Minutes 01/23/1934 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

January 2~rd. of .D~re.ctor of Public v~elfare. Mr. Mayo's'motion that Item A of the Oity Manager's recommen- dation to the ~ouncil on January 22nd., 1934, relating to the consolidation of the office of Coroner with that of Director of Public Welfare, be taken i~omthe table and concurred in, was adopted, and by the following vote: Ayes: Fox, Mayo~ 0ast, Ogg - 4. Nays: Brooks, Hutchins, Moore -'3. The following letter from the Assessors was read: "Portsmouth, Va., January 23rd, 193~. To the Hon. City Council, Portsmouth, Va. Gentlemen: On Dec. 28th, 1933, we the unders.igned were apoointed by the Honorable Judge of Hustings Oourt as real estate assessors for193~. We qualified gan. 3rd, 1934, and immediate- ly got in touch with the City Manager notifying him that we had qualified and were ready for service. A day or two later we had a conference with the Eanager to discuss our compensation at which time he stated that we would have to s~e the Council, S~nce that ti?_~ejhaveA~e~n seekin a conference with the'Council thru the Eanager, whica coozerenoe was helm an. at which time the Assessors proposed to.do the work for the same amount pa~d for the same work four years ago less the same rate of cut that other people working for the city had ~affered during the last four years. A motion was made and seconded that we be paid the se~e as our predecessors less a cut of 20~ to which the Assessors agreed. An amendment was of£ered to this motibn to lay the motion on the table, which was carried. In order that the assessment may not be held up to the detriment of the ~ax p~ye~s we now propose to proceed with the work accepting whatever the Council sees fit ~o pay us under protest and without prejudice as to our legal or moral rights as to future adjudication as to what ~ay bedecided to be a ~reason~ble compen'sation after the work has been finished. As stat- ed above we reported to the Manager for duty immediately after we had qualified and have had several conferences with him regarding the work and have been subject to his call since that time and of course will be paid from the day we reported for duty. The State Law allows the Assessors a reasonable pay for the work. The Council has made an arbitrary appropriation of $1500.O0 before consultation with the Assessors and ev- idently without knowledge of the amount of work involved, we propose to make a proper assess- ment according to the word and intent of the law and to do it in as short a time as possible. Nine years ago the Assessors were paid $5000.00 'each, four years ago $4000.00 each and at no time less than $4000.00 each. We do not believe the arbitrary appropriation is commensurate with the 'service to be rendered. We propose to de what is just and £air and upon completion of the task, we shall ask for a just compensation. There is a great deal of work to be done and the sooner we can begin the less the cost will be. Yours very truly, Oharles Franklin Harper F. Nash Bi!isoly Assessors~.~ Motion of Er. Brooks to receive and order filed with the u~derstanding that the pay o~ $1,500.O0 to be paid to each of the assessors be without prejudice. Priv. ilege of the floor was granted ~to Er. F~rper, who stated that the addption of the motion was unnecessary.~ Brooks withdrew his motion. filed, No, ion of Mr. Mayo that the letter from ~he- assessors be received and ordered was adopted.~ The following communication from the City Attorney was _r~ad: "At ygur last meeting you referred to me ~he following matters: 1. Order of cou~t reducing the assessment on the prope=~y of the City Realty Corporation. This was a matter which was filed in court in 193~ and stayed on the docket of the court.until Ootobe= 1~33 before trial. The Board of Equalization in !931 increased the as- sessment against the property of the City Realty Corporation at ~214-16 High Street by charg- ing against the corporetion c~tain pumps and taaks which did net belong to the corporation and which was not real estate. The Court-reduced the assessment to the extent of $2,000., and the City Realty Corporation should be refunded $53- for each of the years 1931 and 1~3~ and relived of $53- charged for the year. 1933. 2. The communication of Nfs. Mary W. Hatton concerning ttxes charged against a building on the rear of the property 31~ King Street. The theatre building which extended over on this property was destroyed by fire in 1931. The Commissioner of the Revenue failed to m~ke any correction in the. assessment for 1~3~, and in July 1932 the City Council relieved Mrs. H~tton of the taxes charged against an assessment of $2500. The full value of the property was again oha~ged on the Land Books of 1~33, and Nfs. Hatton paid the taxes. She should be re~und- ed the sum of $65~25 which she p~id on the pre-pa~rmen~ tax plan. ~he Commissioo~r of the Rev- enue has corrected his book so that the assessment will appear proper for Notion cf Mr. Fox to concur in the Attorney's recommendation and appropriate $1yl.25 to.make said refund, was adopted, and by the following vote: