no real open airing of
that betrayal. No one's taken responsibility. There's been no accountability, but I think there's an opportunity for the village to kind of push back on that. you know, the village is being or the Bington brothers are being sued by a resident over the process of the launch
and the village has been named as a defendant. So, the village has an opportunity here to settle with the plaintiff or even to switch sides and become uh one of the plaintiffs against the
Bington brothers. Just an idea, retribution, poetic justice. Finally, Adam Newman. So, I asked about his plans uh and that question was deflected by the mayor and the council um for a variety of reasons, but my
question again is are there plans for either the Raider Church or Little Farm? And have they been shared with any council members or with Plerbia or the Corodino group? And if so, when are they going to be shared with the residents who will be most be the most impacted by
this development which is not another kavista? It's 10 times the size. So this lack of transparency, you know, again, just breeds mistrust and suspicion. I think there's a lot of talent in the village. There's a lot of residents who have deep experience in
various fields, including real estate. And I think the council could leverage that. It doesn't always have to be us versus them. It doesn't have to be adversarial. Everybody's invested in making Elportal a better place, more livable, and not selling it down the river or the canal. And lastly, I want
to know about live streaming. How come these meetings are not live streamed in the day and age of of Google Meets and Zoom? I heard it was a budget constraint, but you just spent $167,000 on rocks. Not not needed or wanted by from what I
can tell. If you really want buyin from the residents and encourage community engagement, you should prioritize live streaming instead of spending $10,000 on tasers. >> Thank you very much. >> Next, we're going to welfare.
Alexandra Vasa 120 Northwest 86 Street. Um so now that the three minutes uh are going to be uh enforced um I appreciate that. So we can so there's more opportunity for for participation but at the same time I
have to bring uh in public what I shared with the all of you in the email uh what can we do to increase the participation of people um via um you know streaming all these meetings I don't think it's that expensive or
difficult uh to have include more people there's especially elderly uh on in the west side, it's impossible for them to stay here until past 10 p.m. um in this freezing room. Uh if you have children,
if you have anything else to do the next day, it's really hard for people to be here. So, in order to be more inclusive, I um urge you to find ways to not just to be more efficient with time, but to
um communicate with us better. And uh the second thing is again yes about the budget. Um I was surprised not to see it in the agenda today. I understand u Mr. Mayor that you have you know a lot to share with us about you know the
activities that you have in your free time but um yes I I was really surprised that we don't have that um at this time you know. So thank you. >> Thank you. Who's next for good and well?
>> Attorney Giller said he was five minutes away. >> All right. Hearing seeing none. Closing good and welfare. Going to the consent agenda. A motion to approve consent agenda. So
moved. >> Moved by council person. I have a second. >> Second. >> Second by council person winters. Consent. All in favor say I. I. All >> oppose say nay. hearing none. All right. So, we're waiting for agenda item number G1.
That's attorney Geller. Um, and he's five minutes away. We've been told. Okay. So, let me try to remember. So, as far as uh what was spoken about in good and welfare, uh the Adam Newman,
the site plan, what was uh what was going to be there did not come up. What was stated in the previous meeting was Adam Newman shouted out the mayor and why would Adam Newman it was something like this? I'm paraphrasing. You don't shout out somebody unless somebody owes
you a favor. Unless they did a favor for you. Nothing was brought up as far as um are there site plans? Um have site plans been put in? Nothing. Not one thing was brought up about that. So um so that's what was said in the previous meeting
and the next meeting if you want to I can read the transcripts from that. Okay. >> Nothing was brought up about the site plan. All right. It was suggested that Adam Newman shouted out the mayor at an event and therefore somebody doesn't shout out somebody without somebody doing a favor for somebody. That's what
we said. >> And mayor, there is still a standing question of has >> Yeah, I got I got you. I got you. Yeah, I got I got you. I got you. >> So, that's what was being said. Um, as far as as far as uh
live streaming, we can look into that. But understand that um when when budgets are cut, then things are cut if it's not already budgeted, but we can look into that as far as live streaming. And we'll look into as far as uh other individuals that live stream also and see if they
have like, you know, a live stream individual or company that does it pretty cheap. we're looking as far as any type of site plan or anything like that. And what we're talking about u what was stated was it's going to be much larger than the kavista
or or 10 times or whatever times larger than the kavista. Not one thing has even been looked upon or spoken about when it comes to the trailer park. Not one thing has been sub submitted when it comes to the trailer park. Um I believe that Mr. Newman is focusing on
the church first. But not one thing has been submitted as far as that happens. I think that um the Cordino group once they do get things submitted then they'll reach out and they give it to us and then we let it out as soon as it's submitted. So So
nothing's been submitted as far as that goes. Okay. So it gets submitted to the the planning and zoning department first. They'll submit with them. They speak directly with the planning and zoning department andor the building department. And then once it runs through there, um, it goes to the clerk
and then submit it to us as a whole. Okay? So, we'll keep you guys updated on that. Um, for those of you who got my Oh, and by the way, the uh the comment about I do a lot of my off time
on every agenda. You see my mayor's report. I've been doing that for about two years already. So, it's not the first time there's been a mayor's report. Okay. Attorney Geller, G1 is your item. If you would please jump into that.
Um, we Where is Mr. There you uh Miss Driver and I have had the occasion to speak on two three occasions. Um, we discussed some general parameters. I had a conference with the
vice mayor who's handling this for us. Uh I understood she would not be able to be with us this evening. Um based on my conversation with the vice mayor, we prepared a draft contract
which we sent to Ms. Driver, but only this morning. And uh I told her that, you know, she should understand clearly that uh although I try my best to be fair that I'm here to represent the interests of
the village and that she was strongly encouraged to have that draft contract reviewed by council of her choice. And my understanding is she is going about doing that. Obviously
they need a little bit of time whoever it is uh has to look at it, read about read it, think about it and then at that point either they or she will get back to us. Uh there was a proposal I should maybe call it an offer that the vice
mayor instructed me to convey in terms of salary and some of the other conditions that are set out in the draft contract. And um right now we've finally been able to get
that information to Miss Driver. I'm sure she'll be back with us as soon as her council has the opportunity to review it and at that point we'll go from there. I don't think this needs to be an extensive process and uh
that's where we're at. I I want to be clear that the process of negotiation is somewhat confidential or will be apparent as we move down the
road. But I certainly want to be clear that we do not negotiate in a public forum. negotiation is a private thing and uh any council member who wants to be briefed
on our progress and where we're at is certainly entitled to that and I'll make myself available to each of you to uh bring you up to speed if that's what you'd like. But that's not something that we do in public. There are still
some terms that are not settled between the person you've chosen and the village. Before I go to the residents, um are there any com comments or questions from the council about the interim manager
position negotiations? >> No, I just think uh the general question of what is the anticipated timeline for um accomplishing the contract Um, I have um something I want to share.
