185  MINUTES BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF YORK Regular Meeting June 18, 2024 6:00 p.m.  Meeting Convened. A Regular Meeting of the York County Board of Supervisors was called to order at 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, June 18, 2024, in the Board Room, York Hall, by Chairman G. Attendance. The following members of the Board of Supervisors were present: Douglas R. Holroyd, Sheila S. Noll, M. Wayne Drewry, G. Stephen Roane, Jr., and Thomas G. Shepperd, Also in attendance were Mark L. Bellamy, Jr., County Administrator; Brian Fuller, Deputy County Administrator; Richard Hill, County Attorney; Michelle Wright, Administrative Invocation. Pastor Dave Peterson, Coastal Community Church, gave the invocation. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America. Mr. Holroyd led the Pledge of  Stephen Roane, Jr.  Jr.  Coordinator; and Victoria Diggs, Administrative Assistant.  Allegiance. PRESENTATIONS  EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION PROGRAM  County Administrator, Mark Bellamy, came forward to make a special presentation about Deputy County Administrator, Brian Fuller, commending, him for his 40-years of service to York County. He stated Mr. Fuller had clearly made a significant impact on the community. Mr. Bellamy explained that Mr. Fuller began his career in 1984 as an Activity Specialist; by 1986, he had advanced to Recreation Supervisor; and by 2012, he took on the role of Parks Recreation and Tourism Manager. In 2015, Mr. Fuller became the Deputy Director of Community Services, and by 2017, he was the Director of Community Services. In 2021, he took on dual roles as both the Director of Community Services and the Assistant County Administrator. Mr. Bellamy then stated that in 2024, he had the pleasure of promoting Mr. Fuller to the position of Deputy County Administrator. Mr. Bellamy then asked Mr. Fuller to come forward sO that he might present him with his 40-year pin and certificate. Mr. Bellamy further noted that there has not been a significant event in York County in the past 30-plus years that Mr. Fuller has not influenced. Mr. Bellamy noted that Mr. Fuller has made an extraordinary impact on the community, and added that he is incredibly proud of him and is grateful to work with him. Mr. Bellamy pointed out that Mr. Fuller makes everything that the County does much easier, and that he greatly appreciates everything that Mr. Fuller does for Deputy County Administrator, Brian Fuller, came forward and stated that his journey has been incredible and that he has been fortunate to participate in countless County events, especially those in Yorktown. He noted that he has worked on various programs through the Parks and Recreation Division, and has been involved in construction projects, including construction of the McReynolds Athletic Complex (MAC) facility. He added that although the MAC Complex took years to become a reality, it has become a wonderful facility for the community. Mr. Fuller expressed his appreciation for both the Board's and Staff's support over the years and added Sheriff Ron Montgomery then came forward to make a special presentation about Master Deputy John W. Henry. He asked Master Deputy Henry to come forward. Sheriff Montgomery explained that it is his privilege tonight to talk about Master Deputy John Henry, who is celebrating his 20th year with the York/Poquoson Sheriff's Office (YPSO). He noted that Master Deputy, Henry was initially hired as an intern from Christopher Newport University. However,. Sheriff Montgomery noted that Master Deputy Henry served as a Deputy on patrol for his first thirteen years, but has been an administrator for the training division for the past seven years. He then listed Master Deputy Henry's extensive list of achievements with the YPSO: he has  the County.  that he looks forward to accomplishing more for the County in the future.    186 June 18, 2024  been a member of the Emergency Response Team for 17 years,. serving as a team leader, operator, and sniper; he is a Master Firearms Instructor, Defensive Tactics Instructor, NRA Instructor, Criminal Chemical Munitions Instructor, TASER Instructor, is a special weapons and tactics instructor, and ALERRT Instructor (Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training); and he has received a Sheriff's Special Commendation for valor, received a resolution from the Virginia House of Delegates for his work, and has multiple lifesaving awards. Sheriff Montgomery further stated that Master Deputy Sheriff Henry has been recognized as the YPSO Top Cop and has received numerous awards from Mothers Against Drunk Driving for his efforts to curb drunk driving. Sheriff Montgomery then pointed out that Master Deputy Henry has been the Sheriff's Office's master trainer at the range, significantly elevating its training programs. He further noted that Master Deputy Henry's instruction and guidance have helped the Sheriff's Office to develop a top-notch program. He then stated that Master Deputy Henry frequently coordinated with the Hampton Roads Regional Academy, and oversees all classes held there. Master Deputy Henry is also the liaison with federal agencies that use the YPSO range, and ensures that the entire program is managed efficiently and effectively. Sheriff Montgomery then thanked Master Deputy Sheriff Henry for his 20 years of service and added In response, Master Deputy Sheriff Henry thanked the Board for the special recognition. He stated that he is grateful for the opportunity to serve the County through the Sheriff's Office, for his family who allow him to work in his various capacities, and for all of his partners and  that he looked forward to working with him for many: years to come.  teammates at the Sheriff's Office. ECONOMIC AND TOURISM DEVELOPMENT  Mr. Darren Williams, Deputy Director of Economic and Tourism Development, came forward and introduced two of his colleagues: Alicia Taylor and Heidi Speece. He stated that they would Ms. Alicia Taylor, Waterfront Operations Specialist reported on several successful events. She noted that the winter markets, held twice in February and twice in March, were very popular despite cool weather, and boasted strong attendance and robust sales. She mentioned that the Sister Cities French Market featured French-themed offerings, and that the Yorktown Pirate Invasion Weekend attracted record crowds. The event featured pirate encampments, cannon firings, naval battles, and sea shanties. She further stated that after a 19-year hiatus, the Workboat Races returned to Yorktown on June 2, 2024, organized by Alan Holston of Workboat Life. The event saw 38 participants in 12 races, with around 1,500 land spectators and 200 spectator boats. She noted that the Chesapeake Bay Magazine covered the races extensively, and that the Board had proclaimed June 2nd as Chesapeake Bay Deadrise Day. She explained that the event also featured model boat displays and honored the York County Rescue Crew for saving the iconic Linda Carol workboat from a fire five years ago. Recently, she remarked, that the Kalmar Nyckel, a full-size replica of a Swedish warship, visited Yorktown, offering free deck tours and sold-out sailing tours. Over 6,000 visitors came to see the ship, tour it, and participated in its sailing excursions. As Ms. Taylor noted, these events were very well-received by the community and contributed to a vibrant atmosphere. She stated that two weeks ago, on June 6th, the department initiated the Sounds of Summer concert series with The Uptown Band. This year, the event have an exciting lineup featuring four new eclectic bands. She noted that the events repeatedly draw large crowds to the waterfront, boosting business for local dining establishments and generating exposure for local attractions. She pointed out that the County is just two weeks away from the 4th of July celebration, which holds special significance in Yorktown. She stated that the staff is diligently working to provide a wonderful day of activities, including the 4th of July parade, family activities, an evening concert, and a spectacular fireworks show over the river. She also noted that this year, the piers have welcomed back a familiar sight: American Cruise Line ships. She pointed out that this season is packed with 28 scheduled arrivals, offering a fantastic opportunity to welcome visitors from around the world to Yorktown. She added that the County is arranging a variety of tours in Yorktown and coordinating with other businesses to offer additional excursions, encouraging passengers to explore Yorktown while they are in port. She explained that community members can easily find the full schedule of events at Visityorktown.org. She then invited Ms. Speece to the podium to give some updates on other big happenings in Yorktown this year. Ms. Heidi Speece, Content Marketing Specialist, shared exciting plans for the Virginia 250 celebrations, commemorating the 250th anniversary of the United States in 2026 and of the Siege of Yorktown in 2031. Activities have been ongoing, including historical portrayals,  provide a brief update on the department's successes and upcoming events.    187 June 18, 2024  educational programs, and events to engage the public. She mentioned that notable upcoming events include the reenactment of Marquis de Lafayette's return on October 18, 2024, and of the 250th anniversary of the Yorktown Tea Party in November 2024, featuring various festivities over a span of five days. In June 2026, Yorktown will host part of the Sail 250 Virginia event with tall ships and military vessels. For more details, she directed the Mr. Williams then came forward and expressed his appreciation to the staff for their hard work in preparing all of the aforementioned special events. He further stated that he would be happy  community to visit WWW.VA250.org/York-County. to answer any questions that the Board might have.  Chairman Roane opened the floor for Board comments and/ /or questions. and that he is excited to see what it will bring to the County.  Mr. Drewry stated that it appears. the County has a packed schedule for the next few months Mr. Shepperd remarked that he is somewhat overwhelmed by the amount of planned activities and events for the community. He stated that he looked forward to hearing more about these Mrs. Noll expressed her excitement about all of the planned activities that will bring many tourists to the County. She added that anything that extols Yorktown's history is always welcomed. Although the events will bring many people and traffic to the village, she hopes that those living there will embrace the opportunity to share our nation's history with the visitors. Mr. Holroyd thanked Ms. Taylor and Ms. Speece for their excellent presentations. He added Chairman Roane praised the Lafayette video, which was shown during the presentation. He said that it was very well done. He further voiced his appreciation for the wide variety of events that will appeal to a large number of people whilst keeping the focus on the County's history. He then expressed his appreciation for the excellent work of the Economic and Tourism staff. Ms. Margaret Mack-Yaroch, Director of the York County/Poquoson Social Services agency, presented the Agency's 2023 annual report, highlighting the Department's mission to support the basic needs of citizens, promote sel-sufficiency, and protect vulnerable children and adults. In 2023, she noted, they served 15,461 individuals, handled nearly 1,300 Adult Protective Services (APS) and Child Protective Services (CPS) reports, and received over 5,500 requests for financial assistance. She explained that the Department's funding originates primarily from federal and state sources, coupled with a small local match. She pointed out that key programs include child care assistance, the Virginia Initiative for Employment (VIEW), the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). She then emphasized the impact of the Children's Services Act, which promotes collaboration with schools and community partners to support families and prevent foster care placements. In 2023, the Department received nearly $15,000 from community partners, aiding their efforts post-COVID. She also mentioned the Department's notable achievements, including an employee's graduation from the Emerging Leaders Academy and a collective 672 years of staff experience. Looking ahead, she stated that the Department is actively recruiting foster parents and partnering with state and private providers to support foster care. The total budget for 2025 saw an increase of $307,000, with overall funding amounting to $6.8 million, benefiting citizens and families in need. Chairman Roane then opened the floor for Board comments and/or questions. Mrs. Noll asked Ms. Mack-Yaroch to comment more about the recent advertisements she had seen regarding foster care, including weekend respite care for foster care providers. In response, Ms. Mack-Yaroch explained that people are sometimes hesitant to become foster care parents due to the significant time commitment involved, as there is no exact timeframe for. how long a child will remain in their care. Typically, children are unlikely to leave foster care within the first 90 days due to legal processes and necessary parental services. She also mentioned that respite care, which is much shorter term and can range from overnight to two  events in the near future.  