Posted on

Does your vote count? Only if you vote.

On November 4, 2014, Knox County had 104734 people vote on Amendment 1 altering the state’s constitution to give government control over a woman’s body. In 2013, 444622 lived in Knox County. That means 24% of the population decided to vote.

102554 people voted on Amendment 2.

100453 voted on Amendment 3.

95443 people voted on Amendment 4.

What does this mean? In short, Knox County allowed roughly the same number of people who show up to a football game on Saturday to decide to change the state of Tennessee’s constitution.

2016 is not far away. Get registered to vote. Learn the issues. Ignore the marketing. Make educated decisions. VOTE!

Posted on

Don’t ruin it for everybody

Dear parents, rather than trying to force your ideals upon my children, please allow them to read the assigned reading and be challenged by the concepts and the language within the writing. These books, Feed and Robopocalypse, were chosen for a reason, not by random choice. If you do not want your child to read the book, let your child read the alternative reading but leave my child alone. I believe these high school students, these young adults, can handle it.

See more at Hardin Valley STEM reading assignment stirs up controversy.

Posted on

Don’t ever be afraid to address your city council

Have you ever stood before your city council? Have you ever expressed your ire with a law? Voiced your discontent with a resolution?

This is your First Amendment right demonstrated. Watch. Cringe. And follow James Inman‘s example.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

[Source, Wikipedia, United States Bill of Rights]

Posted on

My State Representatives Do Not Represent Me

Tennessee House Rep. Julia Hurley (R-Lenoir City) said, "I don’t understand why it’s news, and I don’t want to talk about the desk."

Tennessee House Rep. Julia Hurley (R-Lenoir City) has confirmed that she carved her initials into her desk in the state legislature. … this childish display is indeed pretty disappointing — and she isn’t the only one who’s done it, as there are other initials and dollar signs carved into the House’s desks.

[Source, BoingBoing, Tenn. state rep: "I carved my initials in my desk in the House, but I don’t understand why it’s news"]

Representative Hurley, allow me to explain. Your vandalism of public property is news. It demonstrates your lack of respect for your position and your standoffish, it doesn’t matter, response is suggestive of how you may chose to ignore your constituents.

I was twelve years old, not 29, the last time I carved my initials into something. It was a hand rail at a Disney World ride during an excruciatingly long wait. But after being scolded, I felt bad and was apologetic. I realized the wrong I had done in choosing to vandalize. Perhaps Representative Hurley would do well to learn from a child that we accept our wrong doings and apologize.

Why does this matter? Because as an elected official, she reflects upon every person of Tennessee. When people outside of TN learn that I am from TN, their first impression of me is established by the news of Representative Hurley’s, or Stacey Campfield’s et al, actions and legal decisions. Also, if Rep. Hurley does not approach her job with more professionalism, and let’s face it–carving in desks is something middle schoolers do, how can we expect her to approach legislative decisions?

Posted on

Stop Outsourcing at Knox County Schools

A friend from Jobs with Justice of East Tennessee asked that I help spread their word:

Jobs with Justice of East Tennessee is petitioning to save the jobs of 275 or more custodial workers as Superintendent Dr. McIntyre has proposed an outsourcing plan as part of the 2011-2012 school budget which would:

  • lay off 275 workers across the county
  • reduce custodial wages by $2-$5 per hour
  • decrease quality of work (as shown by the last outsourcing attempt)

Please sign our online petition urging the school board to avoid outsourcing in our schools! http://bit.ly/g69Uz3

Jobs with Justice of East Tennessee is having a lunch for custodians and other school employees and community members this Saturday.

Custodians and other school employees and community members have been circulating petitions and talking to the Board of Education about the proposal to contract out custodial services. This is a very bad idea – bad for employees, students, and the whole community. There are a couple of School Board meetings coming up soon, so this might be a good time for folks to get together and talk about what we need to do next.

Let’s meet for lunch Saturday, April 30, 12 noon to 2 pm at the UNITE Building, 1124 N. Broadway (less than a mile north of Central).

Since custodians work different shifts, Saturday seems like the best chance to get together. We’d like the other folks who have been working on this to attend as well.

Lunch & Child Care are provided.

Family members are welcome at this gathering. Everyone is important. We’ll talk about what we’ve accomplished so far, and how we might move forward to save jobs and the quality of our schools. We can do this!

If you have questions before Saturday, call Jobs with Justice volunteers Karly Safar, 615/519-0157 or Brad Rayson, 865/385-4421.

