|
March 14. 1972
<br />
<br />72-51 The following ordinance, approved at last meeting, was taken up and read:
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE CITY OF PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA, 1961, BY
<br />REPEALING SECTIONS 10-75, 10-76 AND 10-77 THEREOF, PERTAINING TO REMOVALS;
<br />AND BY ADDING THERETO THREE NEW SECTIONS NUMBERED 19-8~, 19-85 AND 19-86,
<br />PERTAINING TO REMOVALS." '
<br />
<br /> (a) The following request to speak, received from Mr. George R. Walker, was read:
<br />
<br /> "Please place my name on the agenda of the 14 March, 1972 meeting of the Portsmouth
<br />City Council to speak to the proposed ordinance on second reading concerning moving permits
<br />and fees."
<br />
<br />Mr. Walker spore in opposition.
<br />
<br /> (b) The following ~etter received from Cot. George W. E. Daughtry, General Manager,
<br />Portsmouth Chamber of Commerce, was read:
<br />
<br /> "The Executive Committee of the Portsmouth Chamber of Commerce acting for the Board of
<br />Directors adopted the following resolution which was recommended by the Urban Renewal and
<br />Development Committee:~
<br />
<br />'Be it resolved that the Portsmouth Chamber of Commerce supports the adoption
<br />of the Residential Moving Permit Ordinance which is presently being considered
<br />by City Council.' (Sections 10-75, 10-76, 10-77, 19-84, 19-8S, and 19-86 of
<br />the Code of the City of Portsmouth, Virginia, 1961.)
<br />
<br /> Members of the Executive Committee
<br />
<br /> (c) The following letter received
<br />Roads Movers Association, was read:
<br />
<br />urge you to adpt this ordinance."
<br />
<br />from Mr. Joseph S. Midgett, President, South Hampton
<br />
<br /> "The South Hampton Roads Movers Association is comprised of 29 of the largest and most
<br />reputable moving firms ~n the cities of Norfolk, Portsmouth, Chesapeake, and Virginia Beach.
<br />
<br /> Recently we have been apprised of an ordinance to amend the code of the City of Ports-
<br />mouth, Virginia, relative to removals.
<br />
<br /> Specifically, I refer to Section 19-84, which states that a person owning, operating,
<br />or renting any moving van, truck, trailer, wagon or ~ther vehicle which shall be used to
<br />haul or move household goods, furniture or personal effects from place to place within the
<br />city or from any place within the city, shall not less than twenty-four hours prior to such
<br />removal make a report thereof.to the Chief of Police on forms provided by the Chief of Polie¢
<br />Such report shall contain a general description of the property to be moved, the name and
<br />address of the owner of such property, the address from which and to which the property is tc
<br />be moved, the date of such removal and such other information as is deemed reasonable and
<br />necessary. A copy of such report shall be affixed to and prominently displayed on the wind-
<br />shield or other prominent area of the vehicle used for such remov&l.
<br />
<br /> It is a specific vi~lation of the rules of the Interstate Commerce Commission to pro-
<br />vide information to any one other than the owner of the property on any shipment moving in
<br />interstate traffic. Therefore, it would be a violation of our regulations for us to file a
<br />report moving any person from the city of Portsmouth to an address outside of the state of
<br />Virginia.
<br />
<br /> Also, there have been several instances where local ordinances of this nature have been
<br />declared unconstitutional and, therefore, we ask that you not institute this ordinance in it~
<br />present form.
<br />
<br /> I believe that the latest ruling on an ordinance of this nature sustained the plainiff'
<br />case in that it violated h~s right of movement and, therefore, violated his constitutional
<br />rights under the first amendment of the constitution. I do believe that it would impose an
<br />unreasonable burden on the~,!~oving company involved in making such a movement even on shipmen
<br />moving ~ithin the city of Portsmouth.
<br />
<br /> We certainly wish to be cooperative because our Association intends to perform the
<br />functions of our industry in the highest professional manner. However, we do 5eli~e that
<br />the above ordinance will be unwieldy and administratively burdensome, both to the City of
<br />Portsmouth and to the general moving industry.
<br />
<br /> We solicit your aid in bringing this information to the Council and askiBg them to not
<br />adopt this ordinance in its present form.
<br />
<br /> If we can be of any assistance, then we would be most happy to work with ~ou and the
<br />City of Portsmouth in attempting to adopt some regulation that would be beneficial to every-
<br />one concerned."
<br />
<br />(d) The following letter received from Mr. Joseph S. Midgett same as above~ was read:
<br />
<br /> "Please find enclosed sufficient copies of a letter from the Household Goods Carriers
<br />Bureau to distribute to all of the members of the Counail, supporting our positions regardin
<br />the proposed amendments to the City Ordinance pertaining to removals.
<br />
<br />
<br />
|