that he is looking forward to enjoying the planned events.  SOCIAL SERVICES ANNUAL REPORT    188 June 18, 2024 home.  weeks, is often more appealing to potential caregivers, especially those with other children at Mr. Holroyd expressed his gratitude for the support that he has received from Ms. Mack-Yaroch and her team. He acknowledged that there have been numerous occasions in which he needed assistance on personal issues in various constituencies. He thanked everyone on her staff for Mr. Drewry expressed his appreciation for everyone's hard work, particularly noting the dedication required by families who foster children. He acknowledged the challenges and the special qualities needed to support foster children effectively. Mr. Drewry also noted that he was surprised by the significant numbers of people being helped across the County. He emphasized the importance of the work being done to support those who are less fortunate. Ms. Mack-Yaroch voiced deep gratitude for the resource families involved in foster care, emphasizing their exceptional commitment and care. She emphasized the meaningful impact that foster families have by integrating foster children into their homes and treating them as part of their own family. Ms. Mack-Yaroch also shared recent examples of approving out-of- town requests for family vacations, illustrating how these families go above and beyond to Mr. Shepperd reflected on the challenging realities faced by some children and families in York County, expressing his astonishment at the severity of abuse and neglect cases seen through confidential reports received by the Board of Supervisors. He acknowledged the significant financial resources allocated to Social Services despite the County's generally, affluent profile. Mr. Shepperd also raised awareness of the County's comparatively low Social Services needs compared to neighboring urban areas like Hampton and Newport News, underscoring the complex socio-economic dynamics within the community. He concluded by requesting comparative statistics from Ms. Mack-Yaroch to further understand these dynamics. Ms. Mack-Yaroch stated that she would acquire the statistical information requested by Mr. Chairman Roane asked Ms. Mack-Yaroch to provide the public with the easiest method by Ms. Mack-Yaroch explained how residents can access Social Services in York County. She mentioned that information about the agency's offered programs can be found on the York County website, under the Government tab. She also noted that applications can be completed in person at the office, where walk-ins are always welcome. For those uncomfortable with visiting in person, she stated that applications for all 17 programs can be filled out online, even ifr residents only qualify for a few. Lastly, she stated that citizens may. contact the office by calling (757) 890-3787 or visiting the agency's office located at 301 Goodwin Neck Road.  their help in uncovering issues and finding solutions.  provide enriching experiences for the children in their care.  Shepperd and provide it to the Board as soon as possible.  which they can contact her office and secure the agency's assistance.  CITIZENS' COMMENT PERIOD No comments were made.  COUNTY ATTORNEY REPORTS AND REQUESTS  County Attorney, Richard Hill, highlighted the increasing number of adult protective cases in the County, which his office frequently handles. He pointed out that, according to Ms. Mack- Yaroch's report, the number of active cases for adults is nearly half of those for children. He also mentioned that the Attorney General recently established an Adult Protective Services Unit for Central Virginia. He then praised the local Peninsula Elder Abuse Forensic Center, led by a member of Margaret's staff, for their excellent work in the local vicinity. Mr. Hill emphasized the significance of these efforts and took the opportunity to commend the team's contributions,  which he regularly observes in his office.  COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR REPORTS AND REQUESTS Mr. Mark Bellamy, County Administrator, had no comments.    189 June 18, 2024  MATTERS PRESENTED BY THE BOARD  Mr. Drewry expressed his appreciation for the various activities and improvements in the County. He mentioned the positive impact of events like the boat races and beach music, which he and his wife enjoy. He praised the County for being a great place to live, work, and play, highlighting the community's care for one another and the efforts of social services in helping those less fortunate. He also commended the new Sheriff's Office building, noting its high quality and numerous available facilities, such as a workout center for deputies. He then mentioned that the Seaford Elementary project is almost complete, pending final approval from VDOT, which should improve local traffic, much to the relief of Seaford residents. Finally, he shared his excitement regarding an upcoming trip to Germany to visit the County's Sister City, Zweibrûcken. He mentioned that he looking forward to learning about the town and reporting Mr. Shepperd emphasized the importance of staying hydrated and safe during hot weather. He advised that it is crucial to drink water regularly. He also mentioned the need to be mindful of pets in the heat, noting that surfaces can become extremely hot and harmful to them. Additionally, he warned against leaving children in cars, explaining the dangers and legal implications, especially with newer cars that can shut off if the key fob is taken too far away. He concluded by reminding everyone to prepare for the upcoming heatwave and take necessary Mrs. Noll shared her experience of participating in a County event organized by the Peninsula Chinese-American Association, a nonprofit established over 40 years ago to promote cultural understanding and fellowship. She noted that since 2007, the Association has awarded 70 scholarships to students, and at a recent outing that she attended, five Grafton students received scholarships. She also expressed her gratitude for being invited to the event, highlighting the importance of cultural diversity in her district. She emphasized the value these students bring to the community and hoped they would return to contribute to the local workforce. She concluded by noting that Chairman Roane would be discussing another Chairman Roane shared his experience at a recent award ceremony where he enjoyed a barbecue and recognized local youth. He appreciated seeing many York County families and students there receiving recognition. Afterward, he attended the third annual Juneteenth celebration at the MAC, which featured food trucks, presentations from the National Park Service, and participation from the Chamber of Commerce. The event, which lasted from noon Mr. Holroyd began by sharing his excitement about the Kalmar Nickel tall ship, encouraging others to experience it during its visits this summer. He then addressed community concerns regarding the Colonial Parkway's upcoming closure in Queens Lake by winter 2024, emphasizing the need to explore solutions to mitigate traffic issues at intersections like Lakeshead and Hubbard Lane. He mentioned seeking assistance from both the County and Congressman Rob Wittman. He then discussed an upcoming self-funded delegation trip to Zweibrucken to strengthen ties with Yorktown's sister city. He highlighted the historical significance of this relationship, particularly in defense efforts during the Siege of Yorktown.  back about the experience.  precautions to stay safe and hydrated.  significant event in which they participated.  until evening, included a movie screening and attracted a large crowd.  Chairman Roane covered several topics during his remarks:  He discussed a recent community event hosted by the Sheriff's Office Citizens Advisory Committee that focused on combating scams. The event emphasized the financial impact on residents and shared both cautionary tales and success stories. He emphasized the importance of awareness about defenses against scams, urging County, residents to verify urgent, suspicious requests and to not immediately respond He mentioned the availability of the community room at the new Sheriff's Office for local  tos suspicious calls or emails.  organizations to use, encouraging them to book it for meetings.    190 June 18, 2024  He thanked Mr. Fuller and Master Deputy Henry for their extensive years of service in the County, emphasizing the value of their institutional knowledge and contributions to He expressed appreciation for the opportunities to attend community events and celebrate achievements with various organizations, highlighting the privilege and He concluded by wishing his fellow Board members a safe and successful trip overseas  community well-being. importance of these engagements. and looking forward to their return.  RECESS  Chairman Roane called a briefrecess at 7:08 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 7:18 p.m.  PUBLIC HEARINGS  APPLICATION NO. ZM-198-24, YORK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO CONSIDER The matter was considered and approved on a vote of 5:0. A summary of the proceeding is Jeanne Sgroi, Planner II, presented an application to amend the York County Zoning Map in alignment with the newly adopted Comprehensive Plan. She stated that the plan identifies discrepancies between current zoning and land use designations in four key sub-areas: Waller Mill/Lightfoot, Hornsbyville Grafton West, Penniman North/South, and Yorktown Lackey. She noted that the proposed rezoning of 20 parcels aims to bring these areas into conformity with the Comprehensive Plan's conservation goals. She explained that significant acquisitions by entities like the City of Newport News and the American Battlefield Trust are driving the need for these changes, primarily transitioning properties to Resource Conservation (RC) zoning. She further stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval, with one parcel at 1900 Wolf Trap Road excluded due to a citizen's request aligning with the Comprehensive Plan's Mr. Holroyd raised concerns regarding the Waller Mill property, particularly the 409 Oak Tree property, which the City of Williamsburg purchased. He referenced reports stating that the City planned to convert its 127 acres into affordable housing for its employees. His question to Jeanne Sgroi was whether the Resource Conservation (RC) zoning designation proposed for this Jeanne Sgroi explained that the property in question currently zoned Rural Residential (RR), permits one dwelling per acre of land. The proposed Resource Conservation (RC) zoning district Mr. Drewry inquired whether the Jutrus Property was being excluded from the application. Ifit Ms. Sgroi informed the Board that the Jutrus property will be excluded from this application.  ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TOTHE YORK COUNTY ZONING MAP  below.  industrial designation.  