Before You "Vote the Ticket," Stop and Think
Don’t you hate having to publicly criticize your friends? I know I do, if for no other reason than I don’t have enough friends to go around that I can spare losing one or two over a political issue. But here I am, about to criticize, without naming, some friends of mine that go way back, simply because I’m in disagreement with something they’ve written and circulated...
Yes, I’m talking about the "Vote the Ticket" flyer. I suspect a number of my critics assumed I had a hand in that operation -- I haven’t been attacked as "pro-Gordon" in several days -- but the truth is, I didn’t even know about it until a few days ago. Fortunately, a reader of this blog emailed me a scan, and I am now up to speed like everyone else in Giles County.
(to continue reading, click on "comments," below)
Yes, I’m talking about the "Vote the Ticket" flyer. I suspect a number of my critics assumed I had a hand in that operation -- I haven’t been attacked as "pro-Gordon" in several days -- but the truth is, I didn’t even know about it until a few days ago. Fortunately, a reader of this blog emailed me a scan, and I am now up to speed like everyone else in Giles County.
(to continue reading, click on "comments," below)
posted by J. Kendrick McPeters | 12:07 AM
128 Comments:
And what can I say? Well, my long term anti-zoning friends have made some good selections for County Commissioners. I picked many of the same people, probably for the same reasons, in an ad that was just published in the Giles Free Press. Beyond that, I find the flyer to be a bit questionable, and wonder what went into making some of its recommendations.
For example, "Vote the Ticket" endorses Kay Gibbons as Register of Deeds. This makes no sense to me. I can't imagine what the Register of Deeds has to do with zoning, whether she be pro-zoning, anti-zoning, or disinterested. Moreover, I am told that this endorsement was made without any effort to contact the challenger in that race, Sandy Ralston. That seems a little bit unfair, and suggests that my friends were in a big hurry to get the job done.
Another strange ticket choice, is Lee or Flacy for General Sessions Judge. Not that I have anything against these two individuals, but, again, what is the relevance of the General Sessions Judge, to county wide zoning? I assume that both Lee and Flacy will uphold the law as written, and not "nullify" a zoning plan by refusing to enforce it. This is what we expect of judges, and whether Lee and Flacy are pro-zoning, anti-zoning, or indifferent, their personal feelings are almost certainly not an issue when it comes to judging the law.
Likewise with the various endorsements for the school board. If any group of people is far removed from the policy making that goes into countywide zoning, I'd have to think the school board is it. Yet, for some reason, my friends have gotten carried away with the act of endorsing candidates, and endorsed a slate of school board candidates. Now, personally, I think they did a good job of picking. But, if the purpose is to defeat zoning, there isn't much point in trying to influence the school board races.
The same goes for the Sheriff. Now, in theory, you might could elect a Sheriff who has pledged not to arrest anyone charged with breaking the zoning laws. That's unlikely, but possible. But the only reason to endorse such a "nullification" candidate, would be that there was a competitive race, and the other candidate was anxious to enforce the zoning laws. That isn't the case here; Kyle Helton is running unopposed, and his victory is what is called "a sure thing." Why endorse him as the anti-zoning candidate? Your guess is as good as mine.
So now we come to the "biggie"-- the ticket's endorsement of Janet Vanzant as County Executive. It is with great trepidation that I broach this subject even at all. I'd always intended to make my blog neutral, and stay away from endorsing anyone. But my friend's decision to distribute this "ticket" has forced my hand.
And I must say that, by any objective standard, Janet Vanzant has been a disaster from the standpoint of opposition to zoning. I've searched my memory, and I can only recall one incident where Vanzant did what I would call "the right thing." That was when she broke a tie, to call for a non-binding citizen referendum on the Land Use Management Plan. The authors of the "ticket" describe this as an example of Vanzant "backing the people based on duty." My opinion, based on her other actions, is that this was an instance of her choosing not to commit political suicide by opposing a referendum on zoning. That and nothing more.
This one act of doing the right thing was certainly an isolated case. And in my opinion, the one person most responsible for passage of the LUMP was Janet Vanzant. You see, back when Roger Reedy was putting on his dog and pony pro-zoning show, I begged Vanzant to go on the radio, show some leadership, and oppose the LUMP in public. I had dissected the zoning plan to the point that anyone of moderate reading comprehension could understand how incomplete and unworkable it was. I explained all the failings to Vanzant, and pointed out that it was her office that would be tasked with enforcing this unworkable plan.
I urged her to avail herself of the free publicity that was available via the radio and newspaper, and for her to urge the Commissioners to reject the plan. She not only refused to raise a finger to help the 78% of the county that opposes zoning, she justified this abdication of duty with the excuse that "a former County Executive had advised her to stay out of the zoning issue."
So who do we suppose that Vanzant's secret advisor is? Could it be Giles Collier? No, Mr. Collier rode the no-zoning horse to victory in 1994, and he wouldn't offer Vanzant that sort of crummy advice. Could the mystery man be James Miller? No. Nobody would take advice on county politics from someone who failed as badly as James Miller. So, that leaves, by the process of elimination, only one person alive who could've advised Janet Vanzant to "stay out" of the zoning issue. And that person is, of course, Corky Wakefield.
But did Vanzant even take Corky's advice? In my opinion, she did not. All during the critical period of her first year in office, she was a "stealth" pro-zoner. Please remember that 78% of Giles County is opposed to having zoning crammed down their throats. We know that, by actual referendum figures. You would think, then, that a "neutral" County Executive would appoint anti-zoners to 78% of the seats on the Planning Commission, or at least, in the interest of balance, 50-50. But, of the whole Planning Commission, numbering at least a dozen people, she appointed only one anti-zoner, Connie Howell (who had practically begged Vanzant for the nomination). And on the critical "Land Use Management" committee, Vanzant appointed nothing but pro-zoners.
So the deck was stacked by Vanzant, against the will of 78% of the public, from the very beginning. And Vanzant was unwilling to demonstrate leadership by coming out in public against the plan, let alone lobbying commissioners.
