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 6 · column 6 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
nit; uni was in st utJieateu in the senate on Feb. 14 by a 17-19 vote. But after reconsicU eration, SB 758 passed 19-18, with Sen. Stephen D. Newman (R-23rd) changing sides and Sen. Louise Lucas (D-18th), who didn’t vote the first time, voting for passage.
Sen. Edd Houck (D-17th), who voted against the bill every time, found fault with both the intent and scope of the legislation.
“What you are doing is allowing a state agency to negotiate with private companies without regard to local authority,” said Houck. “With all the pressing needs of technology, I understand the need for these towers. But where they are placed is another issue. This bill goes too far.”
After debate that Houck characterized as “ugly,” SB 758 passed and was forwarded to the House Committee on Transportation. From there, it was assigned to Katzen’s subcommittee.
Local reaction
Rappahannock County has responded to the problem of new communications towers by formulating its own ordinances, but if SB 758 becomes law, communications tower builders could simply apply for sites in VDOT rights-of-way, and put up their towers without going through the county approval process.
Some fear that the tie-in with the state’s Intelligent Transportation System Program and the open-ended interpretation of what is “deemed to be in the public interest” could virtually guarantee that tower permits filed with VDOT would be approved.
93.7%