|
September
<br />
<br /> 54-253 - The.following letter from the Citizens Protective Les~ue was presented:
<br /> '~It is noted that the City Council at its last meeting, Augus~ 24th, 1954, initiate,
<br />action to dispose of the site originally selected by the Portsmouth Redevelopment and Rousing Authority for the
<br />Jeffery Wilson Homes, bought and now o~T~d, by-the City of Portsmouth.
<br /> Since there is an admitted 'and an apparent urgent desire for a new mLullcip~l build
<br />lng and court houSe, it is suggeste~ that the City Council review its present intention and give serious consider-
<br />ation toward utilizing .this site for the establishmeng of a truly handsome new court houSe and municipal buildin
<br />or buildings. In interest of the welfare and real progress of our City, the Citizens' Protective League invites
<br />you go consider a few pertinemt facts:
<br /> 1. If it is the purpose of the present city administration to construct a new
<br /> Court house and/or municipal building go provide immediate and future needs
<br /> of Portsmouth, then this site is well worth your consideration.
<br /> 2. Why not use a site the City already owns; as our Navy Department has finally
<br /> been persuaded to do for the construction of their new hospital here.
<br /> 3. The site, as you know, is located north of Glasgow Street~ between ~{t. Ver-
<br /> non Ave. and Western Branch Road, at the southernmost end of Broad St.
<br /> graphically, it is very near the center and wel~ within the natural growth
<br /> of the City.
<br /> 4. It is far enough'uptown and west, as not go interfere or disrupt the presentl
<br /> e~cps_uslon of downtown businesses.
<br /> 5. It is readily accessible from any direction and ideally conditioned, at presq
<br /> ent, to cause a minimum of inconvenience t~ h~me owners a~d any radical
<br /> placement of persons ~hat otherwise would become necessary under another p a~.
<br /> If, in fact, the City of Portsmouth is determined to spend a ~i~t~ dollars or
<br />mere, as it is admitted will have,to be done With So-called Federal aid, to obtain a new shopping center, often
<br />time spoken of as a Civic Center with one er two more low-roofed, flat., yellow brick buildings, that will
<br />prove no credit to our growing city and uneconomical - shall we say - fifteen years hence.
<br /> } . A~.progressive civic center plan should be exactly what it is and nothing else.
<br /> (A) it should consist of a court houSe and/or municipal building, large
<br /> enough and tall enough to house all the various departmental or admini-
<br /> strative offices of the City; economical in construcIion and efficient
<br /> in space.
<br /> (B) It should be an imposing structure, something all citizens may well be
<br /> proud of, and in conformity with the dignity and the rights of every
<br /> individual
<br /> It is, indeed, the duty and proper function Of the City's elected repre-
<br /> (~) ' truer such a center, not a shopping centen
<br /> sentatives to authorize and cons '
<br /> Neither is the responsibility of a HouSing ?Authority nor a proper func-
<br /> tion of the Federal Government - no matter how unsocialistic they may
<br /> pretsnd to be.
<br /> (D) A municipal building and/or court house should not be made dependent on
<br /> a slum c'learance project, nor upon any other contingencies other than:
<br /> Is the City able to finance it from and within its own resources or
<br /> income?
<br /> Let us stop new and rid ourselves of this false urge of dependency upon the
<br /> dictates ef local and Federal bureaucracy to spend our money as they doom fit. The Citizens Protective League~
<br /> therefore, in view of these facts, sincerely request and implore you gent lemon of the Council to earnestly
<br /> reconsider the apparent intent to sell the site here mentioned for some possible immediate and temporary advan-
<br /> tage that might be gained by the City.
<br /> With this in mind, we also wish to take this opportunity to remind the Council
<br /> that it is already committed to the possible costs of annexation, to an enlarged school program, to neither of
<br /> which we have object,on; that the City of Portsmouth rep6rtedly 'is-operating under a deficit of a little more
<br /> than a half million dollars, despite statements made to the contrary; that the ~resent administration is now
<br /> ~egotiating for a new bond issue and, further, is Taced with the immediate~need for a new g0 inch water main all
<br /> the way from Suffolk a~ an estimated cost of $600,000.
<br /> We truSt too, that you have ~ot forgotten the mistake made, only recently,by thef
<br /> sale of the old Market building and the contract for the newly erected and existing market shed.~'
<br />
<br />On motion filed.
<br />
<br />adopted.
<br />
<br />54-255 -
<br />
<br />Motion of ~kr. Smith to suspend the rules to hear from Joseph P. Donlan, was
<br />
<br /> git. Donlan presented the following letter:
<br />
<br /> "This is written for the purpose of obtaining further information pertaining to
<br />the administration of the city's business, for the benefit of our fellow citizens who bmve an abiding and contin-
<br />uing interest in these matters.
<br /> It is requested that the questions hereinafter stated be publicly answered a~
<br />the meeting of the City Council and confirmed by letter to me at the earliest possible date.
<br /> 1. Has the Portsmouth Baseball Club paid its indebtedness to the City
<br /> for rental of the stadium? What is the total amount of this debt? If it
<br /> has not been paid, why has not some effective action been initiated to
<br /> collectcthe money?
<br /> 2. According =o news reports, the Portsmouth Transit Company has not
<br /> paid the gross receipt tax due the City since March, 1954~ which is now in
<br /> excess of Eighteen ThouSand Dollars ($18,000.00). 'Way 1/as this money not
<br /> been collected promptly when due? A review of the State and City Codes
<br /> and the City Charter does ~ot disclose any authority for the City to sub-
<br /> sidize either the Transit Company or the Baseball Club; nor is discrimina-
<br /> tion permitted in the collection of taxes.
<br /> 3. What, if any, progress has been made to abolish nepotism in City
<br /> employment?
<br /> 4. Row many city employees reside outside theCity limits? Why is the
<br /> practice ~ow permitted when jusI a few years ago other city employees who
<br />
<br />
<br />
|