Miss Jacobe, can you share? >> All right. >> Yeah. Attorney Geller, Council Person Urban, um, asked about the anticipated timeline for the negotiations to to I'll answer this
way. Um, I have to put myself in the shoes of Miss Driver's Council. That's why people get lawyers. So I would say to you that I would
assume that we're talking days. I don't see any reason why it would be longer than that. I wouldn't be shocked considering that it was transmitted
today um before noon. I wouldn't be shocked if I heard something tomorrow. But if it were, you know, Thursday instead of Wednesday or Friday instead of Thursday,
that would not shock me. Uh perhaps the attorney in question. I don't know yet who it is. And in fact, it may not be somebody that negotiates on behalf of Miss Driver. maybe somebody that gives her private individual advice
and tells her to go forth and pursue it in direct negotiations. If somebody said that um attorney's got a busy week, but he'll make the time or she'll make the time this weekend,
uh I would be uh at least a little surprised if we didn't hear something back by Monday. But that doesn't mean it won't be tomorrow. >> Thank you. Uh, Council Person Winters.
>> All right. And let me just stress again, I'm happy to talk to any of you one at a time so there's no sunshine issue and bring you up to speed. Um, Vice Mayor Morton when she told me she was not able to be with
us this evening specifically did ask that I brief the council and tell you where we're at with it. Um, I'm comfortable with the document that we've extended, but nothing about it is carved in stone.
>> Council person Winters. >> All right. Thank you so much. Uh colleagues, uh I pass out a piece of paper that is public document. So in our last meeting about hiring a new manager, my concerns were responded with an immediate motion contradicting my concerns. Now these concerns have become
valid with proof. Colleagues, tonight is an opportunity for full transparency as we finalize the terms of the incoming interim village manager. The votes appear to be settled and I accept that. But because this decision directly affects our residents and our financial
stability, we owe the public an honest, complete picture before approving a salary that exceeds even that of our former manager, especially when our village cannot afford such a figure without cuts elsewhere. To begin this relationship on the right foundation, we
must acknowledge the factual record of the candidate's most recent employment. According to the city of Belglade official HR documents, the candidates's total service there lasted approximately 5 months, all of which occurred within a probationary period. Under every
established HR and public administration standard, employment that does not survive a probationary period does not constitute completed or qualifying managerial experience. The employee action form in the personal file classifies her separation as a
termination. While the candidates submitted a resignation letter requesting the effective date of December 31st, the interim city manager issued a written directive the same uh the second day on November 21st as her final day of employment effective immediately. He
required the return of all city equipment, denied remote work requests for December, and processed her separation that day. She then received her final paycheck plus an additional month of pay compensation consistent with severance type agreements. Now
there are not interpretations or opinions. These are just the formal records that have been uh pre given by the city of Belglade. So to maintain trans remain to maintain transparency and ensure public record is accurate I'm submitting um the following documents.
one, Belglade employee action form, which listed the separation as a termination signed by the HR. Two, the candidates's own resignation letter dated November 20th requesting for a final employment date of December 31st. And three, uh the memorandum from Belg's
HR director dated November 21st, confirming that her actual final day employment was November 21st and documenting that the additional month of pay. Together, these documents establish an unmistakable record. The candidate did not complete her probationary period, did not complete a full
performance cycle, and did not leave under conditions typically associated with a successful service of managorial role. Leading experts in HR and public administration consistently affirm that a full performance cycle, generally one year, is required to demonstrate
managial competence. Employments that end during the probationary period is considered introductory, not experience. Based on these standards, a fivemonth probationary tenure ending in a separation does not qualify as managorial experience under any credible HR framework. For this reason, I will
not be able to support the incoming interim managers request for the top salary which was uh inside of the uh documents that were sent out to all possible um applicants. um as it is much higher than our previous village manager
and we cannot afford this without significant budget cuts. If the council moves forward with this appointment as appears likely, I strongly urge that her salary be set at the entry level of the scale. Approximately $90,000 was what the entry level on the scale was, which
is fully appropriate for an interim manager who has not yet completed a prior managerial probationary period or demonstrate a full cycle of performance. This is not about personality or politics. It's about transparency, fiscal responsibility, and ensuring that
we make decisions grounded in documented facts and sound public administration standards. Our residents deserve that clarity and our incoming manager deserves to begin her role without uncertainty or unanswered questions hanging over her appointment. Now, since we did have a discussion with the
interim manager and we requested for the reason for the um separation was for a resignation. There is technically a resignation here, but it does not appear to be under the same circumstances as we
originally thought. So, I would like to make a motion uh to end negotiations with the interim manager driver and reopening the hiring process. And I would like to have a second for discussion on this motion. >> Does um
>> second from lightward. >> Does council person winters have a second? >> Does council person winters have a second? >> She just said yes. >> Does council person winters have a second? You said I needed to talk through this mic. Second.
>> Okay. Thank you very much. We have a motion. We have a second. Um, Council Person Winters, uh, you said for discussion. Um, you want to you want to discuss? >> Yes. So, I would like the a chance for everyone on the council to discuss this so that we all agree on the reasons and
why it makes sense. Yeah. So, I'll take the first three minutes on that one. Um, firstly, by the councilman's own logic, uh, it would be defined as wholly unacceptable and out
of place to say, I don't know, halfway through your first term as an elected official, try and give yourself a raise from $3,000 a year to $67,000 a year. So credibility here is falling through the floor. There is no credibility on
this issue. I discussed this exact issue with the candidate in a phone call before coming in here already with a mind that she was probably the leading candidate.
