Minutes 02/28/1961 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

February 28th. 1961 1. January 29, 1960 - Company met with and advised Council of need for in,mediate fare increase. 2. February 9, 1960 - Portsmouth Transit Company filed petition for fare increase. 3. February 25, 1960 - Council decided to defer decision on Portsmouth Transit Company's request for six months ar the request ~f Community Bus Uompany and asked for additional informstion from Portsmouth Transit Company 4. March 24, 1960 - Information requested by Cou~ci~ submitted by Portsmouth Transit Company. 5. May 19, 1960 - Lengthy meeting and broad discussion on fare increase between Council and Company - no actio taken. 6. June 28, 1960 - City Council held another public meeting with Portsmouth Transit Companyand againdeferred action on,fare request for another SlX months, in order to determine results to be realized by the Company from operations in the annexed areas, even though it was shown that the Company was then losing money. ?. January-l?, 1961 - Portsmouth Transit Company reported to Council that operating revenues failed to meet operating expenses during the preceding six months of 1960 by $11,681 and that the tess for the entire year · 1960 was $28,074. At this time the Company requested permission to install on February 1 a fare s~ruc~ure of $.25 adult fare and a $.12 ~ school fare. Council took the request under advisement, but has rendered no decision to date. 8. January 1E, 1961 - City Council requested a conference with Community Bus Company on January 31, which was not held on January 31 due to a request for delay by Community Bus Company. Tho Portsmouth Transit Company ha~ been providing:public transportation in Portsmouth for fifteen years under an ordinance with the City which plainly states that the City Council '...will at all times prescribe ra~es of fare which will permit a reasonable return...on the investment in the bus service in thn city.' (8%) This ordinance of the City is not being complied with ~y the Council and, 'as a result, our Company is being critically damaged and faces liquidation. The Council has a duty to the bus riding public and a responsibility to the Company underi the City Code to grant us such relief. Our investment is being con£iscated~ ~o~trary to ou~ constitutional rights under the present fare structure, and unless the proposed fare increase requested of Council on January l?~ 1961 is authorized by March 3, we will be forced to make drastic reductions in Service to reduce the confis- catory losses. ~Furthermore, we wi-il then have no alternative except to make plans to liquidate the business. ' We do not want to do. this because the riding public and business will suffer, but Council's continued inaction will leave us no choice. Signed - Warren R. Pollard "At the reques~ of our employee~,.we have agreed to defer for one week the curtailment of service mentioned in our letter of February 21 .... : Therefore, we are respectfully requesting City Council to defer until March l0 any action on our request for. a fare increase.. Meanwhile, we would like ~o have the opportunity of discussing Portsmouth's transit situation at a closed, informal conference at your convenience on.o~ abou% Monday, March 6.? Signed - Warren E. Pollard On motion of Mr..BreedloMe ~he eommunications~were received and referred to the continued conference on the transit problem, without dissenting vote. 61-45 - The following communication from Donald C. Kilgore was read: The underszgned has been requested by the operators of the Employees Transportation Association (independent bus operators to and from the Norfolk Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, Virginia) to appear before Council at its meeting on February 28, 1961 to present a petition requesting a permit to continue operation in the City limits of the City of Portsmouth. We would very much appreciate being placed or~ the agenda for this meeting and having the privilege of addressing Council and making, the presentation of the afore- men~ioned petition. I feel reasonably certain that the matter will not require the attention of the Council for more than a five or ~en minute period of time." Signed - Donald C. Kilg0re Rules were suspended a~d M~.-Kilgore ~poke, presenting-the fello~ving petition signed by Mrs. M. C. Pickens and many others. Motion of ~r. ~Breedlove to ~eceive the petition and refer it to the continuedconference of the Councilmen. the transit problem, :was adopted, without dissenting vote~ .CoUncil resumedses~ion. On motion rules were suspended~ Mr. Kilgore~spoke stating that it is. his wnderstanding that counsel for some of the petitioners who were party to the-guit, has been filed-with ~ustice I'~nson2 Appeal has not-been granted and until such time th~ injunction takes effect. ~ Mr..L.H.. Keller spoke on Portsmouth Transit-Company's injunction to s~op operation of privately operated buses. . ~ Council resumed sessionj Council adjourned for conference. Council resumed session. The Mayor stated that since the Council is presently negotiating with the Portsmouth Transit Company and the Co~mu~ity~Moto~ Bus Company~ it.cannot ~ant the reques~ of the private bus operators. He stated further:if the Council were-to try to'intercede o~ intervene, the bus operators would be running a risk if they o~rated buses on March lsto The Mayor advised that the proper recourse is to apply ~o the ~upreme Court of Appeals for s w~rit of supersedencs. ~ : 61-46 - Motion of Mr. Breedlove to go into the election of a City Assessor was adopted, withou~ dissenting vote.