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 3 · column 2 of 9 · from the scan, no model involved
voted against this the last time because the planning commission said it doesn’t comply,” Baldwin responded. “It’s only fair to get their opinion now.”
Compliance?
“Either we make the judgement on whether (Goode’s revised 13-lot proposal) is in substantial compliance or we shouldn’t be on this board,” Luke said, adding that the decision wasn’t difficult.
Wood made the motion to delay action until the board’s next regular meeting on May 3 to allow all the supervisors time to review the revised plan.
“We’ve had two years on this thing,’’ interjected Latham before a vote on the motion.
"We just got the papers,” corrected supervisor "Butch” Eastham, referring to the revised subdivision plan.
"But we knew what was being done,” Latham replied.
"I think we’re malingering myself,” added Luke.
The motion to delay action passed with Latham and Luke opposed. Following attorney Compton’s announcement that he and Goode would be in court on May 2, Luke suggested an executive session to name an attorney to represent the supervisors.
(At the February board meeting, Commonwealth Attorney George Davis advised the supervisors to
89.8%