Monthly Archives: August 2006

Redux

Posted on by
Reply

The Oak Ridger’s “breaking news” from Friday afternoon confirms that challenges have been filed in three County races following the Aug. 3 election: General Sessions Judge candidate David Stuart, along with County Commission candidates Joe Lee (Dist. 7) and Harold Whited (Dist. 3).

David Stuart will be on WYSH‘s “Ask Your Neighbor” program tomorrow — Monday, Aug. 14 — from 10-11 a.m. The radio broadcast (AM 1380) is hard to pick up in some parts of Oak Ridge, but they also broadcast over the internet from their website, and simulcast on Comcast Channel 12. The call-in number is 457-1380.

I’m usually not a proponent of challenging election results, but there were problems in this election. Given the closeness of some of the races, the results are questionable. If nothing else, hopefully the court challenge will cause changes to eliminate the excessively long lines that kept a large number of people from voting.

In 2002, 19,750 people voted. There was a US Senate primary (Lamar Alexander v. Ed Bryant), but not nearly as heated as this year’s Corker-Bryant-Hilleary battle. The County General had four contests in the countywide races: County Executive (Lynch v. Rick Meredith); Sheriff (Bill White v. David Beams); County Clerk (Jeff Cole v. Jack Copeland); and Register of Deeds (Tim Shelton v. Anita Vines).

This year, there were more contested local races, as well as a US Senate primary that was even higher profile than four years ago. One would have expected the voter turnout to be equal, if not greater. Yet, it was only 15,232, a decline of 4,518 voters.

It’s impossible to know exactly how many people left because of the long lines, but 4,518 additional voters could have made a huge difference in the outcome.

In Highland View, approximately 225 people voted on election day… but anecdotal reports are that half the people who showed up left without voting.

In Fairview, the number voting on election day was only nominally more than the number who had voted early… a very surprising statistic, given that election day turnout should be 60-65% of the total following normal patterns.

There’s no way I can see to discern whether these missing or disenfranchised voters would have voted for the candidates who came up a few votes short, or whether their votes would have mirrored the rest of the returns… but it is the reason we have legal recourse when there is doubt.

I do not know how the judge will rule; if there is a re-vote, I do not know who will win. But I’ll be listening on Monday to hear what David Stuart — an acknowledged expert on civil liberties etc. — has to say about it.

Spell it Out!

Posted on by
3

Cathy Toth lays it on the line in a letter to the editor in the Oak Ridger today: City Council caused schools’ funding shortage.

Key highlights of Cathy’s letter include:

Here’s how it works: The superintendent’s office works up a budget, based on what they need to run the schools for the next year, and presents it to the School Board. The School Board goes through that budget line by line. Time-consuming and difficult, they do this publicly. Anyone can attend the meetings, watch them on Channel 15, or read the detailed minutes. The School Board looks at the revenue from the federal, state, and county sources and asks City Council to cover the rest. On May 22, City Council said “No.”

Let’s talk priorities. That’s what a budget is — a statement of what a community values enough to pay for. For many years, Oak Ridge placed education near the top of the list. In 1987, city leaders spent 46.6 percent of the city budget on the school system. Last year they spent less than 30 percent.

…

However you slice the data, the priority given the schools has seriously declined in the last 20 years.

The May 22 vote left the schools about $500,000 short, and something had to be cut. The School Board protected programs (e.g., 4th grade strings, driver’s education, freshman football, class sizes), but transportation took a hit. So did teacher raises, building maintenance, and basic supplies. Add to the problem the rising costs of energy, insurance, and the state retirement program. Add again programs, such as No Child Left Behind, which the federal government mandates but does not fund. Oak Ridge Schools does not control any of these costs.

With rising costs and a policy to maintain a flat tax rate, this problem will only get worse.

Despite all efforts to accurately communicate the shortfall leading to reduced bus service this year, misinformation still abounds. On the Oak Ridger’s Forum, “Mom Goose” continues to carry on about purchasing buses with air conditioning for the football team, while “Atomic Citizen” incorrectly claims:

“More than two dozen new administrators and teachers will enter Oak Ridge schools this year”. Not to mention all current administrators and teachers were given raises. That is where the school board decided to spend their money, not on transportation.

Neither Mom Goose nor Atomic Citizen have listened or tried to get the facts, apparently. No new administrators were hired, except to fill vacancies. The only new administrative position proposed was that of Athletic Director, which was the very first thing cut, long before the Board approved a budget request to send to City Council. Buses are replaced according to State requirement — every ten years, I think. And yes, the preschool just got new buses to accomodate a different State requirement for 5-point harnesses last year.

I welcome any thoughtful discussion on how we might better manage the budget for the school system, for the City, or both, but when people just make things up and then try to base their arguments upon it, well, it denigrates the whole process.

Today’s post was supposed to be “Frivolous Friday.” but that will have to wait.

Probation Changes

Posted on by
2

WYSH broke the news yesterday, and the Knoxville News-Sentinel carries a longer story this morning. The Anderson County Probation Department will be dissolved by year’s end, with duties likely transferred to a private company.

County Mayor Lynch’s explanation rings hollow to me, though. While he cites his reasoning (in the KNS article) as the scandal that has plagued the department and it’s director, Alan Beauchamp,

there’s so much negative feedback, it gets to the point that it’s not worth it,” he said.

Rumors and lingering reports of scandal have dogged the department and its high-profile director, Alan Beauchamp, for the past few years.

he also maintains “no evidence” of wrongdoing:

“Everybody has accused these people, but nobody has come forward with evidence,” Lynch said. “It’s best to get it (the probation department) back in the private sector’s hands.”

Somehow, this looks like an opportunity for Beauchamp and his employees to form a private company and do the same thing with less oversight. And, that would remove County officeholders by one step from Beauchamp’s outside activities, like his other two existing businesses — the e-zine and tv show, “Inside Anderson County,” as well as his political consulting business, Energy Media.

Stay tuned. I can’t imagine this saga is finished.

Gossip or Breaking News?

Posted on by
1

Heard two interesting things today:

1) That the Probation Department (Alan Beauchamp’s group) is being dissolved, and the service will be contracted to a private company. WYSH has the story:

…By telephone early this afternoon, Mayor Lynch said that while the Probation Department has been successful over the past several years in providing services to probationers and the community alike, he and other officials are tired of seeing the county government as a whole cast in a negative light because of what he called the rumor mill and negative reports about the department, which has been subject to numerous allegations of misconduct investigated by the TBI. While none of those probes have turned up sufficient evidence to prosecute anyone involved in the department with any wrongdoing, rumors and innuendo continue to swirl about the department and its chief Alan Beauchamp and were actually made into issues during the recently completed judicial election.

2) That the State Elections Coordinator, Brook Thompson, has called for the Anderson County Election Commission to delay certifying last Thursday’s election results until at least Monday, based on problems at the polls.

More as I learn it – AHA! The Oak Ridger just posted one of the stories:

Meanwhile, the Anderson County Election Commission has had to postpone the certification of its election results until 5 p.m. Monday. The Election Commission had planned to certify the results on Thursday afternoon but has been asked by state Election Commission officials to postpone the action.

Brook Thompson, state elections coordinator, sent out a letter to Election Commissions across the state asking that they first have a conference call with his office on Thursday or Friday.

“As you know, we tried a different procedure for election night that did not require you to hand-enter your vote totals,” Thompson wrote in a memo to all county election commissions. “While that process met with mixed success, the certification process is a different matter.”

The lead-in on that story is that David Stuart may challenge the election. I know I’ve heard many stories about long lines — 2 or even 3 hours — in the Anderson County election, and some people are simply not able to wait that long. One gentleman left because his oxygen tank was running out. Others may have left unable to bear the oppressive heat on election day, or because they had to go back to work, pick up children, or other obligations.

