Aug 18 2025

Aug 15 MBA board meeting notes:

• Attendance: All MBA board members present except Jason Charles who had an excused absence.

• Approved June minutes, after providing a bunch of minor corrections.

• Acknowledgement that we’re in hurricane season - be prepared, we have staff to work overtime - thanks in advance. Also thanks to staff for work cleaning up much sargassum at Smith Bay.

• Recognized HL Freyn (present) for award of watersports concession [previously YakShak].

• Recognized the board members who worked on making sure MBA didn’t lose the federal money for the Bathhouse 1 renovation.

• Noted change in fees: price of vow renewal is now the same as the price of weddings.

• The minimum wage for all government workers will increase to $35K effective Oct 1 [Bill No. 36 0053].

  • Discussion of impact to MBA - assuming that not only salaries below $35K need to be raised but also that some other salaries in higher salary bands will need to be adjusted up, an estimate was given of an 18% increase to the overall salary budget. [Later in the discussion there was mention of a 16% increase, but either way it’s clearly a significant difference to the budget.]

  • Finance committee to meet ~early Sep to compute new salaries, new NOPAs, etc.

• Discussion of needing to find a time that works for a  board retreat to develop a plan/outline for a strategic plan. Had previously attempted to do this but had difficulty with scheduling.

• Question about generator testing and certification by HKT - instruction to give them a hard date by which generator must be tested, suggestion of withholding further payment until then.

• Contracts for bathhouse renovation went to Rumina Construction LLC (lowest of 3 bidders and submitted efficiently). Noted a delay in the contract [not positive I caught this part correctly but possibly the delay is the permit to demolish the old bathhouse]. Confirmed that the plan has taken environmental considerations into effect, including use of a silt screen to prevent runoff, and a plan to evacuate water because of the high water table.

• Shed 1 renovation RFP selected Mark McAllister [McAllister & Associates] - issue is the integrity of the concrete, specifically pieces of concrete falling off (not the building itself falling down), submitting building permit with drawing from draftsman. Re signage/caution tape around the shed for liability purposes, there was an agreed-upon suggestion to increase the perimeter of the cordoned off area around the shed, as shade-seekers are currently hanging out just outside the shed where pieces of concrete could fall.

• DM Hospitality (Pash Daswani) requested the addition of a second temporary structure (booth on wheels?) for credit card processing to reduce wait times for people renting chairs (waiting is a bad experience for visitors). They are currently using a folding table. This would be on the southeast (shed 2) side of the concession. Several questions from board members about whether this would increase congestion or be too close to shed 2, with responses from other members reassuring that it would not. Questions from board members about the temporary nature of this structure and where it would be stored, with responses that it would be mandatory that it would be mobile and removed every day and set up again every day at the same agreed-upon spot. [There was some discussion about DM’s current storage area that I didn’t quite follow; possibly, there had been an expectation that chairs would be stored there, but instead it is towels etc that are stored there, or vice-versa?] Need to make sure DM would be paying an adequate amount for additional storage space (make sure that is in agreement). 

• Discussion of proposals for upcoming Poker Run dates, with a preference for less crowded days.

• Fairchild Day is Dec 27, although the observance will likely push out to January to avoid conflicting with holiday/travel. Discussion of for 2026 townhall and decision to hold it Jan 24 2026 at shed 2. [It was unclear to me whether the townhall was intended to be part of Fairchild Day or if that would be a separate day. Also, there was no mention of a 2025 townhall; there has not been one so far this year.]

• Scheduling the townhall led into a discussion of shed rental booking. Have had some groups habitually booking far into the future and preventing other usage [unsure, but I think this refers to something like a group booking a shed the same day/time every week for 6 months], and there was a reference to MBA having contacted some people who had booked shed rentals to cancel some of their future bookings. There was also a discussion of general dissatisfaction with the current booking system, and a mention that they are looking into an evaluation from a different vendor.

• From Friends (Sara and JoAnne):

  • Regularly see boats rafting, jetskis in swim area, etc.

    • That’s not an MBA board issue. Contact the MBA staff when individual incidents occur. Or DPNR hotline to ticket - can also call 911 to dispatch to DPNR. Get photo/video evidence, try to ID boat/get tag number. [Online DPNR hotline form at https://dpnr.vi.gov/contact/anonymous-tips/]

  • Most commercial activity is on one side of the beach, but the sandcastle excursion is in an area that was historically non-commercial and less dense. Would it be possible whenever their contract is next up for negotiation for it to move closer to all the other commercial activity, leaving a larger area of the beach free of commercial activity?

    • Good questions from board to clarify what the actual concern is. [As I was largely proxying the concern from others, I’m not sure I adequately represented. Question to readers: Friends who have brought up the sandcastle excursion, what is the root of your concern? Possibility of tripping on holes/uneven surfaces when walking? Discomfort with change? Concern that this is but one in a series of future excursions that will span the entire beach leaving no sparse areas? Is the concern with commercial activity, and/or with large groups in general, or specifically with groups of (cruise ship) tourists? Please discuss.]

    • The board pointed out that this specific tour is only one day a week, and also noted that different beachgoers may not like certain beach uses (e.g., some people may not like seeing weddings, or walkers for that matter), but their primary concern is with the safety & security of the park (both the people and the ecosystems), not with some beachgoers not liking other beachgoers usage, provided that it doesn’t impede safety & security. Also, there is no commercial usage at the furthest NW end of the beach past where the parking ends.

    • As a followup question, asked whether there are any preservation limits in place to prevent unbounded additional activity. One of the board members indicated that this is the sort of thing that would go into the strategic plan.

  • I [Sara] raised that both myself personally and Friends as a group are interested to reduce the generation of waste at the beach, for instance by having recycling available, and would be willing to assist in any way we can. Similarly we are interested in educational efforts such as tree labeling.

    • As Friends has not provided them documentation, e.g., as a registered 501c3 [because we are not registered, which I acknowledged], they would not be open to Friends working with them. [I think this could be partly a liability concern and that they would be willing to work with an official organization. However, it was not made explicit whether registering Friends would be sufficient for the beginning of this sort of MBA/Friends partnership, nor was there mention of whether either of these specific projects are ones MBA has interest/resources to pursue, either with or without Friends.]