|
At a regular meeting of the City Oounci! held December 27th, 1932, at 8:00
<br />there were present:
<br />
<br />were read
<br />
<br />Vernon A. Brooke, Leslie T. Fox, W. R. Nutchins, S. B. Noore
<br />Archibald Ogg - 6. '
<br />Als5 the Oity Nanager.
<br />
<br />J.Alden Oast,
<br />
<br />Einutes of regular meeting held December 13th and soeciaZ meeting of December 19th,
<br />and approved. ' -
<br />
<br /> The following communications from the OityEanager were read:
<br /> to amend and rexordaiq an ordinance
<br /> 1st - 'I am attaching for your a~oroval an ord~nanoezentitled 'An 0rdin~nce Oreat-
<br />ing a Bureau of Earkets and Standards in the Department of Public Welfare, consisting of the
<br />Division of ~eights~ and Neasures~ License~ Inspection and EunicioaI Earket and Providing for
<br />the ~ecessary ~mployees t? carry ou~ the Provisions of the Ordi~ance~ which was adopted by
<br />the Gouncil on August 26tn, 192~.
<br /> This ordinance is submitted for the reason that some pzrts of the present
<br />ordinance are not in effect ~nd have not been in effect for some time, and I feel that other
<br />parts of the ordinance should be ~mended in order to permit a more efficient and economical
<br />operation of the Narket building.,
<br />
<br /> In connection therewith, the following ordinance was, on motion of ~. Fox placed
<br />on its first reading: ,
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINANOE TO ANEND AND RE-ORDAIN AN ORDI?~ANCE ENTITLED 'AN ORDINANCE
<br />0REATING A BUREAU 0F ~P~EETS AND STANDARDS IN THE DEPART~.~ENT OF PUBLI0
<br />WELFARE, CONSISTING OF THE DIVISION OF ~IGHTS AND NEASURES, LICENSE
<br />INSPEOTIOE AND EUNIOIPAL ~AREET AND PROVIDI~G FOR ~HE NECESSARY ~PLOY£
<br />EES TO GARRY OUT THE PROVISIONS OF THE O.RDINANOE.,
<br />
<br /> 2nd - ~Authority is requested to refund Geo. W. Nauoin Company 953.00 which was
<br />paid to the City 0ollector for 1~32 personal property tax, on ~n erroneous assessment·
<br /> The Commissioner of Revenue has relieved this tax according to law, but be-
<br />fore the Council could act on the Oommissioner's action, Er. Eaupin had paid this along with
<br />other taxes.,
<br />
<br /> Eotion of Er. Brooks to refer to City Attorney w~s adopted.
<br />
<br /> 3rd - 'I am attaching hereto bill from the Ohildren~s Home Society of Virginia
<br />dated December 23rd, for board of Walter Williams from September let, 1~32 to January 1st,
<br />1933, amount $6~.y0.
<br /> I reeo~end payment of this bill but as our appropriation for Probation has
<br />been exhausted, additionaZ aopropriation of $89.~ will be necessary to pay this bill.
<br /> I am handling with the ~hildr~n's Home Society of Virginia for suitable
<br />placement of ~alterWilliams, but it now.appears that we will be unable to m~ke a more satis-
<br />factory disposition of this child for some time.,
<br />
<br /> Eotion of }~,~. Brooks to concur in the Nan~ger's recommendation and to appropriate
<br />$69.Y0 to pay said bill, was adopted, and by the fol~ow~ng vote:
<br />
<br />Ayes - Brooks, Fox, Hutchins, Eoore, Oast, o.gg - 6.
<br />
<br />Nays - None.
<br />
<br /> 4th - 'Yurther in connection with my letter of December 19th~, inclosing copy of
<br />letter from ~r. Eorton L. Wallerstein, Executive Secretary of the League of Virginia Eunici-
<br />palities regarding request from the Council of the City of No. fork,~ ~ for" ou~ views with refer-
<br />once to a complete investigation of public utility rates,' also advising that the League had
<br />cemmttuicate~ with the American Public Utilities Bureau and ascertained that -the entire cost
<br />o£ a proceedin~ to investigate all the rates onaroed by the Virginia Elec~i'o & Power 0ompany
<br />in Virginia, including expenses of e_very description whatsoever, would not exceed $15,000.'00
<br />and on this basis o-o~r propor~tion bf the to~al co'st would be
<br /> I ido not believe the Virginia Electric & Power Oompany wou~d object to
<br />such an investigation, as it would determine if the rates now being charged are fair, and if
<br />not, what adjns,t_ment should be made in the present ra~es. Therefore, in view of this and the
<br />importance'~ of this qu~estion to the public, I recommend that we ?artieipate in. the exoe.nse of
<br />such an investigation with the understanding that the cost to the City of Por~smouth-wzll not
<br />exceed $1,5~o~.6~.,
<br />
<br /> ~otion of Er. Hutchins to lay on table tnatil next meeting, was adopted.
<br />
<br /> 5th - ~On December 10th, t932, there was a fire in the Armory building on Crawford
<br />and South Sis., which de~maged the building to the~ extent of approxi:~ately $!,81~.81. This
<br />building is covered by fire insurance and I have made a settlement with the insurance companies
<br />whereby' the '0ity will receive gl, 681.48 for the damage done.
<br /> The amount received from' th~ insurance companies will be used in repairing
<br />the damage done by the fire. I feel that the building can be restored to a satz=~aeto~y eon-
<br />alit ion s.~ 'an ex_nonce 'that will not greatly exceed the insurance collected.'
<br />
<br />On motion, same was ordered filed.
<br />
<br />The following communications from the City Attorney were read:
<br />
<br />let - 'At your last me,ting you referred to me a eomm~uication from Er.
<br />
<br />0.N]Boyd
<br />
<br />
<br />
|