Posted on

Knox County Charter Amendments in Plain English

Upon examining the sample ballot from the General Election in Knox County, TN November 4, 2008, I found the questions of the Charter Amendments confusing. So I emailed the Election Commission and learned that they are not allowed to comment on the ballots. However, the County Law Director’s Office writes the questions so I called and spoke to a very kind and informative lawyer at the County Law Director’s Office. He also pointed me to today’s Knoxnews Editorial (which says vote yes to 3 and 4. I disagree.). The following is my interpretation of the Chart Amendment questions based upon his answers to my questions. Please see this earlier post or the sample ballot for the actual questions.

LIQUOR REFERENDUM

First we discussed the Liquor Referendum. There are not overreaching implications of this question. Either we want to be able to have liquor by the drink served in bars and restaurants in the county, just like we do in the city, or we don’t. It’s a very straight forward question.

COUNTY CHARTER AMENDMENT QUESTION 1

This is a housekeeping amendment to bring our county into conformance with state law. In short, the amendment says, "Amendments can be added to the ballot."

COUNTY CHARTER AMENDMENT QUESTION 2

This is also a housekeeping amendment. Apparently the current charter does not explicitly state how the composition of a Charter Review Committee (that is, who makes up the committee). I looked for the actual wording in the current charter but Google is failing me at the moment. So, as a matter of housekeeping, this question adds to the charter language that says:

a Charter Review Committee is "composed of 27 members with 1 member of the County Commission from each commission district to be nominated by the Commission, 9 non-commission members who are registered Knox County voters nominated by the Commission and 9 noncommission members who are registered Knox County voters nominated by the Knox County Mayor."

There is no hidden agenda or far overreaching implication.

COUNTY CHARTER AMENDMENT QUESTION 3

This question is actually two unrelated questions in one. The first half of the question is asking do we reduce the number of county commissioners from 19 to 11. Each commission district would be reduced from 2 representatives to 1. And 2 at-large commissioners who would serve county wide and not be bound to district. This is similar to the way the city government works. So if you feel the city’s representation of the people is effective, then that part of the question is a YES vote. If you feel the city’s government is ineffective, then that half of the question is a NO vote.

The second half of the question regards a nepotism policy which obviously prohibits family from supervising or influencing employment of a relative. It also says that no person drawing a paycheck from Knox County would be able to serve as a commissioner. For example, a Knox County school teacher could not also be a Knox County Commissioner.

This is a tough question simply because the first half has to weigh between less overhead in our county government versus less representation. And the second half has to do with eliminating the good ol’ boy network in our county government (again, my interpretation, not the County Law Director’s Office). However, you cannot vote NO to half and YES to the other half. Your vote is either FOR or AGAINST.

COUNTY CHARTER AMENDMENT QUESTION 4

Right now, the positions of County Trustee, County Clerk, Register of Deeds and County Law Director are all elected positions. If you live in the county, you get to vote for the people who hold those positions. This question proposes that those four positions will no longer be elected. Instead the Mayor will appoint those positions.

That’s it. To review and my recommendations:

  1. (YES) Housekeeping
  2. (YES) Housekeeping
  3. (NO) Two unrelated questions: a) reduce the number of commissioners b) Instate a nepotism policy
  4. (NO) Change 4 elected positions to positions appointed by the Mayor
Posted on

Instead of Stacey Campfield…

Since we don’t want to vote for Stacey Campfield, and he is running unopposed, who should we write-in? I always do myself but wouldn’t it be cool to actually see a write-in candidate show up in the numbers? For that to happen, we would all have to write the same name. Feel free to write-in "Doug McCaughan" but I think maybe it should be an easier name and better qualified like "Randy Neal" (maybe we ask Randy first)

Posted on

County Charter Amendments in Plain English?

Update Oct 29, 2008: My interpretation is now posted. Click THIS LINK to read the explanation of the Charter Amendments as explained by the County Law Director’s Office. If you are looking for a quick answer and want to vote my decision, vote (1) Yes, (2) Yes, (3) No, and (4) No.

I was just looking over the Sample Ballot for the General Election in Knox County, TN November 4, 2008. There are 5 potentially confusing choices that may leave many voters guessing. Has anyone put the Charter Amendment questions and the Liquor Referendum into plain English?