It was a long ballot, and I’d hate to be the election worker faced with removing a voter from the machine because they were taking too long, but on the other hand, the long wait in the heat undoubtedly meant that some people simply didn’t get to vote. Thousands fewer voted in this election than the one four years ago, and I don’t blame David Stuart for wondering if the voters who went to the polls and had to leave could have been his margin of victory.

Personally, I think it might have been. There’s no way to prove it, except a re-vote in November.

Partnership?

Posted on by
4

A good partnership involves relatively equal effort, along with relatively equal benefit or reward.

Rex Lynch came to Oak Ridge last night to bring City Council an agreement he would like signed — an agreement stating that Oak Ridge will not annex Bull Run Steam plant for the next 20 years unless it is privatized.

As a reference point, Bull Run Steam Plant is the only parcel in Anderson County that Oak Ridge is allowed to annex under the contentious growth plan agreement signed (by Lynch) five years ago.

“What are you offering Oak Ridge in this?” Council asked. The County officials’ response was that it would show Oak Ridge as a “good parter.”

From this absurd exchange, I can only deduce that Lynch is thinking of a partnership in the carnal sense, showing up here with a bottle of cheap wine, looking for a cheap date.

All the cities — not just Oak Ridge — got shafted in the growth plan signed in 2001 due to the bias inherent in the State’s Growth Plan Law… but I certainly expect our City officials to ensure that it doesn’t happen voluntarily.

Tell Lynch to jump in the river. Preferably, New River.

Face Time at the School Board

Posted on by
2

As expected, a number of people addressed the school board last night regarding the change in bus service — nearly all from Sunshine Playschool, which provides before and after school care to elementary students.

Because of a change in state law, the 15-passenger vans that most daycares use will no longer be permitted after January 1. Thus, Sunshine sold their vehicle, planning for their Willowbrook elementary students to ride the bus — but they did so four days before the May 30 Board decision to eliminate bus service within a 1-mile radius of the schools.

However, vehicles with a capacity of less than 10 people are not affected; there’s still the option to use a minivan, SUV, etc. For daycares with a large number of students to transport that would not be easy, requiring either multiple vehicles or multiple trips, but it would be better than the current situation.

From the last speaker’s remarks, there’s evidently some confusion (no surprise here) about the State’s reimbursement for student transportation under the BEP. The reality is, the State reimburses Oak Ridge Schools about 52% of the cost of actual riders who live more than 1.5 miles from the school. Of course, in a city the size of Oak Ridge, that’s a minority of the kids, especially for the elementary schools.

The last speaker apparently believed that the State funds bus service for all children who live more than 1.5 miles from the school, whether or not they ride the bus. He wanted to know where the money was going, since his child attends Sunshine and is not eligible for bus service to and from the daycare, but would be eligible to and from home.

He was right about one thing though: if this continues, Oak Ridge will lose its standing as one of the best school systems in the nation. When fixed and mandated costs — things like electricity, fuel, insurance and participation in the state retirement program — rise at rates much higher than the cost of living, we cannot continue to offer the same services when we do not have the funding to even maintain the status quo.

While we did receive a 4.5% increase in funding from the City, costs in the regular instruction program rose 5.3%. “Regular instruction program” is things like teachers and books — the basics. Our mandated State Retirement expenditure just for the regular instruction program rose 21.2%, or $182,784. Electricity went up 20%. Natural gas went up 45%.

The City increased funding by 4.5%… and thinks that should be enough.

I have to give credit to Stacy Myers, who spoke on behalf of Girls Inc. He asked for one of two solutions: to provide bus service to elementary students who participate in Girls Inc. after school programs, or to have someone watch over the several Willowbrook students who attend that program until one of their vehicles can get to the school to pick them up. At least he presented a viable option, rather than an unattainable demand.

Although there are almost no school systems in Tennessee that provide bus service to all students as we have up until this year, something has been taken away, and it hurts. I’m no less concerned about student safety than any one of the parents sitting in the audience last night, because I’m a mom too, first and foremost. It bothers me. A lot.

