My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes 12/14/1982
City-of-Martinsville
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1982
>
Minutes 12/14/1982
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/4/2006 2:15:52 PM
Creation date
12/4/2006 2:09:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Meeting Date
12/14/1982
City Council - Category
Minutes
City Council - Type
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />TUESDAY <br /> <br />DECEMBER 14, 1982 <br /> <br />aspect of the proposed ordinance: <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />1. Mr. John L. Gregory, III, Attorney at Law and Counsel for <br />a number of home-occupation citizens; <br /> <br />2. Dr. Nelson M. Fox, Jr., representing Fox Enterprises, a <br />distributor of Amway products; <br /> <br />3. Ms. Paula Clodfelter, representative of Avon Products, Inc.; <br /> <br />4. Ms. Hilda Olson, Manager-Senior Distributor for SASCO <br />cosmetic products; <br /> <br />5. Ms. Barbara Bocock, also with SASCO products; and <br /> <br />6. Mr. Roger Huff, of Amway Products. <br /> <br />Objections raised by the foregoing opponents centered around the following; <br /> <br />A. Under the proposed ordinance, persons pursuing home occupations <br />could possibly be required to obtain as many as three separate <br />licenses at $30.00 each (as wholesalers, retailers; and as <br />commission merchants); <br /> <br />B. Under such requirements, it would become necessary for many <br />licensees to keep separate sets of books and records; <br /> <br />C. Many of such licensees would be least able to cope with <br />record-keeping requirements as well as least able to pay <br />the license taxes, particularly those who are involved only <br />on a part-time basis; <br /> <br />D. Many of such possible licensees are retirees or other persons <br />who pursue the home-occupation roles merely as something to do <br />and/or to provide supplemental income; <br /> <br />E. Enactment and enforcement of the proposed ordinance (as to <br />home occupations) would discourage a number of citizens from <br />continuing their home-occupations and, therefore, be counter- <br />productive; and <br /> <br />F. Subjecting these people to license taxes and regulations <br />would provide no more City services than they are now <br />receiving nor more than other homeowners receive. <br /> <br />During the course of these presentations, the foregoing persons indicated that they would <br /> <br />have no objections to taxing the major distributors so long as their sub-distributors or <br /> <br />sub-retailers or sub-wholesalers or sub-commission agents are not required to be licensed <br /> <br />and/or to be taxed; and, all of these persons urged Council to postpone action on the <br /> <br />proposed license tax ordinance, pending additional information and appeals they expect to <br /> <br />present. Too, if any tax on home occupations is to be imposed, they urged that it be <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.