area would affect those plans for affordable housing. allows only one dwelling per five acres of land.  was indeed excluded, he expressed his support for the proposal. Mr. Shepperd expressed several points during his remarks:  He acknowledged the importance of rezoning from R1 (allowing one dwelling per acre) to R5 (allowing one dwelling per five acres), noting that such changes require applicants to He raised a concern about population growth and the Comprehensive Plan's target of 80,000 residents, questioning if this figure remains valid. He emphasized the need to understand how the remapping process aligns with this population target. Earl Anderson, Chief of Development Services, discussed a zoning change from higher densities (like R20 or RR) to RC, noting that this will likely decrease the number of properties developed within the County. He mentioned that many properties, particularly those owned by the City of Williamsburg and protected under a conservation easement, cannot be developed beyond farming, He noted that overall density, would likely decrease due to the shift to lower density zoning. He also commented that organizations like the American Battlefield Trust and the City of Williamsburg would not significantly increase the subdivision beyond its current levels.  seek approval from the Board, which enhances Board input.    191 June 18, 2024  Mr. Shepherd expressed skepticism about the impact of the zoning change, suggesting that even if agreed upon, he does not foresee significant changes occurring. He mentioned population figures, noting that despite a current population of 72,000, there is a projected increase to 80,000. He discussed the historical context of zoning to control population growth since the 1990s, emphasizing the importance of zoning regulations in managing future growth, Mrs. Noll asked about properties designated for resource conservation and inquired how many Mr. Anderson explained that the decision regarding properties in the Comprehensive Plan was not focused on buildability but rather on ownership and potential future use. He noted that numerous properties near the reservoir are situated around tributary streams, emphasizing that the City of Williamsburg and Newport News Waterworks aim to protect these water resources. Therefore, building near these water resources may not be advantageous due to the Chairman Roane thanked the presenters for their information which provided context about the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, emphasizing that the current effort is to align zoning with this plan. He acknowledged the collaborative effort involving community members, business representatives, County staff, and others in developing the plan. Chairman Roane further expressed gratitude to the Planning Commission and staff for addressing concerns raised by Mrs. Jutrus without losing sight of the broader alignment goals. He then asked about the plans for a large parcel set aside by the American Battlefield Trust near Williamsburg, inquiring whether there are intentions to use it for historical or tourism purposes or ifi it remains set Ms. Sgroi mentioned that the Planning Division contacted all property owners involved in the application but received no response from them. She speculated that while the owners may acquire land to preserve it, she is unaware of any plans they have to develop those properties Chairman Roane then called to order a public hearing on proposed Ordinance No. 24-13 that AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT OF THE YORK COUNTY ZONING MAP BY RECLASSIFYING VARIOUS PROPERTIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS SET FORTH IN THE UPDATED Debbie Jutras 1900 Wolf Trap Road, stated she and her husband own 1900 Wolf Trap Road and that they wish to be excluded from a zoning change proposal. The property is currently zoned for general business and light industrial, and she opposes the plan to convert it entirely to light industrial zoning. Ms. Jutras expressed concerns about the potential loss of revenue opportunities for the County if the zoning change limits the property's development potential.  potentially requiring vertical development in the future. oft them are non-buildable due to their topography.  need to safeguard them as valuable natural resources.  aside with no current plans known  was duly advertised as required by law and is entitled:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CHARTING THE COURSE TO2040  She emphasized their intention to sell the property and opposes its rezoning. As there were no other speakers, Chairman Roane closed the public hearing. Mrs. Noll made a motion to approve Application ZM-198-24.  Chairman Roane then opened the floor for Board comments regarding the application. Mr. Shepherd thanked staff and the applicant on the great job done on this application which  appropriately aligned the zoning in this area.  Mr. Drewry and Mrs. Noll had no further comments on this Application.  Mr. Holroyd expressed support for this request, although apprehensive over the City of Newport News and the City of Williamsburg purchasing property that helps to support the County's tax  basis.    192 June 18, 2024  Chairman Roane stated that the application fits in well with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and he thanked those who were responsible for the excellent presentation provided on this application. He then called for the vote on Mrs. Noll's motion to approve the application.  On ai roll call the vote was: Nay: (0)  Yea (5) Holroyd, Noll, Drewry, Shepperd, Roane  APPLICATION NO. ZT-185-20 -) HOME OCCUPATIONS 17, 2024 meeting. A summary of the proceeding is below.  The matter was considered and on a vote of 5:0 was continued until the Board's September Chairman Roane announced that the Board will consider and possibly vote on the amendments to the Home Occupation regulation. However, he added that the Board sought input from the public and noted that numerous participants had signed up to contribute to the dialogue. He further noted that the Board will likely move a formal consideration to a future meeting to Mr.Anderson provided a brief presentation on the proposed amendments. He mentioned that a Home-based Business Committee has worked on the proposed amendments for six months, which included reviewing existing businesses and proposing changes to the Zoning Ordinance. He noted that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendments by a vote on 7:0 on January 13, 2021. He further mentioned that over two-thirds of the County's businesses are Home Occupations, and that the Board considered the amendments at the June 4, 2024 work session. He listed notable changes that the proposed amendment would  ensure that the Board members properly consider all input.  mandate:  The most significant changes addressed parking and capacity constraints: the number of people on- site, which impacts the increased intensity of use and parking problems; removed uses from 24.1-282; addressed intensity in 24.1-281; and mandated meeting parking and other requirements. He noted that any use exceeding this mandate requires a Special Use Permit (SUP), and stated that off-street parking must wholly be on the subject property. He further listed additional changes, including new parking minimums, depending on property size; parking spaces surfacing; and residential Additional changes included: removing specific lists of home occupations, focusing instead on use intensity and parking; SUPS for certain businesses and situations exceeding specific limits, and adding new prohibited uses while considering some Mr. Drewry emphasized the main issues of noise, parking, and the number of people coming to and leaving the property during the day. He acknowledged that the Board is already addressing these concerns and expressed optimism that the current efforts represent a strong beginning Mr. Shepperd expressed reservations about ongoing issues related to residential noise complaints and enforcement difficulties faced by the Sheriff's Department. He stressed that residential areas should remain primarily for housing rather than business activities, like massage therapy, which caused considerable community opposition. He worried that current rules might not prevent unwanted business activities, such as drone operations, in residential neighborhoods. Mr. Shepperd emphasized that the Board of Supervisors often becomes the last line of defense for residents and is frequently involved in resolving these disputes. Mr. Drewry asked for clarification on the term "surface parking spaces".  parking capacity limits.  previously prohibited uses for allowance under specific conditions.  toward a successful resolution.  Mr.Anderson clarified that a "surface parking space" must be a defined parking area, surfaced Mr. Drewry emphasized the importance of having mechanisms to prevent violations from  by gravel at a minimum. getting out of hand.    193 June 18, 2024  Mr. Shepperd mentioned that repeated ordinance violations should lead to permit removal and confirmed that the permit would not transfer to a new homeowner once the current homeowner Chairman Roane pointed out that Section 24.1-282, which previously allowed home occupations as a matter of right, has been struck out. The current status is 'reserved," Mr. Anderson noted that based on feedback, staff would likely not remove the provision in question. He explained they are investigating and analyzing the business license database, which has generic categories like home office, merchant, and personal service. He mentioned that they are also examining over 2,000 businesses to understand their operations better. He further explained that most home offices involve minimal client interaction, while personal services make up only about 17 percent of all home businesses. Most home businesses are merchants, who sell items online or at local events. The goal is to classify these businesses to Mrs. Noll emphasized the importance of the SUP because it allows neighbors to be informed and voice their opinions about new applications in their area. She noted that neighborhoods are important, and residents should have a say in such matters. She requested careful consideration of SUP requirements for at-home businesses while reviewing the regulations. Chairman Roane inquired about the procedure for continuing the discussion until the August 20th public hearing. He confirmed the schedule, noting that there would be a work session on the first Tuesday of August, followed by the public hearing on August 20th. He asked if a motion was needed to officially continue the discussion to the new date and sought clarification Mr. Hill recommended that if the intention is to receive further public comments at the next meeting, the citizen comment period should not be closed. Instead, he suggested that when there are no more comments, Chairman Roane should simply state that public comments are finished for the day. Then, a motion should be entertained to continue the public hearing to a chosen date. This approach avoids the need for re-advertising and allows the discussion to  leaves.  indicating that decisions on this section are still pending.  refine the list of permissible uses.  on the correct process.  continue from where it left off.  Chairman Roane then commenced the Citizens' Comment Period.  Chris Davidson, 1723 Back Creek Road, a home-based business owner in York County, spoke in support of the proposed ordinance changes. He highlighted the history of the review, starting from 2019 as part of a broader initiative by the Economic Development Office, in which his wife played a key role. He then emphasized the need to modernize outdated regulations and expressed support for the changes endorsed by the Planning Commission. He urged the Board to respect the Planning Commission's work, to avoid making fear-based decisions, to avoid over-specifying allowed uses,, and to support economic opportunities with regards to the proposal. He then concluded by stressing the importance of supporting York County citizens Melanie Soble, 259 Nottingham Road, a homeowner on Nottingham Road for 18 years, described her negative experience with a home-based business operated by new neighbors. She moved to her current home for its peace and quiet but has faced significant disruptions since the new neighbors started their home business. She stated that the business began operating before they. had officially filed for a SUP or a business license, which caused several issues. She noted parking problems, noting that the increased traffic and parking challenges have caused significant disruption in the cul-de-sac, which impacted garbage and mail services and raised concerns about emergency vehicle access. Additionally, the business, which functions as a play place for children, has resulted in excessive noise and safety concerns due to inadequate play structures and general clutter in the backyard. She called for stricter guidelines and enforcement to manage home-based businesses effectively. She emphasized the need for better reporting mechanisms to address issues and protect residents, expressing frustration at having Tim Meyer, 2808 George Washington Memorial Highway Suite 101, expressed strong support for the home-based business ordinance. He emphasized the importance of balancing opportunities for home-based businesses with necessary controls and enforcement to ensure  who operate home-based businesses.  