Violating agreements

Louisa officials may argue that laws required them to file suit within 30 days. However, Fluvanna could contend that the two-county agreement ignores laws requiring zoning applications to receive a fair public hearing and that Supervisors vote on an application only after such a hearing. Louisa charges that Fluvanna failed to conform to the agreement because our Supervisors heard from the public and made an informed decision, one that Louisa County did not like.
Our Supervisors must, as a matter of official duty, consider the effects of a project, such as the James River water intake plant and pipeline, in terms of its suitability at a proposed location. In December, Fluvanna Supervisors heard from residents concerned about the water project’s ravaging of important historic sites, its impact on scenic and environmental assets along the James River and other potential problems. Supervisors denied zoning permits to move the pipeline forward.
Ruling on the zoning permit applications was Fluvanna Supervisors’ prerogative and responsibility. Still, Louisa believes Fluvanna violated the agreement. Louisa almost certainly violated it. Perhaps the two counties should scrap the contract and start over. Maybe Fluvanna could, finally, negotiate for its citizens a fair deal.

Related Posts

dewi88 cuanslot dragon77 cuan138 enterslots rajacuan megahoki88 ajaib88 warung168 fit188 pusatwin pusatwin slot tambang88 mahkota88 slot99 emas138