During a recent government meeting, council members engaged in a heated discussion regarding the amendment of the budget, specifically concerning the mayor's salary. The meeting was marked by tensions as several council members expressed frustration over the absence of their colleagues, who had left the room prior to the vote. This prompted concerns about the legitimacy of proceeding with decisions in their absence.

Alderperson Kumar voiced strong objections to the departure of the three council members, arguing that it undermined the democratic process. Kumar emphasized the importance of fulfilling their duties as public officials and criticized the notion of being held hostage by those who chose to leave. The sentiment was echoed by other members, who expressed a desire to ensure that all voices were heard before making significant decisions.

The council debated whether to table the amendment or proceed with a vote. Some members were concerned that tabling the amendment would lead to further delays and theatrics in future meetings. Ultimately, a motion was made to amend the budget to draw funds from the fund balance rather than the tax levy, which passed with a vote of 7-0. This decision was framed as a way to signal to the community that the council was considering the implications of increasing the tax burden.

The final vote on the budget, which included the amendment for the mayor's salary, was conducted through a roll call, resulting in a 6-1 approval. The council's actions reflect ongoing discussions about fiscal responsibility and governance, as they navigate the complexities of budgetary decisions while ensuring that all council members are engaged in the process.