to deal with these problems herself.    194 June 18, 2024  proper management. He highlighted his past involvement with the Chamber of Commerce, noting that the initiative has been well-received and even nationally recognized. He mentioned that many home-based businesses eventually grow and could benefit from available commercial properties, especially those along Route 17, which would enhance the County's property and economic landscape. Mr. Meyer stressed that effective enforcement and control are crucial for the success of the ordinance, which has been a key focus for both the Chamber and County John Farley, 143 Little John Road, expressed concerns about allowing home-based businesses in residential neighborhoods. He emphasized that residential areas should remain focused on being peaceful living spaces rather than locations for businesses that generate traffic and parking issues. Mr. Farley, advocated for a robust distinction between residential and business areas. He suggested that different parts of the County might need different rules, and stressed that neighborhoods should not be converted into commercial spaces. He noted that he is self- employed and runs a business from a commercial property and advocated against approving home-based businesses in residential areas, proposing a reevaluation of the ordinance to better Toni Chavis, a past president and current Board member of the York County Chamber of Commerce, and a member of the York County Citizen Advisory Council, expressed support for the proposed home-based business ordinance. She shared her experience of running a home- based business for 23 years without disturbing her peaceful neighborhood. She underscored the ordinance's purpose, noting it is designed to balance business operations with neighborhood concerns while adapting to modern needs and changes over time. She emphasized that the ordinance aims to support businesses while preventing any negative impact on residential areas. Ms. Chavis assured that the ordinance explicitly mentions guidelines and SUPs to address potential issues and ensure that businesses do not adversely Richard Howell, 104 Horseshoe Drive, expressed concerns about the proposed home-based business ordinance. He acknowledged the committee's efforts but raised issues with the plan's ability to manage parking and vehicle access, noting that enforcing these rules could be problematic. He worried about the impact of allowing large industrial vehicles and trailers in residential areas, which could negatively impact neighborhood character. He also voiced concerns about the lack of limits on certain types of businesses and the need for community input on more intensive or undesirable business activities. Mr. Howell emphasized that while he supports home-based businesses in general, he is concerned about the potential for Diane Howell, 104 Horseshoe Drive, expressed strong opposition to the proposed home-based business ordinance. She shared her personal experience of not noticing any evidence of home- based businesses in her neighborhood, despite claims of their prevalence. Ms. Howell emphasized her desire for a neighborhood. that maintains its aesthetic and character without the intrusion of commercial vehicles or visible business operations. She criticized the proposal's removal of certain regulations, such as the SUP process and specific guidelines for businesses like gift shops, and stressed the need for better enforcement of parking and outdoor storage rules. Ms. Howell also expressed concern about the potential introduction of undesirable businesses, such as vape shops or adult stores, and urged the Board to consider these issues Mr. Shepperd expressed his appreciation for the committee's work on the home-based business issue but raised concerns about the current process. He stated that many home-based businesses, which are effectively "invisible" and have minimal impact on their neighborhoods, should not be subjected to burdensome regulations. He suggested that businesses like legal practices or online operations, which do not affect the neighborhood visibly, should be exempt from extensive regulatory procedures. However, he acknowledged that businesses with visible impacts, such as those involving large vehicles or significant traffic, should be regulated to protect residential areas. Mr. Shepperd emphasized the importance of balancing neighborhood protection with practical business operations and advocated for a streamlined approach for less Mr. Drewry emphasized that the key concern in regulating home-based businesses is the impact on neighbors. He suggested that if neighbors are unhappy with a business, there should be mechanisms to address their complaints, such as shutting down the business or obtaining  staff.  protect neighborhood integrity.  affect their surroundings.  unregulated growth and its effects on residential neighborhoods.  seriously.  intrusive home-based businesses.    195 June 18, 2024  the approval of neighbors. He also stressed the importance of ensuring that businesses comply with local ordinances and stated that there should be follow-up to verify compliance. Mrs. Noll explained that the SUP process is designed for home-based businesses that involve clients coming to the home to ensure that neighbors can provide input on such businesses. She noted that this requirement does not impact professionals like lawyers or CPAs who work from home without clients visiting. She further stated that the SUP process allows neighbors to have a say in the operation of businesses that might affect their surroundings. Mrs. Noll then emphasized that the SUP requirement is the policy she has always supported. Mr. Holroyd made two points. He first suggested adopting a model similar to the City of Chesapeake's ordinance, which requires an SUP if a business involves more than just the homeowner, such as having employees, which significantly affect the home environment. He stated that he believes this approach addresses the issue of whether a business can operate without being noticeable. He also acknowledged concerns about daycare facilities and noted Chairman Roane thanked staff for their presentations and the community for their feedback, noting that the current model for managing home-based occupations in the County is successful. He emphasized the need to continue supporting both visible and invisible businesses while ensuring they do not impact neighbors. Chairman Roane suggested that County staff simplify the classification process by using an "if-then" statement for businesses with no customer contact, no physical product production, and no commercial vehicles, allowing them to operate by right. He acknowledged that his proposal is simply a suggestion and mentioned that the Board would have time to discuss and refine these ideas in a work Mr. Shepperd questioned the need for a business license for "invisible" businesses, such as those run from home without visible impact on the neighborhood. He noted that professionals like lawyers or doctors require specific licenses to practice but wondercd why home-based businesses, which operate without being noticeable, need a business license. He then suggested that the cost and necessity of these licenses might not be justified for such businesses and proposed that if a business has minimal impact and makes minimal profit, it Chairman Roane commented that Mr. Shepperd's proposal is interesting, but he noted that it goes beyond the home business ordnance idea. He noted that it could be a good topic for a Mrs. Noll stated that perhaps the County Attorney should answer Mr. Shepperd's question. Chairman Roane said that the topic would be more appropriate in a different meeting. Mr. Drewry questioned whether the County charges enough on business licenses. Chairman Roane disagreed, stating that he does charging residents more for business licenses. Mr. Anderson suggested that the Board consider postponing the decision until September 17th, to allow more time for staff preparation and to gather further community input before the Mrs. Noll made a motion to continue Proposed Ordinance No. 24-14 to September 17, 2024.  that the County would address and follow up on these issues.  session scheduled for August before making a final decision.  might be unnecessary for the County to require a license.  work session.  public hearing.  On a roll call the vote was: Nay: (0)  Yea (5) Noll, Drewry, Shepperd, Holroyd, Roane  PROPOSED CONSOLIDATION OF EROSION AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS The matter was considered and on a vote of 5:0 was adopted. A summary of the proceeding is  below.    196 June 18, 2024 County of York.  Chairman Roane introduced Ordinance 24-16, which aims to integrate the stormwater requirements of the County of York and the Erosion Settlement control requirements of the Mr. Krieger summarized proposed Ordinance 24-16, which consolidates the erosion and stormwater management programs in the County into one ordinance. This consolidation aligns with recent state guidelines merging these mandates into the Virginia Stormwater Handbook. The purpose is to streamline operations, eliminate redundancies, and maintain compliance with state regulations without changing fees or substantial operational processes. The urgency stems from state requirements to adopt the changes locally by July 1, 2024, with minor adjustments like adding a review panel to handle issues between the County and permit Mr. Drewry asked what the advantages and disadvantages of merging the two programs will be. Mr. Krieger highlighted the advantages of merging. erosion and sediment control with stormwater management into a single ordinance. By aligning definitions and processes under the Virginia Stormwater Handbook, it reduces redundancies, streamlines compliance efforts, and ensures consistency across localities. This consolidation responds to state guidelines and aims to simplify regulatory access by incorporating all relevant guidelines into one Mr. Drewry asked if the stormwater and erosion departments will be consolidated. Mr. Krieger explained that consolidating erosion and sediment control and stormwater management into one ordinance is not consequential because all of the work already falls under the oversight of the Public Works Department. Such work includes reviewing plans by stormwater engineers, issuing permits, and conducting inspections to ensure compliance with regulations such as silt fence requirements and runoff management. The merger simplifies  holders.  comprehensive document.  operations by centralizing these responsibilities. Mr. Drewry asked if the consolidation would be more efficient.  Mr. Krieger stated that the state's new guidance aims to reduce redundancies and conflicts. Mrs. Noll commented that the merger would make the department more efficient. Mr. Drewry questioned the necessity of having two separate entities handling similar tasks once erosion and sediment control are combined with stormwater management under one Mr. Krieger clarified that although erosion and stormwater management will be consolidated under one ordinance, different specialized staff will still handle various aspects. Professional engineers and engineering staff will review plans to ensure they meet specifications before permits are issued. Inspectors will then ensure that the work on-site adheres to the approved plans and specifications. He then clarified that there would not be any less permits than there  umbrella.  