Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Meeting Votes Summary topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
York City Council approves multiple measures; amends drone budget to require policy review
Summary
At its May 21 meeting the York City Council approved Resolution 35, finalized a budget ordinance with an amendment requiring an administration review of drone policy before activating new equipment, passed Bill 13 on tenant conduct, and introduced Bill 14 on policing for Penn State York.
Get email alerts on the Meeting Votes Summary topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At its May 21 meeting the York City Council approved several measures and handled multiple introductions. Major actions recorded on the legislative calendar included final passage of an appropriateness certificate (Resolution 35), final passage of a budget ordinance that the council amended to require the administration to review drone policies before activating new equipment (final passage recorded as Bill 11 on the agenda), final passage of another bill noted on the record (bill number not specified in the transcript), final passage of Bill 13 (landlord‑tenant disruptive‑conduct changes), introduction of Bill 14 (consenting to reassignment of shared policing responsibilities for Penn State York) and introduction and passage of Resolution 36 (York Bridge 81 project signatory updates).
Resolution 35: Certificate of appropriateness - Motion: Approve certificate of appropriateness for work at 101–102 North Shore Street and 118 South Beaver Street (Resolution 35, introduced by Betsy Buckingham). - Vote: Roll call recorded as five yes votes (Bob: yes; John: yes; Dennis: yes; Buckingham: yes; Washington: yes). Outcome: approved.
Drone budget ordinance (final passage; amendment) - Motion and amendment: Council considered final passage of a budget ordinance tied to acquisition/activation of new drone equipment and approved a council amendment requesting that the administration review and update the city’s drone policy prior to activation of any new equipment. The solicitor advised that a nonmaterial amendment requesting an administrative review was appropriate for a budget ordinance and that the council generally does not direct administrative policies; the council modified the amendment in line with that guidance. - Recorded final vote on the ordinance as amended: Buck: yes; John Escue: yes; Dennis: yes; Buckingham: yes; Washington: yes. Outcome: approved (final passage with amendment).
Final passage of an additional bill (not specified) - Motion: Final passage (transcript does not specify a bill number or title). The clerk recorded affirmative votes; the item moved forward on the consent of council. Outcome: approved (bill number not specified in transcript).
Bill 13 (landlord‑tenant disruptive conduct) - Motion: Final passage of Bill 13. Clerk roll call: Buck: no; John (as recorded by clerk): yes; Dennis: yes; Buckingham: yes; Washington: yes. Outcome: approved 4‑1. Public comment raised concerns about potential impacts on victims and vulnerable tenants.
Introduction: Bill 14 - Bill 14 introduced by Council member Washington: a bill consenting to assignment of shared policing responsibilities for Penn State York to York County Regional Police Department. The bill was introduced and will proceed through the committee/advertising process as required.
Resolution 36 - Motion: Introduced and approved to update signatory authority and land‑acquisition details for the York Bridge 81 project (College Avenue Bridal) and to include parcel numbers referenced in the record. - Vote: Recorded as affirmative by the clerk (yes votes recorded). Outcome: approved.
The meeting minutes and roll calls provide the procedural record; where the transcript did not supply a bill number or further detail, the item is described as 'not specified' and the clerk's recorded roll calls are reported as given on the record. Several public comments during the meeting urged additions to police/technology policies (drone data retention and sharing) and raised civil‑rights and housing equity concerns tied to the ordinance discussion. The solicitor and staff were cited in the record as advising on advertisement requirements for ordinance amendments and on the difference between budgetary ordinances and policy direction for the administration.

