Minutes 02/13/1934 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

leered :Taxes due at Dec'. 31st, 193-3. This showing was made notwithstanding the fact that $106,495.50 in Uncollectible Taxes was charged.off to Profit and Loss iu December 1932 a~d December 1933. Your attention is also invited by the ACcountan,t to the fact that the City OD-. crated during the year 1933 without .the necessity of borrowing for current expenses in anti- cioation of tax collections, as has been the apparent necessity for many years past. A review of Eihibit 'I' of the report, which analyzes the Sinking Pands, shows the Sinking Funds were handled very satisfactorily during the year. The cash in banks, in both the City and Water Sinking Funds, was less on Dec. 31st than on Jan. 1st, 1933. practi- cally all of the income of the Sinking Funds during 1933 was invested in Portsmouth bonds. 4123,O00.O0 par value of bond-s were purchased during the year, on which a substantial profit was earned for the Sinking Funds. Additional bonds were purchased during January of this year. In addition to the profit realized from the purchase of these bonds, the Sinking Funds will earn approximately one Der cent more in interes,t on the $123,000.O0 than would have been earned had the funds been deposited in the banks on interest. The Sinking Fund disbursed $100,OO0.O0 during the year in payment of matured bonds. The report shows~-the Water Department ~et Revenue for 1933 amounted to $45,263.16 i~ other words, the Revenue o-~ the Water Department for 1933 was 4~5,263.16 more than the Ex- Dense. Please note the ACcountant advises that the Sinking Fund deposit requirements for 1933 were approoriated and oaid during th~ year, while the Appropriation for the year 1932 f~om the General Fund was ~40,O00.O0 less than the requirement for that year. The Accountant advises that since the audit report at Sept. 3Oth, 1932 "Ports- mouth and Norfolk. County Ferries Surplus" has increased to the extent of $63,O00.00. One-half of this amount, $31,Y50,00, represents an ±nc-rea-se in the ~Oity's equity therein, and this amount should be added both to the Ferries Property Accoun~ and Capital Surplus, to properly reflect the Oity's investment at Dec. 31, 1933. In order that the City's Investment Account will properly reflect the City's equity in the ferries property, I recommend that we comply with the Accountant's recoxmendation." be -Notion that the report be received and-that the City Manager, s recommendation concurred in, was adopted, and by the following vote: Ayes: Brooks, Fox, Hutchins, Mayo, Moors, Oast, Ogg - Y. Nays: None. The following communications from the City Attorney were read: 'At your last meetiog you referred to me a commtuuication from George ~[. Brandon -requesting that he be refunded $10.13 princioal for taxes got the years 1919, 1920 and 1921, together with 4Y.29 interest thereon, and that he be relieved of $106.26 for ,taxes for the years 1922 to 1933, inclusive. It is the contention of George W. Brandon that he is assessed with a parcel of land, bO by lbO feet adjoining his property belonging to the estate of Lit- tlc Hinton, and with the buildiug on the Hinton land. It-apoears from the records that ~e. orge W. Brandon has since 191~ .been assessed on the land books of~ the City with a piece of lan~ described as ~"Piece 120 by l~O feet north side Key Road~. The land which he owns contains thi's measurement, and the assessment map shows that this is all the land he is assessed with, and that the Hinton land is not assessed to anyone. Hence the Hinton land is not assessed to him and he is not entitled to relief on this account. . It also appears that the piece of laud, 120 by 140 feet, was as. sessed as a va- cant parcel in 1919 and 1920 at $60. In 1921 the land was ~aised to $200. and a building as- · sessed thereon at SaO0. The land was then assessed with a building a,t $200.. until the pres- ent time. There is no small building on this land to be assessed at $~90., and it is appar- ent that there is an error in the building assessment. The building in which Brandon lives appears to be assessed on the property of the Citizens Insurance Company, Incorporated, which adjoins his land. B.randon should then be ~elieved of t.he followia2g4taxes charged in error agair~t the building, $3.00 lo~ 1922, 43.00 for 1923, $~.10 for 1-92 , $2.50 for 1925, 45.-00 for 1926, $5.40 for 192Y, and 45.30 for each of the years 1928, 1929, 1930, -1931, 1932, -and 1933. ~ Motion of ~r. Fox ~o concur in ,the a. nd b~ the following vote: ~ity Attorney's recommendation, was adopted Ayes: Brooks~ Fox, Hu~chins, Mayo, Moore, Oast, Ogg - ?. Nays: None. ,In b~inging suits ~o sell real estate for delinquent taxes, I have found .the procedure somewhat involved, and I have prepared a bill to amend the charter of the City by adding thereto a new section ~ be known as Section ~5-A. The amencLment will incorporate into the charter the essential provisions'of section gO3 of the State Tax Code, and will per- mit all proceedings to be instituted in the name of the Ci.ty.. Section 403 provides that the proceedings shall be brought -Ln the name of the. Commonwealth at the instance of the Attorney General,the Department of Taxa~on, or the City Treasurer. While the City now has the right to enforce its lien, the additional remed~s as set forth in section 403 will be very helpful in the collection of taxes. I recommend that our Reoresentatives in the General Assembly be reCaested to have the bill passed.~ Ths bill- ,A bill to amend an act of the General Assembly of Virginia, approved March lC, 19~8, providing a new charter for the City of. Portsmouth, by adding thereto a new sec- tion to be known as section 46-A, relatinE to the collection of ,taxes. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia that an act of the General Assembly of Virginia,. approved March lO, 1908, providing a new charter for the City of Ports-