|
June 15, 1967
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 10-79 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF PORTS,~4OUTH, VIRGINIA,
<br />THE TAX ON THE SALE OF UTILITY SERVICES"
<br />
<br />1961, INCREASING
<br />
<br /> 67-165 - "I submit the attached ordinance and recommend it be placed on first r~ading. This amends
<br />Section 37A~20 of'the. City Code pertaining to charges for Water service. The ordinance establishes the
<br />following Rat.es: ~"
<br /> 1. For the first fifteen thousand cubic feet used in any one month, thirty cents per hundred cubic feet
<br /> 2. For any next quantity between fifteen thousand cubic feet and one million cubic feet used in
<br />any one month, twenty cents per hundred chbic feet.
<br /> 5. Per any next quantity in excess of one million cubic feet used in any one month, fifteen cents per
<br />hundred cubic feet,
<br /> The above rates will apply to the Cities of Suffolk and Portsmouth but the rate on the first
<br />fifteen thousand will be double for all other areas served by the Portsmouth Water Department. The other
<br />two step rates will be the same as Suffolk and Portsmouth.
<br /> It is believed that these increased rates are not out of line in Tidewater, the State
<br />of Virginia or the United States. In fact, on normal residential requirements the rates still remain the
<br />lowest in Tidewater. (For your information a copy of these comparisons is attached ker~to).
<br /> The most important factor to be evaluated is the rate of return that the City is receiving
<br />on its investment. The Water system is now valued at more than S25,000,000 this being book value and
<br />not replacement cost. If this Utility were governed by the Corporation Commission it would allow at
<br />least a 6% return on the investment or more than 81,580,000 annually. The 6% is a minimum of what~o~her
<br />Utility Companies are receiving. Portsmouth has been receiving a ~eturn of less than 2 1/2%. Fbr
<br />many years Portsmouthhas expended more than $200,000 annually from its current revenues for capital
<br />improvements yet it has still been necessary to issue $4,000,000 in bonds in $2qe past four years and addition~
<br />bonds willl,have to be sold in the near future. This will require additional funds to finance these
<br />capital expansions and reduce further the return on capitaliinvestment in the system. The citizens
<br />of Portsmouth should not be required to bear all of the burden by reduction oS any funds that could
<br />accrue for the operation of the City government from any surplus the Water Fund might have. If the
<br />rates are not increased this will occur.
<br /> We are fortunate in just having the American lnBurance Association inspect and
<br />review the adequacy of the Water system, with regard to fire insurance rates. They have unofficially
<br />advised me, their survey not being complete, that the Water system has kept pace with ~he necessary
<br />expansion to serve the population and~has improved over the 1950 survey.
<br /> For us to keep up ~ith the necessary expansions we are now in the process of receiving
<br />bids for a new filter plant estimated to cost $1,000,000 and there also has to be built a new high
<br />level storage tank and new transmission lines.
<br /> The new rate structure calls for approximately a 19% increase in revenue. To put in
<br />dollars and cents, to the average residential property in the City of Portsmouth, it means an increase
<br />of about 60 cents per quarter or 20 cents a month. To carry this further, it will cost the consumer
<br />about 5 1/2 cents per day for Water. I know of no other commodity that you can buy as cheap, that is
<br />so important to every day life."
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Knight, the following ordinance ~ssapproved on first reading without dissenting
<br />vote:
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINANCE TO AqEND SECTION ~7A-20 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA, 1961, TO
<br />INCREASE THE RATE OF CHARGES FOR WATER SERVICE"
<br />
<br /> 67-166 - "I submit the attached ordinance and recommend it be placed on first reading.
<br /> This amends the Compensation Plan for emplby~es of the City, for increasing the
<br />salaries of the judges of the Municipal Court and the Juvenile Domestic Relations Court. There is an
<br />annual increase of $600 for the judges of these two courts.
<br /> This also amends the compensation to the City Attorney which will be paid by the School
<br />Board for services rendered by him to the Board."
<br />
<br />On motion of Mr. Barnes, the following ordinance was approyed on first reading, without dissenting vote:
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 12 OF ORDINANCE NO. 1966-51, WHICH ESTABLISHED A COMPENSATION PLaN
<br />FOR EMPLOYBES OF THE CITY, INCREASING THE SALARIES OF CERTAIN OFFICIALS"
<br />
<br /> 67-167 - "I submit the attached ordinance and recommend it be placed on first reading.
<br /> This amends the ordinance pertaining to the Retirement System for the Fire and Police
<br />Department and other City employees. It will eliminate the requirement of employees to contribute to
<br />the pensions systems. This City Government will assume this cost in lieu of any general salary raises
<br />to the employees. Funds have been provided in the 1967-68 budget fortthem~ossary contributions."
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Johnson, the following ordinance was approved on first reading without dissenting
<br />vote:
<br />
<br />"~ ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE CITY OF PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA, 1961, BY RBPEALIN~ SECTIONS
<br />26-28, 26-29, 26-73, and 26-74 THEREOF, AND BY AMENDING SECTIONS 26-1, 26-S, 26-7, 26~19, 26-20,
<br />26-2S, 26-26, 26-2?, 26-51, 26-5?, 26-58, 26-40,~26-41, ~6-45, 26-48, 26-52, 26-54, 26-64,
<br />26-65, 26-70, 26-71, 26-72, 26-76, 26-82, 26-83, 26-84, 26-85, 26-86 ~ND 26-90 THEREOF, TO
<br />ELIMINATE EMPLOYBB CONTRIBUTIONS ~0 THE PORTSMOUTH SUPPLEmeNTAL RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND TO THE
<br />PORTS~,~UTH FIRE ~ND POLICE RETIREMENT SYSTEM"
<br />
<br /> 67-~68 - "I submit the attached ordinance and recommend it be placed on first reading.
<br /> This appropriates $90,000 from the Capital Improvement Fund for the construction
<br />of streets and utility improvements in connection with the Weaver Redevelopment Project, Va R-40. These
<br />ame-~the nemessary improvements the City is required to make in connection with this urban renewal
<br />project.
<br /> This appropriation covers the contract price of $72,962.24 plus engineering and contingencies
<br />of $14,600. T~ bids were received for these improvements as follows: A. G. Pinkston Company, $72,962.24;
<br />Portsmouth Paving Company,$?$,799.08; A. G. Pinkston Company being the low bidder.
<br /> I recommend the contract be awarded to this firm."
<br />
<br />
<br />
|