Many of the residents here tonight We're here the evening of the interviewing process and I believe everyone who witnessed that process also believes that Miss Driver is most qualified candidate
and this is where I take my hardworking background because I made it to 40 before I realized oh the seauite don't talk about hard work the
Seauite talks about everyone else's hard work. So here late in life getting my act together and I'm figuring out how to work smart not harder. >> You ain't >> personally
I went through 42 employers to learn a whole bunch of skills that a lot of people don't seem to have. The least of which is reading the room and reading someone standing in front of you
to understand what degree of certainty they have that they know what bull versus horse tastes like out the rear end. If you know what I'm saying. Nothing about this resignation letter is
intimidating that we don't have a qualified candidate. Like I don't even know what the big deal about this is to be perfectly honest. So, I'm not going to sit here and
have someone who tried to give themselves a $67,000 raise a few months into their first term say that the the higher end of what we advertised is too much. when we've had multiple discussions on the council that
the high end of what we advertised is too low or not high enough to to get the kind of talent we're looking for. And I'm just going to explain to you that I stand
firmly behind our decision and our candidate. And I think we have someone who can absolutely on the first day walk in and get us in the correct direction. >> Okay. M uh thank council person. All right. So you guys, there was a um so
let me just explain a couple of procedural things here. So first of all, if somebody motions um I have to hear their motion. Somebody else can't tell me that somebody else motion. All right? I have to hear their motion. Um the second thing is we had a motion, we had a second. Um council Erdman wanted to
speak, so he jumped right forward. Um it's rare that individuals can force individuals to stop to talk or make a statement, but there's a motion. There's a second. We would first have to take the vote. Council President Urban kind of jumped forward. He wanted to speak, but we have to take a vote on the
motion. There's a motion. There's a second. We have to take a vote on that. um when it comes to the speeches. So, Council President Urban spoke. Um we do have to have a a vote for the motion. Uh madam clerk, we have a motion. We have a second. Motion by council person
winters. The second was counc. >> Well, the vote is that's that's why I said this is unorthodox because the vote is about discussion. >> That is not what the motion was. >> The motion the motion was to discuss. and my council person winters. Wasn't that the motion?
>> It's part of it. The motion was to end negotiations with interim manager driver and reopen the hiring process and have a second to discuss the motion. >> It was to discuss. Yeah, the motion was it was a discussion. >> The first part of that motion is an action statement to end discussion with
the candidate. The first part of that motion is an action statement. >> So I discussed it. >> Discussion is appropriate on the motion. >> Yeah. So, so we're removing the discussion portion from the motion then.
>> Okay. Well, then we have a motion and we have a second. >> Roll call. >> So, the motion in the second, Madame Clerk. Uh, specify that one more time for the motion. Take out the discussion. Council person Winters.
>> Okay. Do we want to have a discussion first because I think lifewood wanted to say something? You want me to remove the the motion for the second? >> You restate the motion. >> Okay. So, motion to end negotiations with interim manager driver and
reopening the hiring process. >> Okay. So, that's the motion. We have a motion. We have a second. Uh, council person. >> Did you get a second? >> You were the you were the second. >> Okay. So, the whole thing is we're we're voting against. >> Correct. >> Okay.
See, a lot of this talking is kind of gibberish for me. I don't know about anybody else. It's kind of gibberish. And it don't matter that I have a PhD. That's not the that's not the issue. The issue is it's got to be plain language. Where are we going? What are we trying
to do? And my uh my partner over here says we need to do some more. We don't need to just accept one. Am I saying it right? >> Yes. So it makes sense to me before we start u making final decisions. That's my thoughts.
>> Thank you very much. Um there's a motion, there's a second. Uh I think that no vote needs to be made. I think that when it comes to situations uh like this, I think transparency is is key.
But I think when you have a motion, when you have a second, um all that takes place within the votes. Uh but if we're if we're talking about shutting down or closing the current negotiations, do we go back to um
opening it up fully? >> I said it was part of the the motion was to reopen the hiring process. Yeah. So, if I could have 30 seconds. >> No, go ahead. Go ahead. >> Okay. So, we went through an exhaustive process. We thought we were only going to have two candidates. We had, uh, 12
that were effectively emailed to us, eight that we interviewed, six that showed up. And so, I mean, uh, we went through the process. And I'm just going to remind everybody once again, the person who is uh making this motion earlier this year tried to get
themselves $67,000 a year have been looking for some way to get whatever they can out of the village ever since. And had a candidate that they guys, I'm telling you, the the worst person that you saw in that interview process is the
closest person to Council Person Winters. Okay? just ask the meta glasses. All right. So, so what are we It's obn this is an obnoxious motion flat out. >> Yeah. I think that the the problem that
I kind of have with this um is to reopen it all the way again. I just think that that would be an exhaustive process. You're talking about reopen it for another what couple of months? >> I thought I thought we were going to have some kind of financial scandal. I
thought we were going to have some kind of uh ethics issue. I thought we were going to have some kind of uh uh you know, whistleblower. This is a resignation letter and amicable terms. I don't understand at all how we're making
this molehill into a mountain other than the unending effort by the person sitting to my right to inflict his will in every single possible way in every single seat that exists in this uh
village. I'm If you think I'm going to sit here quietly and not call it out, you have never met me. >> Yeah. Um, the concern that I have is that we've gone through a hiring process. Now, if it was something like
reopening it to the final individuals, that's different. >> That was my original intent, but I misspoken. I apologize. >> Okay. So, that's that was your original intent. It was original intent was to reopen the last section of the process
>> to the the five individuals who were here. >> Yes. >> Mayor, if the maker of the motion is uh qualifying it, we have to ask are is the second okay with the way the maker of the motion said it. Do you still second
based on how he said it? Excuse me. Counc Light. >> No. >> If we haven't done it properly, if we haven't done it professionally, if we haven't done it the right way, then we need to start again. >> Oh, that's what the yes would be for.
>> What should start again? >> Council Lightwood Ward. Just to clarify, the maker of the motion in response to the mayor has said that he wants to not, if I understand it, Forgive me for paraphrasing. Now he wants to go back to
the beginning. He wants to go back one step to finalists. Now I have no vote and no opinion and no say. I'm just trying to clarify. But he's stated he wants to go back a step to the finalists
and the question is is that okay with the secondary do you still second taking a step back which is what he's proposing. Thank you. Um, Mr. Attorney, so you you are rescending what you asked for. >> Clarifying.
>> It's clarifying. Not really. >> Clarifying. Yes. >> You're clarifying it. So, I'm going to remove my second. Is that all right? We have to do a vote on that. >> No, ma'am. >> I'm removing my second. >> Okay. >> Thank you.
>> So, we have a motion. Um, it's three times. We have a motion to uh reopen to the >> What is the motion clearly stated at this point in time? >> I think the motion is clearly stated that the councilman wants to return to
the last step >> to the >> five finalists. >> Well, I think >> the interview of six >> the evening of the interview of six >> with the same six
Well, they were eight games, >> right? Two. So, >> two additional may show up. >> This So, this includes individuals who are not here in person also. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> All right. Those that were voted as
those that were presented as finalists, whether they were here, not here, that's my understanding. I can be corrected. The second has withdrawn it. Um, obviously I don't think you're seconding it, Councilman. Uh, the mayor
>> I want a little bit more clarity though because I feel like we're having this motion in discussion before we're having the discussion about what the interim process is, which is going to lead us to a process where we're selecting a permanent manager.
