Election Commission Votes To Restore Polling Places
Email Print

The Cannon County Election Commission voted Monday night to restore three polling places.

The polling places are Short Mountain No. 2, Short Mountain No. 4 and Pleasant Ridge.

During its November meeting, the Election Commission unanimously voted to move the Short Mountain polling places from Short Mountain School to two different locations. Short Mountain No. 2 was moved to Gassaway and Short Mountain No. 4 to East Side School.

They also voted to move Pleasant Ridge from Woodbury Grammar School to Auburntown.

The vote to restore all three polling places was 3-2, with commissioners Jackie Gannon, Louise Mayo and Sue Patrick voting in favor of the motion made by Patrick and commissioners Matt Studd and Lindburg Dennis voting against.

The decision to rescind November's action was met with cheers of approval from a packed room of residents from the Short Mountain and Pleasant Ridge communities in attendance in the courtroom of the Cannon County Courthouse. The meeting had to be moved there from the Election Office due to the large crowd.

The decision effects 1,141 of Cannon County's 8,216 registered voters. Of those 1,141, less than half, 423, voted in the last election.

The Election Commission had hoped to save over $6,500 this election cycle (the three elections this calendar year) by closing the three polling places. In addition to those lost savings, it is estimated the Election Office will now need an additional $4,000 this calendar year to inform voters by mail of the decision to reinstate those locations as voting locations and to hire poll workers.

The Commission's action to keep the three polling places open must be approved by Tenneseee Coordinator of Elections Mark Goins before it becomes official.

(Check back to CannonCourier.com and see next week's addition of the Cannon Courier for additional information from Monday's meeting)

Share:
Members Opinions:
January 10, 2012 at 6:44am
Democracy at work--bowing to the will of the people. Some concepts are more important than saving tax dollars.
We need to make it easier for people to vote and not throw roadblocks in the way of one of our most cherished rights.
Now let us roll back the photo ID law passed by Republicans.
Great day for the voters of Cannon County!
[Delete]
January 10, 2012 at 9:43am
We can't afford to remove the photo ID law MMW / a.k.a. dailyreader because people like yourself who plan on committing voter fraud.

If it weren't for people like you who plan on voting multiple times and encouraging your fellow Democrats to do the same then we wouldn't need a photo ID law now would we?

But, since you are determined to elect canidates by fraud then I think it best that we leave the ID alone so we can guarantee one person equals one vote!

That would ensure that we have a GREAT DAY for the voters of Cannon County!
January 10, 2012 at 9:55am
There is incorrect information in this report. The $6500 savings is for 3 elections. The year for the election office is July 1 thru June 30. There will only be one election for this year ending June 30, 2011. This money had already been budgeted and appropriated for this election. There will be two elections in the next fiscal year. If this affects 1141 voters, new cards will have to be sent. Postage of .44 per voter at a cost of will be $502.00. Supplies and labor will be in addition to this cost. Money is already in the budget for this because there is $20,000 budgeted for an election that will cost somewhere around $15,000. I just want to clarify the facts. Sue Patrick
January 10, 2012 at 10:48am
MMW
Now let me see if I understand this. The greater good for a select few out weighs the greater good for the many. This is not what
I rember being taught in civics class. But of course that was in the 50s.
As for the savings, remember as I always say "MY government sponsered PORK is YOUR tax dollars." And then we question why our taxes are so high and so many government agencies are running in the red. PORK The greater good for a few at the determint to the majority.
I live within 2 miles from my polling place but would gladly drive several miles to save the taxpayers of this county six thousand plus dollars.

As for the comment about voter ID, this is getting old. If I go to buy beer I must show a pictured ID(now remember I went to school in the 50's). I must also show ID and sometimes give a thumbprint if I cash a check at any bank where I do not have an account. I recently hauled a load of scrap metal to the scrap yard and was asked for both a picture ID and a thumbprint.
Now which is more important, my buying beer, cashing a check, selling scrap or being sure that you and I are casting a legal vote?
Jack
[Delete]
January 10, 2012 at 3:01pm
The monetary amount in the article is correct. It is based on the number of elections scheduled for this calendar year, not the county's fiscal year. The bottom line is that reversing the decision made in November will cost taxpayers $2166.66 per election.
[Delete]
January 10, 2012 at 3:10pm
Jack / mkeller well said.

