|
September 27, 1921
<br />
<br /> 5th.
<br />Cemetery du~ing the month of August.
<br /> On motion of Mr. Esleeck, the report was referred
<br />write same so that it Gan be read.
<br />
<br />Forwards m report ffrom the Keeper of Cemeteries of lots and graves sold in Omk Grove
<br /> to the City M~nager,to have the Keeper
<br />
<br />6th. "Honorable City Council,
<br /> Portsmouth, Va.
<br />
<br />"Gentlemen:--
<br />
<br /> [ have exhausted every means in attempting to
<br />Corporation to settle for fire hydrant~rental in this mown. This
<br />1921, amounted to $398?.50. The State Corporation Commission has ruled
<br />ties Corporation ~as authority to pay this rental.
<br />
<br />ge~ the Cradock Utilities
<br />rental up to Sept. 30th,
<br /> that the C~addck Utili-
<br />
<br /> ~ may add that the town of ~uxton has paid and is paying its hydrant rent-
<br />al without protest. As it is a very serious matter to shut off these hydmants, which will
<br />result in depriving the town of fire protection and also will-increase fire insurance rates,
<br />I deem it a question o£ polioy~ which I scarcely felt authorized to decide.
<br />
<br />hydrants until
<br />
<br /> My recommend~Zion in
<br />the bill is paid.
<br />
<br />the matter is that I be
<br /> "Yours tx~dly,
<br />
<br />authorized to
<br />
<br />shu~ off the
<br />
<br />~J. P. Jervey, City Manager."
<br />
<br /> Whereupon, Mr. Smith moved that the ma~ter be referred ~o the City Nanager for further
<br />conference, with the Cradock Utilities Corporation, and if the matter can not be adjusted in
<br />'30 days ~hat the hydrant supply be cut off.
<br /> .... Mr. Brooks moved to amend, ~hat the matter be referred to the City Manager a~'d City
<br /> Attorney to confer further with thS~,.Cradock Utilities CorpOration, and to report further on
<br /> same to the Council ~t its ne~ ~egular meeting.
<br /> The amendment w~s adopted by the following vote:
<br />
<br /> Ayes--Brooks, Esleeck,
<br />
<br />yth. Honorable City Council,
<br /> Portsmouth, Va.
<br />
<br />Smith, Hall~, Hutohins, Cast, White,
<br />
<br /> "Gentlemen:--
<br /> The Road Con~isslon of Norfolk County has requested that the Council
<br />consider the matter of the share which the City should bear on the cost of maintenance of
<br />~he West Norfolk Bridge.
<br />
<br /> As indicated in a previous communication, the former City Manager mgreed
<br />that the City should bear one-half of the cost of both maintenmnce aha operation. The former
<br />City ~t~o~ney, Capt. Happer, states that he remembers the conference, but does not remember
<br />definitely the agreement.
<br />
<br /> The whole matter'hinges on two points: !st, does maintenance include opera-
<br />tion. 2nd, should the City abide by the decision made by the former City Nauager.
<br />
<br /> A representative of the Board of Supervisors will appear before the Council
<br />at the meeting on September 27th, and it is recommended that he be given the privileges of
<br />the floor.
<br /> "Yours very truly,
<br />
<br /> "J. P. Jervey, City Manager."
<br />
<br /> On motion,~e privilege of the floor was granted ~o A. B. Carney, Commonwealth Attorney
<br />for Norfolk County, and R. B. Preston, Road Engineer of Norfolk County, who spoke in favor
<br />of the City of Portsmouth paying one-half of both maimtenance and opermtion.
<br /> ~r. Hall moved that the matter ~e referred to the City Manage~, City Attorney, and
<br />Finance Committee.
<br /> Mr. Brooks moved to amend, that we concur in the contention of Norfolk County that
<br />the City pay one-half'of b~th maintenance and operation of the bridge.
<br /> Mr. Esleeck raieem a point of order that ~r. Brook~ amendment was not in order.
<br /> Tn~ Chair over-ruled Mr. Esleec~s point; whereupon ~r. ~sleeck appealed and was sus-
<br />tained by the following vote:
<br /> For Chair's decision: Brooke, Smith, Hutohins, 3.
<br /> Bustaining Mr. Esleeok: Eeleeok, Hall, Oast, ~hite, ~.
<br />
<br />A vote being tmken on Mr. Hall motion, it was lost by the following vote:
<br />
<br />Council,
<br />
<br /> Ayes-- Esleeck, Hall, Hutchins, 3.
<br /> Nays-- Brooks, Smith, Cast, White, ~.
<br />Then Mr. Esleeok moved that the matter be t~eduntil the nex~ regular meeting of
<br />The m~ion was lost by the following Vote: ~
<br />
<br />Ayes-- ~sleeck, Hall, Hutohins,
<br />Nays-- Brooks, Bmith, Oast,~White,
<br />
<br /> Mr. Brooks moved that the mazter be referred to the City Manager and City Attorney,
<br />to report at the next meeting as to the sha~e which the City should ~ear~on the cozt of main-
<br />tens~uce and operation of the bridge.
<br /> Mr. B~ooks' motion was adopted, ~ ~' ' ~
<br />
<br />
<br />
|