Worse, Janet Vanzant attended almost all of the zoning committee meetings, and she participated in the high handed, "no input from the public accepted" manner in which they were run. I recall there was one meeting when copies of the plan were passed out to all the people on the committee. Noting that several officials were absent from the meeting, I asked politely if I could have one of the extra copies. No, answered Vanzant, offering zero explanation as to why extra copies of the zoning plan needed to sit unread in a pile. (Note that, after about fifteen minutes of my sitting in the audience glaring at her, getting angrier and angrier, she finally relented and gave me a copy.)
When there finally was a public hearing that allowed citizens to speak, where was Vanzant? Nowhere to be found. Absent without leave. She apparently didn't care what the people of Giles County had to say about the zoning plan, perhaps so she could maintain her facade of "neutrality." And when there was another public meeting about the zoning plan, where was Vanzant? Again, she chose not to attend.
In my opinion, Vanzant had the power, had she chosen to exercise it, to stop the LUMP. First, she could've appointed at least a few anti-zoners to the Planning and LUMP committees. Second, she could've insisted that the committee meetings be run fairly, allowing input from ordinary citizens. Third, she could've demonstrated leadership, and utilized the free media available to her, to campaign against the LUMP. (She could even have rebutted the various misleading statements that were made by Roger Reedy!) And finally, had all this been insufficient to flip three commissioner's votes, she could've resigned as the Chair of the Commission, and cast a VETO against the LUMP. But she did none of this, and allowed, by her premeditated inaction, the poorly conceived LUMP to become law.
As a result of all this, I have to break with my anti-zoning friends who are now spreading "the ticket" around Giles County...
I intend to vote for Glenn Gordon, who is not only vastly more qualified to serve as a County Executive than Vanzant, but who, unlike Vanzant, is on the side of the people when it comes to zoning. For proof of this, I refer you to Mr. Gordon's answers to my questionnaire. He stated, in no unclear terms, that he thought the LUMP should be repealed, and that the people of Giles County should have a vote on any future zoning plan. This is much to be commended, especially in comparison with the "answers" of the incumbent, who chose not to respond to my questionnaire. And her record -- on zoning, and other issues -- speaks for itself!
But I am not flipping the lever for Gordon merely because Vanzant has been such a solid disappointment. Nor am I considering only a single issue, such as zoning. Rather, I am taking into consideration all of the facts I know about Glenn Gordon. Here in one person, is a man who has had many different careers -- teacher, factory worker, business owner, personnel director -- and has devoted a great deal of his life to charity. Here is a man who is able and willing to answer questions on the campaign trail, rather than duck them. And here is a man whose honesty and integrity have never been questioned.
I do not know what possessed the writer of "vote the ticket" to endorse Vanzant. Or, to get involved in other races that are unconnected with zoning. But everyone is entitled to at least one mistake in judgment, I suppose. I have no reason to believe that my friends who were behind this flyer endorsed Vanzant after being made aware of all the facts. Perhaps it is my fault, after all, since my family relationship to Mrs. Vanzant has made me loath to criticize her in the past, leaving my friends in a position of ignorance.
But surely now, the mists of ignorance have been dispersed. Anyone concerned about the issue of county wide zoning, should, by now, realize that Glenn Gordon is their candidate in the race for County Executive. Of course, zoning is not the only issue! Happily, though, Glenn Gordon stands out as the right choice for Giles County, any way you look at things. Who better would understand the needs of our schools, than a former educator? Who better to understand -- and do something -- about our need for industry, than someone who worked his way up from the factory floor, to the owner's office?
In a rational world, a man with Glenn Gordon's experience in business and overall qualifications would be running for President of the United States. How lucky we are, that a man of his caliber is willing to serve in the lowly job of Giles County Executive.
So, on August 3, I will be proudly casting my vote for Glenn Gordon. If you care about the future of Giles County, and hope for real progress, I suggest you go and do likewise.
Kendrick,
Thank you for that enlightening glimpse into some of Vanzant's past actions. I was planning to vote for her, but now I definitely won't.
Thank God for your education and wisdom that enables you to run this website! Keep up the good work. God bless you and you mom.
Who did the "Ticket" endorse for commissioners?
Rather than typing in the "Ticket," I'll simply copy and paste the text from my latest newspaper ad, which endorses certain candidates for the Commission:
Attention Giles County Voters
Every four years, We, The People of Giles County get an opportunity to have our voices heard. We have the right, and the responsibility, to go to the polls, and elect those who represent us.
It's been four years since the last county election. How have those last elected been serving us in the years since then? Well, some have been naughty — passing a zoning plan, proposing a wheel tax, and allowing the school budget to grow unchecked — and some have been nice, opposing these sort of things. It is the purpose of this ad to name names, and aid the voter in avoiding a repetition of past mistakes.
The biggest mistake, by a country mile, was the passage of a county wide zoning plan on July 21, 2003. Didn't hear about this when it happened? That's probably because the supporters of this zoning plan dishonestly chose to refer to their zoning as "Land Use Management." But the truth is, this "LUMP" (as it is called) is not only a zoning plan, it's the same zoning plan, slightly gussied up, that was created by James Miller in 1991, and overwhelmingly rejected by the people of Giles County at the time.
This diabolical zoning plan slams the door shut on new industry and new growth. It puts the entire rural area of Giles County into one "no development" zone, which is called FAR. It even requires permission from the County Commission to build a new church or private school, something which even Miller's 1991 plan didn't do. And this "LUMP" is so poorly written, that it offers little or no protection from so-called "noxious" industries.
Who was responsible for this deceit and trickery? Who spent countless hours plotting against the property owners of Giles County, and then ultimately broke the state law in his mad rush to pass this rotten plan? None other than Fourth District County Commissioner, Roger Reedy. In an earlier age, a petty tyrant like Reedy would be tarred, feathered, and run out of town on a rail. But the best we can do, is to defeat him at the polls, come election day. Voters of the Fourth District, don't shirk from your duty! No matter how bad the weather, or how tired you may feel, please go to your precinct and vote Reedy out. While you're at it, give incumbent commissioner Edwin Lovell the bum's rush, too. When Reedy made the motion to zone all of Giles County, Lovell seconded it. They both have worn out their welcome and need to go!
Fortunately, the Fourth District has two excellent candidates running, and they both believe in freedom and property rights. I'm speaking of J.C. McGee and David E. Ross. Working together, we can expect these two men to work to repeal Reedy's despicable "LUMP," and to fight any future efforts to zone Giles County.
