Residents used the council's public comment period to demand greater transparency and accountability around the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) contract scheduled for consideration by the city.

Nathaniel Green, a resident of 824 Aberdeen, told the council it should "have a public reading of the contract" before voting so "the public knows what the contract says," and argued that the document contains accountability provisions the public should see. "It's not just about being transparent, but it's an opportunity to educate the public," Green said.

Tasha Mills cited national data compiled by Policescorecard.org and said the Akron Police Department scores poorly on measures of violence and accountability. "We have a problem," Mills said, summarizing several statistics she read from the site covering 2010 through 2023, including higher-than-average rates of deadly force and racial disparities in fatal encounters.

Tamara Coteague presented a year-by-year breakdown of use-of-force reports and complaint data and questioned the timing and size of raises in the FOP agreement. She said the contract includes a 14% increase spread over three years and argued officers should "earn that raise, not be given it," asking why raises should proceed while concerns about complaints and use-of-force remain unresolved.

Reverend John Beatty framed the issue in moral terms, urging the department to be known for "lending a hand to our citizens, rather than shooting them in the back."

Council members who spoke after public comment said they supported taking time to review the contract. "We were given the contract this past Friday," Councilman Hannah said, noting she found language showing the FOP would receive a larger percentage raise than nonunion employees and that "it didn't mention anything about police reform" and did not require administrative leave without pay in the event of a shooting. "So the review board will stand as is. They won't have too much bite because there is no language in the contract that addresses that."

Councilman Garrett echoed the call for time to review the 96-page document and said the council should "listen to our constituents" and explain the contract's provisions before rushing to vote.

No council vote on the FOP agreement occurred during this meeting; sponsors asked for additional time and committee review. The public comments and councillors' remarks recorded during the meeting indicate prominent concerns about transparency, oversight mechanisms in the contract and parity between bargaining and nonbargaining employee raises.