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 2 · column 4 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved

By Jason Peck
Rappahannock News Staff Writer
The state’s highest court on Friday sided with several area newspapers in a landmark case against the Culpeper County Board of Supervisors.
The Virginia State Supreme Court ruled 7-0 that county supervisors violated the Freedom of Information Act when they met behind closed doors to discuss alternatives to a 1,500-student high school.
“It is the right decision,” said Lawrence Emerson, founder and former editor of the Citizen. “It should encourage Culpeper government officials and officials across the Commonwealth to be more careful and think more about the public interest than their own personal interest. This was an egregious violation of state law, no doubt about it.”
Citizen attorney Craig Merit denied extensive comments, due to the ongoing nature of the case.
“The opinion of the Supreme Court speaks for itself,” he said.
The case began when supervisors declared a closed meeting Oct. 5, citing a FOIA exemption that permits government bodies to discuss negotiations before awarding a contract.
But the meeting came after an architectural contract had already been awarded to Reston-based SHW for design work related to constructing a new high school.
Instead, supervisors discussed design alternative to building a 1,500-student high school. Among the options was the aborted 2,400-student “mega high school” created by combining both Culpeper County High School and Culpeper Middle School.
The Citizen promptly filed a petition against the board.
The general district court initially sided with the supervisors. But newspapers around the state made donations toward legal funds that eventually mushroomed to more than $100,000. Daily newspapers The Culpeper Star-Exponent and The Freelance Star of Fredericksburg signed on as plaintiffs in the circuit court appeal.
1
95.0%