It bothers me that the schools receive only a passing mention in the City’s strategic plan, in a city that has always valued providing the best in public education. It bothers me that Council members who campaigned on educational excellence can’t see that the restricted funding is causing very real harm — and no, it’s not a political stunt. Our books are open, and any board member or administrator would be more than happy to assist, if needed, with explaining the complexities of the funding sources, restrictions on the use of funding from various sources, and why we were forced to cut bus service.

It’s not all the City’s fault: the State does a poor job of funding education statewide. I’m personally working very hard on that. But it’s not new. What is new — at least in the last several years — is the City’s approach to prioritizing the needs of the school system relative to other city services and the tax rate.

For years, cuts have been hidden in areas that didn’t outwardly affect anyone, mainly using money from savings in the fund balance. Our savings is very nearly gone, and we can’t hide the cuts any longer.

Council members will tell you that cutting bus service was the School Board’s decision, and that is true, but we are legally obligated to balance the budget. Unfortunately, few seem to recognize that while we bear all the blame for the cuts, they have complete control over a significant portion of our revenue.

City Council could have prevented this cut by funding our request. It might have been as simple as only buying half of the city vehicles they budgeted to replace; that would have been more than enough.

Commission Dist. 7

Posted on by
2

There’s some interest in the District 7 Commission race, where John Shuey finished with one vote more than Joe Lee. Here’s how the numbers break down:

ABS EARLY AUG 3 TOTAL
HVW Creasey 2 112 133 247
Lee 3 72 80 155
Shuey 3 49 96 148
PVL Creasey 13 201 255 469
Lee 10 115 121 246
Shuey 11 110 125 246
WDL Creasey 19 80 126 225
Lee 16 48 58 122
Shuey 22 37 71 130
TOTAL ALL PRECINCTS
Creasey 34 393 514 941
Lee 29 235 259 523
Shuey 36 196 292 524

If I were Joe Lee (though I’ve never even met him), I think I’d ask for an inspection of the absentee ballots, at the very least. I’d also check to see of any of these were precincts where paper ballots were used, or where excessive lines caused people to leave without voting.

Precinct Returns

Posted on by
2

For those who are interested (AT, AT2, and anyone else), I’ve finished keying in all the countywide general election returns — or at least the contested races. Click here for the PDF.

Turnout was a factor; I have to wonder how many people left without voting when they encountered lines of an hour, two, or more on election day (in very hot and humid conditions). 15,232 people voted this year, compared with 18,194 in August 2002. Could 3,000 people have made a difference?

You betcha. Stay tuned.

Flanking on the Right

Posted on by
2

I perused a copy of Metro Pulse while waiting on Alpha and Gamma to seemingly try on every pair of jeans in a store yesterday, and was intrigued by an article that seemed to have been written just for me.

Time ran out before I could finish reading, so I pulled it up online this morning. It feels like it was written just for me. So, if you’ve experienced some discomfort about political parties lately, go read Flanking on the Right.

You remember him, I bet. It seems like he was here just the other day. He usually wore a blue suit and a sensible tie. His main concerns were lower taxes, less government, but still he knew some public works were important and somebody had to pay for them. The Tennessee Republican’s politics were moderate, often progressive, and above all, sensible. To get what he wanted, or a good part of it, he could make you a deal. He knew that making deals was the heart of a successful business, and of successful government. The main thing that separated him from the wild-eyed liberal Democrat was that he was a pragmatic fellow. He liked to keep his politics, like the art on his walls, realistic.

Except for use of the masculine prounoun, this fits me. I came to align myself with the Republican party on the principles articulated in the Republican Philosophy — things like “the government closest to the people is the best,” or “government should do only those things that people cannot do, or cannot do well, for themselves.” It is my belief in a strong national defense, a free-market economy, and limited government interference that has traditionally led me to identify with the Republican party.

