Laserfiche WebLink
and for that oversight we apologize and can only say that it was an <br />oversight and certainly not a callous disregard of concern, as alleged <br />in your letter of May 25th. <br />Your attorney again. appeared before the Board on <br />June -6, 1973. -reviewing the Petition submitted in November of 1972, <br />.and another discussion, similar to the one held on November 22, 1972, <br />took place, even though your Associations and your attorney knew the <br />Board's thoughts on the matter because of the discussion in November.. <br />Because of a very busy schedule. I stated that the Board was aware of <br />the problems arising from rezoning and.said a special meeting could <br />be scheduled to discuss the problems. <br />This meeting had not been scheduled prior to today because, <br />quite frankly, there has not been time to prepare the documentation <br />necessary for a proper discussion. This.Board is in the process of . <br />setting up a county -wide water and sewer program, working on our <br />new budget, and handling routine business. <br />Because of our failure to reply to your letter of May <br />25th, you made your own request for an Attorney General's opinion, <br />a copy of which was provided to us by the Press. Our attorney deter- <br />, mined that it was important that the Attorney General know the. <br />County's position if he intended to give an opinion. <br />Your letter of June 26, 1973, accuses the Board of <br />delaying any meeting with you until an opinion had been given by the <br />Attorney General and further accused our Attorney of trying to <br />delay the Attorney General's opinion. This Board has never attempted <br />to delay a meeting with your groups except for the problem of time, <br />as I have previously.explained, and our attorney has never attempted <br />to delay the Attorney General's opinion. <br />Further in your supplemental letter to the Attorney <br />