The meeting began with a critical focus on Aguilar’s nomination, a matter brought forth by Mayor Brian A. DePena. Public input was limited, with Richard Russell, a resident, being the sole speaker. He supported Aguilar’s appointment and criticized the council’s prior decisions that had removed the police chief position from the civil service selection process. Russell argued that this change had politicized the role, replacing professionalism with politics, and he urged the council to confirm Aguilar’s appointment to end what he termed a “political crap show.”

A council member provided an overview of the extensive process leading to Aguilar’s nomination. A national search had been conducted, and a selection committee, including community members, police department representatives, and councilors, had recommended three candidates to the mayor. Aguilar emerged as the mayor’s choice, although a contract remained unsigned.

The council’s agenda next turned to the procedural steps required to confirm Aguilar. The nomination was sent to the personnel committee for further review. However, the scheduling of the committee meeting became a contentious issue. The Vice President of the council was tasked with organizing the next personnel committee meeting, leading to debates over the timing and efficiency of handling the police chief confirmation. A council member suggested placing the committee meeting on the May 6th agenda to expedite the process, but concerns about the Vice President’s multiple responsibilities, including a new job, complicated the scheduling.

Tensions escalated as council members debated the necessity of addressing the police chief confirmation promptly, citing ongoing issues within the police department as a matter of significant importance. The council president emphasized respecting the chair’s decision on scheduling, despite the urgency expressed by some members. One member attempted to adjourn the meeting, but the motion failed, prompting further procedural discussions and a brief recess. A motion to suspend Rule 18, which governs debate on pending matters, was introduced to facilitate continued discussion on Aguilar’s nomination.

Despite the procedural wrangling, the council managed to vote on a motion to suspend the rules, allowing for open discussion of Aguilar’s nomination. This passed with a 7 to 1 vote, with one member absent. However, scheduling conflicts persisted, particularly regarding the personnel committee meeting set for May 12th. Some council members challenged the chair’s adherence to established processes, while others supported her decision to maintain the scheduled meeting date.

The debate over the confirmation of Aguilar was further complicated by a procedural motion to suspend the rules and bypass the committee review, allowing for a direct council vote. Legal counsel advised against this, citing Rule 6, which requires committee referral for all business before council action. Despite this, a motion to table the nomination was put forth, seconded, and passed, delaying Aguilar’s confirmation vote until the next scheduled meeting.