While punishing the guilty, we should take care to reward the righteous. And that means that the incumbent Commissioners who voted against Reedy's zoning plan, need to be returned to office. So, in the First District, that means reelecting Ramona Flacy and Alfred Harris. While you're at it, cast a vote for challenger Andrew R. Shaver, who opposes zoning.
In the Second District, Stoney Jackson has earned another term. And David Bailey, one of the challengers, has a distinguished record of fighting zoning, and very much deserves your vote.
In the Third District, both Billy Beets and Tim Risner voted against Reedy's zoning plan. Meanwhile, Third District challengers David Adams and Joe W. Fralix have both pledged in writing to vote to repeal the "LUMP," and to restore the citizen's right to vote on zoning. This means that there are four good candidates for only three slots, and that the Third District voter has a fairly tough decision to make, deciding which three to choose.
In the Fifth District, Connie Howell has been the most tireless opponent of the pro-zoners on the entire County Commission. She was supported in her efforts by Fifth District incumbent Larry Worsham, who voted against Reedy's rehashed zoning plan, and should be returned to office. The final incumbent in that district, Bill Holt, is a pro-zoner from way back, and needs to be shown the door by the voters. Challenger Tommy Pollard is against zoning, and would make an excellent replacement for Bill "conflict of interest" Holt.
In the Sixth District, the only incumbent running, Butch White, is a pro-zoner who supported Reedy's plan. So, if you are in that district, the smart move is to vote for Lee A. "Shorty" Brown, James Harwell, and Tina Cox Wilson.
In the Seventh District, voters have an outstanding candidate in the running, W. Allen Barrett, who opposes both zoning and wasteful spending with great fervor, and who champions the right of ordinary citizens to be heard at school board and County Commission meetings. He should be elected, along with anti-zoner Alan Faulkner. Both Seventh District incumbents, Tommy Campbell and Terry Harwell, are pro-zoners. Tommy Campbell once tried to pass a wheel tax by Private Act, in order to deny the voters a say in the matter. For a better Giles County, send both Campbell and Harwell packing on Election Day.
County wide zoning is a critical issue. Vote only for candidates that pledge to repeal the "LUMP" and restore our right to vote on zoning. Giles County is slowly dying and needs to welcome new industry, not zone it out. As far as "noxious" industry goes, there are ways to keep it out, without implementing any sort of zoning.
To keep up with the latest goings-on in local politics, log on to the new community affairs blog, Giles Free Speech Zone. You can get there quickest by pointing your browser to this URL:
www.snipurl.com/sbla
Read the Free Speech Zone to find out how candidates responded to a detailed "yes or no" questionnaire, and to see the candidates (some of them) reply to their critics. This information may be of help.
Your Vote Counts!
Use It Responsibly!
Kendrick:
Perhaps one of these new county-saving industries will locate next door to your property....let's see, how about a rendering plant? We need the industry, don't we? And surely you wouldn't object to progress! Would you?
“Vote The Ticket” seemed very, very suspicious to me, so, I did some investigating and this what I found. Apparently, “Vote The Ticket” was only distributed at Intermet in the cover of darkness and only placed on the third shift employees cars with the exception of one and it was placed on the notice board. I also found that one of the names on the ticket is employed at Intermet. Very suspicious!
Could this possibly be another one of Vanzant’s attempts to sway votes her way and “try to influence the voters to elect only who she wants in office?” Very suspicious!
The people I spoke with said, “The entire plant was voting for Mr. Gordon with the exception of three employees.” Very suspicious!
So, Kendrick, maybe your friends didn’t let you down as you thought and until I have other factual information this is the way it seems. Very, very suspicious!
Maybe you could do some investigating too.
I work at Intermet and I can tell you the three employees are; Danny Glover, Buster Keaton and David Bailey who is running for some office.
Glenn gave Danny Glover a job when he couldn't get one and if he lost he job now, no one would hire him.
Sorry Mr. G, he hasn't got enough sense to be grateful to you.
Don't we have industrial parks for new industries? How about that rendering plant beside your property mr McP?
Oh, and yes, Connie Howell and Allen Barrett are such "champions" of the anti-zoners. What a laugh. Wouldn't it be interesting if someone put in a garbage dump right across the road from her house? Well Connie, would you still be so concerned about my rights as a county resident? No, you would be concerned about stopping the garbage dump just as others in the county tried to do with the quarries you saw no problem with!!
Anonymous said:
Don't we have industrial parks for new industries?
Yes, but... those "parks" are controlled by the local industrial board. Not everyone is convinced {ATTENTION! UNPROVEN RUMOR AHEAD!]that the industrial board is actually devoted to recruiting new jobs, and may in fact be more dedicated to helping out the existing industries, by keeping the wage rates down.
Not only that, but the "parks" are located in the city limits, which means that industries have to pay the city property tax, on top of the county tax. That might be enough to discourage some from locating here, along with a lack of space for a truly large -- say, Saturn sized -- facility.
How about that rendering plant beside your property mr McP?
Go for it! You can actually put this little experiment to work, as the house I live in is the last house in the Pulaski city limits. So, just buy the S.W. Latta house next door, tear it down, and start rendering away. Mind you, I've been reading up on the tort of "nuisance," and I'm fairly sure that such a plant would have to run in a clean and non smelly manner, if it attempted to locate in a residential neighborhood. And therefore, I'm not terribly worried about what would happen if someone tried to locate one next door. But go ahead and try....
Wouldn't it be interesting if someone put in a garbage dump right across the road from her house? Well Connie, would you still be so concerned about my rights as a county resident? No, you would be concerned about stopping the garbage dump...
I suspect that Mrs. Howell would attempt to stop the garbage dump by means of the Jackson Law, which requires that counties -- even those without zoning -- vote to approve new dumps. It's amazing to me how pro-zoners keep forgetting about the state's Jackson Law, but the fact is, it provides more protection from dumps that zoning possibly could.
...just as others in the county tried to do with the quarries you saw no problem with!!
Dude, passing a zoning plan AFTER THE QUARRIES HAD ALREADY BOUGHT THEIR LAND would have helped nothing whatsoever. On the other hand, condemning and seizing the land would've stopped em dead in their tracks. I'll bet Connie would've supported that, but the ever so compassionate pro-zoners emphatically would not.
