City staff (Speaker 4) outlined a proposed traffic‑calming ordinance and told the group the City Council would be the final arbiter for installing or removing calming devices. "If council votes to not install an ordinance at a specific location... that can be amended," Speaker 4 said, adding that City staff provides recommendations but the council has ultimate authority and is the appeal body.

Speaker 4 described a stepped approach to calming devices: begin with better LED signage and warnings, then consider rumble strips (less aggressive and less damaging), and, if necessary and where appropriate drainage allows, speed humps as a last resort. The presenter noted that speed humps can affect drainage and lead to localized flooding concerns and that some streets in Anniston will require case‑by‑case engineering review.

The presentation also referenced ISO rating considerations: Speaker 2 and Speaker 4 said emergency response times factor into rating evaluations and that the ordinance's minimum street‑characteristic guidance is intended to protect safety while giving staff discretion to recommend suitable measures.

No formal vote or motion on the ordinance was recorded in the presentation; staff characterized the document as guidance that preserves council discretion and creates a transparent recommendation process for traffic‑calming installations.