are today.  Mr. Drewry asked if other jurisdictions are doing the same.  Mr. Krieger highlighted that the decision to merge erosion and sediment control with stormwater management was driven by the State of Virginia's initiative to streamline regulations. This consolidation aims to eliminate redundancies and align with broader environmental goals set by federal laws like the Clean Water Act. He anticipated that other related ordinances, such as those for the Chesapeake Bay and wetlands, may also merge into a unified handbook or ordinance in the future, all aimed at eliminating redundancies and Mr. Drewry noted that in his view, the notion of combining the departments seems more Mr. Shepperd reflected on his long tenure on the Board and noted that he has seen various environmental boards, like the Wetlands Board and the Chesapeake Bay Board, handle overlapping responsiblities. He expressed strong opposition to placing new responsibilities under the Chesapeake Bay Board, citing past dysfunctions. While he supported the  reducing pollution and runoff. efficient than current practice.    197 June 18, 2024  consolidation of rules and management, he emphasized the importance of elected supervisors, like himself, having a say in these matters to reflect citizen sentiments. He then asked whether the daily work was consolidated under public works. He then asked if the ordinance simply Mr. Krieger agreed with Mr. Shepperd. He explained that Mr. Shepperd's description is Mr. Shepperd expressed concern about consolidating environmental regulations under a single authority, emphasizing that it should be done sensibly without removing authority from the Board of Supervisors. He warned against undermining elected representatives. and noted that various entities, like the HRPDC and sanitation districts, already play roles in supporting local municipalities. He strongly, opposed assigning additional responsibilities to the Chesapeake Bay Board, preferring to retain local control or even return it to the state if necessary. Mr. Krieger accentuated an odd aspect of the rule, noting that the panel would handle disputes between the County and permit holders. However, since the County enforces state laws, the ultimate decision would fall to an inspector from the Department of Environmental Quality, Mr. Shepperd explained that the local rule was implemented to provide citizens with quicker and easier access to rulings without the need to defer to other localities like Newport News. While the state gave municipalities the option for this local input, he warned that if the state complicates matters, it would be better to revert the responsibility back to them, noting that Mr. Krieger stated that it is preferable to house the ordinance locally for the citizens rather  aims to re-format state laws and regulations rather than moving employees.  accurate.  who would have the final say in the matter.  they currently lack the manpower to handle the job effectively. than reverting the responsibility back to the state. Mr. Shepperd agreed with Mr. Kricger.  Mr. Krieger requested assistance from Mr. Hill regarding the wording of the ordinance. He also asked whether it is possible to direct permit issues to the Board rather than the Chesapeake  Bay Board.  Mr. Hill said that the permit issues may be directed to the Board.  Mr. Krieger stated that despite his vast experience in public works, he wanted to ask a few experts, namely Mr. Joseph Brogan, Stormwater Programs Manager, and Mr. Robert Walters, Mr. Hill stated that the discussion, in his view, revolved around changes in the provision about  Engineer I, to weigh in on the matter.  hearing appeals. Mrs. Noll agreed with Mr. Hill.  Mr. Hill stated that the question is about who will hear the appeals, whether it be the Chesapeake Bay Board, the Board of Supervisors, or someone else. The alternatives presented were either the Chesapeake Bay Board, the Board of Supervisors, or the Board could designate  one person to hear those appeals.  Chairman Roane asked who currently hears the appeals.  Mr. Brogan stated that while the newest ordinance specifies that appeals should go to the Chesapeake Bay Board, in his 30 years, there has never been an appeal. Therefore, he does not Mr. Walters clarified that the appeals process specifically applies to permit violations. If the County finds someone in violation of their permit conditions and issues a notice to comply or another formal document, the appeals process allows the person to challenge the County's Mr. Shepperd stated that the Wetlands Board has the authority to issue fines up to $1,000 for violations, and this has been consistent over the years. However, he is uncertain whether the  see it as a significant issue either way.  judgment.  Chesapeake Bay Board has ever had similar authority.    198 June 18, 2024  Mr. Walters stated that the Chesapeake Bay Board does not handle issues related to permit violations. Instead, the County's Stormwater Division has the authority to issue fines for permit  violations, and the appeals procedure is related to these fines. Mr. Shepperd asked if such an appeal would be an appeal of staff work. Mr. Walters stated that Mr. Shepperd's statement is accurate.  Mr. Shepperd expressed that he has never encountered an appeal and believes that significant related issues would go to court. He stated that he is uncomfortable leaving such matters to the Chesapeake Bay Board and prefers to bring them to the Board of Supervisors, sO that they are aware of what is happening in their districts and can mitigate the issues escalating. Mr. Walters explained that the new ordinance allows for appeals to go to court but requires a local authority, such as the local governing body or a zoning board like the Chesapeake Bay Board, to review it first. Thus, while court appeals are still possible, there must be an  intermediary review step.  Chairman Roane asked the speakers to wait for further questions.  Mrs. Noll questioned why Mr. Shepperd objects to appeals being made to the Chesapeake Bay Board, noting that there has never been an appeal to this Board. She suggests that the Mr. Shepperd explained that the reason for his concern is due to past issues when the Chesapeake Bay Board and the Wetlands Board were separated, which caused significant controversy and citizen reaction. He mentioned the need to involve individual citizens and the Mrs. Noll stated that she does not think that a similar experience will re-occur. She then asked Chairman Roane reminded the Board to focus on asking questions to the staff, rather than getting into background comments by the Board. He suggested that they return to asking  objection might be unnecessary and futile.  ensuing battles, expressing his desire to avoid repeating that experience. Mr. Shepperd whether he wanted appeals to come directly to the Board. questions to the staff and discussing how to proceed after the public hearing. Mrs. Noll stated that she had no additional questions until the public hearing.  Mr. Holroyd asked for an explanation regarding which hearing section the ordinance would Mr. Shepperd emphasized that his question about the designated hearing section is similar to Mr. Walters explained that the designated member would only relate to the Board of Supervisors. In his view, the Board should consider three options for hearings: having the hearings conducted by the Chesapeake Bay Board, by the entire Board, or by a single member Mr. Drewry commented that he was okay with the matter being conducted by one member of Mr. Hill suggested that the designated member should be a member of the Board. He proposed leaving the ordinance language broad, stating "the Board of Supervisors or a single member," Mrs. Noll asked whether the single member would be a Board member, or someone designated Mr. Hill clarified that it could be either option, but stated that the ordinance was written to Mr. Bellamy asked Mr. Brogan who issues LDAs and stormwater permits. He also asked who  mandate.  how their zoning official handles responsibilities.  of the Board.  the Board, or by the Board at large.  allowing flexibility for future decisions without restricting options now.  by the Board.  signify a member of the Board. conducts BMP inspections.    199 June 18, 2024  Mr. Brogan answered that his division of the Public Works Department issues LDAS. He further clarified that his division conducts BMP inspections and issues stormwater permits. Mr. Bellamy pointed out that the two individuals responsible for the discussed function are Mr. Brogan and Mr. Walters. He emphasized that the efficiency discussed pertains to paperwork, not manpower - the same individuals will carry out the processes and actions as before,  regardless of whether the paperwork is combined or not.  Mr. Shepperd stated that the Chesapeake Bay Board cannot do an appeal.  Mr. Bellamy stated that he recommended sending the matter to the Chesapeake Bay Board. He suggested this because the Board of Supervisors was tired of hearing about various issues. He wanted to keep this off of their plate, but acknowledged that other options were available. He emphasized that the recommendation was originally his idea, and did not originate elsewhere. Chairman Roane asked about the practical impact on York County citizens and homeowners of combining two documents, which would result in almost 50 pages of changed language. He Chairman Roane called to order a public hearing on proposed Ordinance No. 24-16 that was AN ORDINANCE TO INTEGRATE THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNTY OF YORK AND THE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNTY OF YORK INTO A CONSOLIDATED EROSION AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, IN CONFORMANCE WITH SECTION 62.1-44.15:27 OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA, There being no one who wished to speak concerning the subject application, Chairman Roane Mr. Holroyd expressed that there is general agreement to keep the appeals discussion or hearing at the Board level. He is comfortable with either an appointed member of the Board or the Board as a whole handling it, noting that it has not been an issue in 30 years. He further  wanted to understand the real-world effects of merging these two ordinances. Mr. Brogan clarified that there would be no significant change. duly advertised as required by law and are entitled:  1950, AS AMENDED closed the public hearing.  stated that in his view, it would be best for the Board to handle appeals.  Mrs. Noll agreed with Mr. Holroyd.  Mr. Drewry also agreed with Mr. Holroyd, expressing appreciation for Mr. Bellamy's effort to protect their time. However, he concurred with Mr. Shepperd, emphasizing the importance of the matter, especially since he lives near the water. He expressed a strong interest in being Mr. Shepperd suggested that in their procedures, the Chairman could either handle. the task or designate someone to do sO if the need arises, which makes the situation manageable. However, he emphasized that he does not support the idea of giving up control over the matter. Mrs. Noll noted that Mr. Shepperd would want to know about an appeal, especially since his Mr. Drewry agreed, noting that since District 3 is surrounded by water, any appeal would likely Chairman Roane sought clarification on a section regarding permit applicants or permitting requirements. He asked who makes the decision and where the written request for a formal Mr. Bellamy asked whether the ordinance is written as a recommendation to the Chesapeake  involved in those decisions.  neighborhood backs up to the water. come out of that district.  hearing by the Board or the Chesapeake Bay Board should be directed. Mr. Hill clarified that Chairman Roane should make that in his motion.  Bay Board.    