Incidentally, my sister, who opposes zoning, lives next door to a dump. So far, it hasn't destroyed her quality of life, caused her children to mutate, or anything like that. So it is possible to be a "victim" of "noxious industry" and still hang on to your principles, believe it or not.
I dont have a problem with the job Janet has done b/c honestly I dont keep up that well but I do have problem w/ her having a part-time secretary who works M-Th-She sits at the BIG desk while Jane sits in the corner. Jane gets the BIG desk when shes not there on Fridays-If you need two secretaries M-Th, then why dont you need both of them on Friday-Is it b/c shes Judy Roberts daughter-Just curious!!
Had their been a plan in place BEFORE the neighbors sold or leased their land to rock quarries, they would have been stopped dead in their tracks.
To Anonymous, Monday, July 31, 2006 10:28:06 AM
Have you ever seen Jane’s qualifications for her job and are you someone who has first hand knowledge of this situation?
I am David Bailey, employee of Intermet. Sorry to hurt your feelings but more than three are not voting for Glenn Gordon, so what, it's there choice and its there freedom to do so. People there are wanting to know who you are so they can tell you themselves. I have the balls to stand up for what I believe, and the balls to fight for the rights of the people of Giles County. I don't hide. So what Sandra is kin to your wife, and the flyer did not say Sandra was for zoning. It was group vote to put on the flyer the name of the person who was the most favored by the group, thats all. I believe the last line of the flyer was to vote your mind (YOURS)not your wife's or your neighbor's or your parent's or your boss'. I believe that Glen would be the first to tell you, do what you think is right. If elected as Comm. Dist. 2, I will do my best to vote what the people of my district want, not what I want. Oh yeah, I didn't put the flyers out under cover of darkness, I put it on the board in daylight, as for the parking lot, I have no ideal who did that. I believe the board at work is for all employee's and not just yours so you need to leave other peoples stuff alone.
Mr. Bailey,
A few questions please!
Who are the members of this infamous group you speak about and what are the rights you are fighting for?
How many of the candidates did you interview before you created “Vote the Ticket?”
Who are Sandra and the wife you are writing about?
Did Mrs. Vanzant tell you she was against zoning since this seems to be your motive?
Why did the group decide to only distribute the flyer at Intermet and only on the third shift cars?
Mr. Bailey I will be waiting to see if you have the “balls” to answer these questions TRUTHFULLY!
To the voters in Mr. Bailey’s district, you might consider the fact he has
exhibited is intellect not knowing the difference between “there and their” after all he will be making decisions for you as a community!
In my opinion, if you put the entire group together, you might come up with “ONE GOOD IDIOT!”
The members are the ones banded together for the zoning fight.
I didn't create "Vote the Ticket", so I can't tell you.
I haven't had a conversation with Mrs. Vanzant.
Against zoning is the motive, the only motive.
I don't know anything about putting the flyers on cars, as far as third shift I don't know.
I am on day shift and I put the one flyer up on day shift.
So whats the big to do about Intermet?
So, Glen Gordon use to work there!
As far as I know he doesn't own it or work there anymore and I don't see his name on my check.
So what, I'm not the best speller in the world, so who died and left you judge?
I am at least man enough to put my name on my comments, are you?
Mr. Bailey,
Thank you for your answers but I didn’t ask you one question about Glenn Gordon so why would you bring his name up?
What zoning are you fighting? I haven’t heard anything about any zoning to be fighting over regarding this election?
Who are Sandra and the wife?
David, in your post on, Wednesday, August 02, 2006 10:49:43 PM you wrote the following:
“I believe that Glen would be the first to tell you, do what you think is right.”
That pretty much sums up the true essences of the character of the man we loving call Mr. G. and even you could not dispute that fact. So, why in your other post did you make such sarcastic remarks when referring to him?
Yes, you won your election, at less I think you did, it would behoove you to apply some of his character traits to the job you have representing the people in your community.
Duhhh!
My remarks were not about Glenn, they were about you, it seems you get your feathers ruffled when someone else doesn't agree with what you believe.
I didn't put anyone down or say anything untruthful about anyone.
I simply expressed my right to free speech, which is what this site was suppose to be about.
As for the people who are in my district I will represent them, ALL OF THEM.
As far as I know you don't know my character traits and of course I don't know you because you are ANONYMOUS.
David,
So, Glen Gordon use to work there!
As far as I know he doesn't own it or work there anymore and I don't see his name on my check.
The above remarks are what I am referring to as sarcastic and you are saying they are not? Are you going to handle a situation with the commission when someone disagrees with you or calls your hand? That is not something to be proud of!
You still haven’t answered my question about Sandra and the wife!
The remarks are not sarcastic, they are the truth. Glen is a good man and he ran a good clean race. I was just saying, just because I work at Intermet and he use to, doesn't mean that I have to vote for him.
As for a situation with the commission I will stick to what the people in my district tell me what they want and I will vote accordingly.
For example, I have been working against zoning for over two years, which led me to run for office.
That's it for answers from me on this site, if you really need more answers just see me at work. The election is over and it's time to move on and start working on the real issues at hand.
David, since you oppose zoning..would you mind terribly if your neighbor sold his land to a firm that wants to put a garbage dump right beside your house? Oh, don't tell me...I already know the answer. You would have no objection to that whatsoever! RIGHT! And why are you so opposed to zoning...the tvery thing that would prevent your neighbor from doing you that way? You ever wonder why surrounding counties have it and you don't hear all this whining and complaining?
I understand that Mr. Bailey and Mr. Barrett are both preachers???????
David,
You make NO sense in your post. You are against zoning but you backed a candidate that voted for zoning and Mr. Gordon answered the questionnaire from Kendrick saying he was oppose to zoning. Please explain that logic!
If that is your truth, then good riddance from this blog. You should fit right in with the county executive!
Anonymous Saturday, August 05, 2006 7:15:19 AM I understand that Mr. Bailey and Mr. Barrett are both preachers????????
Please don’t group these two men together because there are differences between the two.
First, Mr. Barrett calls things as he sees them and you won’t hear him lying about or for anyone.