The questions are:

COUNTY CHARTER AMENDMENT QUESTION 1
Question 1: Shall the Knox County Charter be amended as follows: The Knox County Charter Section 9.05 D is hereby amended to delete the phrase “Not more than sixty (60) days and not less than forty-five (45) days prior to the next general election next following its appointment” and to substitute the following language: “In accordance with Section 9.05E” and to delete only the first sentence of Section 9.06 E, and to substitute the following two sentences: Any and all proposed charter amendments to be submitted to the voters of the County shall be submitted to the Knox County Election Commission in accordance with state law. The County Election Commission shall submit any Charter amendments certified and delivered to it, in accordance with the provisions of this Section 9.05, to the voters of the county at the next regular State or County election following the delivery to the County Election Commission of the ordinance or petition proposing the amendment?

Update from explanation: This is a housekeeping amendment to bring our county into conformance with state law. In short, the amendment says, "Amendments can be added to the ballot."

COUNTY CHARTER AMENDMENT QUESTION 2
Question 2: Shall the Knox County Charter be amended as follows: Section 9.05 of the Knox County Charter dealing with the composition of and the selection process for the members of a Charter Review Committee is amended by deleting Subsections D. and E. in their entirety and substituting the following: D. Within certain prescribed time periods, but not less than every eight years, a Charter Review Committee will review this Charter to determine the need for amendments. The committee shall be composed of 27 members with 1 member of the County Commission from each commission district to be nominated by the Commission, 9 non-commission members who are registered Knox County voters nominated by the Commission and 9 noncommission members who are registered Knox County voters nominated by the Knox County Mayor. Only 2 noncommission members shall be nominated from each commission district. The Commission shall vote upon each nominee individually. If the nominee does not receive a majority of votes, then whoever nominated that nominee shall nominate someone new. E. Proposed Charter amendments shall be submitted to the Election Commission in accordance with state law?

Update from explanation: This is also a housekeeping amendment. Apparently the current charter does not explicitly state how the composition of a Charter Review Committee (that is, who makes up the committee). I looked for the actual wording in the current charter but could not find it. So, as a matter of housekeeping, this question adds that language to the charter.

COUNTY CHARTER AMENDMENT QUESTION 3
Question 3: Shall the Knox County Charter be amended [1] to reduce the number of commissioners elected by the people from nineteen (19) to eleven (11) so that each commission district will have only one (1) instead of two (2) elected representatives along with two (2) at-large commissioners elected in a County-wide vote so that seven Commission Seats shall be elected in the County primary and general election of 2010 for an initial extended term of six (6) years and every four (4) years thereafter while four (4) Commission Seats shall be elected in the County primary and general election of 2010 and every four (4) years thereafter; [2] to insure no person shall be eligible to serve as a member of the Commission who is employed in any other position by Knox County; [3] to adopt a nepotism policy prohibiting an elected or appointed official from recommending, supervising, or causing employment of his or her relative to an office or position of employment within Knox County government and; [4] to require elected or appointed officials to disclose, prior to voting, any conflict of interest in any matter and recuse him/herself from the discussion and/or vote on the matter?

Update from explanation: This question is actually two unrelated questions in one. The first half of the question is asking do we reduce the number of county commissioners from 19 to 11. Each commission district would be reduced from 2 representatives to 1. And 2 at-large commissioners who would serve county wide and not be bound to district. This is similar to the way the city government works. So if you feel the city’s representation of the people is effective, then that part of the question is a YES vote. If you feel the city’s government is ineffective, then that half of the question is a NO vote.

The second half of the question regards a nepotism policy which obviously prohibits family from supervising or influencing employment of a relative. It also says that no person drawing a paycheck from Knox County would be able to serve as a commissioner. For example, a Knox County school teacher could not also be a Knox County Commissioner.

This is a tough question simply because the first half has to weigh between less overhead in our county government versus less representation. And the second half has to do with eliminating the good ol’ boy network in our county government (again, my interpretation, not the County Law Director’s Office). However, you cannot vote NO to half and YES to the other half. Your vote is either FOR or AGAINST.