I I hope I've explained the interim process >> and you're and you're correct. I'm not going to beat a second. So my my only comment then would be that the mayor though he's presiding has the privilege to second the motion without passing the gavl but that does not mean
he has to. So the motion is restated unless since I it's pretty clear Councilman you're not seconding. Well, I'd like to >> if Councilwoman Lightoot Ward chooses to second it, after all, that's up to her.
She said no and the mayor has the right to second. Otherwise, procedurally, the motion would not receive a second. >> Well, we need to explain it again because obviously the things have been changed around and we want to make sure everyone understands completely on the dis what's going on.
So, uh, life ward. Um, during the last meeting, we had a, uh, resignation from Belme Belgrade for quality of life reasons. Now that we learned that that resignation was not for quality of life, it was actually a termination. We were told something
different than what is actually in the city records of Belglade. So, my motion is simply to go back one step to our finalist and re-choose another interim manager using what all the hard work that's already been done with the council for the last month.
>> I'm sorry, Councilman, but I have to correct something you've said. >> Yes. >> Um, you've said to choose another interim manager. In fact, if you >> sorry to restart the process from last
>> go back one step to where the finalists nothing about that motion disqualifies Miss Driver as somebody that has the is one of those finalists. So she's not disqualified in to say it's
another it's just to re-choose re you know >> pardon from the last step. It's it's not >> my motion was to negotiations with Miss Driver
>> by returning to the previous step but >> she would nonetheless remain eligible. >> Okay. So, um, I will make the motion again. My motion is to end negotiations with the interimm manager driver and reopen the
hiring process from the step last week with our finalists. >> That's the motion. Um, is there a second? >> Point of order. Do we have any other candidates? Seven. You had eight candidates. >> We had eight.
>> If the motion passes, you go back to the eight. That's the effect of the motion. Council Councilwoman Life that they pardon. >> The effect of the motion would be to go back to the eight candidates who were finalists last time. That includes Miss
Driver. It includes those who presented to you. and it includes a couple of finalists who were unable apparently to attend the meeting. So, it's up to you to whether or not you second. The mayor certainly has the ability as well. Um,
actually, Councilman has the ability, but he's stated clearly that that's not his intention or desire. So whether you choose to second it and go back a step or if the motion is not seconded and dies, we will continue our process that
we're working on with Miss Driver. >> In all in all fairness, erase my second right now. Obviously, we're not ready for it. >> So, first of all, let me let me
straighten something out. Um, so let me let me straighten this out. First of all, I meant to say, by the way, Miss Councilwoman Life Ward, if you have a question still, I'd be happy to address it, but uh maybe we'll hear from the mayor first if that's okay with you, council.
>> That's perfectly okay. >> The mayor seconds procedure usually is the mayor seconds. If we have less, if you have three people with the mayor included, we have four people. Therefore, the mayor is presiding over the meeting. The
mayor is not second. Okay. It's always been like that. We have a motion. I'll ask three times for a second. >> What is the motion? >> Council person, repeat your motion. Let
let me let me try it, mayor, if I might. Last week, Councilwoman, you had eight finalists. You voted as a body uh not unanimously, but you voted by a majority to select Kamitra Driver, who's
sitting right here, as the top candidate and to negotiate a contract with her to be the interim village manager. That process is moving forward. Now,
the motion would be to stop that negotiation with Miss Driver to be the interim manager and instead to return to the posture you
were in last week before you voted for Miss Driver as a body. Not all of you, and I don't really recall who voted exactly how in every case, but to return to the posture you were in
last week of having eight finalists before you for your consideration in selecting an interim manager. That essentially is the motion to stop the negotiation
that's now ongoing. and to return to where the village council has eight finalists in front of you. That's the motion. I think that's correctly stated. Councilman, >> you should say
>> yes, sir. >> Okay. Because the they don't get the nod. And the question that's going to you councilwoman, >> because you it's your privilege. Do you want to second the motion
for further discussion and possible action or do you decline to second the motion which unless I mean the mayor stated that he does not feel comfortable
issuing a second as as the presiding officer that's certainly his privilege in the same way it's your privilege to second or not to second. And so the question is whether you prefer to continue, practically speaking, whether
you prefer to continue the negotiation process with Miss Driver to see if we can reach an agreement for her to be the interim village manager or whether you prefer to stop that process and return
to when there were eight finalists before the council to choose. >> Well, okay. That's the mayor's prerogative. He's chairing the meeting. >> Mayor, can I speak? May I speak? >> Yes. C.
>> Point of order. I think we need to slow this thing down because right now what you're asking, what I what I thought we were asking is that eight people, Can you say eight people? Eight people have not been what
we understood. Only one person. That doesn't sound fair to me now that you're telling me this. In the meantime, it's holding up a responsibility that we really need to be more fervent about
and that is to get a new person. So, if I'm if I'm wrong, I apologize. No, ma'am. You're correct. It's either to stay with the selection you made last
week of this person, this woman who's sitting in front of you or to put it back in front of the council to choose again from the eight finalists. And
whether you second the motion to stop the ongoing negotiations and go back to the eight or whether you decline to second in which case we stay in the posture of going forward and negotiating with
person who was voted for last week and that's that's your prerogative to choose. Okay, since I started this this rat running around in the room, I'm hearing this. We only have one one person that we've talked to. We only have one person
to give us information. I don't doubt that one person can't do the job. I do not doubt that at all. But it doesn't seem fair if we're coming here with just one person, period, that we've heard from. If it's been more than that, I'm not getting that. So, when my my council
person here um uh made the motion, you did. That's why I second it. But if it's not >> All right. So, let me let me jump. >> Hold on. If it if it's I'm going to stop. If it's not that,
then we need to make it that. It should be more than one person. It's not It should be more than one person if they if that's what we want. If we just want to get the first person that says I do, then that's that's a prerogative. But it doesn't seem like if nobody else right
now that we've talked to, or you all have, cuz we haven't, I haven't, has decided that they want a they want a piece of the the pie, too. Why not give it to them? Why take one person and then say, "Okay, that's that's enough." Is that what you're saying?
Councilwoman, if I might, if you want to continue with the person chosen last week, decline to second. If you want to open it to other finalists, then second. It's
what you want to do whether you second or not. I want to decline it so that we can make this fair because the last time I heard something like this where we only took one person out and everybody voted it. Once I realized what was happening, not this one in particular, but way down. You know, I've been here a little while.
>> Yes, ma'am. >> So, I'm not trying to not have this person. I'm saying, let's be fair. If it's just one person that said, uh, yeah, let me come. Let me go. Let me do this. >> I may have stated it confusingly. If you want
the person in front of you for us to negotiate with, then don't second. If you want other candidates that we heard from last time, then second.