200 June 18, 2024  Mr. Hill explained that the ordinance currently includes both options. He suggested making a motion to choose the preferred option, voting on it, and then the final version will remove the Mr. Bellamy clarified that three options exist, not simply two: a single person, the Board as a whole, or the Chesapeake Bay Board could hear the appeals. He then stressed that the final ordinance must be clear regarding which option of the three the Board desires. Chairman Roane asked who would hear an appeal given the current language of the ordinance. Mr. Hill proposed that the matter would come before the Board, allowing them to establish a procedure in which hearings could be conducted either by the entire Board or by a designated person. He. suggested that if the ordinance is passed with both options intact, and if it removes references to the Chesapeake Bay Board, the Board would maintain the flexibility to choose Chairman Roane suggested that there might not be a need to strike anything from the ordinance. He proposed that if the Board reviews appeals first and then decides whether the full Board or an appointee will handle them, or ifit will go to the Chesapeake Bay Board, then a decision can be made at that point. Therefore, the ordinance could remain unchanged because Mr. Hill clarified that in the current ordinance language, the appeal either goes to the Board or to the Chesapeake Bay Board. He then clarified that the matter will be decided once the Board Mr. Holroyd made a motion to pass Proposed Ordinance No. 24-16R as amended.  references to the Chesapeake Bay Board, resolving the issue.  either option moving forward.  the decision process starts with the Board. chooses which version of the ordinance to pass.  Ona a roll call the vote was: Nay: (0)  Yea (5) Drewry, Shepperd, Holroyd, Noll, Roane  AMERICAN CRUISE LINES PRIORITY DOCKING AGREEMENT  Mr. Darren Williams presented a proposal for a priority docking agreement with American Cruise Lines aiming to strengthen York County's longstanding relationship with the company. He explained that the agreement responds to public calls to support responsible tourism by partnering with a company known for its environmentally conscious practices and domestically flagged river class vessels. He stated that key points of the agreement include limiting vessel size and passenger capacity, ensuring, a set number of arrivals at a flat rate, and promoting Yorktown, Virginia in all cruise itineraries and advertisements. In conclusion, he noted that the agreement also emphasizes Yorktown-centric excursions and specifies docking arrangements at Mr. Shepperd asked whether the Board would hear about a related airplane later during the Mr. Williams expressed confidence that the docking agreement would integrate scamlessly with existing arrangements, describing it as a fantastic additional amenity for American Cruise Line passengers. He emphasized that the docking area usage would complement existing operations Mr. Shepperd asked whether the plane and cruise boat would be docked at Yorktown Mr. Williams indicated where American Cruise Lines will be docked, pointing out the green area in the the diagram. He specified that this area is designated for American Cruise Line's docking purposes. He further explained that the planes will be able to dock elsewhere, indicated by the Mr. Drewry noted that American Cruise Lines is committing, to 20 guaranteed arrivals at Yorktown per year. He asked whether they intend to dock more than that number.  the T Pier and adjacent facilities.  meeting. He asked about how this airplane will fit in with the cruise docking.  without any conflict. simultaneously.  blue boxes on the diagram.    201 June 18, 2024  Mr. Williams explained that American Cruise Lines' scheduling aligns with seasonal weather patterns, with more visits during the spring and fall seasons in Yorktown and fewer during extreme weather periods. He mentioned the flexibility in the docking agreement, allowing adjustments to their scheduled days based on local events and activities. Additionally, he highlighted American Cruise Lines' commitment to York County, including an annual capital contribution intended to benefit both their passengers and the local community during their Mr. Drewry indicated that he would like to hear more about the annual capital contribution and the amount of trips that American Cruise Lines was looking at in the future. Carson Islander, a Marine Operations Analyst at American Cruise Lines, emphasized that Yorktown is a crucial part of American Cruise Lines' Chesapeake Bay itinerary and they aim to further integrate it into their offerings. Having visited Yorktown for over two decades, their goal is to showcase American history, believing Yorktown and York County are essential in telling that story. The priority docking agreement will facilitate investments in the riverfront area and enable them to expand their dockings, enhancing their relationship with the community. Mr. Drewry asked about the capital contributions American Cruise Lines plans to make and inquired about their ideas or if Mr. Williams and his team will be developing them. Mr. Williams discussed potential projects that could benefit York County from American Cruise Lines' capital contributions. He highlighted the need for additional cutout spaces to accommodate trolleys, motor coaches, and event traffic, particularly during the Riverfront Markets. Another proposed project involves funding a trolley that was not federally funded, providing flexibility for additional tours and excursions. He also mentioned the importance of increasing power capacity on the piers to allow vessels to connect to shore power, rather than using generators. These projects would be mutually agreed upon between American Cruise Mr. Islander added that American Cruise Lines currently has several case studies across the country, such as in Kalama, Washington; Hannibal, Missouri; and Natchez, Mississippi, where American Cruise Lines has participated in riverfront beautification projects with their port partners. These projects typically involve investments in landscaping and revitalizing the riverfront area, and they plan to work closely with Mr. Williams and his team on similar efforts Mr. Shepperd asked how many times the Cruise Lines would visit Yorktown this year, and what Mr. Williams provided an update on American Cruise Lines' schedule, noting, that their last arrival was on June 11th and the next cruise ship is not expected until around October 26th. He noted that the company's ships plan to stop at Yorktown 28 total times during 2024. He mentioned that arrivals were frequent in May, with approximately eight to ten visits, contingent Mr. Shepperd mentioned that he was wondering whether the County would need to build a new Mr. Drewry explained that building an additional dock would be unnecessary, given that  absence.  Lines and York County.  in York County.  the time gap between each arrival would be.  on the company's schedule and availability for booking.  dock.  American Cruise Lines only docks one ship at Yorktown at a time. Mr. Williams agreed with Mr. Drewry's statement.  Mr. Holroyd expressed his support for the environmental commitment and emphasized that commitments should be reciprocal between American Cruise Lines and the County. He sought clarification on the shore power project, wanting to understand its scope, financial Mr. Williams explained the shore power project to the Board. He indicated that they are currently in the fact-finding phase, and are simultaneously making improvements. to the dock master building and laying the groundwork for the project. He noted that the project involves bringing power from the other side of the street, which will require conduits to transmit the  requirements, and its impact on the environment.    202 June 18, 2024 provided once available.  power. Engineering is actively working on the details, including cost estimates, which will be Mr. Holroyd asked if the project is in the County's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). He stated Mr. Williams stated that he was unsure, but vowed to get the project into the CIP. Mr. Drewry mentioned that he did not see the project in the CIP.  that this should be the County's first priority.  Chairman Roane acknowledged American Cruise Lines' positive partnership. with York County over the years, praising both their aesthetically pleasing boats and their positive impact on the waterfront without creating disruption. He mentioned understanding the aspects of the agreement related to advertising and promotion. He expressed a desire to clarify the concept of priority docking, questioning its specific meaning since they still use the same pier and scheduling is required. He implied that the issue might be a matter of semantics. Mr. Williams emphasized that American Cruise Lines' commitment to the County includes paying more than normal docking fees and making a capital contribution. He stated that in return for this commitment, the County will prioritize American Cruise Lines over other cruise lines for docking at its facilities. He pointed out that the agreement specifies that their annual dockings will be determined at the beginning of each calendar year, which is justified by American Cruise Lines' environmental practices, domestic flag status, and alignment with Chairman Roane questioned the practical implementation of giving priority to American Cruise Lines if another cruise line has already booked a specific week at York County's facilities. Mr. Williams explained that American Cruise Lines would get priority because they have made Chairman Roane asked whether other cruise lines would understand that they could get Mr. Williams concurred and further explained that York County has 15 blackout dates available during the season if necessary. He emphasized that the agreement with American Cruise Lines guarantees only 20 arrivals each year, stressing that this does not entail unlimited use of the Riverwalk Landing pier; rather, it specifically guarantees 20 arrivals.  community-defined criteria for sustainable and appropriately sized tourism.  ai financial commitment above the normal commercial docking fees. bumped from docking because of American Cruise Lines' priority status.  Chairman Roane asked if the agreement is annual.  Mr. Williams concurred, explaining that the agreement lasts for 10 years and can be extended if Chairman Roane expressed concern about setting a precedent for other cruise lines over the next decade. He questioned whether granting American Cruise Lines a priority, docking agreement might lead to other cruise lines requesting similar agreements based on the Mr. Williams explained that the agreement does not have any of those problems.  necessary.  precedent set.  Mr. Drewry sought clarification on the scheduling process.  Mr. Williams explained that the schedule is set for January 1st at the latest. He further explained that the visitation calendar is typically set in October or November of the prior year. Mr. Williams stated that the contract warranted a maximum of 170 passengers and a Chairman Roane called to order a public hearing on proposed Ordinance No. 24-98 that was  Mr. Shepperd inquired about passenger and vessel limits.  maximum vessel length of 270 feet.  duly advertised as required by law and is entitled:    203 June 18, 2024  A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENTER INTO A PRIORITY DOCKING AGREEMENT AND LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH AMERICAN CRUISE LINES, INC., FOR THE USE OF COUNTY FACILITIES LOCATED ONTHE' T-PIER AT THE RIVERWALK LANDING PIERS There being no one who wished to speak concerning the subject ordinance, Chairman Roane  closed the public hearing.  Mr. Drewry_moved to adopt of Ordinance No. 24-98.  Chairman Roane opened the floor for Board comments and/or questions.  Mr. Shepperd expressed enthusiasm and support for continuing the County's relationship with American Cruise Lines. He mentioned previous meetings with individuals like Charlie Robertson, President of American Cruise Lines, which laid the groundwork for this agreement. He sees the partnership as beneficial for promoting York County's history and attracting Chairman Roane expressed strong support for the partnership with American Cruise Lines, likening it to a longstanding relationship that now feels ready to take the next step, akin to getting married. He emphasized the benefits of American Cruise Lines' commitments, including advertising and promoting the County, and expressed gratitude for the opportunity.  external attention.  