Laserfiche WebLink
<br />AMENDMENT TO SECTION 2.72.030 <br />ORDINANCE lF7l8 <br /> <br />APPROVAL <br /> <br />PHONE TAX <br /> <br />Councilman Cummings <br /> <br />Councilman Meier <br /> <br />5/19/81 <br /> <br />Page - 9 - <br /> <br />City Joss advised Mr. Badger the existing <br />ordinance states that anyone doing business <br />as a "professional" that is licensed by <br />some branch of the State, i.e. Realtors, <br />Attorneys, Doctors, etc. are not required <br />to pay the business license fees to the <br />City. This exemption is allowed by the <br />existing ordinance and it was his opinion <br />that the LBA was suggesting that all busi- <br />nesses regarless of occupation or profession <br />pay the business license fees. It was <br />Attorney Joss's recommendation that Council <br />vote on each of the amendments separately, <br />then vote on Ordinance #718 as a whole. <br /> <br />To strike the last sentence relative to the <br />payment of Social Security payments to the <br />State in order to comply with their regu- <br />lations. <br />Councilman DelPizzo moved that the last <br />sentence of section 2.72.030, page 3, <br />Payroll Deductions be deleted from Ordinance <br />lF7l8. Seconded by Councilman Meier. Question <br />called for. All in favor. Motion carried 6-0. <br /> <br />Administrator Wurl explained to Council <br />formerly the Telephone Co. had a franchise <br />tax with the City for approximately 2%, <br />this has since been revoked. Under the <br />present system the revenue collected by <br />the City amounts to 1%, and the suggested <br />fee of $1.00 per month per user would amount <br />to approximately 2~% of the state fees col- <br />lected. He defended the increases in fees, <br />stating they needed to be up-dated to keep <br />up with the rate of inflation depleting <br />revenues. <br />Administrator Wurl advised that the phone <br />tax is collected state-wide and those cities <br />whose fees are less ultimately pay for those <br />cities whose fees are more. <br />Was of the opinion that a 300% increase was <br />to great a jump at one time - that perhaps <br />a smaller percentage should be taken now. <br />Stated that since our citizens of Louisville <br />were paying the fees in any case, why not <br />have a more realistic portion coming back <br />to the City and defended the amendment. <br />