Minutes 12/09/1969 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

69-409 - The following letter from Frank H. Keeling. was read: "I am requesting permission to appear before the City Council on 9 December, 1969. The su'oject matter will be curbs, gutters, and drainage in the Brighton area." Motion of Mr. Smith to refer to a conference of Council was adopted, without dissenting vote. 69-410 - The following letter from A. L. Vann was read: "t~ne Simonsdale Civic Club asks that a representative again be heard concerning Curbs and Gutters for the Simonsdale area. A group was present at the May Council meeting and we are anxious to see some action on these matt e rs. !' Motion of Mr. Turner to refer to conference of the Council to be held on December 15th was adopted, withoul dissenting vote. The Chair requested that a map showing where curbs and gutters have been placed in this area in the last i0 years be prepared. I 69-411 - The following letter from .he City Attorney was read: "At your last meeting you requested the City Attorney to look into the legality of a motion made by Counci man Burrell J(~hnson at the November 11, 1969 meeting. The motion at that previous meeting ~nich was adopted by the Council stated as follows: ~/~nat a four~h lane be constructed on this highly, congested highway, Wear'High Street, from Cnurchland Bridge to Cedar Lane from funds in this year's budget and that a fourth lane be added from Cedar Lane to Churchland High School in the budget for next year.® ~Fne concern for the aforestated motion apparently stems from a portion of Section 17 of Chapter 3 of the present charter which reads in part as follows: ~No ordinance or resolution appropriating money exceeding the sum of $1,000, imposing taxes or authorizing the borrowing of money shall be ~assed on the day of its introduc- tion, nor shall any sumh ordinance or ~esolution be ~alid unless at least thr-~e days intervene between its introduction and passage. · If the motion by Mr. Johnson was indeed a resolution or ordinance directing the appropriation of money for a particular purpose, then obviously, it is invalid under the said ~r~ovision of the charter. However, if the motion constituted a direction to the City Manager as to how to ex-Dead the moneys prev~ously~appropriated ~nd to provide for such an item in the budget for the coming year, then i~ is quite logo. The motion stated ~Jjat tq~e funds for the construction of the fourth lane of High Street West from khurchland Bridge to Cedar Lane were to be taken from this year~s budget. Therefore, this would constitute a direction to the City Manager to t]eai~sfer funds previously ~ppropriated to the purpose stated in the motion. ?ne second portion of the motion directs that provisions for ~a fourth lane to be constructed from Cedar Lane to Churchla~d High School 'be included in the budget for the next year. It is obvious that this latter portion of the motion could only be construed as a direction to the City Manager in connection with the pre]~aration of his budget for the next year. ~%is portion of the motion could, of course, be overruled by the C~un~il when it considers gile budget for the coming ~iscal year at a later date. It, of course, could not be binding on a future City Council whid~ could take such action as it might deem appropriate at the time it should take the matter under consideration. ~nerefore, Mr. Johnson' motion is no ~ifferent from action that is customarily taken at the request of the City Manager at the conclusi of each fiscal year when the City Manager requests authority to transfer funds between various departments and accounts of the city in order to bring them in line prior to t2he end of the fiscal year. Therefore, it is my opinion that the motion by Mr. Johnson was legal and that it simply constituted direc- tions to the City Mmnager as how he should act d~ring the current fiscal year and as to how he should orepare his budget for the coming fiscal year. In conclusion, I reiterate the fact that this motion does not ~ind this Council nor any future Council in regard to the matters which were the subject of the motion in that they could be reconsidered and overruled at a later date." On motion of Mr. Holley, received as information, without dissenting vote. 69-412 - Letters from the following, requesting the City to accept the conservation program were received: Mrs. l{illie Mae Jackson Willie Morton Jackson Mr. and Mrs. Charles Mingo Motion of Mr. Eastes to receive as information. M~tion of Mr. Holley to amend the motion to refer to a conference. Vote being taken, the amended motion was adopted, without dissenting vote. 69-41S - The following letter from R. A. Craig, Jr., Chairman, Portsmouth Citizens Advisory Committee, was read: "Please ha advised that the Portsmouth Citizens Advisory Committee at its regular;meeting on Monday, 1 December considered the Mt. ~ermon Project that has previously been submitted by the Portsmouth Redevelopment and Housing Authority to Co~mcil for their consideration. After consideration of the plan the me,pets o~ the Citizens Advisory Committee, on an 8 to 2 vote, voted to endorse the Mt. Hermon plan as submitted and recom- mend it to City Council for their approval and adoption." Motion of Mr. Turner to concur in the recommendatimn of the Citizens Advisory Committee was lost, there being, no second. Motion of Mr. Johnson to refer to the conference on the study of Mt. Hermon to be held on December lath, was adopted, without dissenting vote. 69-414 - The following resolution was read, and on motion of Mr. Turner, was unanimously adopted: