Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 10 · column 4 of 4 · from the scan, no model involved
the county has to be asked by the SCC to comment on the impact of the powerlines on the Master Plan.
This was not done, argued attorney Bean, nor could have been done, because the law went into affect after the SCC hearings were concluded. Consequently, the law is not retroactive, said Bean.
JUDGE SNEAD and the Vepco attorneys did not agree. Attorney Joseph Spivey argued the SCC record was “replete” with mention of Fauquier’s Master Plan and the proposed powerlines. Even though there was testimony regarding the Master Plan, admitted Bean, there was no formal request by the SCC for a comment by the Board of Supervisors.
Judge Snead ruled that even with no request made by the SCC, the opportunity for the Supervisors to comment did exist. Judge Snead ordered the Vepco suit “ended” in favor of the power company, because the approval of the powerline route is at the state level.
The attorneys made no more arguments. Judge Snead had informed them of his decision the day before, and the final court proceedings were basically for the record. Only two of the citizens against the powerlines, and one in favor, attended the court session. □
93.4%