>> That's what I'm saying. I'm saying the second one because if I'm if Listen, >> okay, >> I have no personal influence on anybody. I just want it to be done right. If we have more than one candidate that wants to look at this and we have had them
come before whoever >> to say they want the job too, that's what I'm talking about. If nobody else has come forward, that's why I said yes. >> If you're saying you want other candidates continued, then you are seconding the motion.
>> I want other I want other people >> then you would second the motion if that's your preference. If that's your preference, then you would second the motion. >> So, we have a motion on the table. Do we have a second? >> What's the motion?
>> The motion is to stop the negotiations with one person with Miss Driver and return to where you had eight finalists and go back to consider the eight. That's the motion. If you want further
candidates considered, you do second. If you want to continue with Miss Driver only, then you do not second. >> Who made the motion? >> Mr. Winters. Let me let me do this. You guys, >> you want this person to be here, but we haven't heard anybody else.
>> I'd like to see all eight finalists. >> Okay, we're we're in the same ball game. You want to see all all of them? I want to see all of them. I don't want just one. I want to see all of them. Then you would second. >> So I did the right thing. Why y'all looking at me like I was?
>> But you need to re re because the motion was restated. If you choose to second, you need to restate that you second. >> I I second and it will the the the process will continue and this person doesn't automatically become the person.
>> That's correct. >> Then I then I then I don't take then I'm not taking back my second. >> Okay. Then but it still depends on whether the motion passes. That has yet to be determined, but yes, it's then it's seconded. >> I think I think I lost everything. >> Okay,
>> we have a motion. We have a second. I'm going to open it up to um our residents. Um about this particular item, the uh village manager position. Come to the microphone. Um you have three minutes. Say your name and address for the record if you like to comment on this.
>> Hi, Adam Simon. uh 360 Northeast 85th Street. Good to see you all. Um I just wanted to just say a couple things. I wish uh Darien Martin was here today. Um so
last week um I felt so first off I think you all need to um get along. I mean we voted for you guys. You guys represent um us. Uh, I think, you know,
you guys don't have to like each other, but yeah, Charlie, your $67,000 was stupid. Let's get past it. It's not going to happen. It was dumb and I'm glad it was voted against. But you made some salient points last
week and I felt you were railroaded by Darien Martin. Um she you made a point that um the commute was that she resigned today. You said you found evidence that she was terminated. So if
that's true, that would be a lie. I'm not saying it is a lie, but if it's true, that would that would be a lie. Okay. Um and then second, your two points. I felt at the moment you made those two points,
Mrs. Martin said, "I move to vote." And then it went right to Urban. He says, "I second." Went to Lightfoot Ward. She said, 'I'll do whatever this guy does. By the time it got to Charlie, he was sunken underneath
the bench here. You know why? Because nobody likes him. You know, and at the end of the day, you like his points are valid, right? There's valid points. Like, let's look at this stuff. We had a problem with our not all of us but many
of us had a problem with our city manager before. Right, wrong or indifferent. She did some great things and she did some not so great things. We want to be in a position where the people that we don't elect are the right people and just because we went through one interviewing process,
how do we know we picked the right person? So, I think it's great. I I saw last week the old city manager was here. He seemed great. Also, like this is an interim position, right? So, it's not like a permanent spot. Why not save a little money, let that person
prove themselves out, and then give them a raise when it's time to pay the piper, right? It's like, why give somebody 165 grand or whatever, 170 grand that's that for an interim job? I saw a guy here that said, I'll do it for 85 grand.
Didn't fit the mold. Couldn't say the city, right? his L portal or whatever he was saying, but sink or swim, right? Like 85 grand. If the guy can't do the job, he's out interim. You You have time to get what could be an amazing candidate here,
you know, to to proof itself out. And I think you did the right thing today. I know it took some time, but it just seemed weird to me that that it was just flushed through so quickly. I mean, I I think you're awesome, but I never seen you smile ear to ear since I've been
coming to these things how you were when she left the room and like Martin was just railroaded you. And I thought that was wrong because two meetings earlier, you were rude and disrespectful and she put you in your place and then she did that in a very lawyerly way last
week and disrespected you and I didn't like that that slippery slope, that way of doing it. And I wish she was here because I would say that I voted for her. I voted for you. I voted for you. And I voted for you. >> Rep us. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you, M. >> Any Yeah, you will be able to. Anyone else for the interim manager position? Say your name and address for the record. The floor is yours. >> Hi, my name is Janelle Ruez. 8825 Northeast 2nd Avenue.
haven't been to one of these meetings in probably 15 years. So, I would like to applaud all of you for showing up and I am so happy that I came. What I just witnessed was I have no idea, but there's a lot of tension in
this room. I own a med spa right down the street. And I just wanted to know what's going on with the church next to me, but I actually want to run for like city council now because there's obviously
serious serious issues here. And I am I don't know how I can help, but I want to help our community to come to these meetings. And I have nothing you I think I don't know any of you. I think you're all very smart
and um if I can help to just get people to be aware of what's happening here, then I'll get involved. >> Thank you. Um anyone else for the village manager position? >> Greg Steer, 120 Northwest 86 Street. Uh
I I didn't you know qu I don't want to question the qualifications of the interimm village manager but I'm just wondering why you guys had an applicant who actually held the position before who knows the village knows where the
buttons are and how to push them who would have no learning curve who would hit the ground running which is what we need because we're so far behind the eightball after our former city manager left so abruptly. So, it's just kind of a headscratcher. Why wouldn't wouldn't
have gone with that applicant. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Sue. >> Um, this is about the village manager position. Anyone else? Name, address for the record. >> Jay Rivero, 225 Northeast 86 Street. For
those that have not attended this meetings previously or met the previous applicant that was city manager, let's go back and look at the history of him just like what Mr. Winters did on this drivers. He was terminated from here.
Okay. Secondly, yes, we all need to get along. We all need to get our ducks in the road here. Okay. And spend the village money correctly. Miss Driver is being is one of six candidates that was
in front of all of you last week. You had enough time to review their resumes. You had enough time to make contact with their employers and or any history you wanted to know besides asking them how
long is the drive. Okay. I don't know A from C of Miss Drivers, but we need a city manager that can put this city back in order. If she's coming in as an interimm manager,
let her work on an average type salary. I'm not looking at whatever the proposed was. Then consider the work that she's done when you post for a permanent position. Out of the five that you interview, yes, one could not even say the name of
the village. Another one was extremely young, no experience whatsoever. Another one, like I said, previous manager that was terminated and there's action against him. He filed a lawsuit against the village. And
the other one was supposedly a candidate for governor that had no experience as a village manager. or you know really working in public sector. So we all need to go back and look at the minutes, look at the tapes and
reconsider what this waste of time is. I am not spending another five hours in here for you to make a decision that's not a valid one because you did not do what you need to do. And um attorney Geller. >> Yes sir.
