Laserfiche WebLink
A% an adjourned meeting ef the <br />l~oard of Supervisors of 0hester- <br />field County, held at the 0curt- <br />house on 5]oveml)er 30, 1956, a~ <br />8:00 p.m. <br /> <br />Pres en t: <br /> <br />Mr. Irvin G.llorner, Ghairman <br />Mr, H. T. Goyne <br />Dr. Robt. O, (;ill <br />Mr. R.J.i~ritton <br />Mr. Marshall P.1)riskill <br /> <br />~bs eot: <br /> <br /> iqr. Stan]ey R.xtague, Jr. <br /> <br />This day having been set for a public hearing on a proposed }%us[ness License <br />Tax Ordinance, the ~otico of intention of the ltoard of Superviqor's having been <br />published in the Richmond Times-1)ispatoh on Novem.~;er 1~ and 21, respectively, <br />this n~tt, er came tip for consideration by the l%oard of S~pervi~ors. <br /> <br />There appeared a delef.,ation of approximately 130 people before the [%card to <br />oppose the im~)osition of license ta~es on the contractors and other special <br />categories, iqr. Fred ¢~ray speaks for a ~roup of con,ratters, s~ates that his <br />~roup does not objec~ %o ~he re~ulatory phase of the proposed ordinance bu~ <br />requested the Board to postpone the i~position of these taxes at this time in <br />order that the ~tat, e be given time to impose a ~alos Tax. Mr. Gray cites <br />further t~t the pmincipal o~f gross receipt tax is unfair, the eDfo~cemeMt will <br />be of a tremendous problem, and such a tax will force the contractors tokeep <br />aD extensive accounting of funds,received from the various ]ocalities. <br /> <br />~Ir. Jennings, owner of the E1 Patio, and Mr. George McKesson, spoke against <br />Section 3 o'f the proposed Ordinance, dealing with "Dance Halls and Night Clubs". <br />Mr.t~el~nstein, operator of the l{e]lwood I)rive-In-Tbeater, objects to Section <br />of the proposed Ordinance which deals with the "Mo%ion Picture Theater". <br /> <br />~lr. J. Justin Moore, representing the Virgi~ta Electric ~ Power C~')mpany, presente( <br />a propose([ revision of Section .9, Subsection (b) whichwould delete license tax <br />on curr~.~nt furnished to heavy industry. <br /> <br />Hr. Frank ~eber raised certain questions concer~]ing Section 11, whichdeals with <br />"nutomobile C. raveyards". <br /> <br />~lr. D...Murphey, requested that the I{oard reduce i~s tax set out in Section <br />dealing with ,,Palmistry, etc.'~ ar]d states that the group he represented was in <br />favor of a re~;ulatory phase of this Ordinance. <br /> <br />~lr. Nathaniel House speaks for a citizens group, which opposes the proposed <br />Ordinance. <br /> <br />~fter much discussion and consideration of this matter, it is resolved oh motion <br />of Mr. Goyne, seconded by ~lr.}~ritton, that a decision on this ~tter ~e deferred <br />to December 1, 1956 at 7:30 <br /> <br />On motion, the meeting is adjourned until 7:30 p.m. on []ecember 1, 1956. <br /> <br />Executive Secretary <br /> <br />Chairman ~ <br /> <br /> <br />