|
January 22nd, 1954.
<br />
<br />At a called meeting of the City Council, held January 22nd, 1954, there were present:
<br />
<br />Fred A. Duke, R. E. Hawks, C.C. Houghton, Jr., James N. Howard,
<br />Edg~r W. L~wrence,'R. Irvine Smith, I.G. Vass, City Manager, and R,C.Barclay,City Attorney.
<br />
<br />The following call for the meeting was read:
<br />
<br /> "Please attend a called meeting of the City Conncil, to be held ~n Friday, January 22nd,
<br />7:30 P.M., in the Council Chamber, to consider the petition presented to repeal the Annexation Ordinance.
<br /> By Order of the President."
<br />
<br /> 54-22. A petition signed by Charles L. Parker and ethers, filed with the City Clerk on the 13th day
<br />of January, 1954, was presented, petitioning the Council of the City of Portsmouth to eause to be submitted ~to a
<br />vote, the following question:
<br />
<br />"Shall the ordinance adopted by the Council o£ the City 6f Portsmouth on the
<br />l?th day of October, 1953, providing for the annexation of certain territory
<br />of the County of Norfolk, be repealed?"
<br />
<br /> Gn motion of Mr. Houghton, seconded by ~r. Smith,
<br />the following vote:
<br />
<br />the following resolution was.adopted, and by
<br />
<br />Ayes.: Duke, Hawks, Houghton, Howard, Lawrence, Smith.
<br />
<br />Nays: None.
<br />
<br />'~R~solution
<br />
<br />Be it Resolved by the Council of the City of Portsmouth, Virginia,
<br />that there be submitted to a vote of the electors of the City of
<br />Portsmouth at a special elebtion to be held on the 13th day of
<br />April, 1954, the question set forth in the petition of Charles L.
<br />Parker and others, filed with the City Clerk on the 13th day of
<br />January, 1954, namely:
<br />
<br />Shall the ordinance adopted by ~e Council of the City of Portsmouth
<br />on the 17th day of October, 1953, providing for the annexation of certain
<br />territory of the County of Norfolk, be repealed?
<br />
<br />And be it further resolved that the Electoral Board of the City be and
<br />they are hereby directed To make the necessary arrangements for the
<br />election and open a poll and take the sense of the qua%tried voters of
<br />the City on the question as set forth in said petition."
<br />
<br />Mr. Duke, in casting his vote, made the following comments which he requested be recorded:
<br />
<br />"It is my belief that I should vote 'no', but fear that it might be construed to mean
<br />that I am voting in favor of the repeal of the ordinance I am voting 'yes' I am s~re
<br />that the person or persons who incorporated the referendum provisions in the Cily Charter
<br />never had any idea it would be used by county citizens to contravert the action of the
<br />City Council and the pr~ress of the City, and furthermore I do not believe the annexation
<br />ordinance, which is one for the administration of the City and not one for legislative
<br />matters, is such an'ordinance as is included in the referendum provisions."
<br />
<br />On motion adjourned~
<br />
<br />Approved -
<br />
<br /> President.
<br />
<br />
<br />
|