Minutes 02/27/1973 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'Fe, hr]~s rv ~7 1 Certainly, when the sum of $100.00 exclusion on real estate improvements was inserted in the State Code in 1928, the amount was worth much more on the dollar market. In today's inflationary era $100.00 could scarcely be used to pay for the purchase and installation of a screen door. The State Code takes into account no consideration of the fact the appreci- ation in value varies considerably from one community to another where property value itself reflects the value of improvements. If the cities are to erect a bulkhead against slums or urban flight, relief must be given in the realm of property taxation. Constant tax increases and added penalties for home maintenance are causing the great majority of middle income or fixed income persons to abandon any hope of keeping their residences in proper repair. We request the City Council to ~ake the following action to help relieve the burdens of property owners: Request the State Legislators to introduce a bill to get the Code of Virginia Taxation Paragraph 58-812 rewritten eliminating the word repairs. Request the Federal and State Senators and Representatives to enact some type of Income Tax relief such as co-sponsored by Congressman Whitehurst last year for those who repair their homes. The picture should be clear to those who look for answers. The problem is a cancerous one spreading blight, eating away the foundations of community respectability and creating a ghetto - a non-taxable resourcesand drain on the city coffers. W~ earnestly implore you to seriously consider our plea and we anticipate action.which will bring relief." Motion of Mr. Johnson and seconded by Mr. Smith, to be referred to the City Attorney for consideration, was adopted by unanimous vote. 73-77 - Motion of Mr. Johnson and seconded by Mr. Smith, that the City Manager investi- gate into the disposition of felonies and misdemeanors to determine how cases are handled after arrests and the weakness of the system where criminals are capable of committing more crimes while waiting on disposition, to report back within 30 days, was adopted without dissenting vote. 73-78 Motion of Mr. Johnson and seconded by Mr. Smith, the re~oning of Haysom Street by returning to Planning Commission for rehearing of ~etition (which was previously denied December 4, 1972) on Council's iniZiative, was denied by the following vote: Ayes: Holley, Johnson, Smith Nays: Early, King, Wentz, Barnes 73-79 The following letter received from Daniel R. Hagemeister, Assistant City Attorne was read: Re: Sale of Waterfront Property "The City has advertised for sale a certain parcel of muniaipal land which is located on the Elfzabeth River in downtown Portsmouth. This advertisement elicited one response, that of Mr. Allan L. Segal, which is dated February 12, 1972, and a copy of which is attached here to. After a thorough review of Mr. Segal's letter, is my opinion that his proposal is not responsive to the advertisement published by the City. This conclusion is based upon my assessment of the several terms and con<ditions set forth in subparagraphs Ca) through Cf) of the Pebruary 12 letter. These conditions, particularly subparagraphs (b) and Cc), render the offer to purchase the land illusory. Accordingly, I'must advise you that Mr. Segal's proposal is not a bid within the meaning of the law and it is t~s, incapable of being ac- cepted. Since the proposal is not a bid, the current situation is somewhat ambiguous. In order to resolve this ambiguity, it would be appropriate for the Council formally to reject Mr. Segal's proposal and to direct the Department of Law to inform Mr. Segal of this action and return his deposit of $5,000.00. An oral resolution is a suitable means of achieving this result." Motion of Mr. W~ntz and seconded by Mr. Smith, that be it resolved to concur in the recommendation of the Assistant City Attorney and that ~id submitted by'Mr. Allan L. Sega/ be rejected, was adopted unanimous vote. 73-88 Motion of Mr. Smith and seconded by Mr. Holler, that regular Council meeting scheduled for March 13, 1973, be changed to March 19, 1973, in order for members to attend Public Hearing of the Third Crossing to be held on same night, was adopted by unanimous ~ote. By unanimous vote, the meeting adjourned at 12:10 ~.M. APPROVED City Clerk