Laserfiche WebLink
June 13th, 1961 <br /> <br />At a regular meeting of the City Council, held on June 13th, 1961, there were <br /> <br />R. Irvine Smith, Jack R. Barnes, W.R. Breedlove, W.To Leery, R.B. Seward, <br />George R. Walker, R. E. Weiseman, A.P. Johnson,Jr., City Manage~ J~S.bivesay,Jr., <br />City Attorney <br /> <br />The meeting was opened with prayer by Mr. Smith. <br /> <br /> 61-147 - A public hearing on the proposed Fiscal Guide for 1961-62 was held. <br /> The following spoke: <br /> <br /> E.g. Williams, Mrs. Marian W. Rawls, Marion E. Tuttle, Louis Whitehead, <br /> L. H. Keffer, S.R. Hensley <br /> <br /> 61-147.1 - Motion of ~r. Walker ~o change the order 6f business ro consider Item <br />#1 of New Business first and Ordinance entitled 'An Ordinance to Amend and Reordain Section g-l/6 of the Code of <br />the City of Portsmouth, Virginia, 1961, as Amended To Provide for the Beginning of the Fiscal Year on the First <br />day of January of each year from and after January 1, 1962' which was referred to a conference at last meeting~ <br />be removed from the table and considered second, since both items pertain zo the budget ordinance, was lost,there~ <br />being no second. <br /> <br />The following reports from the City Manager were read: <br /> <br />firs~ reading. <br />1961-62." <br /> <br /> 61-148 - "I submit the attached ordinance and recommend that ir be placed, on <br />This ordinance appropriates funds for the operation of the City Government for the fiscal year <br /> <br />Motion of NLr. Weiseman ~o place the following ordinance on firs~ reading: <br /> <br />"AN ORDINANCE TO '.APPROPRIATE FUNDS ~ECESSARY FOR OPERATION OF THE <br />CITY GOVERNMENT FOR AND DURING THE-EtSCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1961 <br />AND ENDING JUNE 30, 1962" <br /> <br />~r. Walker made the following s~a~emen~: <br /> <br /> '"If the government is living within its income, its credit is good. If, in some <br />cris~s, it lives beyond its income for a year or nwo, it can usually borFow temporarily~ on reasonable terms. <br />But, if like the spendthrift, it throws discretion to the winds, is willint to make no sacrifice at all in spend-t <br />ina, extends its taxing up to the limits of people's power to pay and continues ¢o pile up deficits, it is on the, <br />road ~o bankruptcy." (Unquote) That was said by none other than Franklin D. Roosevelt in Pittsburgh, Pa.. on <br />Oct. 19, 1932 -- s sound statement by one who practiced the opposite of his preaching~: <br /> I want to make it unmistakably clear, that ~hen I refer in the following comments~ <br />to acts or actions of the City Manager I consider such acts and actions to be those of this body: and the respon- <br />sibility of this body which ha~, in full knowledge of the factS, tacitly approved his actions. The Manager is <br />human. He has a job which pays well, both in coin of the realm and in power, and his job depends upo~ the pleasure <br />of the majority (4) of this council. <br /> The Record of Council shows no official action which, in anyway, repealed or <br />amended this directive concerning the use of the funds received from the tum~el commission. I note in the <br /> 2 ' <br />30 April? 1960 ~onthly Finance Report that the entire ~1,352,547.5 zs found under the Realized Revenue column of <br />the General Fund. <br /> The nextpiece of evidence to prove that Council did not blindly, end without <br />warning, arrive at today's point of need for more than a half-million of additional revenue, ia the ~anager's <br />1960-61 budget, the current budget ending this month. Of thisbudget the Record of Council, June 28th, 1960 <br />Item 60-172 contains my statement. <br /> Today we have before us the delayed action tax increase~ Both the 1960-61 budget <br />and the alleged pay raise £~om non-existent tunnel funds were as false as a three-dollar bill. When the audit <br />of that fiscal year was received in September 1960 it contained on Page 7 in the analysisof changes in Balance <br />of the General Fund the following masterpiece of understatement, (Quote) "In early 1960 the City received <br />$1,352,547.52 fro~ the Elizabeth River Tunnel Commission. This is the prime factor in producing g surplus in the <br />General Fund." ~nquote) A,surplus of only $141~101.85 after a wind-fall of n~arly $1~400~000.00~ This is <br />certified proof that the~tire tnnnel fund was credited to the General Fund revenue for fiseal 60-61~a~ there- <br />fore did not exist after 30 June9 1960. <br /> The June 1960 Finance Report (received in July after the budget was in force), <br />when compared with the audit for that year, produced many questions in my mind and during the second Council <br />meeting in October, 1960 I presented these questions and asked the lZianager for a writtenanswer. I quote one <br />of these questions: '~age 2 of the 30 Jun~ 1960 Finance Report shows as REALIZED REVENUE in the General Fund <br />$1,352,547.52from the Tunnel Commission~ the exact amount of the agreement. Page 3 of the 31 July 1960 Finance <br />Report shows es ESTIMATED REVENUE in the General Fund $150,000.00 under Title of TUNNEL FUNDS RECEIPTS - Salaries <br />This is not believed to be possible and an account of transactions with explanation is helieved to be in order." <br />(Unquote) To this date, I have not received an answer, oral or written. <br /> During the Council meeting of 13 December 1960, I again reminded the Manager and <br />Council of these unanswered questions and presented a summary of my comments on fiscal year 59-60. I quote from <br />that statement: "We actually under-estimated the Revenue by $186,523.74. Exhibit B (of the audit) indicates <br />that we exceeded it by $1,166,023.78 <br /> <br />Calculation: <br /> <br /> $8,566,383.78 <br />minus 1~352~547.52 <br /> 7,213,836.26 <br />minus 77400,360.00 <br /> - 186,523.74 <br /> <br />Revenue shown in B (which incIuded all Tunnel ~unds) <br />Received from the Tunnel Co~issiou <br />Actual Revenue <br />Estimated Revenue 59-60 Budget <br /> <br />The General Fund balance on June 30, 1960 of $141,101.85, although correct from <br /> <br /> <br />