Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Towing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Towing advisory board reports 16 authorized firms, routine audits and minor complaints to York County supervisors
Summary
Captain Jason Houston told the Board that a 16-company towing roster (10 upper-county, 6 lower-county) is handling roughly 75 police-requested tows per month under the new ordinance; staff perform random audits and plan small ordinance tweaks.
Get email alerts on the Towing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Captain Jason Houston told the York County Board of Supervisors on March 3 that the towing advisory board has authorized 16 companies to provide police-requested towing across the county (approximately 10 in the upper county and six in the lower county) under the new ordinance. He said participating firms are fielding about 75 calls per month.
Houston reported only one formal complaint since the program began; that complaint was resolved at the sheriff's-office first tier after a deputy mistakenly called for two tows instead of one, and the charge was rescinded. County staff said they perform regular random audits by pulling tow sheets and comparing receipts and body/dash-camera footage to ensure fees and procedures are consistent with the ordinance.
The advisory board and sheriff's office also described a rolling inspection program for tow yards and said about six companies are awaiting their first annual inspections. Officials said the main implementation challenge is locating permitted storage lots in the lower county; a previously listed company lost its lot when the property was sold and has been unable to find a permitted replacement site.
Board members asked whether the ordinance is meeting expectations and how the advisory board will evaluate success. Presenters said the low complaint volume, regular call handling and other jurisdictions seeking the county—s ordinance are early indicators of success, and the advisory board plans to return to the supervisors with minor recommended tweaks to definitions and equipment standards.
No formal ordinance changes were adopted at the meeting; the board was told that any amendment would follow the standard ordinance process and likely require a public reading or formal adoption steps.

