Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Closed Session topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Takoma Park council votes to go into closed session to consult counsel on Cooper audit

Takoma Park City Council · February 5, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Takoma Park City Council voted to convene a closed session to consult with legal counsel about an audit related to Cooper v City of Takoma Park, citing Maryland Code provisions that allow closed meetings for personnel matters and attorney consultation.

The Takoma Park City Council voted to convene a closed session to consult with legal counsel on an audit related to Cooper v City of Takoma Park. The council cited Maryland law allowing closed meetings to discuss personnel matters and to obtain legal advice.

Unidentified speaker, announcing the vote, said the meeting would be held via a separate Zoom room and that "We will not reconvene in public after the meeting." The announcement specified two statutory bases: Maryland Code, General Provisions Article §3-305(b)(1) for personnel matters affecting one or more specific individuals, and §3-305(b)(7) to consult with legal counsel regarding the audit.

A motion to convene the closed session was moved and seconded; the clerk conducted a roll call by council member name. Several council members responded with "Yes" or "Here," and the clerk later confirmed the roll call had been completed and that members were present. During the roll call there was a brief point of order when one participant said they had not heard another council member; the clerk reiterated that the vote had been recorded through the roll call.

Following confirmation of attendance, the presiding speaker said the group would move to the separate Zoom link to begin the closed session. The public portion of the meeting ended without further public discussion of the audit or personnel matters.

No names of the attorney or the specific personnel matters to be discussed were provided in the public record. The council did not indicate any plan to reconvene publicly after the closed session.