|
November S, 1927
<br />
<br />Coronerts Inquests, which had been laid on the table by Council November 1st, was taken up.
<br /> On motion of Mr. Brooks, a special appropriation Of $400.00 was allowed for same, and
<br />by the following vote: . ,
<br />
<br />Ayes-- Brooks, Dunford, Maupln, Oas% stewart, Whiter 6.
<br />
<br /> The bill of Lloyd E. ~arren, to amount of $25.00, ~or defending a prisoner by Order of
<br />Court, which had beenlaid on the t~ble by Oouncil November 1st, was taken up.
<br /> On motion of Mr. Brooks, a special appropriation of $25.O0was allowed to pay the bill.
<br />
<br /> The bill of W. E. Henderson~ So amount of $25.00, for defending a prisoner by Order of
<br />Cou~t, which ~had been laid on the ~able by Oouncil November 1st, was taken up.
<br /> On motion of Mr~ Brooks, a special appropriation of $25.00 was allowed to pay the bill..
<br />
<br /> The regular reports of the City Treasurer, City Oollector, and City Auditor for the month
<br />of October, l~?, were presented and were ordered to be filed.
<br />
<br />NEW BUSINESS
<br />
<br /> A request of the Oity Oollector that $10.OO be refunded ~. R. Welton, agent for the Ports-
<br />mouth Improvement 0o., amount paid in error on personal property for the year 1925, was referred
<br />to the Oity Attorney.
<br />
<br /> A bill was received from Phlegar & Tilghm~n, shorthand reporters, for one-half fee for
<br />reporting investigation of Norfolk 0ounty Ferries.
<br /> On motion of Dr. Dunford, ~ special appropriation of $12.00 was allowed to pay the said
<br />bill.
<br />
<br /> A communication was read from Mrs. Isab~lle Whaley as to assessment on her property 1~97 E.
<br />Hamilton Avenue, as of January l, 1~27, whereas the house was not completed until April,
<br /> On motion of Mr. White, the communication was referred to the Oity Attorney.
<br />
<br />The following communication was read from Mr. Arthur Emmerson:
<br />
<br />~ "November 4, 1927.
<br />The Oity Council,
<br />Portsmouth, Va.
<br />
<br />Gentlemen:
<br />
<br /> I am informed by the press that you will have a special meeting to consider what
<br />steps to take to cover possible loss to the-Water Denartment as a result of the Etheridge Case
<br />inNorfolk.
<br /> personally I can see but one sslution that is just and that is to have each consumer
<br />who does not own the property occupied, put up a deposit of a sum sufficient to cover a reason-
<br />able bill for the premises. I feel that the Etheridge decision was just regardless of what
<br />ordinances may have been in effect and I feel that any of the pl~us outlined as possible soluti~ns
<br />except the one above mentioned would be as flagrantly unjust as the one the ~ater Department
<br />is now using.
<br />
<br /> The other plans seem to suggest that~ 'You can't move your property so we will make
<br />you responsible; we might not catch the other fellow., He can be caught if he puts up a deposit.
<br />Some few perhaps will have a bill exceeding the deposit a~d possibly some will leave in a hurry
<br />as has been done, and leave a balance. Some additional clerical work will be necessary but I
<br />fail to see where it will be very much.
<br />
<br /> ! am not so vitally interested in this question except in principle as very few
<br />of my tenants pay the water bill, but, if properly administered, I amwilling to take a change
<br />on higher water rates if the above plan is used.
<br />
<br />Very truly,
<br />
<br />ARTHUR EEMERSON,"
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Maupin, the communication was referred to the special meeting to be
<br />oal~ed on the water question.
<br />
<br /> Mr. Cast moved that the Oi y ~Auditor audit~, the reports of the City Collector and City
<br />Treasurer each month and submit them with hi~ report to the City Manager.
<br /> The motion was adopted.
<br />
<br />On motion, adjourned.
<br />
<br />
<br />
|