I have just heard from our attorney that Chancellor Fansler has upheld our position, and has denied the request for a Summary judgment filed by the attorney representing Dave Reynolds, who is interested in developing the land on Stockton.

This is of course, good news, but every coin has two sides. The judge has set a date now for a full blown hearing at the end of March. The fact that we prevailed in the Summary hearing, because the plaintiffs had not borne the burden of proof that our appeal was unconstitutional, is no guarantee that in a full hearing we would again prevail. Also the expense issue can become significant. I have asked Bill Nulton, who lives adjacent to the proposed development to consider what could be an acceptable compromise position. Similarly, I have asked our attorney to talk to the plaintiff's attorney about the possibility of a compromise position. In light of this ruling the developer should also be more open to compromise, since there is no guarantee that he will prevail at the full hearing, and a compromise could save him $10,000 or more to pursue this further in the courts.

I will keep everyone informed as issues develop.

Joe