Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Organizational Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Berkeley Group recommends modest staffing increases, IT upgrades and process changes in York County assessment
Summary
A consultant team presented a 100+ page organizational assessment recommending roughly a 4–5% staffing increase over several years, technology upgrades and process improvements across county departments; board members asked for prioritized items and cost estimates.
Consultants from the Berkeley Group presented the final organizational assessment to the York County Board of Supervisors on Feb. 4, summarizing department‑level findings and recommending incremental staffing, software upgrades and process changes intended to improve service delivery and efficiency.
The Berkeley Group said the report — more than 100 pages and informed by about 52 in‑person staff interviews and meetings with four board members — shows York County provides a “high level of service despite current staffing vacancies” but identified opportunities in technology, succession planning, cross‑training and targeted hires.
Why it matters: the assessment frames choices for the board and county administration about investments that affect budget priorities, staffing and resident services.
Highlights included department‑specific recommendations: add a tax auditor and convert two administrative assistants to full‑time at the commissioner of revenue; expand delinquent‑tax collection capacity and automation in the treasurer's office; hire a grants coordinator and additional payroll support in county finance; fill an economic development specialist and seasonal waterfront staff for peak periods; add two HR analysts and restore an employee development position in human resources; and expand IT cybersecurity resources, Office 365 transition support and a financial systems specialist to bridge finance and IT systems.
The assessment also recommended operational steps such as a countywide citizen survey to measure services, a one‑stop permit intake concept for planning and permitting, digitizing older paper records, and reconsidering the allocation of public‑works crews between northern and main facilities to reduce travel time.
Consultant Darren Coffey summarized the staffing proposal as modest relative to the county workforce: “If you add 18, it's 4.5% over the 10 departments,” he said, framing the change as a phased, multi‑year approach rather than an immediate hiring surge. Board members raised budget concerns and asked for a prioritized short list and cost estimates. One board member estimated a high‑level implementation cost of “anywhere between 4 and $6,000,000,” and asked for clearer fiscal modeling; Coffey and county staff said they would produce a concise action list with timeframes and cost guidance for board review.
Several supervisors urged exploring automation, software integration, and contracting before adding ongoing payroll costs. County staff said they have already begun steps that align with the consultants' recommendations, and they told the board a community benchmarking survey with national comparators — requested at a prior retreat — is ready to launch and will be presented in a board package for review.
Ending: The Berkeley Group said many recommendations can be implemented incrementally; county staff and the board asked the consultants and administration to produce a bulleted implementation plan, prioritized short‑term actions and rough cost estimates to guide the FY budget process.