>> About two three months ago that there was meetings here. You were not here. You had a one of your uh >> proxies. >> My partner. Yeah. >> I requested information about a recall
petition in recalling lifeoot war, Dr. Lightoot Ward and possibly Mr. Winters based on their actions. Life at war has been here multi many years cannot even speak over the
microphone. Votes automatically yes or no for information without reading her information. >> Thank you. Who else for good and welfare village manager position? He already one time up, Mr. Simon. One
time up. Velvet Connelly, 355 Northeast 87th Street. Um, so I do think it's valid if a candidate gave
information that was found later on to not be accurate as far as experience because that is directly connected to salary, right? Salary a lot of times is based on your level of experience. So if
the experience level is not what it was represented to be, then I do think that that's something valid to examine to say, are we going in the right direction as far as salary negotiation price-wise? And then we also have to consider
looking at that candidate in context of the other candidates that they were put up against if we thought they were more qualified and that was the reason they were voted for. Now, I don't know. I wasn't here for the entirety of the meeting. So, I'm definitely not saying that is what happened. But I'm saying to
me that's the validity of if new information is presented, I think that does have to be taken into consideration if something now is being brought to the forefront that we didn't know last week when the decision was being made. Um, so
you know, for me, I also would like to see from a fiscal standpoint that if we're taking some anybody because there were I remember there were several candidates that that I was here for at the beginning who were offering to do the job at a reduced rate. It's an
interim position. So, if we can get somebody in who will do the job for less than the going rate and we can use that as a probationary period and perhaps save some money during that time or hire more staff during that time that could
be able to accelerate the results, I think that's a a good decision to make. Um, I don't know what the salary is that's being discussed as far as the the current uh interim candidate. What I've heard is that it's higher than what the previous village manager was making. Um,
and if that is the case, I think that should be taken into consideration as well. If we had other candidates, because it is an interim position, we're not locked in. Can we get somebody to do it at a lower rate that might allow us to do more in that shorter period of time and that person also prove themselves? And if we don't like it, we
can always go back and we can always look at another person for a permanent position. So, just some ideas on how we might handle it. Thank you. Thank you, >> mayor. Just as a clarification, um I know that because of, you know, that's who we hear from typically, you
use the word residence, I do need to say for the record that anyone present has the right to speak. And specifically, I should point out that although um Miss Driver is not a a resident of the village, um particularly in view of the
fact that she's being discussed, should she choose, she certainly has the right to speak and and to address these. She's not required or compelled to in any way. Just because you by habit use the word residence, I want to be clear for the
record that the opportunity to speak is available to Miss Driver who is not required to do so. >> Yeah, Miss Driver already motioned that she wanted to speak. I'm bringing her up after the public comment is closed because she's a person. >> Yes, >> no problem. Anyone else from the
audience about the village manager position? All right. Hearing seeing bring it back to the council. Um, Miss Driver, would you like to say a >> Thank you so much, Mr. Mayor. First, I want to say that um
I appreciate the due diligence of the council persons. Uh you absolutely uh this is a big decision choo choosing who will help steer the ship and the vision of the council for the village of Elorttowal and it should not be taken
lightly and you absolutely should do your due diligence and investigate every candidate. Um so I am full support of that. Um I wanted to speak um only because
I want to clarify and make the let the record reflect that what is here far as mark termination is not accurate. This is not correct at all. Um as you see in the file I submitted a resation letter.
you see from the memo from the city manager accepting the resignation and the and our terms and I also have a letter of reference from the city manager that I could be more than happy to provide um to you all. Additionally,
um I was shocked to see that this was marked termination on this one. I hadn't seen my personnel f seen this in my personnel file. So, while you were discussing, I texted the city manager of Belglade and um sent him a picture of this and he has said that that is
absolutely not correct, that that should not have been marked that way. He doesn't know why the HR director who is no longer employed at the city would um mark that as termination and said that he will definitely take care of that and
make sure that it is corrected. So no matter how you guys decide to move forward, I fully support how you choose to move forward, whether it's with me or to open it up and go out with another candidate because I want the best for the village of Alpert. So no matter how
you move forward, I will make sure that for the record that you will get the corrected form from the manager of the city manager of the city of Belglade because the last thing I want to leave any impression that I'm not honest, that
I'm not a woman of integrity, and that I'm not a woman of my word. And I have been nothing but forthright and honest with my discussions with each of you. Well, not each of you. Um, but with Council Person, um, Urban and Council
Person Winters, those are the only two that I spoke to over the phone before the interview. I was very, uh, upfront and very honest with my communication and responses to your questions. I was very honest and upfront when I interviewed before this council and before the residents here. And as I
said, no matter moving forward, the the one thing that I have of value is my reputation. And I refuse to be known as a woman that is not of integrity and that was dishonest. So I will make sure that you all have that. But at the end
of the day, whatever works best for the city of city of village, I mean city the village of El Pratttow, I completely support it. I still firmly believe that I am the best candidate for this city. I I do believe that I can bring um
a lot to the village. I'm not going to reiterate and and and go through another interview process, but I I did want to just say that that um I do wish this city, this village the the best. I think it has such great potential. It's
beautiful and I I truly was looking forward to starting here and bringing the vision of the residents and the council. um to light, but if you guys to choose to go in a different direction, I still wish you all the best. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Um any questions or
comments from the council? We do have a motion in the second. >> Yeah, just quick comment. So, like I said, there's nothing in this uh pieces of information that was news to me because um I did address those concerns
in the phone interview I did with the candidate. Um and um and the reason I selected the candidate and out of the six that we spoke with was because of the
expertise with which she answered questions in a nuanced way that tells me she can walk the tight rope, has walked the tight rope. This is not a new skill for her.
