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 18 · column 4 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
Exchanges between officials and speakers grew more heated as administrative assistant John McCarthy explained that the only questions before the planning commissioners were (1) is a landfill needed? and (2) if it’s needed, is the Stover tract a reasonable place for it to be? Leachate collection, monitoring wells, trench liners and other technical aspects of the landfill’s design and development fall under the state’s purview while cost projections and other budgetary matters are the responsibility of the Board of Supervisors, Mr. McCarthy emphasized repeatedly.
Supervisor Nelson Lane took exception to accusations that the board has not been diligently pursuing a solution to the county’s trash crisis. “We’ve done our homework .. . This board is responsible for finding potential landfill sites in our county. Beyond that, it goes to the state.”
Replying to the threat of a suit should the Stover tract be developed as a sanitary landfill, the representative from Stonewall-Hawthome, the district that holds the current privately owned and operated Clark landfill, said: “If we don’t put in a landfill, see who goes to court.” And he maintained that without a landfill, the county could be paying $12,000 a day to have its trash collected, hauled and disposed of by a private contractor with access to a private landfill.
With the chairman’s declaration that the public hearing was closed, the planning commissioners took a
94.4%