1961-02-06 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

467 ON MOTION THE MEETING ADJOURNED. R ~ + - CLERK ~ ~ PR SIOENT COUNCIL CHAMBER - FEBRUARY ?0, 1461 THE COUNCIL MET IN REGULAR SESSION ON THIS DATE WITH THE FOLL.O~+JiNG MEMBERS PRESENT: MR. HAGGERTY, MR. MICHIE, MR. MOUNT AND MR. SCRIBNER. ABSENT: MR. LEE. THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 6, 1961 WERE READ AND APPROVED. THE MAYOR AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO ANYONE WHO WISHED TO SPEAK FOR DR AGAINST THE LICENSE TAX ORDINANCE. MR. R4NDOLPH BEAN ADDRESSED THE COUNCIL AND PRESENTED THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT: INTRODUCTIDN ~ AM RANDOLPH BEAN, A DIRECTOR OF THE RETAIL MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION. THE FOLLOWING REMARKS ARE MADE ON BEHALF OF THE 16O LOCAL BUSINESSES COMPRISING THE ASSOCIATION. NEED FOR SOUND TAX STRUCTURE AS BUSINESSMEN, G!E ARF VITALLY INTERESTED IN THE ECONOMIC CONDITIONS THAT PREVAIL IN CHARLOTTESVILLE. WE RECOGNIZE THAT TO PRODUCE A GOOD CLIMATE FOR OUR BUSINESSES, THE CITY MUST HAVE G000 GOVERNMENT AND GOOD GOVFRNMENTA~ SERVICES. WE ASK FOR AND WE ARE EXTREMFF_Y FORTUNATE TO HAVE THE KIND OF MEN ~.~'HO SERVE OUR CITY ON ITS GOVERNING BODY. LIKEWISE WE ADVOCATE THOSE SERVICES WHICH WILL MAKE THIS COMMUNITY AN EVEN MORE OUTSTANDING PLACE IN WHICH TO LIVE, IT IS OBVIOUS STATEM~'NT RE: THAT A SOUND TAX STRUCTURE IS NECESSARY ',JHICH WILL PRODUCE REVENUE TO PAY FOR LICENSE TAX ORDINANCE THESE SERVICES. PROPOSED TAX INCREASE A FEW WEEKS AGO AFTER THE REPORT OF A STUDY GROUP ON TEACHERS SALARIES, THE CITY COUNCIL DETERMINED THAT ADDITIONAL REVENUE WAS NEEDED IN ORDER TO MEET AN INCREASE IN PROJECTED EXPENDITURES. THE COUNCiL~S FINANCE COMMITTEE HAS PROPOSED TO RAISE THE RATES OF CERTAIN EXISTING TAXES. AS REPORTED IN THE DAILY PROGRESS OF FEBRUARY 7, ~~S~d~EPING UPWARD REVISIONS IN LICENSE TAXES INCLUDING BOOSTS OF UP TO NEARLY 5n PER CENT IN THE RETAIL MERCHANTS LEVY, WERE RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL ....~~ THE COMMITTEE REPORTED THAT ITS RECOMMENDATIONS ',JERF MADE TO BRING THE EXISTING LICENSE T4X ORDINANCE iN LINE WITH SIMILAR ORDINANCES IN OTHER VIRGINIA CITIES. THl1S, IT IS PROPOSED THAT THE RETAIL MERCHANTS TAX RE INCREASED TO A LEVEL WHICH '.,'OULD BE APPROXIMATELY THE AVERAGE OF THAT TAX AS IEVIEO IN 77 OTHER VIRGINIA CITIES. RETAIL TAXATION IN 158, THE VIRGINIA RETAIL MERCHANTS '~SSCCIATION EMPLOYED MITCHELL, tislIGGINS AND COMPANY, RICHMOND CERTIFIED PUBLIC .ACCOUNTANTS, TO CONDi)CT A STUDY OF THE TAXES IMPOSED ON VIRGINIA RETAILERS IN RELATION TO THE TAXES LEVIED IN ETHER STATES. THIS STUDY REVEALED THAT IN COMPARISION WITH RETAIL MERCHANTS IN OTHER SOUTHEASTERN STATES, VIRGINIA MERCHANTS CARRY ONE OF THE HIGHEST STATE AND LOCAL TAX BURDENS. FOR EXAMPLE, A CORPORATION ~:'HICH HAS RET41L SALES OF $2,Q~O.(1~ PAYS DIRECT STATE AND LOCAi. TAXES IN VIRGINIA WHICH ARE MORE THAN SC~ HIGHER THAN COMPARABLE TAXES IN NORTH CAROLINA 4ND MORE THAN 100,E HIGHER THAN SIMILAR TAXES IN GEORGIA, A COMPARISON OF THE RETAIL MERCHANTS TAX IS EVEN MORE IMPRESSIVE. IN THIS CATEGORY ONLY WEST VIRGINIA TAXES RETAILERS MORE THAN VIRGINIA AND THESE TWO STATES ARE FAR AHEAD OF THE REST.