Minutes 05/08/1928 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Cast moved that the following~ordinances, which had been placed on firstreading May 8th, be ~.~on the table: An Ordinauce to Amend andRe-ordain Section 306 of the City Code as Amended and Re-ordained by an' Ordinance Passed by the City Council on June l?, 1920, Relating to the Furnishing of ~ater to Consumers and to Premises, Recuiring Contracts and Deposits from Water Consumers and Persons Applyin~ for Taps. ~u Ordinance to Amend and P~-ordain Section 306 of the City Code as Amended and Re-ordained by an Ordinance Passed by the City Council on June l?, 1920, Relating to the Furnishing of Hater to Consumers and to Premises, Requiring Contracts and Deposits from ~ater Consumers and Persons Applying for Taps. The motion was adopted. The following report was read from the City Attorney: Honorable City Council, Portsmouth, Virginia. Gentlemen: At your last meeting you referred to me the following tax matters: (1) Reo~est of the City Collector that $1.35 be~refunded Robt. F. Pe~kins, amount paid in error on 1927 City personal property tax. This was an error made in the City Oollector~soffice whereby Mr. Perkins waz~given the receipt of Robt. M. Perkins by mistake. The receipt was returned and he was given his cor- rect receipt and the City owes him $1.35, which should be paid. (2) Order of Court making certain tax reliefs for year 1927, on account of erroneous assessments. This order was entered at the instance of the Oommissioner of the Revenue and was made to correct certain assessments made By him. Fire.corrections relate to ~real estate, one was a double assessment, one church property, in one instance the building was burned, and the other'two~ instances were errors made in carrying figures. The taxes charged to Mrs. Evelsua Spooner Shultzwere previouslyrelieved by the~Oouncil on December 30, 1927. The other cor- rections r.~late to personal pr~perty and were relieved for various reasons, some being double assessments, and many being against people who had moved to Norfolk County. The taxes should be relieved. (3) Order of Court making refund to Frank Baker of $289.~J~ taxes paid the City of Portsmouth in error for the Years 1919-1926 inclusive. Frank Baker's property is located on the Gosport Road near Trmxt-~u~and .the dividing line between the City and the 0ounty runs through the land. ~ne property is assessed both in the City and the County. He has been paying City taxes but not the county taxes. Upon a survey it was a~oertained only one-~alf acre of his land wa~ in the City. Consequently the court cor- rected the assessment to one half an acre and fixed ~ts value at $200. for 1928. He has paid into the 0ity Treasurer the sum of $306.~ and was due to have paid $17.25fi~red onthe pro- ~o~tipns of t~e l~ud in the City to that xn~the County. I therefore t~ink he should be refunded ~289.~ for taxes paid for the years 1~19, 1920, 1921, 1922, 1923, 192~, 1925, and 192~. The ~ i~lance of the tax charged for 1926, n~melY $45.00 and part of 1927 tax as~amounting to $128.56 together with interest and penalties, and pa~t of 192E amounting to $125.98 should be relieved. (~) Petition of ~m. H. Oast, Counsel for the Trustees of the City Mission Board, to be relieved~from payment of taxes for the years 1~21 and1922, to amount of $212.67 on property 409 Dinwiddie Street, same having been usedsolely for charitable purposes. The facts in this matter are that the City Mission Board, an.organization under ~he jurisdiction of the Mission Board of the Methodist Episcop~.l Church, South, agreed to pur- chase this property the latter par~ of1920. The property was ~nvolved in-the Mahoney bankruptcy matter, a substituted trustee~ was appointed under a deed of trust on J~nuary 31, 1921. The ~roperty was sold under the deed of trust and conveyed by the trustee to George Larkin in February 1921. George La, kin and wife conveyed it to the Trustees of the Mission Board by deed dated January 29, 1922, I am informed that these proceedings were.had in order to clear the title to the property. Mr. Larkin tells me that the Mission Board purchased the property the last part of 1920 or the first part of 1921 and was immediately placed in-possession of th~ property. That it took care of the interest on the loan on the property and paid him interest on the balance 9f the_ ourchase price and assumed all obligations of the property from the fimst part of 1921. ~T~at a deed would have .been made except for legal complications and~to all intents and purposes ~ne ~roperty belonged to the City Mission Board during the years 1921 and 1922. Had the C~ty ~&iss~on Board secumeda deed when it first purchased the property no taxes would have been circumstances I would recommend that taxes for the. yea~ 1921 assessed ~o amo~uti~to $~.6Oand taxes for the year 1922 assessed ~ainst .George Larkzn a~'penalti$~ thereon be relieved. Yours very truly, ~'spe¢~alappropriati0~ of $1~5 was~made ~o allow the refund to .Robt. F. Perkins a~ $28~.44 to make ~he.~efund to Frank Ba~er. (Mr. Oast was excused from voting on the relief of taxes t of the city MissiOn BOard) -