Minutes 01/09/1934 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Januarv~ been given due notic? ~f said petition and who appeared and defended-the same. Upon considera- tion of the-said petitmon and of the evidenc~ introduced by the parties, the cou~t being of the opinion that the Board ef ~quali~ation of'~the C~ty of Portsmouth erred in increasing the assess- merits ef the buildings on he sa~d land frem$1500.O0 to $3500.~0, and that~the said buildings are assessed for more than the fair market ~alue thereof a~ that the said assessment of $3500~B0 has been carried on the land books of the City for the year 1931, page 80 line 16,1932, page 81 line 13, amd 1933, page 83 line I0, it is adjudged, ordered and decreed that the assess- merit'on the buildings on the said land be reduced from $3500.~0 to $1500.00 and that the said City Realty. Corporation be refunded the sum of $5~.~0 for each of the years 1931 and 1932 paid by it on account of said erroneous asseesment, and that it be exonerated from the payment of the sum of $53.00 charged against it on account of said assessment for the year 1933. It is further~ordered that copies of this order be certified by the Clerk of this Court to the Oouncil of the City of Portsmouth and the Commissioner of the Revenue of the said CitY. Copy, Teste: Wm. Hodges Baker, Clerk, By Nellie M. Calvert, Motion of Mr. B~ooks to refer to the City Attorney was adopted. The following letter was read: "Portsmouth, Va., Jan. 9, 1934. The City Council of the City of Portsmouth, Gentlemen: On November 23, 1933, we, with other Oil Companies were invited tc bid on approx- imately 2300 gallons of lubricating oils for use by the ~ity of Portsmouth. The request was made to bid on certain oils which compare to oils manu-factured a~ud sold by the ~tandard 0il Company and the Texas Oil Company. Pleas~ understand the request specifically set out that bid must co- ver all oil to-co~mpare with ells ~isted on the proposal and on no other basis. ~ submitted a bid which according to-list furnished the writer by City Auditor was $168.00 lower than~the American OllO~mpany to whom was awarded the contract. I talked to your Auditor, Mr. Brinson, and requested him to allow me to see the original bids submitted by the di~.ferent ell companies. Mr. Brinson refused ~he request, but did furnish a list of b. ids made, mmasmuch as these bids covered the requirements of the City, we were of t. he impressmom that all bidding companies would be permitted to see the bids as is customary ~n city and govern- ment departments. Now in view of the fact that ou~ company is a taxpayer 'in the City of Portsmouth and responsible for all obligations which they might make in submitting their bid, we feel that we a~e due some explama~len why we should net receive the award of this contract and why we should be~refused ou~ request ~e see the competitive bids of other oil companies, Trusting that you will give this letter you~ consideratilon, we are, Yours respectfully, Sinclair Refining Company,. By C.E. Nix, City Salesman., On motion of Mr~ Fox, same was referred to the City Manager. The Manager sta~ed that all the projects asked fo~ hy the City of POrtsmouth from the Civil Works Administration had been allowed except the School project, and that when all were allowed, mere than $20G,000.~0 would have been allowed from this Administrat~ion work in the City of Portsmouth. On motion adjourned. CITY CLERK. Approved - pres ident.