1959-09-28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

3s AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REENACTING SECTION 27.12 2(D) ORDINANCE CARRIED OVER RE: OF THE CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY CODE OF 1945 ENTITLED 'SIGNS PERMITTED IN THE SEVERAL SEC. 27.12 2(0) ZONING DISTRICTS' ", WAS OFFERED BY MR. WEINBERG, SECONDED BY MR. COLEMAN, AND CARRIED OVER TO THE NEXT MEETING FOR CONSIDERATION. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REENACTING SECTION 121.3 OF ORDINANCE CARRIED OVER RE: CHAPTER 7 OF THE CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY CODE OF 1945 ENTITLED 'BUILDING CODE' " was SEC. 121.3 - CH. 7 OFFERED BY MR. WEINBERG, SECONDED BY MR. COLEMAN, AND CARRIED OVER TO THE NEXT MEETING FOR CONSIDERATION, AND REFERRED TO THE BUILDING CODE REVIEW BOARD FOR RECOMMENDATION. ON MOTION BY MR. SCRIBNER, SECONDED BY MR. COLEMAN, MR. E. H. GAIN WAS MEMBER - AIRPORT COMM. REAPPOINTED TO THE AIRPORT COMMISSION FOR A THREE YEAR TERM EXPIRING SEPTEMBER 1, 1961 ON MOTION BY MR. DAVIS, SECONDED BY MR. SCRIBNER, THE CITY MANAGER WAS CITY MGR. AUTHORIZED AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE CONTRACT WITH THE S. P. C. A. FOR BOARDING DOGS AND ARTICLE 5 TO EXECUTE CONTRACT S. P. C. A. WAS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: "FIFTH: THE S. P. C. A. WILL NOT CONFINE DOGS WHO ARE KNOWN TO HAVE BITTEN ARTICLE 5 AMENDED A PERSON UNLESS SUCH DOGS ARE STRAYS OR ARE OWNED DOGS WHOSE OWNERS HAVE FAILED TO COMPLY WITH SECTION 26 OF CHAPTER 3 OF THE CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY CODE OR SECTION 29-195 OF THE 1950 Va. CODE ANN. AS AMENDED AND SUCH DOGS SHALL 8E BROUGHT TO THE S. P. C. A. SHELTER BY ONE OF THE LOCAL GAME WARDENS. THE WARDEN SHALL THEN NOTIFY THE JOINT HEALTH DEPARTMENT OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE." ON MOTION BY MR. DAVIS, SECONDED BY MR. COLEMAN, THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED: BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE APPROPRIATION RE: WATER AND GAS EXTENSIONS THAT $291.47 BE AND THE SAME IS HEREBY APPROPRIATED FOR THE CITY'S 5TH ST., N. E. SHARE OF WATER AND GAS EXTENSION ON FIFTH STREET, N. E. THE RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING $1,069,541.00 FOR THE OPERATION OF THE CITY APPROPRIATION RE: OPERATION GOVERNMENT AND FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES, WHICH WAS OFFERED AT THE MEETING OF THE CITY GOVERNMENT AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 24, 1959, WAS ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING RECORDED VOTE: AYES: MR. COLEMAN, MR. DAVIS, MR. MICHIE, MR. SCRIBNER AND MR. WEINBERG. NOES: NONE. THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT WAS MADE BY THE MAYOR; "WITH REFERENCE TO THE APPROPRIATION FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES SOME SUGGESTIONS STATMENT - MAYOR HAVE BEEN MADE THAT THIS COUNCIL AND THE CITY MANAGER ARE NOT IN SYMPATHY WITH THE "FREEDOM OF CHOICE" FOR SCHOOLS AND IN ORDER TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT WE WANT TO SAY THAT THIS IS DEFINITELY NOT TRUE. THIS GOVERNING BODY SUPPORTED THE TUITION GRANT LEGISLATION AND WE URGED OUR MEMBER OF THE LEGISLATURE TO VOTE FOR THE BILLS WHICH WOULD MAKE THIS POSSIBLE BECAUSE WE FELT THAT OUR PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE A CHOICE AND THAT OUR COMMUNITY WOULD BE MUCH BETTER OFF WITH THE "FREEDOM OF CHOICE" SCHOOLS THAN THE PROBABILITY OF NO SCHOOLS AT ALL. OUR OFFICERS HAVE COOPERATED WITH THE PRIVATE SCHOOL OFFICIALS IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE CONSISTENT WITH THE LAW AND THEY SHALL CONTINUE TO DO SO. SOME OF OUR CITIZENS ARE DISTURBED ABOUT THE FACT THAT SOME ADDITIONAL M®NEY WILL BE NEEDED ON ACCOUNT OF THE TUITION GRANTS AND ABOUT THE STATEMENT THAT IF THE SAME AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL MONEY IS NEEDED NEXT YEAR THAT THIS MONEY SHOULD CnM~ FROM TAXES AND NOT FROM SURPLUS FUNDS WHICH HAVE BEEN EARMARKED FOR OTHER PROJECTS. WE HAVE A VERY EXCELLENT SCHOOL BOARD ANO WE ARE SURE THAT THEIR CHIEF DESIRE AND AIM IS TO SEE THAT THE CHILDREN OF OUR CITY ARE GIVEN THE VERY BEST EDUCATIONAL POSSIBILITIES CONSISTENT WITH STANDARDS WHICH PREVAIL AT THE PRESENT TIME. WE KNOW TOO THAT THEY ARE AWARE OF THE COSTS AND WILL DO THEIR VERY BEST TO SEE THAT ONLY