Mr. Bailey on the other hand has just lied in his post regarding the two candidates for county executive. He says he is passionately against zoning but he voted for Mrs. Vanzant, a liar and she voted for zoning and to compare the two is simply not fair.
No, Mr. Bailey will fit right in with the anti-zoners.
No, I am not joking!
Do you know Mr. Scepters personally and can you dispute his intelligence? Anyone can learn a great deal about zoning from him if only one would read his post with an opened mind.
I must have missed the spot where Mr Bailey said he was voting for Mrs. Vanzant or Glen Gordon. The only comment about who was voting for who was by an anonymous employee of Intermet that said she knew who was voting for who.
Have the citizens forgot about the last fight for zoning. I believe there was a private act passed and filed in Nashville, saying that if zoning was to be adopted in Giles Co. that it would have to be by the voters, the commissioners must have had overlooked that fact, and the rights of the counties' citizens.
Anonymous of Saturday, August 05, 2006 3:45:53
Mr. Bailey voted the ticket and Mr. Gordon’s name was not on it!
Anonymous of Saturday, August 05, 2006 5:20:31 PM, I have read this whole page, It is ashame that you have nothing else better to do, than putting down people and make ridicule of them. I say your a sad strange individual that just wants to be heard, because you really really REALLY have absolutely nothing else better, but I on the other hand just sat time out to see what kind of people would write about someone who listens to the people and cares to serve the people for what is right. I would like to write more, but I got to get busy.
If you are so busy why are you posting in the first place?
Anoymous of Saturday, August 5, 2006 5:20:31PM, I guess you went to the polls and helped Mr Bailey push the buttons! I still haven't seen Mr Bailey say anything about the way he voted, yet you call him a liar. A liar of something that you said happened.
I was just wondering, could it be that your crystal ball is cloudy, cloudy from your tears cause Mr G lost!
Anonymous August 05, 2006 3:45:53 PM
I must have missed the spot where Mr Bailey said he was voting for Mrs.
Vanzant or Glen Gordon. Saturday,
His phone number is in the book, call him and ask which candidate he voted for and see if he will tell you the truth? I already know.
David, Why would you and your “group” exclude the one that has the most knowledge on zoning in Giles County, and probably the US?
David, oh David, Where are you? Running away from more questions it seems!
mr. bailey, who are the members of your group and are any of them members of the KKK?
I know they are!
Sorta reminds me of that movie.....dangerous Minds. We have a group of those here in Giles County, don't we? They are against everything!
Look, zoning differs from place to place. I just hope the "new" commission will make any necessary adjustments to the plan Giles County has so that the whiners will stop whining!
I likewise challenge the new commission to do just that and not be bullied by those whose ambition is to destroy it!
the new commission can't make any adjustments or enforce it. Its tied up in the courts. They can however repeal it and start over.
really disappointed in the blog, sounds like a bunch whiners. Must be a queer convention in town!
Repeal it and subject a new one to a referendum vote? And you honestly think people would vote in favor of it? You must be delusional after all the negative talk and scare tactics put forth by the anti-zoners. To repeal what we have means we end up with nothing at all!
And who is responsible for it being held up in court? Think.
Anonymous said:
Repeal it and subject a new one to a referendum vote? And you honestly think people would vote in favor of it?
If the new plan didn't trample over property rights, and existed merely to protect from noxious uses of land, then I would vote for it. So, too would all of my antizoning friends that I have discussed this with. And if the county's most "radical" anti-zoners would vote for it, why wouldn't the general public?
You must be delusional after all the negative talk and scare tactics put forth by the anti-zoners.
Scare tactics, huh? The pro-zoners are not above trying to scare people, I assure you. (They've trumped up a little dust on the road into doomsday, if you haven't noticed.) And fifteen years ago, children at one of the elementary schools were coming home crying because the teacher "taught" them that, "if we don't get zoning, we'll all get cancer and die."
To repeal what we have means we end up with nothing at all!
No, you have nothing at all already, since the unworkable plan is not being enforced.
And who is responsible for it being held up in court?
That would be Roger Reedy and the other "corner cutters" who broke the law, and made a lawsuit pretty much inevitable.
Think.
That's a good plan. And if you do, you'll realize how much better it is for a group of ordinary citizens to file suit against the LUMP, than a noxious industry. Believe me, your paper tiger of "protection" is going to crumple just as soon as its faults are trotted out in a court of law. Far, far better that my group is doing it, than the next FTI.
My group??? This is exactly what Giles Countians need to be wary of.
Anonymous said:
My group??? This is exactly what Giles Countians need to be wary of.
It's only "my group" in that I wrote the original lawsuit filing, pro-se, and found a few folks to join me. The original co-plaintiffs were David Bailey, Leonard Rogers, Gilmore Tarpley, and Fred Winkles. These were joined, after the suit was filed, by Allen Barrett, Bernard Burnett, Gayle Jones, and DeRay Stalvey.
I only know most of these people very slightly (other than my cousin Gayle) and the vast majority of them, I haven't seen in the two years since we filed suit. So, if you are worried about me being the head of some malevolent group that wants to take over the county, and rule over it with a rod of iron... find something else to worry about. All we care about is seeing that the zoners obey the state law, and that's that.
Speaking of which, are any of the pro-zoners out there even the least bit upset that Reedy and his gang broke the law? Or do the ever so wonderful ends justify the means? I remain curious, as not a single "pro" seems willing to address this.
I am a "pro-zoner" (by your definition), and I don't mind one bit taking issue with you guys. I'm not at all surprised by the list of those "charter members" who brought the suit. Nor am I any less surprised by those who came on board after becoming enlightened. Those of my persuasion consider them "co-complainers" rather than co-plaintiffs.
No, we don't worry too much about you guys taking over (as you stated). We just wonder what your real and true agenda is. I am not the least bit convinced that you are concerned about my individual rights.
Roger Reedy and "his gang" broke the law? How so? As I understand it, they had both the power and the authority to enact the present plan. By the way, someone said that lawmakers oftentimes have to make laws to protect a man from his own neighbor. Isn't that what happened? If it wasn't, then what was the motive? And please, spare me of having to hear one more time that Roger did it for power! He could care less about that.