I don't find any within the job description of village manager to be new skills for her to acquire. I believe we have a prepared candidate. >> So I I would like to address uh some of those claims uh from Miss Driver. Uh
yeah. So the box marked termination on the employment action maybe is accurate, maybe is not accurate, but her own resignation related correspondence from the bill Glade contains language that does not align with the standard voluntary resignation. According to the memorandum we received is quote,
additionally your final paycheck will contain your regular bi-weekly net salary in addition to one extra month of pay. That is not common practice or routine for resignations. We don't give away pay when you go and this isn't stated as missing PTO days or missing
anything. It says as addition of one extra month pay. So you do not normally re >> time out point of order. What source do you have for the information that that's not standard operating procedure for a 30-day uh pay, regardless of how HR chooses to
term the separation for their own administrative and accounting purposes, which I'm sure is what you'll find out the HR department had done for the for the convenience of the administration. They termed it a termination versus a uh
resignation. And I'm just curious. And of course, 30 days compensation is pretty standard for almost any separation that exists within the corporate world, private or public. >> Not according to Sherm. >> What's the source? >> Sherm. Shrm.
>> Shrm. Sherm says what? >> You want me to look up the exact words right now? Basically, when someone resigns, it's not common practice >> to give out an extra month of salary. If someone is terminated, it is common practice to give out an extra month of salary. So, I'm going to continue with
what I was saying. So, you do not re you do not normally receive your full bi-weekly pay plus an additional month of pay when you voluntarily resign from a municipal position. That type of payment structure is typically associated with a separation initiated
by the employer and the employee. So, we have two conflicting representations here. The official employment action for form from Belglay clearly checked the box says termination. Miss driver Driver is now claiming that the selection was
inaccurate. So yet the documentation we received shows a type of payout that is not consistent with a standard voluntary resignation. So this discrepancy is exactly why the public records request was necessary and why the timing matters. We did not life.
We made the public records request before um we were able to vote last week and it took Belglades two weeks to give us the information. So the discrepancy exactly why the public records request was necessary and why time matters. The the documents took
more than a week to obtain and we did not have time before last week's interviews. So now the documents have been put on the record and on the diet so everyone can see exactly what it says which conflicts what was said to us in the interview last week. And since myself and council president Urban were
on the phone with her, it also conflicts with the statement that was given to me on the phone in the phone interview. >> Mr. Mayor, >> council person, what >> what was the mo can I have the my colleague say what the motion was
because obviously I must have understood something completely different and I'm wide awake. What was what was your motion? The motion was to end negotiations with the interim manager driver and reopening the hiring process for the last eight qualified u uh
applications uh for the manager position from last week. >> In other words, don't settle for just one. >> Try to see many. >> Mr. Attorney, >> is that kosher? Is that all right? Because what I was hear is that's what
the if that >> is. Yes, ma'am. It is your choice as a village council. You're not required to do what Councilman Winters is suggesting. Neither are you precluded
from doing what Councilman Winters is suggesting. It is squarely within your discretion to decide how you wish to proceed. It is proper to bring
such a motion. It is proper to vote for it. It is proper to vote against it. It is an exercise of your discretion as to what you think is the proper path for the village to move forward. My only
additional comment, and I said this last time, is if under under any circumstances, we are not concluding
our negotiation with Ms. Driver with a a contract to go forward tonight. That is not on Miss Driver. She didn't receive the draft till earlier today. Um, I was still, you
know, I worked on it. The vice mayor worked on it. This morning is when we were able to get it to Miss Driver. That's beyond her control. I will again say that since we are not,
you must at least name an interim clerk because it is not proper for this length of time to have your regular permanent clerk, Miss Jacobe, wearing two hats.
And if she is to continue, even if it's a matter of another week, if she is to continue as interim until something gets decided, you must name an interim clerk. She cannot continue to wear two hats. The
only one who can wear one hat is Councilman Wyinners. So, with that said, that's that's my only caveat. How you proceed is up to you. The motion is proper. Being against the motion is also proper.
That's up to you, each of you, to make a decision. Uh, council uh, vice mayor is unable to be here tonight. I was advised that in advance, >> Mr. Mayor. >> Yes, >> there was a motion and I second it. Yes.
>> Yes. >> And that second that motion came from my colleague up here, right? >> Yes. >> Is there a problem there? listening to our attorney, there is no problem with what I said. He offered a motion and I
said yes. >> Absolutely. >> So, it's it's in discussion. Council person Lightoot Ward. The council and you've heard from the audience. The council is now discussing it. I guess three of you have weighed in. When the mayor spoke before, he asked about a
clarification that he expressed a concern about and that's what led to the clarification of the motion by the maker and ultimately to your renewed second. So, I think three of you have weighed in. One may or
may not have additional comments. He's sitting at the front table. That's up to him. or you go to a vote >> then I don't then I don't I don't have need to change anything. No, >> no, ma'am. You just when when we get to the vote, which will be presumably
shortly, >> all the residents have been heard from >> and at least three of the council, you could have the vote right this minute or you could have further comment. That's up to the gavl, but as soon as that's concluded,
you'll come to a vote and you know, you've indicated I don't I shouldn't say that you've seconded the motion. It's up to you to how you vote on the motion. People do second things and not vote for them. That does happen. >> Thank you for the correction. I appreciate it
>> that that I'm on the right track. >> Thank you. You made the motion. I gave you a second. That was it. >> So, what was the problem? >> We're there. No problem. We're in discussion and then we'll have a vote. >> So, um is there any further discussion or
questions from the council? Well, I just found a part for council person. Uh, according to sherm.org, severance pay is a benefit offered by many employers when involuntary terminating the employment
of the employee. Thank you. >> Any other questions or comments from the council? >> Um, Mr. Mayor, >> so you have a motion and a second. >> We do have a motion. We We do have a motion and a second. >> Um, Let me just say very quickly, you
guys. The first thing is is that um I'm not necessarily for I'm not necessarily against opening back up. I I do have a concern about opening it back up to those who weren't here the original time because you're
essentially that night, if you guys don't remember, that night um the residents didn't even speak. They turned in questions that were written down and we went to like 11:30 p.m. or 12, something like that, that night. And that was like the quickest we
could have done it. We brought them out one by one, answered. If you're talking about adding two more individuals to bring it to the the individuals that didn't show up, we have to redo the entire thing again because they didn't have a chance to answer. So, you're talking about doing the
entire night all over again. Like I think that we've already interviewed the six. If you want to bring those six back, I'm with that. But if you're talking about bringing back, I apologize for interrupting, but as a
procedural matter, I need to advise you that the fact that Councilman Winters has I said clarify that's essentially an amendment. The fact that that amendment was presented and seconded
does not deprive you of the ability to further amend. And that might not be clear, but procedurally it is within your power and authority as a member of council to make a another amendment to
the pending motion. You're not required to, but you are privileged to do so if that's your choice. >> No problem. So, um, so that's where I'm at with that. Always remember you go, you guys also
that, um, we can get rid of anyone at any time with three votes. I don't care if they're interim. I don't care if they're permanent for at anyone at any time.
