Copyright & Fair-use Agreement
UNLV Special Collections provides copies of materials to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. Material not in the public domain may be used according to fair use of copyrighted materials as defined by copyright law. Please cite us.
Please note that UNLV may not own the copyright to these materials and cannot provide permission to publish or distribute materials when UNLV is not the copyright holder. The user is solely responsible for determining the copyright status of materials and obtaining permission to use material from the copyright holder and for determining whether any permissions relating to any other rights are necessary for the intended use, and for obtaining all required permissions beyond that allowed by fair use.
Read more about our reproduction and use policy.
I agree.Information
Digital ID
Permalink
Details
More Info
Rights
Digital Provenance
Publisher
Transcription
Claims allowed as per claim book on file in the office of the Clerk. The claim of L.H. Rockwell was reduced to the sum of $3.46 ,the remainder of the claim being held up for investigation by W.H. Elwell, Water, Sewer and Light Commissioner. The claim of Jack Breithaupt in the sum of $17.00 was held up for further investigation by Police and Fire Commissioner Hammond. Thereupon the Clerk presented the following communication: Las Vegas, Nevada. Dec. 3, 1925. To the Board of City Commissioners of The City of Las Vegas, Nevada. Gentlemen: Under date of Sept. 15th, 1925, as Chairman of several petitioning property holders, I presented to your Board, a petition for the repeal of the license tax on Apartment House owners of Las Vegas, To date we have not learned what disposition you have made of said petition, so on behalf of said petitioners, I hereby request that you at the December meeting of said Board, consider said petition for final action, one way or another. The only communication we received from the Board inanswer to our petition was addressed to me as follows: "This is to advise you that your communication of recent date was read to the Board of City Commissioners at a regular adjourned meeting held on the 6th day of November A.D. 1925, and you claim for a refund of license paid on your apartment house was denied on motion duly made and carried. Dated Nov. 9th, 1925. (Signed) Florence Doherty, Clerk of said Board. The Clerk's notice simply states that a recent communication was read to the Board, but does not state what disposition was made of the petition. Accordingly the petition is still before the Board for action and determination, and for this reason, as such chairman, I request the Board, to now consider it for final action, one way or another. As citizens I believe the petitioners are entitled to have their petition decided on roll call, on a yes and no vote, instead of on motion, and on their behalf I request that you decide the matter on roll call. Very truly yours, T.M. Carroll, Chariman for said Petitioners. Thereupon the matter of the petition of the various apartment house owners for the abolishment of the ordinance licensing apartment houses in the City of Las Vegas coming on for discussion, the same having been presented at the regular meeting of the Board held in October, 1925, and having then been taken under investigation, after due consideration, it was ordered, upon motion of Commissioner Hammond, seconded by Commissioner Mundy, that said, petition for the abolishment of said ordinance licensing apartment houses in the City of Las Vegas be and the same is hereby denied, and it is further ordered that said ordinance shall continue infull force and effect as heretofore operated. The vote on said motion was as follows: Commissioners Smith, Mundy, Hammond, and His Honor the Mayor, J.F. Hesse, voting aye. Commissioner Elwell voting no. Motion carried. Thereupon the Clerk presented the following communication: Las Vegas, Nevada. Dec. 3rd, 1925. To the Board of City Commissioners of the City of Las Vegas, Nevada. Gentlemen: I have received notice from the City Clerk to pay an apartment house license for the quarter ending Dec. 31st 1925. In reply thereto I wish to inform the Board that I am not conducting an apartment house business, and that my building is not an apartment house. As to the classification of my building I hereby refer you to the letter of Oct. 13th 1925, addressed to your Board, and which states that my building is a Compartment building something entirely different from an apartment house. Accordingly as I am ano an apartment house owner, I hereby request the Board to erase my name from the city's 1st of so called apartment house owners, and to waive payment from me of said apartment house license tax, to take effect immediately, and on any purported claim the city may have against me under said ordinance. Very truly yours, T.M. Carroll Similar communications from T.M. Carroll as the agent for E.S. Sheppard, Chas. Briner and Jack Irish were also read, and after due discussion of the matter, it appearing to the Board