|
26;
<br />
<br />Msrc~ 22, 1988
<br />
<br /> 83-108 - "Letter from the City Manager recommending adoption of an ordinance to amend
<br />Sections 20-37, 20-51, 20-52, 20~83, 20-54, 20-85, 20~56, 20-58, and to repeal Sections 20-60
<br />and 20-62 pertaining to tax schedules for business licenses."
<br />
<br /> "Last year the General Assembly passed legislation requiring ceilings on the business iicens
<br />tax imposed by localities, also known as the gross receipt tax. The statute also calls for a
<br />rollback on those rates which exceed~these limits. I was hopeful that we could convince this
<br />session of the General Assembly to repeal, or at least to delay the implementation of the roll-
<br />back. The majority of the legislature saw fit to ignore the financial plight of our Ci!ty and
<br />failed to relax the provisions of this onerous tax rollback.
<br />
<br /> The ordinance I am forced by State code to present to you represents a tremendous burden
<br />placed on the City by the State, The State continues to cap and limit our revenue producing
<br />capabilities with no alternative sources of funding being recoggized. This rollback will be the
<br />first phase of a multi-year decrease, and will reduce our estimated revenue by $120,000 this yea~
<br />Future rollbacks will result in revenue reductions of more than $500,000 per year. To make up
<br />for this loss an equivalent of almost one cent would need to be added to the property tax rate
<br />each year. If the legislature continues to erode our sources of funding, the property tax will
<br />rapidly become the only available revenue producing option amoung the waning sources available
<br />to us.
<br />
<br /> Even though it is very difficult, I have no choice but to comply With the State law and
<br />recommend the ordinance be adopted."
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Barnes and seconded by Mr. Gray, the following ordinance was approved
<br />on first reading, and by unanimous vote:
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTIONS 20-37, 20-51, 20-82, 20-53, 20-54, 20-85, 20-86,
<br />AND TO REPEAL SECTIONS 20~60 and 20-62 PERTAINING TO TAX SCHEDULES FOR BUSINESS
<br />LICENSES."
<br />
<br />20z58,
<br />
<br /> 83-106 - Letter from the City Manager recommending adoption of a resolution authorizing the
<br />· ssuance of duplicate notes to replace certain lost or destroyed Grant Anticipation Notes,
<br />series of 1982, of the City of Portsmouth, VA.
<br />
<br /> "On July 1, 1982 the City issued $3,200,000. of Grant Anticipation Notes due to mature on
<br />June 30, 1983. They were issued to provide partial funding for the Pinners Point Sewage Treat-
<br />m~ntPlant .....
<br />
<br /> In August, 1982 the Director of Finance was notified by one of the purchasers of the Notes,
<br />the Pershing Division of Donaldson, Lufkin, & Jenrette Securities Corporation, that they had
<br />mmsplaced note numbers 35 to 40, inclusive, in denominations of $25,000 each.
<br />
<br /> According to the Code of Virginia, 1950, Section 18.1-209, an Idemnity Bond.and Lost Security
<br />Affidavit are required to be obtained from the purchaser before duplicate notes can be issued.
<br />Also, in accordance with Section 15.1-209, the Council is required to adopt a resolution to issue
<br />duplicate notes and request the State Commission on Local Debt to approve the issuance.
<br />
<br /> Our bond counsel, Wood and Dawson, has obtained the required Indemnity Bond and Lost Security
<br />Affadavit from the purchaser. In addition, W~od. i and Dawson has prepared duplicate notes to re-
<br />~lace the lost originals. The Director of Finance has also notified our respective paying agents
<br />Virginia National Bank and Chase Manhattan Ba~k, to place stop payment notices on the original
<br />notes.
<br />
<br /> Copies of the Indemnity Bond, Lost Secur~y Affadavit, the duplicate notes, and the resolu-
<br />tion are attached.
<br />
<br />Approval of this resolution is respectively requested."
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Gray and seconded by Mr. Beamer, the following resolution was adopted,
<br />by the following vote:
<br />
<br /> "A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF iDUPLICATE NOTES TO REPLACE CERTAIN LOST
<br /> OR DESTROYED GRANT ANTICIPATION NOTES, SERIES OF 1982, OF THE CITY OF PORTSMOUTH,
<br /> ..VIRGINIA ....
<br />
<br />and
<br />
<br /> WHEREAS, the Pershing Division of Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Securities Corporation has
<br />advised officials of the City of Portsmouth, ~irginia (the "City"), that six Grant Anticipation
<br />Notes, Series of 1982, of the City, numbered ~os. 35 through 40, both inclusive, dated JUly 1,
<br />1982, maturing June 30, 1983, of the denominatiion of $28,O00 each and bearing interest at the
<br />rate Of ten per centum (10%) per annum have
<br /> e~ither been lost or destroyed; and
<br /> WHEREAS, Section 15.1-209 of the Code of V~rginia, 1980, provides for the replacement of
<br />lost or destroyed notes upon compliance with the provisions of such section and subject to
<br />approval of the State Commission on Local DebtI.
<br />
<br /> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the CounCil of the City of Portsmouth, Virginia, that the
<br />six notes referred to herein are authorized to, be replaced by new notes of like date, number
<br />and tenor pursuant to the provisions of Sectionl 14.1-209. of the Code of Virginia, 1950, and,
<br />upon compliance with the provisions of such se~tmon and subject to the approval of the State
<br />Commission on Local Debt which is hereby requested, the appropriate officers of the City are
<br />authorized to execute and deliver such replacement notes."
<br />
<br /> Ayes: Barnes, Beamer, Gray, Horley, Webb, Whitlow, Johansen
<br /> Nays: None
<br />
<br />
<br />
|