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 9 · column 2 of 5 · from the scan, no model involved
favor leaving the rest of the road gravel,” Lee said. “I’ve got no problem with that.”
Lee said he went to visit Cory and Matthew Caulfield, at their request, in late August. Lee said he told them he’d look into the situation.
“I didn’t want to tell them I’d look into it and not do it,” Lee said. “I didn’t tell them I’d change my vote (on the three-tenths). I said I’d look into it. I consider every vote very carefully. I took time to ride the road and see it for myself.”
Lee said the issue for him was still the fact that the current transition from tar to gravel ended on a slope.
“I felt there was a need to bring that paved surface down to the flat, down to where the transition is more secure,” Lee said.
He also added that he’d heard rumors that he was doing someone a favor.
“I don’t do favors,” Lee said.
More confusion arose when Lee mentioned to County Administrator John McCarthy that he wished he had more time to look at the situation before it was paved.
“I took it upon myself to call Garrett Moore over at VDOT,” McCarthy said.
McCarthy said that on Sept. 9 or 10, he called Moore at the VDOT office in Culpeper and asked him to hold off on the Grimsley paving until the next Board of Supervisors’ meeting.
“Any supposition on this was on my part,” McCarthy said. “It looked to me like the vote was shaky enough to go either way.”
On Monday, Sept. 13, McCarthy faxed Moore a letter telling him that the decision to go ahead with the paving had not changed.
“Over the weekend Bryant made it clear to me that he was dubious about paving the rest of Grimsley, but that he was still in favor of paving the three-tenths,” McCarthy said.
Moore said the re-surfacing of Grimsley could be done by Oct. 15, “barring any natural disasters like Hurricane Ivan.”
95.9%