So, just know that. So, so I I just don't want us to kind of act like if someone's interm stuck with her. I I mean, I don't understand. I want to get rid of her, but I can't. We're just stuck. No. If there's three votes, we can get rid of them tonight, next meeting, whenever we
want to. It doesn't matter if they're permanent, interm, whatever they are. So just understand that the council as a council we're never stuck and our hands are tied and our hands are handcuffed. It's never like that. With three votes
we can get rid of anyone at any time. All right? So just kind of keep that in mind. But and I'm and I'm not necessarily against but my only concern is bringing it back to the individuals also that didn't show up. You're talking about a full on process all over again.
and we went past 12 last time with no resident interaction. That's just my piece. >> Are you moving to amendment? >> No, I'm not moving to amending anything. >> I'm just saying my piece. Um before I We do have a motion. We do have a second before I ask for a vote.
Any last questions or comments from the council? >> I'm open to your amendments. >> Councilman, you're also privileged to move to amend. He asked us to to make the vote. Let's just make the vote and you move forward whatever way.
>> Any last questions or comments? >> Council person Winters, is he amending it? >> No, >> I'm confused. >> No, he's not. >> Oh, no amending. >> No. >> Madam Clair, may I please have roll call, please? >> Roll call. Council person Winters. >> Yes. >> Council person Lifewood Ward. >> Yes.
>> Council person Bomb. >> No. >> Mayor Nickerson. >> No. Is there a new motion? >> I'd like to take the same motion and amend it so that instead of taking all eight candidates, we only take the five
or six that showed up on the day of the last meeting. >> We have a new motion. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> We have a motion. We have a second. Any last questions or comments from the council? >> My only comment is that we've already
done that exact process. That's my only comment. >> Thank you very much, Council President Bomb. >> Madam Clerk, may I please have roll call? >> Roll call. Council President Winters. >> Yes. >> Council President Lewood Ward. >> Yes. >> Council President Bomb, >> no. >> Mayor Nickerson, >> yes.
>> Motion passes three to three to one. Sorry. >> Thank you very much. We need a motion to um for an interim clerk. My suggestion would be Mr. Perez. David Perez is the one that um does all the work throughout different departments. He's the administrative assistant um and office
director and he knows the clerk position also or can be taught and led um with clerk Jacobi. She works very closely with him. Um I have also over the past like year and a half. Uh do I have any motion for interim clerk? >> I'd like to just hear from Sakobe. She
proved me wrong and has really been great interim manager. I just want to know how she feels about that. >> I would still be actually doing the position. He's just saying for the dual role situation. Okay. >> But um I think if you guys are bringing it back by the next meeting for the
whole interview, I don't really think I can still hold on. >> There's clerks who've been on the role for three, four months >> or more. So I can still hold on to the position. >> You guys don't need to choose one right away like he's saying. >> I can hold on to it. I would have his help anyway. >> Yeah. Yeah. But for procedural purposes,
we just need the interimm clerk to be named you guys. >> Would you prefer that, Mr. Mayor, that we go with >> him? So, >> I'm honestly okay with either one doing this. So, um, how would how should we
make the motion then? >> Hold on one second. I think we're getting clarification. I can hold the fort until the next meeting, but you guys have to come up with something by the next meeting. It's in two weeks anyway. >> That's right. >> And I'm going to still be doing the role. I mean, I David can help me, but it's up to you guys.
>> Okay. So, so, so we're good as is for the time being. Council person Winters, we don't have to make a motion right now. >> Um, I'd like to make the motion. >> The motion is on the floor. >> Hold on. A motion is on the floor. >> No, there's there's there's
>> No, we we won the first motion. Now we have to find someone to um >> he's he's but she they they just decide there's no need for it. >> There's no need. You guys are going to bring back to the December meeting in two weeks. >> So we're just trying to get someone that
already works here to hold down the fort till we get the next people inside to talk to them. >> No. No. It was just decided that we're okay. >> We're just leave it the same. >> We're okay for Yeah. >> So do we have to make a motion then? >> Yeah. We we don't need a motion. >> We don't need a motion. Okay. >> We're good.
>> All right. Um, since we have that, uh, >> we had a motion in a second. >> We we we don't have a motion in a second. We're good, you guys. Um, Attorney Geller, do do we have any village attorney reports? >> Um,
the only thing I would say is that, you know, um, you based on your vote need to establish
what the next step is. Um because I don't know exactly what you've got in mind. So if you're going to reinter if you don't think interviews are necessary or however you want to do it,
but perhaps you don't want to wait until your regular meeting. There's a what a PNZ meeting is what's coming up. >> The same day as a regular >> meeting >> the regular council meeting is that
night. It's now the 9th. That's going to be regular council too. Well, if in that case if there is any directive from you as to how you want to proceed so that you
could take action at that meeting. You might want to clarify what you intend your next step to be so you don't have to wait to decide the next step until the next meeting. you may want to say something
procedurally now as to how you do want to proceed forward because I don't know what's in your minds. >> Yeah, let me just say really quickly, you guys, it's not that complicated. We're bringing back the same individuals. Um, we can if we want to
create maybe like one or two or three new questions or something like that. That's it. We don't need to do the whole interview process. They've been through it. Okay. So maybe we just need to come up with like maybe two or three questions um new questions that maybe will have us like look more into the way
they think about certain things or maybe three different scenario situations or something like that that we want to look into and that's that's it and that's all it should be pretty much. Mayor, is your instruction and I by when I say you, I don't mean you person. I mean as a council that the
interim manager clerk invite those people, all of those that were interviewed to come back for a further interview that evening. >> That's what we voted on, I thought.
Well, you didn't spec you voted to reopen it and just to close the loop, so to speak. >> If it's your intention to reinter those individuals, you should so direct the clerk to tell them to all come back
to be reined. >> Can I make a suggestion? I'm sorry. So, um, so they're going to come back and I think that's exactly what they voted for. Can I make a suggestion that each of you provide me with a question and then when you guys come back for the
interview I will ask those questions so each of you get an opportunity to get your questions or reaffirm or that's my suggestion. >> Yeah, sounds good. All right. All right. I appreciate it everybody. Any last questions or comments from the council?
>> Yeah, we're going in the wrong direction here. >> Yeah. Thank you very much, Counc. Um, any further questions or comments from the council? >> What was the motion? >> There's there's no motion currently. We're good. Uh, council person ward. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other questions or comments from the council? Um, hearing
seeing none. Um, do you have a motion to adjourn? >> Some moved. >> Moved by council person winter, second by council person life. All in favor say I. I. The regular council meeting for Tuesday, November 18, 2025 is adjourned at 8:34