|
and read:
<br />
<br />read:
<br />
<br /> Ayes: Baker, Bartlett, Breedlove,Sewa~d, Smith, Walker, Weiseman
<br /> Nays: None
<br />
<br />59-203 - The following ordinance, placed on first reading at last meeting, was taken up
<br /> "AN ORDINAnCE TO A~END SECTION 30-70 OF CHAPTER 30 OF THE CODE OF
<br /> TKE CITY OF POHTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA, 1951, PERTAINING TO PENALTIES
<br /> FOR VIOLATIONSOF ARTICLE V OF SAID CHAPTER, SO AS TO REDUCE THE
<br /> MINIMU~ FINE THEREUNDER TO TWO DOLLARS"
<br />
<br />On motion 6f Mr. Breedlove, said ordinance was adopted, and by the following vote:
<br />
<br /> Ayes: Baker, Bartlett, Breedlovel Seward, Smith, Walker, Weiseman
<br /> Nays: None
<br />
<br />59-205 - The following ordinance, placed On first reading at last meeting, was taken up
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINANCE TO A~END SECTION 2-16 OF CHAPTER 2 OF THE CODE OFTHE
<br /> CITY DF PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA, 1951, CONCERNING APPROPRIATION ORDI-
<br /> NANCES OR RESOLUTIONS, IMPOSING OF TAXES AND AUTHORIZATION OF BOR-
<br /> ROWING''
<br />
<br />On motion of Mr. Breedlove, said ordinance was adopted, and by the following vote:
<br />
<br />and read:
<br />
<br />Ayes: Baker, Bartlett, Breedlove, Seward, Smith, Walker, Weiseman
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br />The following ordinance, placed on. first reading at last meeting, wqs taken ap
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINANCE TO A~END SECTION 8-1.21 OF CHAPTER 8 OF THE CODE OF
<br />THE CITY OF PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA, 1951, AS ANIENDED, CONCERNING
<br />APPROPRIATION ORDINANCES OR ~ESOLUTIONS"
<br />
<br />On motion of Mr.
<br />
<br /> 5~-204 -
<br />tabled, was taken up and read:
<br />
<br /> Bartlett, said ordinance was adopted, and by the following vote:
<br />
<br />Ayes: Baker, Bartlett, Breedlove, Seward, Smith, Walker, WeiBe~zn\
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br /> The followin~ report from the City Attorney, presented at the last meeting and
<br />
<br /> "The 1959 Beard of equalization has completed its work. The Board received 416
<br />applications, o~ which 266 resulted in changes whereby land and buiIdiag assessments were reduced $711,540.00
<br />producing an annual tax loss of $17,788.50.
<br /> In view of the fact that Section 58-907 of the Code of Virginia provides that
<br />the Attorney for a City aggrieved by anyorder of the Board of Equalization may apply to a court of record for
<br />the correction and revision of suc~ order, I have undertaken a careful analys~s of the reductions granted by the
<br />Board. A competent real estate appraiser was employed to assist ~n th~s analys~s.
<br /> We find that the Board made a nmmDer of spot reductions in land values creatin~
<br />in our opinion gross inequalities when these reduced assessments"~re compared to the assessments o~ adjacent land~.
<br />We also find several instances where the assessed values of buildings have been reduced to the point that in our
<br />opinion gross inequalities have been created.
<br /> The attached schedule shows pertinent data on the assessments ~n question. The
<br />number of assessments involved ~s 37, the reduction in assessed values is $391~780.00, and the annual tax loss is
<br />$9,794.50~
<br /> Ia order to assure an equ~t spread of the tax burden, I recommend that the City
<br />institute the svD~tutory process to have these assessments reviewed by a court of record."
<br />
<br />Motion of Mr. Bartlett ~o remove from the table was adopted, without dissenting vo~e.
<br />
<br /> Motion of ~lr. Weiseman that the City Attorney's recommendation be approved and that he be
<br />authorized to proceed as requested, was adopted, without dissenting voze.
<br />
<br />NEW BUSINESS
<br />
<br />59-216 - The following letter from the Commissioner of Revenue was read:
<br />
<br /> "Inclosed herewith are 1957 and 1958 tangible personal proper~y tax notices, in the name
<br />'of Robert G. Appenzeller, which are properly stamped as having bee~ paid. Included in each assessment is the
<br /> value of a boat, amounting to $200.00 which represents a tax of $5.50 each. The assessment on the bo~t is an
<br /> erroneous one as the bo~t belongs to the ~axpayer's father who has been properly assessed for same.
<br /> Due to the foregoing, we sincerely reques~ a refund in the amount of $11.00 Eo said Ro-
<br /> bert O Appenzeller."
<br /> Motion of ~r. Smith that a ~efund of $11.O0 to Robert G. Appenzeller be placed on
<br /> first reading, was adopted, without dis~enting~v6te.
<br />
<br />Mr. Breedlove in the Chair.
<br />
<br /> 59-217 - Mr. Baker presented a statement regarding an advisory referendum to determine
<br />whether or no~ the City should accept that para'of Norfolk County recently awarded by the Annexation Court.
<br />(Statement on file in City Clerk's office).
<br />
<br /> Motion of Mr. Baker that a resolution be ad6pted, authorizing the said referendum
<br />within thirty days, was lost, there being no second.
<br />
<br />
<br />
|