|
Adjourned Meeting
August 8, 2000
7:00 p.m.
Meeting Convened. An Adjourned Meeting of the York County Board of
Supervisors was called to order at 6:32 p.m., Tuesday, August 8, 2000,
in the East Room, York Hall, by Chairman Walter C. Zaremba.
Attendance. The following members of the Board of Supervisors were
present: Walter C. Zaremba, Sheila S. Noll, Donald E. Wiggins, James S.
Burgett, and Melanie L. Rapp.
Also in attendance were Daniel M. Stuck, County Administrator; and
James E. Barnett, County Attorney.
WORK SESSION
ANNUAL REVIEW OF BOARD POLICIES
Mr. Stuck indicated that each year the Board of Supervisors
reviewed its policies which was a compilation of all ordinances and
resolutions dealing with how the County does business. There was also a
set of administrative directives that covered those things not covered
in the policies or which implemented the Board's policies. He
stated that no significant changes had been proposed this year.
Mr. Stuck and the Board members then reviewed the suggested amendments
to the following Board Policies:
BP94-03 Chisman Creek and Wolftrap Parks Usage Policy
BP94-05 Dirt Street Improvement Program
BP94-08 Recreational Fees and Charges
BP94-10 Vehicle Fleet Management
BP96-15 Citizen News Advertising
BP00-17 (New) New Quarter Park
Discussion was held regarding Dirt Streets and the process
required to bring them up to VDOT standards in order for them to be
accepted into the State's highway system. The Board discussed the
charges for boats docking at the Yorktown Pier, accommodations for
smaller vessels to dock at the pier, and the County Administrator's
previous decision to close the pier to fishing. It was noted that
less than 20 percent of the individuals fishing on the pier were York
County residents, and the numbers of individuals fishing were
small. Another difficulty relayed to the Board members was that
the individuals fishing and their paraphernalia were not always
appreciated by the patrons of the cruise ships and tourists walking on
the pier. Regarding the Vehicle Fleet Management Policy, it was noted
that the Sheriff's vehicles were included, and a brief discussion took
place concerning the status of the vehicle owned by the Industrial
Development Authority. A brief discussion was also held concerning
New Quarter Park being open to groups.
Mr. Stuck then reviewed the summary of proposals for York Hall use
which was provided to the Board and which would become another new Board
Policy, BP00-18, upon Board approval.
Mrs. Noll noted that the summary indicated the Board Room would
not be available for non-County users. She reminded the Board
members that when the discussions were held with various groups
concerning the community's needs and the plans for the renovations of
the building, the main reason for building the current platform in the
Board Meeting Room was for use by groups wishing to conduct lectures,
small musical groups, community assemblies, and the like.
Mr. Burgett noted that the decision to restrict the Board Meeting
Room's use was made by the Board at a meeting when Mrs. Noll and
Chairman Zaremba were absent. He explained the Board's reason for
making the decision was because of concern about the expensive equipment
in the room and its upkeep.
Mr. Stuck agreed there was a lot of expensive equipment and
furniture in the room, and the County would incur costs in opening it up
to non-County users. He stated there was some discussion at the
meeting Mr. Burgett mentioned about staffing to open the building on a
regular basis to groups, and there was also discussion about the need
for security when non-County people were in the building, as well as the
added cleaning costs. He indicated that staff had tried in the
policy to suggest that groups which could be accommodated elsewhere not
be allowed to use the Board Room. Mr. Stuck stated the proposed
guidelines were for the Board's review and more discussion before making
any kind of final decision. He reminded the Board members that its
guidance to him was that the process was to be sequential - the
guidelines were to be developed and approved first, and then staff would
approach potential users to discuss space needs.
After a brief discussion, the Board, by consensus, directed that
the finalizing of the guidelines and staff contact with potential users
be done simultaneously and that use of York Hall be added to the topics
for discussion for the September 12 work session.
ANNUAL REVIEW OF PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
Mr. Stuck indicated there were no significant changes this year to
the personnel policies, only wordsmithing for clarification in most
cases. He noted that Mr. McReynolds and Mrs. Blanton were present
to answer any questions the Board might have concerning the policies. He
then reviewed one amendment which represented a new philosophy for the
County regarding career ladders. The V-Team had recommended that
certain job classifications be tiered so that once an individual had
received the required training or certification they would be moved up
to the next level. He stated the amendment was to encourage
employees to continue their learning process, making them more valuable
to the County. Mr. Stuck indicated the only other notable change
in the policies was the proposed amendment to allow sick leave to be
taken in one-half hour increments instead of the present one-hour
increments.