On a roll call the vote was: Nay: (0)  Yea: (5) Shepperd, Holroyd, Noll, Drewry, Roane  COASTAL SEAPLANES YORK RIVER EXPANSION  Mr. Williams discussed plans to enter into an agreement with Mr. Sam Riggs of Coastal Seaplanes to provide chartered flights and sightseeing tours originating from the Riverwalk Landing piers in Yorktown. This initiative aims to offer a unique attraction and amenity, highlighting the historical significance of seaplanes in Virginia's history. He noted that the proposal includes engaging with various County departments, community sessions for feedback, and using underutilized pier space. The operation would benefit emergency responses and streamline assessments during crises like hurricanes, with the sea plane's docking location Mr. Holroyd asked if the plane was of the Beaver or Otter variety. He stated that he used to fly Mr. Sam Riggs, owner of Coastal Seaplanes, stated that it would be an Otter. He also stated  shown and discussed for its suitability. planes in the Canadian Arctic.  that he has around 600 hours flying a Beaver plane out of Southeast Alaska. Mr. Holroyd asked what the going rate for a boat docking is at the pier.  Mr. Williams clarified that the price is free up to 4 hours and $5.00 following 4 hours to close. He also explained that overnight stays cost $1.75 per foot, per 24 hours Monday through Thursday and $2.25 per foot, per 24 hours Friday through Sunday, and that the proposed price of $25 for Coastal Seaplane docking is consistent with similar boat fees. Mr. Williams also mentioned that the concept of accommodating seaplanes was initially unfamiliar to them. He stated that upon researching, they found that other ports or marinas charge between $150 to $200 per week for sea plane docking, which contrasts with Mr. Riggs' intended use of only Mr. Holroyd raised concerns about the impact on recreational boaters due to seaplanes taking off and landing in the area typically used by boats. He questioned whether there had been consultations or feedback from recreational boaters in Yorktown to gauge their support or Mr. Riggs emphasized that their sea plane operations on the York River are conducted with careful consideration for safety and courtesy towards other water users. They adhere to US Coast Guard rules and have conducted operational testing to ensure minimal impact on  doing touch-and-go operations and passenger pickups.  concerns regarding this new activity.    204 June 18, 2024  recreational boaters. They avoid flying over or under bridges, operate courteously around other vessels, and engage in environmental assessments with agencies like the Army Corps of Mr. Williams further noted that during their citizen engagement sessions, which included recreational boaters, there was positive feedback and support for the seaplane operations. Boaters at both a marina and near the Riverwalk Landing piers, he explained found the idea Mr. Drewry expressed his enthusiasm for flying in the area and asked if Mr. Riggs lives off of Mr. Riggs stated that he lives by the Mariner's Museum in Newport News but operates out of Mr. Drewry expressed enthusiasm and support for the seaplane operations, noting how he and his grandson enjoy watching the planes. He praised it as a great entrepreneurial venture and a perfect fit for the County, especially in conjunction with American Cruise Lines. Mr. Drewry also expressed interest in potentially taking a trip to visit Jamestown, noting the convenience and appeal of the seaplane charter services connecting Yorktown with various destinations, Mr. Shepperd asked if the seaplane operations would coincide with the presence of cruise ships Mr. Williams explained that seaplane operations can indeed occur simultaneously with cruise ship visits. He likened it to other charter services currently operating and saw the potential for seaplane tours to be an exciting and unique attraction for cruise ship passengers. Thus, he stated that there is no conflict anticipated between the seaplane operations and cruise ship Mr. Shepperd asked about the operational logistics for the seaplane service during the day. He inquired if the seaplane operator could park their plane at the pier during the day and wait for Mr. Williams explained that since Mr. Riggs' company is willing to pay the daily docking rate, it  Engineers to ensure compliance and safety.  intriguing and expressed approval during these interactions.  Chisman Creek.  Chisman Creek on a regular basis.  including the Outer Banks and Annapolis.  at the docking facility.  activities.  potential customers to approach them for flights.  is more than welcome to do sO.  Mr. Shepperd asked what the daily rate for docking the plane is. Mr. Williams clarified that Mr. Riggs' company will pay $25 daily. Mr. Shepperd asked how much it costs customers for a flight.  Mr. Riggs explained the pricing structure for charter flights and short seaplane flights as follows. Charter flights cost $800 per operational hour and $400 for empty legs. For a flight from the Yorktown to Cape Charles, totaling 30 minutes, the cost would be $400. The return trip with an empty leg would be half price, making it $200, or $100 per person. Additionally, short seaplane flights lasting 10 to 15 minutes are available for $25 per person. Mr. Riggs mentioned that this low cost will make his company's offering very attractive to visitors at Mr. Shepperd asked how the County can support Mr. Riggs' business. He stated that it presents a unique attraction and opportunity for Yorktown. He also asked about the process for taking on new passengers, and asked whether the company would take on new passengers Mr. Williams highlighted that this is a marketing opportunity similar to other businesses in York County. The community would support such ventures and celebrate unique attractions like this. Beyond the $25 a day revenue from Mr. Riggs' operation, he believed there is intrinsic value in having unique offerings that could attract visitors to Yorktown. These visitors might also spend money at local restaurants, gas stations, or even stay overnight, thereby benefiting  Yorktown.  directly from the docks at the Riverfront Landing?  the local economy.    205 June 18, 2024  Mr. Shepperd_compared the new venture to when the Alliance ship was in town, on which people would enjoy boat trips around the Chesapeake Bay. He envisioned a similar scenario with the sea plane, imagining people having a good time and watching the activities. He  envisioned that it could be an exciting and adventurous addition to the area.  Mr. Drewry asked how many seats the seaplane holds.  Mr. Riggs explained that their current seaplane can seat three passengers, with plans to add a fourth seat soon. However, four passengers might be weight-limited due to heavy floats. As the company grows, Mr. Riggs stated that it plans to expand to larger aircraft, such as a Beaver, which would accommodate more passengers. As the first commercial seaplane operator on the Virginia coast, he explained that they aim to serve Yorktown and the County initially, starting Chairman Roane acknowledged the uniqueness of the business and stated that he appreciated it being brought to York County, anticipating it will generate excitement at the waterfront. He then raised concerns about safety, specifically regarding the seaplane's propeller. He asked what measures are in place to prevent accidents and ensure that personnel who tie up the Mr. Williams explained the operational procedures for the seaplane at the pier. He stated that according to the contract, Mr. Riggs must contact the dockmaster's office by phone or VHF radio before arriving, ensuring the area can be cleared for safety. He deferred to Mr. Riggs for Mr. Riggs explained that they are an FAA-certified Part 135 Air Carrier, which allows them to fly across state lines and carry mail. He noted that obtaining this certification took him three and a half years and involved implementing various policies and procedures for safety and ensuring that his crewmembers were fully trained. He also noted that when approaching a dock, the seaplane's engine is shut off to the coast without power. He further explained that no passengers or untrained personnel are allowed on the dock during this time, ensuring a safe Chairman Roane asked if the propeller would be spinning when the plane approached the dock. Mr. Riggs described the procedure for docking a seaplane as follows. The engine is shut off 20 to 30 feet from the dock by cutting the fuel, turning off the magnetos, and shutting off the plane's power, leaving it "dead in the water." Water rudders then steer the plane to the dock, managing the remaining energy. He emphasized the importance of safety, noting that pilots are trained to yell "clear prop" before starting the engine to ensure no one is near the propeller. Chairman Roane asked if Coastal Seaplane's staff or County staff would assist with plane Mr. Williams explained that if there are recreational boaters in the area when Mr. Riggs is docking, they. will be asked to move away temporarily. Mr. Riggs will contact the docks for guidance, similar to any vessel arriving. Ifit is not a suitable time to dock due to other vessels, he explained, Mr. Riggs will wait or circle the river until it is safe to dock. Chairman Roane asked how many times Mr. Riggs' company had landed in Yorktown. Mr. Riggs clarified that their operations at Riverwalk Landing have been primarily focused on gathering interest and community engagement; however, they have landed there a total of five Chairman Roane expressed concern about boaters and personal watercrafts being unaware of a seaplane's approach, as they may not be attentive to aircraft landing in the water. He acknowledged that even with a bird's eye view, boaters could potentially obstruct or endanger the landing process due to their fast and unpredictable movements on the water. Mr. Riggs emphasized the challenge of navigating around personal watercraft, likening them to mosquitoes due to their tendency to approach nearby objects. He mentioned that his company will conduct community engagement sessions to educate the public about seaplanes, similar to regions like Alaska or Miami, where seaplanes are commonplace. As the first commercial  with three seats, then four, and eventually up to six or seven passengers.  plane are properly trained to avoid injuries.  details on safety measures from the plane's perspective.  docking process  docking.  or six times thus far.    206 June 18, 2024  seaplane operator on the Virginia coast, he stated that their responsibility is to teach the public Mr. Williams further explained that Mr. Riggs is diversifying his approach by identifying multiple locations, like Chisman Creek and the Riverwalk Landing, to ensure the continuity of the service. He indicated they are: not relying solely on one location for operations. Chairman Roane asked if the potential utilization of Mr. Riggs and his aircraft to address issues out in the Bay is currently a handshake agreement or a formal agreement. Mr. Williams indicated that any, potential arrangement for using Mr. Riggs and his aircraft for issues in the bay would be handled through Fire and Life Safety. Mr. Riggs clarified that their aircraft operates as a full charter service and not as a medevac. However, he stated that they can transport ambulatory individuals who do not require an ambulance, subject to the pilot's discretion. In addition, he noted during declared emergencies such as hurricanes, they are authorized to provide aid and assistance, and are also permitted Chairman Roane then called to order a public hearing on proposed Resolution R24-99 that was A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH SAM RIGGS AND COASTAL SEAPLANES FOR USE OF THE RIVERWALK LANDING COMMERCIAL PIER FOR DOCKING AND THE EMBARKATION AND DISEMBARKATION OF PASSENGERS FOR CHARTER There being no one who wished to speak concerning the subject application, Chairman Roane Chairman Roane opened the floor for further Board comments on the application. Mr. Holroyd expressed optimism about a new initiative in Yorktown, acknowledging concerns about its impact on boaters and personal watercratt. He emphasized the need for a trial-and- error. approach to understand its effects, highlighted the importance of public education, and overall, he expressed satisfaction, believing the initiative would benefit the Yorktown area. Mr. Drewry highlighted the precautions boaters take when near seaplanes, noting that most are cautious once they spot an aircraft. He expressed concern specifically about jet skis due to their speed, suggesting they pose the greatest risk. Regular boaters, he argued, typically  how to interact safely with their operations.  