However, I have been trying to explain logic to MMW (formerly dailyreader) for a couple of years now and you might as well be talking to a wall because you get about as much logic back.

The only reason I respond to him anymore is simply because I refuse to let him spread his lying, liberal garbage off as the truth because people who don't try bother to really look into things will accept the lies he trys to pass off as the truth. Plus he is a self proclaimed felon if he does what he says and votes often.

I got moved from my precint as well. I didn't like it any more than anyone else did. However, it just didn't tear me up that I couldn't vote in the exact same spot that my daddy voted at for the last forty years like it did most people. I would have simply voted early and solved the problem.

Because of the change this not only costs the taxpayer $6500 that it could have saved, it also cost the taxpayer the costs of the new voter registration cards that went out, it costs the taxpayer the price of the paper, the stamps, the envelopes and the hours worked to get it all together.

FOR WHAT?

Nothing more than tradition.

I applauded the Election Commission for having a bi-partisan effort to save money at little disruption to the voter when they voted to move the precints despite me being moved myself. Now I believe it to be a mistake to retroact something that saved us money for no other reason than tradition and a few phone calls.

I have no doubt that the same people who were screaming the loudest to have the decision reversed were some of the same people screaming at the County Commissioners back in July that their property taxes were too high.

$6500 spent in fiscal 2011 or divided over three elections is still $6500 that could be saved no matter what. It is still $6500 that could have been used in other areas that were more needed or helped reduce the amount of property taxes for the homeowners.

What an absolute waste of time, effort and money this has all been.
January 10, 2012 at 5:18pm
"Typical Corey. Someone challenges his holier-than-thou existence and out comes the personal attacks. ..... It must be nice being a legend in one's own mind."

Legend in his own mind, my goodness all he said in a few short paragraphs was "I have, I respond, I refuse, I got, I didn't, tear me, I couldn't, I would, I applauded, I believe, let me see if I, and I have."

Wonder how one could surmise that "he is a legend in his own mind"--- just because I is his favorite word?

[Delete]
January 10, 2012 at 5:58pm
Spin it as you wish MMW, but the fact is the issue is not about Corey, and is about the three election commissioners who failed to show any backbone and caved to pressure.

None of them are strangers to Cannon County politics. If they did not know that their November vote would upset some people, they are clueless and should examine whether they should continue to serve in their roles, because if this is an example of their fortitude, as another poster commented, they will sell out the majority for the sake of a few.
January 10, 2012 at 7:02pm
Kevin, AMEN!! As I understand one commissioner's reason for changing their vote was that they just got tired of phone calls. It is my opinion that the 13,000 plus residents in Cannon County should be making a lot of phone calls to the three Election Commissioners who reversed their previous votes knowing that it would cost the county extra money while doing away with the savings they originally agreed was a good thing. I ask why that the residents of the Short Mountain and Pleasant Ridge are so priviledged over the other communities in the county? There is only one voting place in District 1 at Westside, only one voting place in District 3 at Woodland. Given the size and terrian in District 2, I understand the Auburntown and Gassaway voting places. I don't understand the necessity for the additional place at Short Mt. or Pleasant Ridge for District 2. District 4 has Eastside and Short Mt. District 5 is for Woodbury. It seems that a few people don't want to be inconvienced, and they think it is fine to cause additional expense for everyone else. The voting numbers at all three of these voting places in question are very low - from 130 to 150 people at each place. It cost just as much on Election Day to keep a poll open for 130 people as it does for 1500 people. It only makes good business sense to do what the Election Commission originally tried to do -- Save money for the County. Shame on the three commissioners who caved in because their decision was not popular with a few people.
January 10, 2012 at 7:08pm
I like how only about 50% of the registered voters put to use their "cherished right".

They will vote as long as it don't take much effort.

Since when did Democracy become bending to the will of the people. So if it's the will of the people to hang black haired people that's cool?

And where do those Republicans get off trying keep everyone from voting? It should not matter if you sneak into the country or a felon you should be able to vote and as many times as you wish. Hear that government bend now!
January 10, 2012 at 7:16pm
If I am understanding the above numbers correct, this would be a savings about 14% of budget. Think what the county tax payers might save if all departments cut their budgets 14%.
Kevin
This lack of backbone is the problem with what I see as most of politics today. A willingness to bow to the politically connected, the big money, and the few who make the most noise.
Would any of these fine upstanding vote changers care to justify why the change?
MMW
? ? ? ? that's all I can say.
January 10, 2012 at 7:29pm
Voter ID is a good thing no matter who passed it, the next thing we need to do as a society is get rid of the political parties ie.repbulican and democrat and have people run as who they are not on party affiliation.
January 10, 2012 at 8:29pm
I would just like to ask those who changed their votes,

Which of your decisions was wrong? What changes or new facts were available to warrant this flip flop? How much did it cost our county to make the initial change and now the cost to change it back?