COUNTY CHARTER AMENDMENT QUESTION 4
Question 4: Shall the Knox County Charter be amended [1] to take away from the people the ability to vote for the County Trustee, County Clerk, and Register of Deeds by changing these elected offices to administrative offices appointed by the Mayor subject to Commission approval effective September 1, 2010; [2] to take away from the people the ability to vote for the County Law Director by changing this elected office to an office appointed by the Mayor, subject to Commission approval, and subject to removal by two-thirds of the Commission for fraud or malfeasance, effective September 1, 2012; [3] to give the Mayor the power, with Commission approval, to create or eliminate major departments of county government and to appoint all department directors, subject to removal for cause by two-thirds of the Commission; [4] eliminate the office of County Auditor and put in its place an Inspector General to be appointed by the Commission for a six (6) year term, effective September 1, 2010; and [5] adopt a conflict of interest policy requiring elected and appointed county officials to disclose their personal interest in any matter requiring an exercise of discretion and to recuse himself/herself from participating in the matter?

Update from explanation: Right now, the positions of County Trustee, County Clerk, Register of Deeds and County Law Director are all elected positions. If you live in the county, you get to vote for the people who hold those positions. This question proposes that those four positions will no longer be elected. Instead the Mayor will appoint those positions.

LIQUOR REFERENDUM
[ ]For legal sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises in Knox County.
[ ]Against legal sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises in Knox County.

Update from explanation: There are not overreaching implications of this question. Either we want to be able to have liquor by the drink served in bars and restaurants in the county, just like we do in the city, or we don’t.

To review and my recommendations:

  1. (YES) Housekeeping
  2. (YES) Housekeeping
  3. (NO) Two unrelated questions: a) reduce the number of commissioners b) Instate a nepotism policy
  4. (NO) Change 4 elected positions to positions appointed by the Mayor

Please post your thoughts in comments. I will be looking for an explanation online and possibly adding my own interpretation.

Michael Silence’s poll says the Amendments won’t pass.

Posted on

Random searches of students passes unanimously

The Knox County School Board voted unanimously to approve random searching of students. The next steps are to have the Law Department issue a legal memorandum then to have a final reading of the policy on November 2nd.

A commenter with good common sense from Volunteer TV’s comments regarding the Knox County School Board wanting to implement random searches in the school (emphasis added):

Posted by: Keri Location: Knoxville on Oct 1, 2008 at 09:46 AM
Are we, as members of a free democracy-protected by a Constitution, going to allow the constitutional rights of our children to be trampled upon? I am as concerned as most citizens about the safety of our children at school, but I am more concerned about the intimidation and conditioning of our children to accept infringements on their rights as American citizens. If we accept policies that not only allow, but encourage the powers that be to randomly search our children, without cause or evidence of wrong doing, how much longer before these policies obscure the rights of every citizen? These children are the future policy makers and leaders of our country and they will lead us based on the manner in which they have been lead. It is time to send a message to our children and the policy makers of our community that we value our Constitutional rights and those who fought and died to secure those rights, far too much to allow anyone, for any reason to strip our children of their liberty. [Source, VolunteerTV.com, Knox Co. School Board considering random search proposal, Keri]

Quit looking for quick fixes and think about the future. Please.

See also: teenagers are not criminals

Posted on

Please vote NO to random searches in our schools

I felt compelled to email each of our school board members (and the ACLU) since tonight they will vote to approve random searching of students in our schools. This is the email I sent. Will you send one?

Dear School Board,

Please vote NO to random searches in our schools. Our money and time will be better spent developing a rapport with the students.

These websites informed me that Knox County School plans to pass a measure to allow random searching of students in the schools:

http://schoolmatters.knoxnews.com/forum/topic/show?id=879777%3ATopic%3A28290
http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2008/sep/30/random-searches-at-schools-studied/
http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2008/oct/01/Knox-school-superintendent-proposes-random-search/

After the Central High School shooting, didn’t security experts advise you that the security cameras were a waste of money and that we’d be better served by having personnel interact more frequently with the students? See this quote from Knox School Matters:

I do not agree, I have a teenage daughter and do not want anyone “doing a pat down” search on her. They had a random metal detector search at Powell the other day and they only ran every 7th kid through it and yelled at the kids to shut up and just go through and dont ask questions. The kids were terrfied not knowing what was going on and being yelled at like criminals. Source, Knoxschoolmatters.com, Cindi

Our students deserve to be treated better than that. The students will not talk to the staff and warn them of impending doom when the student body fears the staff. We gain nothing through fear. In the penitentiary system random searches are to “breakdown” the inmates. Is that our goal? To brainwash and breakdown the children and parents? What legacy will we leave with these children when they graduate and start passing laws for us? For our own safety, will they legalize random searches in our retirement homes? The malls? Our houses?