If you haven’t done so yet, read the article. Yes, I know what the right-wing bloggers think of Metro Pulse, but if you are at all interested in polical philosophy, this one nails it. A couple more noteworthy clips are:

“I see it as a problem for the country in that the candidates tend to focus on issues that may not have much to do with their constituents’ lives. Flag-burning, gay marriage—I may feel like they do about those issues,” he says, as the conservative he is. But he adds that those emotional flashpoint issues aren’t affecting people’s real lives—“They’re not eating up America like the war, the economy, and gas prices.” True enough, few East Tennesseans have ever witnessed either a flagburning or a gay marriage. [John Schmid]

and

A young Republican businessman attending the Republican rally admits he has nothing against abortion. “I’m not interested in legislating morality,” he says. “To me, it’s a moral issue, not a government issue.” Of the pro-life faction in his party, he says, “It’s a small group, but it’s the loudest. It’s like everybody thinks all Islamic people are terrorists. It’s only a small percentage. But they’re the loudest.”

But there is hope. The closing paragraph comes from Howard Baker, whom many of us would uphold as the Dean of Tennessee Republicans:

Howard Baker, now 80 years old, is still a senior partner in the law firm of Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell and Berkowitz, which has offices in downtown Knoxville and the former senator’s home town of Huntsville. He is recovering from back surgery and was not available to comment for this article. But at a Memphis Downtown Rotary Club meeting last October, responding to a question about the right-wing tendencies of his party, he answered that he expected the GOP “will right itself” from its ultra-conservative leanings. Concerning the party’s current tilt, he added, “That’s not permanent. The party system’s going to survive it…. Cyclical changes will prevent any permanent pattern of extremism. Change may seem far off, but it’s just around the corner.”

We’ll see. I surely hope he’s right.

Election Review

Posted on by
8

The pro-Beauchamp v. anti-Beauchamp matchup ended 2:2. He got the Gen. Sessions Judge and Sheriff; he lost the DA and Chancellor.

Of course, he’s had a sheriff tell him to take a hike before, and could again. We’ll see what Paul White is made of.

Like AtomicTumor, it’s the General Sessions Judge race that was the most painful for me. It was so close, with Stuart leading in early voting, that I’m most anxious to see the precinct-by-precinct returns. Unfortunately, due to all the yes-no judicial races and such, the document is two hundred and a bunch pages, so the election commission will be charging for copies this year.

Truthfully, I don’t want a paper copy. I’d rather have it electronically, but with the new system, they don’t yet know how to do that. The Clinton Courier has already picked up the detailed returns, so it will be in their Sunday edition; the Oak Ridger usually carries it, but they hadn’t yet picked one up at 9:30 or so… and 10:00 is generally their deadline, so I’m not sure they’re going to carry it today. Maybe they kept track last night, but unfortunately, WYSH and Channel 12 weren’t reporting the results by individual precinct.

Just out of curiosity, I wonder how many people voted in this election who are currently under supervision of the probation department? That’s not illegal (unless they’re convicted felons), but it would raise eyebrows if there were any evidence of “persuasion” by probation officials.

I’m immensely glad that we have a new DA, and I have a great deal of confidence in Dave Clark. He simply will not ignore investigations that ought to go to the Grand Jury, and the process can work the way it is supposed to. And, contrary to some recent predictions, that one wasn’t even close. Of course, three-way races are notoriously tricky to predict. It was a three-way general that kept Ramsey in office sixteen years ago, with the narrowest of margins between all three.

Robin Biloski will do a fine job as the new 8th District Commissioner, along with veteran Iwanski. That really was a race with three good people, but I know that Robin will represent Oak Ridge well.

Lastly, in the 7th District, Joe Lee fell just one vote short, giving John Shuey the nod. However, that happened in 2002 with Jerry Creasey losing to Chuck Fritts by one, and irregularities led to the election being voided. Creasey won in a November rematch. I expect there will be a thorough review of why paper ballots were used on election day in this district, with a strong possibility of a challenge by Lee if anything looks amiss.