There remain a couple of questions on this site that I would love you guys to answer. What harm is the plan causing anyone? And why are people in surrounding counties not angry and bitter about the issue? Oh, you will say they are contented sheep. Right?
Anonymous said:
Roger Reedy and "his gang" broke the law? How so?
Here's the answer, which I originally posted in the "fun facts about the LUMP" thread. Read it, and then let me know if you approve of such "corner cutting" of the law:
Anonymous said:
Prove it, and I will be grown up enough to agree.
Great! Here's the URL for Lexis-Nexis, so you can verify the truth of my claims, by reading the relevant parts of Tennessee Code Annotated:
http://198.187.128.12/tennessee/lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=fs-main.htm&2.0
Let me start by saying that the state law provides a step by step procedure that MUST be followed, in order to legally pass a zoning plan. This procedure is not a "suggestion" or something that is "optional," it is MANDATORY. Follow me on this point?
Okay, it is sufficient for me to prove that the LUMP was illegally passed, merely by pointing out one step in the procedure that was not followed. As it happens, I can name four steps that were not followed. But, because I want to save back one of my trump cards for the upcoming trial, I am only going to mention three on this blog....
First of all, zoning plans MUST, under TCA 13-7-102, be written by the county's Regional Planning Commission. Why would that be? Probably because, under TCA 13-3-101, Regional Planning Commissions MUST be composed of a majority of "civilians" -- ie, non-elected, ordinary people -- rather than made up entirely of commissioners. So, who actually wrote the LUMP? No-one other than the members of the "Land Use Management" committee-- a group entirely made up of county commissioners. And letting them write the zoning plan is a clear violation of state law--- strike one!.
Secondly, TCA 13-7-104 states that "it is sufficient notice if the caption and a complete summary are published at least once in the official newspaper of the county." But no complete summary was ever printed in any newspaper published in Giles County. Further, the incomplete summary which was published, was published less than 30 days before the public meeting (a no-no), and it contains inaccurate and misleading information. It contained the statement by Roger Reedy, "This (the way the LUMP works) is much different from a zoning plan, since new industry and business are not confined to a specific area." Read between the lines, and what was Reedy really saying? He was saying that the LUMP is not a zoning plan. And that is a lie. Reedy also misrepresented how property would be rezoned from FAR to C and LI. He claimed that businesses wanting a rezoning would simply "come before the Regional Planning Commission, proving that they meet the guidelines within the County Land Management Plan." This is untrue for two reasons: firstly, it implies that anyone who meets the standards will get a rezoning, which is not the case. Secondly, no rezoning can be performed by the Regional Planning Commission alone! Under state law, it also takes a vote of the County Commission to rezone land -- even a "majority of the whole commission" vote if the Regional Planning Commission earlier voted against the rezoning.
"Complete" surely implies, at the very least, "accurate and honest." Ergo, the placement of untrue statements in the "complete summary" utterly voids it, and means that the statutory requirement has not been met. (And this is especially true, given that the summary was published with less than the 30 days advance notice required.) Thus, strike two for the LUMP!
Thirdly, TCA 13-7-104 requires that a public meeting of "the county legislative body" be held prior to their voting on a zoning plan. Yet, a special meeting of the Giles County Commission was never called or held. In fact, the newspaper ad which is claimed to have served as notice for the county states "the Land Use Management Committee of the County Commission will hold a public meeting ...etc." The LUM committee is emphatically NOT equivalent to the County Commission, even if a few commissioners may have attended. No roll was called, nor was a quorum convened. Thus it was not a meeting of the county legislative body, and, consequently, came no where near satisfying the legal requirements that govern the adoption of a zoning plan.
It is likely that the legislative intent of TCA 13-7-104 was for the people who would get to vote on the plan (i.e., commissioners) to be forced to have a hearing before the people who would come to live under that plan. As things transpired, the legislators never got this irreplaceable input. So, the state law was again violated-- strike three; the LUMP's out!
I assure you, these are not minor nit-picks. Failure to have "civilians" involved in writing the plan... failure to give an accurate, honest, and complete summary of the plan, and... failure to hold a meeting of the County Commission... are all gross violations of the state's zoning enabling law. Taken together, they suggest that Reedy and company were willing to cut corners, in order to make it easier to pass a zoning plan that, had the law been followed to the letter, might have failed to pass muster.
I think any honest, fair minded person, will be able to clearly see that the LUMP was illegally passed. These procedural errors are not insignificant, and the real question, in my mind, is not whether the LUMP was passed illegally, but whether the LUMP's illegal passage was the result of a deliberate conspiracy to defraud the public, or was simply a case of incompetents being unable to follow a simple law. Either way, the LUMP will likely be toast, just as soon as all these details are brought out before the trial judge. And then we must start over, hopefully not only with the Commission following the laws, but with input from the public being invited (unlike last time around).
Wednesday, August 02, 2006 11:40:57 PM
As was mentioned elsewhere on this blog, the commission had the authority to enact a zoning plan for this county.
Anonymous said:
As was mentioned elsewhere on this blog, the commission had the authority to enact a zoning plan for this county.
That is correct. BUT THEY HAD TO FOLLOW THE STATE LAW IF THEY CHOSE TO EXERCISE THAT AUTHORITY-- WHICH THEY DID NOT DO. Therefore, they acted as a criminal gang, and the zoning plan they "passed" is not legally valid. Surely, this is not difficult to understand???
Very difficult indeed, since they did have the authority. Please do not presume my ignorance. Thank you.
I know I said I wouldn't be back on here, but had to. I had to apologize to JP and KP. I am sorry, just assumed the wrong person done that, but as I have learned they have not.
Even if someone may not be your best friend, it is still not worth losing them over something petty and stupid(such as this site) Hope you the best.
sincerly yours
dlb
Mr Bailey, are you the same person Mr McPeters has chosen to be on his "blog board"? Doesn't quite make sense if you are and you are not reading this blog again.
Anonymous,
Saturday, August 12, 2006 6:44:25 PM
He is the same person! Just ask him about his trip north to Wisconsin!
David why are you not answering the questions asked of you?
I think there are two favorite words of David’s that need to be deleted and they are, Duhhh and So What!!!
I can just see him now answering on topics brought before the commission with answers like, Duhhh and So What!