I bet there will be a lot of confusion when some people don't know where to go.

I believe the commission and it board should find the most efficient and cost effective way to carry out the election process and if they can't preform this function they should step aside and let someone who can have their seat.

January 11, 2012 at 5:50am
Kevin, there was no spin only noting that sometimes when the people respond en masse with a reasonable request, the officials satisfy the desires of the people.

This is what the election commission did--respond to the desires of the people where it could be done in a reasonable manner. That is the way it should be in this county and across this nation.

Don't suppose anyone has the party affiliation of the three that changed their vote?
[Delete]
January 11, 2012 at 6:01am
MMW, government should look out for the best interests of all the people, not just those in a specific area. Supposedly that was the reason the election commission voted to close the polling places in the first place. I doubt most folks outside of those precincts cares where they vote, but all taxpayers are now having to pay to keep those polling places open.
[Delete]
January 11, 2012 at 6:03am
MMW (dailyreader) if all you can come up with is a plagiarized quote by another person then you are worse off than I thought.

Once again your opinion of me does not bother me in the least because I simply consider the source and know by now your warped sense of reality after all of this time of you blabbing your nonsense day after day.

Back to the real subject. The Election Commissioners made a good choice in November that affected roughly 400 people. Then they made a bad decision on Monday that affects 13,801 people.

Make a decision for the better of the whole, stand by it and move on. It should have been that simple, but now it has become a fiasco as usual.
January 11, 2012 at 6:18am
Kevin all of $2166.66 per election. What does that average out for the taxpayers?
[Delete]
January 11, 2012 at 7:03am
MMW, you figure it out. You are the one who believes it is a "great day" when government spends more than it has to in order to provide a service. In my book that's a sad day, because that way of thinking has led our country to being over $15 trillion in debt.
January 11, 2012 at 8:22am
mmw- if the request was so reasonable why do you suppose the inital change was made? 5 to 0

i believe the" desires of the majority of the people" would be for the commission to conduct our elections in a fair and cost effective manner. i also believe if they are not able to preform this task they should resign or be removed.

i also believe the three flip floppers are, unfortunely members of the same party i am currently regestered with, democrats.
[Delete]
January 11, 2012 at 9:01am
Actually there were two Democrats and one Republican who changed their vote.

The board has three Republicans and two Democrats.

To me this has nothing to do with being a Republican or Democrat and I hope no one believes it did on either vote. It was bi-partisan to change it both times. Politically speaking there was no motive in my opinion on either vote.


In the beginning it was a 5-0 vote to save the Cannon County taxpayer money by removing the precincts. Which despite me personally being moved from my voting precinct I have voted in for the last 20 years, it was one I fully supported.

In the end it was a 3-2 vote to disregard the money already spent, the money that will have to be spent to change it back and the money that will have to be spent each election following because of tradition and a few phone calls.

The kicker in all of this is there is a proposal to raise the sales tax so we don't have to raise our property taxes as much in the future, yet when there is a way found to reduce the property taxes we ignore it despite the obvious.

Talk about an oxymoron! That is the very definition of one.
January 11, 2012 at 1:46pm
From day one of this Republic there have been many occasions when we had to spend money that we didn't have to improve the welfare of the citizens. This seems to be, though on a small and insignificant scale, one of those "great day" moments in history.
The burden to be shared by all taxpayers in this issue will not be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

The state is throwing away millions of dollars implementing an unneeded restrictive law on voter's rights and yet nothing is said by the Reuplicans.

What did Newt said? "Pious baloney"?


Voter ID:
The Jan-Feb issue of AARP has an informative article on this issue.
21 million adults do not have voter ID cards.
1 in 5 over 65 lack proper ID-potential of 8 million voters over 65 that could face problems voting.
3.2 million voters in Ks, Tx, SC, Wis and Tenn could find it more difficult to vote this year.
1st time ever there is an attempt of reversal in the expansion of voting rights.
Brennan Center: ID laws affect poor, African-Americans, students and older Americans the most.
Republican control of legislatures major factor in states adopting new restrictions.