Discussion followed on the cap set on the payment for sick leave
to employees who leave County service. Discussion also took place
regarding the sections on harassment and personal appearance
requirements. The Board was provided with clarification regarding
payment of membership dues for employees' job-related professional
associations and incentive pay for firefighters who obtain emergency
medical technical and paramedic certifications.
ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE PURCHASING POLICY
Mr. Stuck indicated that Mr. McReynolds and Mr. Sawyer were
present to answer any technical questions the Board might have regarding
the purchasing policy and its proposed amendments. He stated there
were very minor changes this year, and he reviewed the two proposed
revisions concerning an increase in the thresholds for competition
levels required for the procurement of goods and services (Section 2-3)
and the elimination of wording in Section 3-17 which required that the
Board be notified prior to the issuance of an Request for Proposals
(RFP) if the RFP was used for procurements in excess of $30,000 and an
RFP was not the required method of solicitation. He explained that
the Board must approve all procurements in excess of $30,000, making
this step redundant.
Mr. Wiggins indicated he had received complaints regarding the way
the County selected its architects for projects. He stated he had
been told that partiality had been shown for certain architects.
Mr. Stuck stated the staff heard the same statements all the time,
and indicated that if the Board wished the staff could produce records
from past years showing that the County staff was impartial in its
selections. He noted that several years ago the Board got involved
with a complaint and reviewed the selection process for that particular
project and found for themselves why the complaining architect did not
get the job. Mr. Stuck indicated there were some cases where the
County sole sources to architects when it was adapting a current
building of the architect's design or the County needed a site adaption
for a new building to be built according to the same architect's plans
of an existing County building.
Discussion followed on the process followed in selecting
architects.
Mr. Burgett then expressed his concern about the County not using
more York County business resources and outsourcing its needs. He
stated he felt the Board needed to do what it could to get local
businesses better at making bids and proposals so that they could be
more competitive for York County business. The Board's goal should be to
increase the amount of money it puts back into the community.
Mr. Stuck indicated the preceding Board had a strategy in its
Goals and Objectives to do just as Mr. Burgett suggested. A part
of that goal was to monitor how much was going to local businesses, and
a system was set up to do that. He noted that in talking
percentages of expenditures going back into York County businesses, the
percentage becomes skewed when a situation occurs like the need for a
courthouse and there is no firm in York County that could build a $10
million structure; and $10 million was a major portion of the County's
expenditures for a year. He noted that typically many of the
companies that do the work on large projects in the County are from the
region.
Mrs. Noll agreed with Mr. Burgett that the Board must continue to
stress this initiative.
Miss Rapp noted it was good to keep it in mind, but the function
of government was not to take care of York County businesses. She
stated it was a concept to be cognizant of, but the County's bottom line
was to get the best price for the goods and services it needs.
LIBRARY MANAGEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT
Mr. Stuck stated the proposed action was to obtain a formal
agreement between the Board of Supervisors and the Library detailing
exactly how the library system was being managed. For many years
things had been done informally, but as the organizations became larger,
it became harder to do informally. He stated staff had attempted
to clarify the current management of the library, and the proposed
agreement covered the salient points. He noted the portion that
generated the most discussion was personnel administration, and he
explained how the head of the Library was, by state statute, hired by
the Library Board of Trustees and answered to them, although the York
County Code stated that the head of the Library was hired by the Board
of Supervisors. He discussed the need to rescind Chapter 13 of the
York County Code because of its conflict with the Code of
Virginia. He noted that an ordinance would be brought to the Board
soon for its consideration. Mr. Stuck indicated the agreement had
a term of five years, and either party could be released from said
agreement by giving 180 days notice.
Discussion followed on what would happen if either party chose to
withdraw from the agreement.
Chairman Zaremba noted that one of the Library Board members' term
had expired a couple of years ago, but the member was continuing to
serve on the Board, and he asked how this had happened.
Mr. Barnett explained that while there were no state limitations
on the number of terms a Library Board member may serve, Chapter 13 of
the York County Code sets a two-term limit, although it also states the
members will hold office until their successors are appointed. He
noted the previous Board decided, because of the member's involvement in
the planning of the new Tabb Library, to allow the member to continue
serving on the Library Board until such time as the new Tabb library
facility was constructed and operational.
Chairman Zaremba indicated it was now time to consider making an
appointment, and he wanted to think about Mr. Stuck's previous
suggestion to wait until the end of the calendar year.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST. (Not on Agenda)
Mr. Barnett briefed the Board members on the recent Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) request received from the Daily Press regarding
email correspondence belonging to the Board of Supervisors. He
discussed his efforts to determine the cost of gathering the emails as
well as his review time to ensure that no privileged or non-governmental
business exchanges were being provided. He noted that most if not
all of the Peninsula jurisdictions had been asked for the same
information, and the School Boards had been sent separate, similar
requests.
The Board members then discussed how the email correspondence
would be provided, whether printed out by the Board members themselves
or have the Computer Support Services Division pull them together.
Discussion also took place on providing deleted email messages which
could be accessed only with difficulty and significant expense from
computer tape for the last two weeks. The consensus of the Board
was to let Computer Support Services handle the email retrieval from the
Board's computers.
Chairman Zaremba questioned whether or not the Board was setting a
precedent in this matter. He asked if the Board would be required to
provide whatever someone asked for if they were willing to pay the
entire costs. He noted that this request was just a fishing
expedition on the part of the Daily Press looking for a story.
Mr. Barnett stated he had not heard of any other jurisdiction that
had refused to comply with this request.
Chairman Zaremba noted that the County Attorney of James City
County was very selective in what he allowed to be sent to the
newspaper.
Mr. Barnett ensured the Board that he, too, intended to be very
selective. He stated he would review all the email messages to make sure
only those email messages not otherwise protected by state statute and
of legitimate government business were forwarded.
CLOSED MEETING. At 8:44 p.m. Mr. Burgett moved that the Board convene in
Closed Meeting pursuant to Sections 2.1-344(a)(5) and 2.1-344(a)(7) of
the Code of Virginia for the purpose of discussing a prospective
business or industry not yet announced and for consultation with legal
counsel.
On roll call the vote was:
Yea: (5) Noll, Burgett, Wiggins, Rapp, Zaremba
Nay: (0)
Meeting Reconvened. At 9:25 p.m. the meeting was reconvened in open
session by order of the Chair.
Mrs. Noll moved the adoption of proposed Resolution SR-1 that reads:
A RESOLUTION TO CERTIFY COMPLIANCE WITH THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
ACT REGARDING MEETING IN CLOSED SESSION
WHEREAS, the York County Board of Supervisors has convened a
closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and
in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information
Act; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a
certification by the York County Board of Supervisors that such closed
meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the York County Board of
Supervisors this the 8th day of August, 2000, hereby certifies that, to
the best of each member's knowledge, (1) only public business matters
lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were
discussed in the closed meeting to which this certification resolution
applies, and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in
the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed, or
considered by the York County Board of Supervisors.
On roll call the vote was:
Yea: (5) Burgett, Wiggins, Rapp, Noll, Zaremba
Nay: (0)
REQUEST FOR COUNTY PARTICIPATION IN CONSTRUCTION OF A PUMP STATION. (Not
on Agenda)
Chairman Zaremba asked Mr. Stuck to address a phone call that he
had received from Mr. Howard Jenkins, a developer in the Lightfoot area
who was involved with the sale to Wal-Mart and the requirement to
construct a pump station.
Mr. Stuck explained the Board policy on County participation in
the construction of sewer facilities by private developers and gave the
Board a copy of a letter sent to Mr. Jenkins in July of 1999 outlining
the options available to him. Mr. Jenkins was inquiring to see whether
or not the County was interested in participating in the cost of
constructing the pump station beyond the award of sewer connection
credits. Mr. Stuck indicated the County's ordinances allowed the Board
to consider such requests.
After a brief discussion, the Board, by consensus, indicated it
was not interested in participating in the construction costs of the
pump station, and asked Mr. Stuck to relay that information to Mr.
Jenkins.
Meeting Adjourned. At 9:35 p.m. Chairman Zaremba declared the meeting
adjourned sine die.
______________________________
__________________________________
Daniel M. Stuck, Clerk
Walter C. Zaremba, Chairman
York County Board of Supervisors
York County Board of Supervisors
Back to Index
|