tos support EMS and emergency services as needed. duly advertised as required by law and is entitled:  SERVICES.  closed the public hearing and asked for a motion.  understand the physics involved and are more mindful of aircraft presence. Mrs. Noll asked which vehicle would have the right of way. Mr. Drewry clarified that whichever vehicle is on the right has the right of way.  Chairman Roane added that once both vehicles are on the water, regular boating rules take effect. He further expressed enthusiasm about a unique business or experience coming to their location. He welcomed the addition and acknowlcdged that it would be a new experience for everyone involved. He emphasized the need for collaboration and understanding among the community, suggesting that some might be surprised by the sight of planes unexpectedly As there were no further Board comments, Chairman Roane called for a vote on the motion to  descending.  approve this application. On a roll call the vote was: Nay: (0)  Yea: (5) Holroyd, Drewry, Shepperd, Noll, Roane AUTHORIZATION OF SALARIES - BOARD OF SUPERVISORS    207 June 18, 2024  Mr. Bellamy explained that the ordinance recently considered maintaining the current salary level but instead proposed a raise. However, the Ordinance before them this evening simply Chairman Roane then called to order a public hearing on proposed Resolution R24-15 that was AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH THE SALARIES OF MEMBERS OF THE YORK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AT THE SUM OF $9,000.00 PER ANNUM, PLUS AN ADDITIONAL SALARY OF $1,800.00 FOR THE BOARD CHAIRMAN AND AN ADDITIONAL SUM OF $1,200.00 FOR THE BOARD VICE-CHAIRMAN,  maintains their current salaries with no raise. duly advertised as required by law and is entitled:  EFFECTIVEJULY 1, 2024.  Chairman Roane opened the floor for further comment.  As there were no further comments, Chairman Roane called for a vote on the motion to approve  this application. On a roll call the vote was: Nay: (0) CONSENT CALENDAR  Yea: (5) Noll, Drewry, Shepperd, Holroyd, Roane  The Consent Calendar was approved on a vote of 5:0. A summary of actions is taken below. Chairman Roane highlighted the items on the consent calendar and asked the Board if there  were items that they wished to discuss separately. Mr. Holroyd expressed a desire to discuss item 12. Mr. Drewry asked to discuss item 15.  Mr. Holroyd expressed his request during a work session for a limit of one short-term rental (STR) per owner within York County. He mentioned that Ms. Caitlin Aubut had confirmed this provision was included but noted he was still trying to locate it within the documentation and sought assistance in finding it. He further mentioned that during their work session, they discussed various guidelines for short-term rentals (STRs). He noted that while most guidelines were covered, he may have overlooked or missed seeing this particular limit included in the Caitlin Aubut, Planner II, explained that according to the proposed Board policy published on the agenda and in the packet, Section 3 outlines short-term rental guidelines. She mentioned that bullet D' states that property owners should generally be restricted to operating one tourist home within York County. However, owners of tourist homes in the Yorktown Village Mr. Drewry expressed concerns about the County Administrator overseeing procurement related to staffing. He believes it could create a conflict of interest, suggesting, instead that oversight should fall under the responsibility of the Board. He emphasized that while he trusts the County Administrator, the optics of the situation might not appear proper, especially in terms of how companies typically interact with governmental bodies. He recommended that oversight for such matters should be with the Board or someone appointed by the Board rather Mrs. Noll expressed that the Board members are not experts in handling procurement issues. She noted that historically, the County Administrator has managed such matters without any problems. She questioned whether the Board has greater expertise or authority than the Chairman Roane clarified that the ordinance being discussed this evening pertains solely to  documentation.  Activity Zoning District would be exempt from this limitation.  than solely with the Administrator.  Administrator in approving companies for procurement.  procurement.    208 June 18, 2024  Mr. Drewry agreed, emphasizing that his concern was about the process after procurement, Chairman Roane acknowledged this distinction and confirmed that he had no objections to the County Administrator securing the company in question for procurement purposes. Mr. Shepperd asked Mr. Bellamy if the County already has a company procured for the issue. Mr. Bellamy clarified that the resolution before them would allow the County to move forward with the Berkeley Group. He mentioned that Ms. Rose McKinney, Human Resources Director, Mr. Shepperd commented on the responsibility of the County Administrator to manage staffing based on professional assessments. He emphasized that knowing the correct number of staff positions is crucial for effective management. He noted that previous Administrators have handled this responsibility by sometimes keeping positions unfilled during lean times instead of resorting to layoffs. Mr. Shepperd highlighted that managing manpower effectively is essential Mr. Bellamy acknowledged the County Administrator's responsibility for managing staff, which includes overseeing procurement processes. He recognized Mr. Drewry's concerns and suggested ways to address them, such as inviting the company in question to present to the Board, allowing them to ask questions and share expectations. He proposed a midterm review where the company could update the Board on its progress, ensuring transparency and  specifically how oversight would be handled.  could speak to the matter if requested.  for meeting County policy guidelines.  oversight throughout the process.  Mr. Drewry stated that he would like the company to do sO.  Mr. Bellamy suggested that during the first work session with the company conducting the study, they would outline the procedure, protocols, and methodology of their assessment. He anticipated that Board members could ask any questions they deemed necessary at that time. He offered to facilitate these arrangements to help alleviate any concerns and provide clarity on Mr. Drewry stated that since this is his first experience with the process, he wants to fully understand it and be involved in it. He emphasized the importance of learning about the methodology, criteria, and reasoning used by the professional company conducting the assessment. He indicated a desire to be informed enough to make decisions about staffing adjustments based on the assessment's findings, ensuring that the Board is actively engaged in Mr. Bellamy asked Ms. McKinney, if the process he laid out makes sense in her opinion. Ms. McKinney affirmed that it is standard practice for staffing companies to provide updates and presentations throughout their assessment process. She assured Chairman Roane and Board members that they are open to presenting their findings and progress at different stages--beginning, midway, and at the end of the process-as described by Mr. Bellamy. Mr. Bellamy requested that Ms. McKinney spend a few minutes explaining the unique aspects of the procurement process for the current project, highlighting that it went above and beyond Chairman Roane added that he would like to hear about the time duration for the effort. Ms. McKinney explained that due to time constraints, they utilized cooperative agreements with companies experienced in this type of assessment, avoiding the need for a lengthy bid process. They evaluated three companies and selected the Berkeley Group based on cost, preparedness, and expertise critical for delivering the required outcomes. The timeline was extended to December 31 to ensure a thorough study aligning with budgetary planning for FY 26, which Chairman Roane asked for the pricing differences between the three vetted companies.  the study's process.  the process.  typical procedures.  remains feasible despite the extension.    209 June 18, 2024  Ms. Mckinneyhghughted that the Berkeley Group offered a quote of $105,000 for the initial phase of the assessment, significantly lower than other companies considered. She emphasized that even without considering cost, the Berkeley Group stood out due to their extensive expertise and preparedness. Their team includes former city managers and directors with specialized knowledge in the public sector, which aligns well with the County's needs. This readiness ensures they can start promptly and deliver a high-quality product, making them the Mr. Bellamy explained that although they had a pre-qualified contract with the most expensive company initially, they chose to conduct further due diligence rather than automatically selecting that option. They felt it was important to explore other potential providers to ensure they were making the best decision for the County. Each of the contracts they considered could have been chosen independently without the need to interview the other companies, reflecting their commitment to thorough evaluation before presenting the recommendation to the Board.  preferred choice for the assessment project.  Chairman Roane said that he appreciated the effort to find the best price.  Mr. Drewry agreed and also expressed his gratitude. Mr. Shepperd moved to adopt the consent calendar. Nos. 10,11,12, 13, 14, 15, and 16, respectively. Item No. 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES.  Mr. Shepperd moved that the Consent Calendar be approved as submitted, specifically Item  Item No. 11. BULIFANTS BOULEVARD PREDESTRIAN ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS. Resolution A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO EXECUTE PURCHASING ARRANGEMENTS WITH EL-X ENTERPRISES FOR THE PURCHASE OF CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE BULIFANTS SIDEWALK  R24-45.  AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT  Item No. 12. SHORT-TERM RENTAL BOARD POLICY. Resolution R24-62.  A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT BOARD POLICY NUMBER BP24-30, SHORT-TERM RENTAL. HOMES POLICY (TOURIST. HOMES. AND. BED & BREAKFAST. INNS). Item No. 13. SMART SCALE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING APPPLICATION ENDORSEMENT. A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR FOUR SMART SCALE TRANSPORTATION Item No. 14. CONTRACT FOR PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE OF EMERGENCY MEDICAL A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENTER INTO A 3-YEAR CONTRACT WITH STRYKER FOR THE ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT CARDIAC MONITOR/DEFIBRILLATORS, AUTOMATED CPR DEVICES AND PATIENT STRETCHER/STRETCHER LOADING, AND STAIR CHAIRS. Item No. 15. PURCHASE RESOLUTION - COUNTY STAFFING STUDY. Resolution R24-104. A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO PROCURE STAFFING ASSESSMENT SERVICES FROM THE BERKLEY GROUP, LLC.  Resolution R24-100.  FUNDING REQUESTS TO BE SUBMITTED BY YORK COUNTY.  EQUIPMENT. Resolution R24-102.  Item No. 16. EMPLOYEE OF THE QUARTER. Resolution R24-96.  A RESOLUTION TO COMMEND JENN CONLEE, GRAPHIC DESIGN SPECIALIST,  AS THE EMPLOYEE OF THE QUARTER.    210 June 18, 2024 On roll call the vote was: Nay: (0) NEW BUSINESS -1 none mcerAppalnte/mpoe. On roll call the vote was: Nay: (0)  Yea: (5) Drewry, Shepperd, Holroyd, Noll, Roane  At 9:44 PM 2.2-371la)00) of the Code of Virginia pertaining to appointments to Boards and Commissions; and Section 2.2-3711(a)0)5) pertaining to the appointment of a Specific Public  Yea: (5) Shepperd, Holroyd, Noll, Drewry, Roane  Meeting Adjourned. At 9:45 p.m. Chairman Roane declared the meeting adjourned sine die/to  6:00 p.m., Tuesday,July 16, 2024, in the Board Room of York Hall.  - tar To G. Stephen Roane, Jr., Chairman York County Board of Supervisors  Markl County Admmistrator MBellay