The Ocala evening star. [volume] (Ocala, Fla.) 1895-1943, 1920-05-04
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Ocala, Fla, April %, 1920.


The board met, pursuant TO call of
the chairman, with all members pres
emit. The chairman stated that the
purpose of this meeting was to can
vass the returns of the bond election
held in Marion county, April goth,
1920, and it being ascertained that
the returns from three precincts had
not been received, the board adjourn
ed to meet at 3 p. m. Monday, April
10Th, 1920 c. K. Rogers, Chairman.
Attest: P H. Nugent, Clerk, by T.
D. Lancaster Jr.. Deputy Clerk.
On the Goth day of April, 1920, he
board of county commissioners of
Marion county, Florida, convened at
the office of said board in the Marion
county court house in Ocala, Florida,
there being present Commissioners ..
H. Rogers, R. B. Meffert, J. W. Davis
and J. A. Talton.
The board met as a county can
wasting board Of election to canvass
the vote cast at the bond election held
in said county on April 20, 1920.
Thereupon the board proceeded to
canvass the vote which canvass was
made solely, exclusively and entirely
from the returns of certificates of the
| inspectors in each election district as
! signed and filed by them with the
clerk and chairman of said board re-
spectively, and in no case did the said
| canvassing board change or vary in
any manner the number Of votes cast
in any polling place in the county as
shown by the returns of the inspec-
toss of such polling places.
The canvass Of said vote being com
plcted in the manner aforesaid, the
result of said election was found and
declared to be as follows:
In Ocala precinct No. l, the number
OF votes cast for bonds was 4O5
D. against bonds 40; in Reddick precinct
No. 2, the number of votes cast fol
bonds was Sd, against bonds 8; II
Pennington precinct No. 3. the mum
Der of votes cast for bands was II
against bonds 80; in Cotton Plant pre-
cinct No. a, the number of votes cast
for bonds was II, against bonds "a
In Romeo precinct No. 5, the number
of votes cast for bonds was IS, agains
bonds 6; in Camp lizard precinct No
5, the number of votes cast for bonds
was l, against bonds 9; in Shady pre-
cinct No. z, the number of votes cas-
for bonds was 6, against bonds II; il
Summerfield precinct No. 8, the mum
ber of votes cast for bonds was &c
against bonds 81; in Lake Weir pre-
cinct No. 8, the number of votes cas-
for bonds was 81, against bonds, none
in Moss Bluff precinct No. 10, tn
number of votes cast for bonds wa
Is, against bonds 3; in Grahamvill
precinct No. II, the number of vote
cast for bonds was IS, against bond
81; in Salt Springs precinct No. I
the number of votes cast for bond
r was L. against bonds 4; in Fort Nc
r Coy precinct No. IS, the number O
votes cast for bonds was 81, agains
= bonds 12; in Orange Springs precinl
No. IA the number of votes cast 70
bonds was none. against bonds II; !
Linadale precinct No. Is, no electio
held; in Citra precinct No. Is. tn
number of votes cast for bonds wa
Z, against bonds %; in Anthony pre-
cinct No. II the number of votes cas-
for bonds was 80, against bonds 81
in Martin precinct No. Is the numbe
of votes cast for bonds was 10. agains
bonds none; in Stanton precinct y,
10 the number of votes cast for bono
= was 81, against bonds none in Blitcl
ton precinct No. 20 the number {
votes cast for bonds was IL, agains
bonds 8; in Belleview precinct No.
the number of votes cast for bono
was SO, against bonds 6; in McIntos
precinct No. % the number of vote
cast for bonds was "a. against bono
none; in Pedro precinct No. % tt
- number of votes cast for bonds We
= Is, against bonds 3; in Dunnellon pr
. cinct No. "a the number of votes ca
= for bonds was 9, against bonds 76;
= Gambler precinct No. 25 the number
It votes cast for bonds was 10, again
bonds>2; in Spar precinct No. &c II
l number of votes cast for bonds WI
d 80, against bonds 5; in Eureka pr
r cinct No. 27 the number of votes ca
IL for bonds was 4, against bonds II;
p Levon precinct No. % the number
\ votes cast for bonds was 7, again
/, bonds 8; in Kendrick precinct No.
the number of votes cast for bont
le was 10, against bonds 13; in Mart
IL precinct No. 80 the number of vot
cast for bonds was 4, against bon
O 27; in Fairfield precinct No 81 Il
e. number of votes cast for bonds w
81. against bonds 5; in Geiger pr
lie cinct No. 30 the number of votes ca
ly for bonds was 3, against bonds Is;
e Emathla precinct No. SO the numb
N of votes cast for bonds was 3, again
a bonds 10. Total votes cast for bono
ut 1914; against bonds, 483.
u Thereupon the board declared tn
1g the result of said election was
b. favor of the issuance of the bonds
% said county in the amount set forth