Laserfiche WebLink
17: <br /> <br />April 27, 1965 <br /> <br />At a regular meeting of the City Council held on April 27, 1965, there were present: <br /> <br />R. Irvine Smith, John L. Dillon, George D. Hastes, Burrell R. Johnson, L. L. Knight, <br />~. T. Leafy, A. P. Johnson, Jr., City Manager, and M. A. Kerb, J'r., City Attorney <br /> <br />Absent was Jack P. Barnes. <br /> <br />The meeting was opened with prayer by Mr. Knight. <br /> <br />65-109 - The following request was presented by John Landers: <br /> <br /> 'tit is my pleasure to again this spring approach you gentlemen and request funds for a 1965 <br />Portsmouth Youth Corps Program. <br /> It is requested-that approval be granted for the funds necessary to operate a Y6uth Corps <br />which would consist of 80 boys and 1S g~rls between the ages of 16 and 21 who reside within the Portsmouth city <br />limits for an eight week program. Eight supervisors would De required; as well as~'a director and associate <br />director. The rate of pay' ~oM-the 95 young people would be 75 cents per hour with a 25 cents~per hour bonus <br />payable for the weekly payroll tha. t employee's are considered to have performed outstandingly. The bonuses earned <br />would be withheld until the end of the 1965program and paid to each recipient in a lump sum. <br /> The rate of pay for the ei~it supervisors would be SI.S0 per hour. The Director and <br />Associate Director would be compensated at a rate of $2.00 per hour. These salaries would be subject to a 10% bonus <br />payable at the end of the program to those who demonstrated outstanding enthusiasm and ability. <br /> It is expected that small hand tools, such as swing blades, rakes, bush axes, shovels, etc. <br />would be required. The estimated cost of such equipment is $I000.00. <br /> The total cost to the city for a program involving the aforementioned 'pe~onnel and equipment <br />at the suggested rate of pay would amount to $37,032.00. In 1963 and in 1964, the program-was operated within the <br />budget established. You may be assured that should the council approve this request, cur 1965 program would not <br />exceed these amounts. <br /> I am confident that it would be inappropriate for me not to thank the council for the funds <br />appropriated for a similar program in 1965 and 1964. As you may recall, in 1963 a pilot program involving 44 boys <br />was completed at a budgeted co~t of $13,000.00. In 1964, a larger program involving 66 boys with a budget of <br />$21,000.00 was conducted. I am sure that I speak for the young people:of Portsmouth when I express their sincere <br />thanks for not only the opportunity for being gainfully employed for the summer months, but also for the opportunity <br />to learn more of the respensibilities associated with ifidividual employment and for the opportunity to make a <br />significant contribution to the safety and beauty of the City. <br /> ~le material accomplishments for the City are certainly indisputable with 'such a..program. <br />The recognition of progressiveness for Portsmouth from many cities throughout out country has certainly improved <br />our communit~$ public image. It is, therefore, my sincere request on behalf of the Portsmouth Chamber of Connaerce <br />that you gentlemen approve this request for city funds in order that the recommended 1965 Yough Corps may be a <br />reality." <br /> <br /> ~.' Eastes expressed the thanks of the Council ito Mr. Landers for this preliminary sketch of <br />the proposed work for 1965. <br /> <br /> Mot$on of Mr. Knight that the proposal be referred to a conference of the Council and that <br />the Council go on record as approving the work of the committee on the plans, subject to the appropriation of the <br />necessary funds, was adopted, without d~ssenting vote. <br /> <br />65-110 - The following resolution was presented by John A. MacKenzie: <br /> <br /> "The Board of Di~ect0r$ of the Portsmouth Chamber of Commerce, at its April mee$ing, <br />unanimously passed the following resolution: <br /> ~ith the completion of Interstate 264 to ;~ashington Street now in sight, and with the <br />actual implementation of the Colonel Crawford Common, the necessity of a Crawford connector is more urgent and <br />essential than ever before. The Chamber of Commerce has requested previously that all necessary action be initiated <br />for the construction of this connector which is so vital to the revitalization of downtown Portsmouth. <br /> The Portsmouth Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, upon recommendation of the Highway <br />and Roads Committee, therefore, reiterates its endorsement of the Crawford Street connector and urges prompt action <br />to implement this most important ~ection of roadway. <br /> In further support of this project, the Portsmouth Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors <br />offers any assistance, which might be helpful in the materializing of this needed improvement. <br /> Since so much depends on connecting Crawford Street with Interstate 264 when the latter <br />highway-is completed in about 12 months, it appears to the Chamber that prompt action is essential. <br />A delegation from the Chamber's Board of Directors and the Highway and Roads Committee is <br />willing to meet with any group, at any place, at any time specified, that will aid in accomplishing this project." <br /> <br />dissenting vote. <br /> <br />Motion of Mr. Knight that the resolution be received with thanks was adopted, without <br /> <br />The following ~epertgcfr6m:.the City b{anager were read:' <br /> <br /> 65-111 "I submit the attached ordinance and recommend that it be placed on first ~eading. This <br />amends the sewer connection fee charges to make them more equitable on multi-family apartment construction. <br /> This charge does not affect our present rate as far as single-family residential constructionI <br />which is $60. On multi-family construction, the present charge is $60 for the first unit a~d $30 for each additional <br />unit. Under the proposed ordinance the fee will be $60 f6r the first unit, $30 for each additional unit up to <br />twelve, $20 for each of the next twelve units, and $10 for each ~nit over twenty-five. <br /> It also clarifies the ordinance with regard to charges for duplex houses, hotels, motels, <br />and motor courts." <br /> <br /> <br />