Random searching is nothing more than theater. It is a waste of staff time, humiliating to the students, and ineffective. Ineffective? The student that wants to bring a gun to school isn’t going to be deterred by the possibility of a random search but I bet that student will be talking and exhibiting behaviors that give warning signs long before the gun comes in. You will pick up on the warning signs by interacting positively with the students. Negativity begets negativity and random searches are very negative.

Random searches at a school are different than random searches at an airport (although equally ineffective and very much theater). At the airport, we have the option to decline being searched and leave. Will our students have the right to decline a search and leave school?

You cannot build trust and safety on a foundation of fear and false suspicion. Please vote no.

Thank you!
Doug McCaughan
phone number

Update: A commenter at Knoxnews has this:

The Supreme Court Case that most directly deals with student searches is New Jersey v. T.L.O (469 U.S. 325). The written opinion states that althought students have not “necessarily waived all rights to privacy in such items by bringing them (legitimate, non-contraband items) onto school grounds,” a search can still be conducted if determined to be “reasonable.” The following describes the factors used to determine reasonableness:

“Determining the reasonableness of any search involves a determination of whether the search was justified at its inception and whether, as conducted, it was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances that justified the interference in the first place. Under ordinary circumstances, the search of a student by a school official will be justified at its inception where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating either the law or the rules of the school.”

In other words, officials must have a reason to search (less cause than suspision) a student. Random selection, by definition, is not a specific reason.

No matter how the school board votes, allowing random searches would be in direct violation of a Supreme Court ruling, and state and county law can not supercede federal law.

http://supreme.justia.com/us/469/325/…

[Source, Knoxnews, Knox school superintendent proposes random searches; board to hear plan tonight, zachbest]

Update: No response from any board member. The ACLU called almost immediately!

Posted on

Knoxville “The Couch”

The New York Times did a travel piece on Knoxville with some creative writing and declared that the locals refer to Knoxville as "The Couch."

KNOXVILLE is often called "the couch" by the people who live there. [Source, The New York Times-Travel, Allison Glock, 8-Jun-08, 36 Hours in Knoxville]

I came to Knoxville in the Fall of 1988 having never lived more than 4 ½ years in one place. Knoxville is comfortable and I settled in. But never have I heard anyone refer to Knoxville as The Couch! I’ve heard Big Orange Country, The Valley, K-Town, and Knoxvegas. Until the Knoxpatch blog came around I’d never heard that one. And by people who grew up here, Hell, but they leave and then usually come home in 2 to 4 years. The only couch reference I’ve ever noticed is the roadside dumping of couches which are often recycled by University of Tennessee students. There used to be a place in South Knoxville where couches go to die. I never took a picture but it was this huge cliff or old, grown over rock quarry and dozens of couches were haphazardly piled at the bottom as if when their time had come they’d run to the edge of the cliff then plummeted to the sacred couch burial ground. (Was near Ijams if anyone is curious).

Allison Glock wrote a very nice article about Knoxville! The couch reference is just befuddling and makes me wonder if some of her 36 hours wasn’t spent on one of the West’s old couches. Of course, maybe it was a red herring to get Knoxville media and blogs to link to the article. If so, it worked! Michael Silence, Byron Chesney, Bill Lyons, Katie Allison Granju, Michael Silence again, Glenn Reynolds, Katie Allison Granju again, Jack Lail, Michael Silence again, Say Uncle, Chris, KnoxInsider, and Randy Neil.

Update: Glenn Reynolds draws the same conclusion I did. (Glenn, who’s your source!) Jack Lail notes the point.

Update: The Reluctant Optimist, Michael Silence rounding up, and Ann Althouse.

Update 9Jun08: Michael Silence writes the NYT’s editor, Knox Blab discusses The Couch and Michael Silence sums up the Blab chat, and Katie Allison Granju announces Ken Schwall will address this on Channel 10 news at 6pm tonight.

Update 9Jun08: Casey Peters does a roundup, and Michael Silence does an update, and Michael Silence conjectures they meant "Swingtown" and then Michael Silence posts the solved mystery. The Couch continues to provide amusement to the newspaper staff, here and here.

Update: Michael Silence gets automated responses from the NYT. Michael Silence notes Liz Donovan jumps in.

Update 10Jun2008: Michael Solomon (letter seen on No Silence Here) complains and says Allison Glock is owed an apology and Barry wonders why a real issue is being ignored for "The Couch". Michael Silence gets a funny comment.