So duh and so what are now to be banned ...hahahahahahaha...free speech zone?
Help me understand this: is David Bailey the writer above stating this blog is petty and stupid but he is serving on the "censor board" and he also was elected as a new commissioner?
Anonymous,
There isn't, and never was, any "censor board." The whole thing was a practical joke that I played on the pro-zoners. I assumed they'd squawk if I took away even the smallest scintilla of their "free speech" rights, and sure enough, they did. The weren't even comforted by an "appeals board" made up entirely of my anti-zoning "cronies." Instead, they talked about slippery slopes and tyranny, and threatened to leave the blog. All of this becaues two or three phrases (out of billions) were "zoned" away from them.
I ended this illustration of the absurdity of zoning late last night. I figured it had run its course, and that I needed to stop before I chased away half the posters from this blog. You can read more about this matter by going to the top of the main page, and perusing the topic "GOTCHA!!! A Lesson for the LUMPsters."
brilliant Kendrick!!!!!
That ranks as one of the stupidest stunts I've ever heard of. What makes you think anti zoners were not complaining?
If it weren't for antagonizing your stupidity, and WAB's arrogant self, and waiting for a response for him getting ripped in the last election, I would have already left this post.
Uh....I think he came in fourth in his district. Seems I recall him wishing that very outcome on someone else. Ouch!
to: frominsideintermet
I have never been on a trip to Wisconsin for Intermet or personally. Seems you don't have your facts just right.
I have never heard of a censor board for this blog.
I believe in free speech and have served to protect it by serving in the military. Have you?
David, Why would you and your “group” exclude the one that has the most knowledge on zoning in Giles County, and probably the US?
Who are the members of your group and are any of them members of the KKK?
I don't no why you guys don't let Mr Barret alone even when he don't have nothing to say you keep trying to stir him up.
Seems to me if four people is in a race all four of em are hopeing somebody else comes in last.
I think a lot of you guys has got mad at Mr Barret and Mr Macpeters cause they showed you up with there little joke and big brains. I always herd guys got jelous about another part not there brains.
David,
Well, how about your quick trip north? You couldn't stand the heat could you??
If those two individuals (McPeters and Barrett) would refrain from coming off as all-knowing and arrogant, they wouldn't be getting sniped at.....huh? I think they invite this sort of confrontation and criticism.
How can I help you understand if you have no clue?
It appears to me that you are the one on the sidelines screaming foul.
Hemmmmm! Someone must of just got off from work, maybe at the courthouse! Look at the time!
Wrong again! So funny. Do you work?
Yes, but I don't see where that matters.
WAB...I am still waiting to be impressed by your brilliance. hahahahahaha
How childish of you. No wonder people voted that you come in fourth!
By the way, Mr. Barrett, be not wise in your own conceits.
WRONG YET AGAIN! You never cease to amaze me. I only mentioned that, hoping you would ponder it and make application to yourself. Obviously, you didn't do that. But I would agree that you have a more than abundant supply of confidence. But confidence, like intelligence, can lead to arrogance and pride if left unbridled. Perhaps you suffer from narcissistic disorder with grandiose delusions? You can find these in the DSM-IV (a manual on mental disorders).
If you want to continue trying to deplete Mr. Barrett’s confidence and intelligence, at least sign your name and give him a fair playing field.
I find the anonymous of Saturday, July 29th post interesting. Buster Keaton’s name is listed, as a supporter of Vanzant and his mother-in-law is a first cousin to Mr. Gordon’s wife, isn’t she?
He has a liftime supply of confidence. How could it be depleted, since it keeps growing? I would gladly sign my name if circumstances would allow me to do that!
To momsaregreat, Yep, that is right. Mr. G gave Buster his job before he was married to one of the Hargrove’s daughters.
Mr. G hired the Hargrove’s daughter Tammy, son Mike and a nephew Todd, at Intermet and he gets stabbed in the back! But, at least they didn’t let Vanzant put a sign in their yard, like they were fooling some one.
I don’t tolerate ungrateful people too well!
Anonymous Monday, August 21, 2006 4:16:11 PM
What are the circumstances that won’t allow you to sign your name?
None of your business. Just trust me on that, OK?
By the way "moms", aren't you being a bit annonymous yourself?
Anonymous Monday, August 21, 2006 9:38:09 PM
By the way "moms", aren't you being a bit annonymous yourself?
In a way I am also anonymous, but I am not making ugly snide remarks as you did in your post! Trust “me” there is a difference.
Dear frominsideintermet,
Gosh, I find your post even more interesting than, Saturday, July 29th post! Didn’t know all that.
Being anonymous and discussing even criticizing ideas is no problem. Being anonymous and hiding behind it to attack a person or spread unfounded rumors and outright lies is the mark of a dishonest coward.
Mr. Barrett....
You go from calling people anal buffoons and pinheads to confused to cowards and dishonest. And "mom" defends that? Is there an irony here?
Mr. Barrett invites the snide remarks due to his arrogance and feelings of superior intellect. He is just too amazed at himself! And you can't see it?
Mom
And trust me, there is a difference between intelligence and arrogance. They don't necessarily blend together well.
Hey anonymous from 9:48 Why don't you just grow up or at least learn the meaning of the words you use. Can't you understand the difference of calling somebody a name and just using a name to identify their behavior? My goodness you sound like a pinhead. If the shoe fits then wear it.
Hiding behind the name anonymous to attack people without proof is the work of a coward. Not telling your name when discussing ideas is very different.
To anonymous 10:36
Can't you get it through your thick skull that some people cannot afford to give out their names on here? Mr. McPeters knew that when he set up this blog. Don't confuse bravery here with posting or not posting one's name!
Yes, according to people like you, I would be a pinhead. Glad of it, however!
And I would suggest to you that if the shoe fits, try not wear it anymore!
To 5:27&28
Don't get so upset that you blow a blood vessel. Posting as anonymous is a very smart thing to do. By posting as anonymous the fear of retribution is removed.
What I said was that it is reasonable to post as anonymous when discussing ideas, it's when a poster begins to throw out unfounded, mean, vicious rumors in personal attacks on the individual that hidding behind "anonymous becomes the act of a coward.