Sounds like an attempt to disenfranchise various groups that tend to vote for the Democrat candidate, driven primarily by Republicans.

[Delete]
January 11, 2012 at 2:06pm
Spending the additional money does nothing to "improve the welfare of citizens." If that were the case the election commission should spend additional money to open up more polling places in all of the districts/precincts in the county of that the welfare of ALL citizens is improved.

The money being spent to implement voter photo ID cards is being done to enhance the integrity of the voting process, which does improve the welfare of ALL citizens. If voters, be they Democrats, Republicans or Independents, are "disenfranchised" by it, they have only themselves to blame.
[Delete]
January 11, 2012 at 4:12pm
Man it must be tough MMW (dailyreader) to live in your world of conspiracy theories and fantasy.


It is one thing to be against something, but to seriously post false information, lies, inuendos and deceit trying to promote a warped sense of reality and mantra day after day, article after article has to be tiring to your soul.

The Photo ID law exists because of people like you.

The law exists because anyone with any common sense understands the idea of one person = one vote.

The law exists to stop people like you who publically stated they were going to vote "early and often".

The photo ID law prevents you from waging fraud as you stated you would by encouranging your fellow Democrats to do so as well.

I want to drive 80 mph on the four lane on my way to work every day. However the law says I can only drive 55 / 65. The law protects you and me and everyone else. It prevents accident and saves lives.

I don't think everyone should be forced to buy Health Insurance that your Democrat President forced the American people to do, but guess what? It is the law and unless the Supreme Court does the right thing and overturns it then I am stuck paying taxes for people who are more than capable of getting a job themselves and working for a living like I do.

You prove every post you make that you are the one and only person who used to call themselves "dailyreader".

You know they discovered who Ted Kaczynski was by reading his manifesto as well.
January 11, 2012 at 11:05pm
I want to thank the election commission for hearing our concerns of why we wanted to keep our poll places in our community. Thanks again!!!
January 12, 2012 at 7:42am
Kevin: Good letter in the DNJ this AM from League of Women Voters reqarding the problems the Voter ID law will present to some segments of the voting public.

The AARP article quoted a lawyer saying the new law will catch only those trying to impersonate someone else at the polls. He noted that as likely as being hit by lightening.

Tennessean article this AM said even though 2011 was a particularly stormy year only 26 in USA were killed by strikes.

I suppose if only 26 Democrats are caught trying to vote illegally (maybe one in Cannon County) that will justify what the Republicans have foisted on the voters.


[Delete]
January 12, 2012 at 8:06am
MMW, I have a solution: Inform those "some segments of the voting public" to go get a photo ID. They have had plenty of time and opportunity to do so since the law went into effect, and still have almost two months before the first election of the year. Or, they can contact the Election Office and request an absentee ballot.
January 12, 2012 at 9:03am
I want to thank the commission for making atleast one wrong decission that HAS ALREADY AND WILL CONTINUE TO WASTE our hard earned tax dollars (the cost to inform of change,the cost to inform of reversal and cost to maintain two poll for 400 total votes). Maybe a couple months of our upcoming sales tax will cover your error.

I also thank mmw for his continued effort to keep this story off track! Like it or not it is the law. You may convince us all it is wrong: and then what? You are smart enough to know there are channels to make change and they dont start here with us. You have the right to get an ID and vote or NOT. Choice is yours!
[Delete]
January 12, 2012 at 10:35am
Just in case people like MMW (dailyreader) can't understand plain English or use the common sense that GOD gave them, here is video evidence of why a Photo ID Law should be enacted in every state in America. This happened this yesterday on 01/11/2011.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/01/11/in_new_hampshire_dead_democrats_get_to_vote

Thank you to the Tennessee Republican leadership for setting the standard for what everyone else should be doing already.

Bud: Good luck trying to keep MMW focused on anything other than nonsense. It is an impossibility.
[Delete]
January 22, 2012 at 3:30pm
Another example of voter fraud that happened Saturday January 21st, 2012.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/21/south-carolina-attorney-general-informs-justice-department-dead-voters/


Powered by Bondware
News Publishing Software

The browser you are using is outdated!

You may not be getting all you can out of your browsing experience
and may be open to security risks!

Consider upgrading to the latest version of your browser or choose on below: