|
July
<br />
<br /> Bill offS. T. Monta~e, Jr., to amount of $157.50, for services rendered in des~r~ylng
<br />~ tagless dogs $ $2.50 each.
<br /> It is recommended that the. Treasurer be a~thorized to pay said bill, out of funds~
<br />on h~nd from collection of Dog Tmxes.
<br />
<br /> Communication from M=-s. E. J. ~tinton asking th be =~fund~d $6.50,
<br />not owned by her.
<br /> It is reoomzmended that said refund be not allowed.
<br />
<br />paid as taxes on a
<br />
<br /> Request of the City Collector that Isaac Eass be refuhded $6.60, paid in error for auto-
<br />mobile license No. 1915; also for th~ Commissioner of Revenue to be autho2tzed to cancel
<br />the license.
<br /> It is recommended that said refund be gr~nted.
<br />
<br />Referred June 2yth
<br />
<br />. .R$com~$~dation of t~e Mamager that a~ appropriation of $~00. be allowed to purchase an
<br />eAec~r~o a~mng machine fo~tthe Commissioner of Revenue, the manuall~ operated machine now in
<br />the Office of said Commissioner to be~ransferred to the M~n~ger's Office.
<br /> It is recommended that a special appropriation of $~00. be a~llowed,
<br />
<br />(Signed) L.G. ~hite, Chairma~.
<br />
<br /> On motion, the privilege of the floor was g~nted to Mr. C. W. Johnston, who spoke in
<br />favor of the City appropriati-n~ $2~500. to assist ~n opposing the rate case now before the
<br />Interstate Commerce Commission.
<br />
<br /> Then on motion of Mr. Brooks, the report of the Committee was adopted, and by the
<br />following vote:
<br />
<br /> Ayes-- Brooks, Hu~chins, Oast, Smith, Stewart, White,
<br />Committee on Athletic Field--
<br />
<br /> "Hon. City Council.
<br /> Gentlemen:-- Your Committee appointed to ascertain the feasibility
<br />of acquiring an athletic field for the City, begs leave to report as follows:
<br />
<br /> That they heartily endorse the idea of a municipally owned athletic field for the Public
<br />Schools of the City, but ~our Committee is informed through a consultation with the Finance
<br />Committee that it would ~e inadvisable to under take the purchase of so heavy an investmen~
<br />as the Cassell T~act, at this time, because of the urgent need of funds fore,many other City
<br />purposes, and therefore, recommends that the C~ssell Tract'be not acquire~
<br />
<br /> In this connection, your Committee desires to point out the ,desirability of acquire'rig
<br />~y condemnation, th~ lowland on the east and north of the present h~gh school building, adja-
<br />cent and contiguous thereto, the same ~o be filled in by the City, from time to time. The
<br />Committee is of the opinion that this property can be acquired for a reasonable figure at
<br />this time and recommends that this be done.
<br />
<br />{Signed) J.C. Smith, Ohai=man.
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Brooks, the report of the Committee was
<br />requested to secure further info~mation with ~ega~vd to the City
<br />demnation the lowland on the east and north of the present high
<br />pose.
<br />
<br />adopted, and the Committee was
<br />securing by purchase or con-
<br />school building for said pu~-
<br />
<br />The following communications were read from the City M~nager:
<br />
<br /> lsd. With ~eg~r~ to.petition
<br />of R. L. MoMurran and others for permission to erect poles for a high power emec~rxc wlre Aine
<br />from Deep C~eek to the North Carolina line on the road now known as the DismaI Swamp Road,
<br />the Manager recommended that the City grant such rights as it m~y convey, the City Attorney
<br />to prepare a lease covering same and that the work begin in 8 months and be completed in 12.
<br /> On motion of Mr.~ ~l~e, the recommendmtion of th# Manager was oono~Lrred in.
<br />
<br /> 2n& "In accor~nce with instructions of the Council given at its meeting on July llth,
<br />I hog to submit the following report in reference to the extension of the present system of
<br />cluster lights westward on Hi EhSt. The cost of this exte~slon will be practically the same
<br />as ~he cost of the installation of the single light units proposed in my original report. We
<br />will secure about 500 C.P. per li gh~ as compared with t,000 C.P. per light using the single
<br />unit type. The amount of energy used in the new system will be smaller, the cost of mainte-
<br />nance will be smaller, as there will be a single g~obe and light to lo~k after as compared
<br />with five globes and lights in the old ~,stem.
<br />
<br /> It is true that the cost to the City will be somewhat greater per unit b~t this
<br />will be partially compensmted by ~-he fact that under the new arrangement alternate lights
<br />willtburn all;nlght~'.~hus doing away with the swinging lights at street intersections, which
<br />are no.w put on when the white way is extinguished at 12:00 o'clock. I believe, in short,
<br />that the old type is obsolete andmay require special arrangements to manufacture them.
<br />
<br /> If it ~s not desired to replace the old lights, we c.ould begin ~he new work at
<br />Chestnut St. and stop at Sixth Ave. This would require about 10~ new lights and would cost
<br />approximately $11,OOO to install and $3,600 per year to operate.
<br />
<br /> In view of the foregoing, I recommend that the single unit type proposed in my
<br />O~ginal letter, be adhered to.
<br />
<br />On motion, the report was referred to Finance Committee.
<br />
<br />
<br />
|