Update 11Jun08: Ken Schwall interviews people.

Update 12Jun08: Metropulse interviews Allison Glock and she isn’t happy with Knoxville bloggers. Katie Allison Granju agrees with me that bloggers were not outraged just confused at the authoritative way Alliison Glock claimed locals call Knoxville "The Couch." We appreciated her well written article and I think her statement "Next time I suppose I’ll just write about Pigeon Forge." is a poor response; instead, she would have made herself look better by thanking the community for the correction to her error. Chris at Rocky Top MBA draws an elegantly written conclusion to Couchgate. Well done Chris!

Michael Silence responds to Glock’s response. And notes other blogger’s responses.

Update 14Jun08: Michael Silence cites more comments (much to Cathy’s chagrin).

Posted on

Be involved with your schools! Act TODAY!

During the rezoning we told the school board that the community wanted to be informed and involved in the choices that were being made. The School Matters forum was created as a result to help facilitate communication on educational issues. School Matters can be used by the community to talk amongst themselves on all issues of education throughout life. Education is not limited to K through 12. Fortunately, the school board listens in on School Matters and often provides commentary and responses.

The Knox County Board of Education will host an overview of school finance and the FY 2009 Budget request at 6:00 p.m. Thursday, June 12 in the West High School auditorium at 3300 Sutherland Ave.

The session is for interested citizens and is designed to provide a primer on school finance and an overview of the FY 2009 budget request and approval process.

[Source, School Matters, Knox County Schools Budget Overview Meeting for General Public]

Your comments to this announcement on School Matters could possibly help keep the budget on track and steer our educational resources in the best possible manner to provide our children with the education they deserve. Take time and comment now! For the children.

Posted on

ACT NOW! They are voting TODAY!

They are voting today!

This vote regarding kids going to the school closest to [their] home, gets voted on TOMORROW! This is an initial vote by six house members. They must be contacted today.

The original email:

Dear Friends and Neighbors,

Rep Mike Turner and Senator Haynes have proposed a change to the Tennessee Code that shall allow "any pupil so desiring to attend the school closest to the geographical location of the place of residence of the pupil." This bill is in committee this week so we must ACT NOW! You can get more information on this bill by going to the TN government state website: http://www.state.tn.us/

The bill is being proposed in both the house (2524) and senate (2891). This addresses the concerns of many families throughout Knox County who felt that their children should attend a school closer to their home.

I encourage you to call or email your representative. Also, if you have a relationship with anyone on this list or in the State House or Senate, please contact them as well.

Below is a list emails for State Officials representing Knox County.

Thank you for your time.

Pamela Treacy

Senate

  1. Randy McNally (R) 307 WMB, 37243-0205 741-6806 741-7200
    94 Royal Troon Cir, OR 37830 483-5544
  2. Jamie Woodson(R) 317 WMB, 37243-0206 741-1648 253-0270
    8509 White _s Pond Way,37923 539-8683
  3. Tim Burchett (R) 310A WMB 37243-0207 741-1766 741-7200
    8220 Bennington Dr 37909 693-1902

House District

  1. Harry Tindell (D) 33 LP, 37243-0113 741-2031 741-1446
    P.O. Box 27325, 37927-7325 524-7200
  2. Park M Strader (R) 214 WMB, 37243-0114 741-2264 741-1005
    708 Farragut Commons Dr,37934 694-9165
  3. Joseph Armstrong (D) 25 LP, 37243-0115 741-0768 253-0316
    4708 Hilldale Dr, 37914 523-6374
  4. Bill Dunn (R) 205 WMB, 37243-0116 741-1721 532-8221
    5309 LaVesta Rd, 37918 687-4904
  5. Frank Niceley (R) 113 WMB, 37243-0117 741-2282 253-0217
    1023 Creek Rd, Str Plns37871 433-4419
  6. Stacey Campfield (R) 113 WMB, 37243-0118 741-2287 253-0217
    2011 Flagler Rd, 37912 455-2627
  7. Harry Brooks (R) 207 WMB, 37243-0119 741-6879 253-0212
    6600 Washington Pike, 37918 687-5987
Posted on

Rocky Hill polling packed


Mobile post sent by djuggler using Utterz Replies.  mp3

I was pressed for time on that post. Didn’t want to cross the 100′ barrier and sound like I was reporting something.

At the time I made that post (4:30pm), the staff reported that roughly 800 people had been through those polls.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.