Laserfiche WebLink
TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 <br /> <br />her property. Mrs. Mansfield also expressed her opinion that she should not be <br />put in the position as having to protest against these landfill/grading <br />operations or in the position as having to employ legal counsel to protect her <br />interests. Mrs. Barbara Holland, of 721 Mulberry Road, expressed her opinion <br />that, in such instances, there should be some typeof controls to protect <br />adjoining property owners. Mr. Young, in response, indicated that he has <br />attempted to cooperate with the adjoining property owners where they have <br /> <br />persons or properL/es and that, buL Eor LIke Ut~usuatl. y heavy t'aliks EecenLLy, <br />there would have been no cause for concern. Furthermore, Mr. Young maintained <br />that, when the work is completed, conditions will be better than they were <br />before the project was undertaken. Meanwhile, City Manager Brown was asked to <br />examine sediment erosion/control ordinances of other Virginia cities and to <br />recommend changes in--or amendments to--the City's present Sediment & Erosion <br />Control Ordinance for Council's consideration. <br /> <br />Responding to an inquiry filed by Mr. George B. Adams, Jr., at Council's recent <br />May 23rd meeting, regarding the question as to whether the City might classify <br />the forthcoming refuse-and-disposal service charge as "tax deductible", City <br />Attorney Worthy reported that, in his opinion, applicable State statutes which <br />empower municipal corporations to provide such service and to charge and <br />collect compensation for such s~rvice do not confer upon such municipal <br />corporations the power, expressed or impLIed, to impose a tax For collecting <br />and disposing of garbage and refuse on a scheduled basis. <br /> <br />In accordance with the requirements of subsection A. 1 of Section 2.1-344 of the <br />CODE OF VIRGINIA (1950, and as amended) and upon motion, duly seconded and <br /> <br /> <br />