Yes, some people have no choice.
Anonymous above, Is it for fear of losing you job?
I do not have to explain myself to you. Suffice it to say that I am unable to divulge my name here.
Mr. Barrett... if you only knew how little of a C-O-W-A-R-D I am! You just cannot get over the delusions you have about yourself, can you?
Oh, you keep beating that drum of bravery because you sign your name. Isn't that a tired argument? Some people have no choice but to remain anonymous. Think. Even your cohort, McPeters, gave people a choice about that when he set up this blog.
And the preacher continues to call people names. Mr. Barrett, have you ever considered anger management classes?
yeah anger management classes for the voices you hear in your head or at least take or increase your medications.
Hey, do you honestly think you are the only person on here who has conviction? If so, you are wrong once again.
As for identifying behavior, perhaps someone was a little off when he or she diagnosed you as having a narcissistic disorder with attending grandiose delusions of self. I tend to think a closer diagnosis for you might be swollen head syndrome, which is not in the DSM-IV. I would bet you have to buy button-up t-shirts. A crew neck wouldn't go over your head.
at least all the voices in your head like you.........polly want a cracker.
at least all the voices in your head like you.........polly want a cracker.
Who is Polly?
Terminally stupid? Now there's a new one!
Ain't it amazing what all kinds of words and terms you can learn when you read the blog. I guess we have to put a point up on Mr Barretts side for that one.
As will be swollen head syndrome. Look for it in the DSM-V.
Isn't it great how this anonymous person can continue to get down on Mr. Barrett and call him names, but they acuse Mr. Barrett of calling names and being arrogant. This person keeps saying they can't reveal who they are -- sure sounds like a COWARD to me. I say shut up and leave Mr. Barrett alone or 'fess up as to who you are.
The anonymity thing has been explained to you over and over and over. You still can't grasp it. Please don't associate bravery with signing a blog or cowardice with not signing one. And, as for name-calling, you don't recall the names Mr. B has called those who disagree with him? Is that over your head?
Some people are just agitators! No matter what you say they just off in left field. Seems like to many people have signed their name on here already! So Mr. Barrett, don't give them any more ammo. Sometimes you have to be a man and bite your tongue before your foot gets inserted. They are not worth the stress and heart ache and probably not worth a response and most aren't worth a #@#*.
Anonymous......
You speak of agitators. Aren't you a bit guilty of the pot calling the kettle black?
See WAB, point proved!
to frominsideintermet,
looks like the people there need to really look for you, I believe they should go to the Human Resourses and let them know that they have a employee publishing things about other employees on line, seems this could be causing some friction at the work place and they could claim that Intermet is quilty of allowing the insideintermet one of causing hostile work conditions, so if anyone there is reading this come to my office on the square and lets see if we can get the ball rolling.
Anonymous Tuesday, August 29, 2006 10:00:33 PM
I believe you need to “read all the posts above” before you start any ball rolling on my be-half. I think you have gotten some of my posts mixed up with some anonymous posts and that is the ball you need to be trying to roll!
Give me your office address and I will roll right on by to see you myself!
to insideintermet, i read all the posts again and i think anonymous is confused for sure.
Yeah, fromisideintermet, I agree with you and anonymous above! Anonymous, Tuesday, August 29, 2006 10:00:33 PM, it is clear, if you will read all the post above, there is no need to roll anything for insideinterment.
i don't think anonymous's ball would roll very far unless he is reading something I haven't and i went through all of them too!
Anonymous Tuesday, August 29, 2006 10:00:33 PM
I, like the above anonymous went back and read all the post too and you are for sure confused! I also noticed there was another post by a Mr. Bailey that mentioned the word “balls”, could he be the anonymous trying to get the ball rolling?
sure sounds like it to me!!!!
Anonymous Tuesday, August 29, 2006 10:00:33 PM—I am still waiting for your office address.
regarding the topic, i heard a mr. harris was the author of the "vote the ticked" does anyone know him?
To Anonymous of, Friday, September 08, 2006 9:31:50 PM
I don’t know Mr. Harris but one of the group that supported the ticket is Mr. David Bailey and he was elected as a commissioner in the Minor Hill district. He can tell you.
What does it matter you wrote want and when. The election is over, some won and some lost. Not everybodies favorite choice could win, thats why is called an election. People go out and work to get votes, each one is trying to win, the people decide, the winner is declared and things move on. So why not move on to something new, that can make a difference, I mean you people are getting in debates about something that has been over for more than a month. Why not focus your energy on spreading the word on things you can make a difference in, like child abuse, spouse abuse. There are plenty of people that could use your help, right here in Giles County.
I agree there are many things we can focus on. But, if you were involved in the election and some candidates got votes by inappropriate behavior and just plain lying, you might have a different opinion and a harder time getting over the results of it.
The same, I think, can be said for child abuse or spousal abuse. When you are directly involved in either, it takes some amount of time to recover.
Please elaborate on how certain candidates gained votes via inappropriate means. This should be interesting, but hasn't this suspicion been about talked to death on here?
Anonymous, Thursday, September 14,Yes, talk of the election results has been on many of the threads on this blog. I was only answering the post above mine.It seems to me, by your post, you have read most of the post regarding the election, so, I see no further need to elaborate on any candidates gaining votes by inappropriate behavior especially since you think it has been talked to death. I am quiet puzzled why you would even suggest I do just that!
Since the posts are anonymous (including mine), I can't tell which is and is not you. OK?
To Anonymous: Thursday, September 14, 2006 9:23:30 PM
Can’t tell which is my post.
My Post Sunday, September 10, 2006 5:33:49 PM
Your Post, Thursday, September 14, 2006 6:28:41 PM
My Post, Thursday, September 14, 2006 8:18:56 PM
Your Post, Thursday, September 14, 2006 9:23:30 PM
Since the posts are anonymous (including mine), I can't tell which is and is not you. OK?
Hope this helps you.
Brilliant! But, you are mistaken. Some of those are not mine. Splitting hairs, are we?
To David Bailey,
Did you attend the meeting at Henry Horton Park?
you know "honest" david bailey is not gonna answer you about that meeting.
David Bailey did not attend the meeting!
Mr. Bailey,
Do you support the spring deal?
Post a Comment
<< Home