As you can see there was only four councilors at the meeting, and the mayor. There are a couple of ways to look at it. Technically the mayor is considered a ‘council member’ so he could have been counted as the ‘5th’ councilor. Also, since NO ordinances (city laws) were voted on, they also would not need a quorum.
Discuss (City Charter Below);
Section 2.02 Composition, eligibility, election, and terms. Composition. There shall be a city council composed of the mayor and eight (8) members.
Section 2.03Â Mayor. The mayor shall serve as a member of the city council. (note: Non-voting except in tie)
Section 2.06 Vacancies; forfeiture of office; filling of vacancies.    (5)   Fails to attend 50% of the regular monthly meetings of the council during a fiscal year, or three consecutive regular monthly meetings of the council, without being excused by the council.
Section 2.11 Procedure.    (c)   Voting. Voting, except on procedural motions, shall be by roll call and the ayes and nays shall be recorded in the journal. Five (5) members of the council shall constitute a quorum , but a smaller number may adjourn from time to time and may compel the attendance of absent members in the manner and subject to the penalties prescribed by the rules of the council.
§ 30.011 QUORUM.    Five members of the council shall constitute a quorum and be necessary for the transaction of business. If a quorum is not present, those in attendance shall be named and shall adjourn to a later time. (1992 Code, § 2-12) (Ord. 50-95, passed 3-20-1995)
Note: Section 2.03Â Mayor. Non-voting member except for tie
Note: normally § 30.011 Quorum of 5 would usually be stated as voting members of council. I wonder how it was changed in 1995?
Did Tex Golfing, Rickalicious Kiley, Erpenchickenbachbach and Dean KarKSY all head to Mexico?