Skip to main content

Search the Special Collections and Archives Portal

Las Vegas City Commission Minutes, January 7, 1947 to October 26, 1949, lvc000006-290

Image

File
Download lvc000006-290.tif (image/tiff; 56.84 MB)

Information

Digital ID

lvc000006-290
Details

Rights

This material is made available to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. It may be protected by copyright, trademark, privacy, publicity rights, or other interests not owned by UNLV. Users are responsible for determining whether permissions are necessary from rights owners for any intended use and for obtaining all required permissions. Acknowledgement of the UNLV University Libraries is requested. For more information, please see the UNLV Special Collections policies on reproduction and use (https://www.library.unlv.edu/speccol/research_and_services/reproductions) or contact us at special.collections@unlv.edu.

Digital Provenance

Digitized materials: physical originals can be viewed in Special Collections and Archives reading room

Publisher

University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Libraries

266 Motion seconded by Commissioner Moore and carried by the following vote: Commissioners Clark, Moore, Whipple and His Honor voting aye; noes, none. Absent: Commissioner Baskin. DRY CLEANERS PETITION Mayor Cragin read the following opinion of the City Attorney regarding Re: Opinion of City the petition of the dry Cleaning establishments of the City, dated Attorney June 29, 1948 and on file in the office of the City clerk. July 13, 1948 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR E. W. CRAGIN and the BOARD OF CITY COMMISSIONERS SUBJECT: LAS VEGAS DRY CLEANERS ASSOCIATION LETTER OF JUNE 28, 1948, ADDRESSED TO YOU AND REFERRED TO THIS OFFICE. In reply to the letter of the members of the Las Vegas Dry Cleaners Association dated June 28, 1948, addressed to you, and referred to this office, relative to passing legislation giving them equal protection with concerns of a like nature operating from foreign communities, please be advised that I have checked the constitutionality of a city requiring a larger license fee from a concern operating from a foreign community than is charged to a local concern. A check of the City Clerk's office indicates that in many in­stances local cleaning establishments are actually paying a higher fee than is required of a similar business concern whose principle place of business is located outside our City Limits. After an examination of the law in regard to this question, I find that there is an indication that permanent or estab­lished places of business within cities have been the bene­factors of favored positions in many city ordinances. While the decisions are conflicting, and in some cases even con­fusing, the numerical majority of the courts have held that such preferential treatment of local business constitutes a denial of equal protection, or abridges the privileges and amenities clause of the Federal Constitution. I feel that there is no question but what the City can impose as stringent conditions upon businesses operating from foreign communities as are imposed upon those which are located within the City Limits. The ordinance could be amended requiring a business operating from a foreign community to pay a license fee based upon the gross business the same as is Imposed upon our own merchants. There are many cities, as I have indicated hereinabove, that have passed ordinances imposing a higher license fee on out- of-town merchants and dealers than are imposed upon their own residents. It might well be that our state would follow the minority opinion and thus sustain such a position unless the fee was so high that it would be considered absolutely prohi­bitive upon the face of it. One of our sister cities within the County does impose a license fee of $300.00 on businesses from foreign communities, and, there­fore, it occurs to me that it would be equitable for your Honorable Board to amend our ordinance governing this situation by imposing a reasonable fee (collectible quarterly, or annually) as the Board might decide, in addition to a fee based upon the gross business done by the respective businesses. If the foreign business were only assessed the same fee as the local business it would still be inequitable because of the fact that the business operating from a foreign community would not be subject to the taxes and other costs of operation imposed upon the local business. Respectfully submitted, C. Norman Cornwall /s C. Norman Cornwall City Attorney Thereafter the foregoing opinion was Ordered filed. DOMINO GAME Mayor Cragin read the letter of Mr. Frank Gordon, Idle Hour, 17-19 Ogden, Letter from dated July 16, 1948, concerning the installation of a domino game in con- Frank Gordon junction with his billiard parlor. The City Attorney stated that it was his opinion that it would be necessary for Mr. Gordon to make a gaming application. Thereafter the City Clerk was instructed to inform Mr. Gordon of this matter. NUISANCE PETITION Commissioner Whipple moved that a hearing be set for August 6, 1948 at Re: Bush Brothers 2:00 P.M for the Bush Brothers Trucklines to appear before the Board Trucklines to answer a complaint of an alleged nuisance submitted to the Board