ahhh yes, but if it takes four years to verify the voter's residency, how many registered voters have moved but are still on the roster?

what is your objection to placing this on the ballot for the voters to decide....after all, this is all the petition does.

I feel covering any objection, as shown on the NCSL stats, there are many ways to limit the improper use of the recall petition, such as putting condition for which it applies.

However, overall, without a special election, it is only costly to the applicant and those in the county who need to verify the count. It is up to the voter to decide if they want any official out of office, all of the voters.

what are your feelings on the issue, and why?.

"That is a dangerous slippery slope for recall."

*shakes head in disbelief*

True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler

Stimulating the economy as best we can!

Further stimulation with Yoga Wear!

please explain why? most states use percentages of those who voted in a particular election to determine a recall. this makes sense to me because these are the people who voted the person in and they are the ones who supposedly should want to change their vote.

again,it would be nice to hear your position and justification for the same.

Number Nine asked: "Why is the number too high?"

Nine, if you missed it on the other recall thread, I shared data in three posts on the practices of the other 18 states that allow recall of their state and local officials. I used each of their formulas to determine how many petition signatures would be required of our Lockett recall group, if these other states' formulas applied to our local effort.

Originally, I sought and found the state statues for California (California Election Code, Section 11221, http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/ELEC/1/d11/3/2/s11221), Washington (Revised Code of Washington, 29A.56.18, http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=29A.56.180) and Wisconsin (Wisconsin State Code, 9.10, http://nxt.legis.state.wi.us/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templates&fn=default.htm&...).

However, when I discovered Commissioner Briggs' post on the Commission Forum detailing the practices of the remaining 15 of 18 states (Commission Forum post of October 25, https://knoxgov.net/commission/commissionforum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=165&s...), I just used the formulas he had found.

I also looked up the number of votes last cast in the 2008 Knox County general election for law director (34,404 per Election Commission, http://www.knoxcounty.org/election/results/cumulative_080708.pdf) and the 2006 state general election for governor (122,481 per Election Commission, http://www.knoxcounty.org/election/results/cumulative_11072006.pdf), both of which are numbers frequently used by these other states as the base in determining the number of petition signatures they require to recall a given local official. Finally, I also estimated, toward the high end, the number of Knox County's registered voters (265,000).

When I applied each state's formula to our local and state vote counts to determine what each state's rule would be in our Lockett recall effort, here is the picture that emerged:

Alaska:
25% of votes last cast for the official being recalled
(34,404 votes for law director x 25% = 8,601 sigs)

Arizona:
25% of votes last cast for the official being recalled
(34,404 x 25% = 8,601 sigs)

California:
10% of registered voters
(265,000 X 10% = 26,500 sigs)

Colorado:
25% of votes last cast for the official being recalled
(34,404 x 25% = 8,601 sigs)

Georgia:
15% of eligible voters at time of last election
(265,000 registered voters x 15% = 39,750 sigs)

Idaho:
20% of eligible voters at time of last election
(265,000 X 20% = 53,000 sigs)

Kansas:
40% of votes last cast for the official being recalled
(34,404 x 40% = 13,761 sigs)

Louisiana:
33.3% of eligible voters at time of last election
(265,000 x 33% = 88,245 sigs)

Michigan:
25% of votes last cast for the official being recalled
(34,404 x 25% = 8,601 sigs)

Minnesota:
25% of votes last cast for the official being recalled
(34,404 x 25% = 8,601 sigs)

Montana:
10% of eligible voters at time of last election
(265,000 x 10% = 26,500 sigs)

Nevada:
25% of votes last cast for the official being recalled
(34,404 x 25% = 8,601 sigs)

New Jersey:
25% of registered voters in the district of the official being recalled
(265,000 x 25% = 66,250 sigs)

North Dakota:
25% of votes last cast for the official being recalled
(34,404 x 25% - 8,601 sigs)

Oregon:
15% of votes cast in last election for governor
(122,481 votes for governor x 15% = 18, 372 sigs)

Rhode Island:
15% of votes last cast for the official being recalled
(34,404 x 15% = 5,160 sigs)

Washington:
25% of votes last cast for the official being recalled
(34,404 x 25% = 8,601 sigs)

Wisconsin:
25% of votes cast in the last election for governor
(122,481 x 25% = 30,620 sigs)

Summary:
Among 18 other states, only 3 states call for more recall petition sigs than does TN.
Among 18 other states, only 1 state calls for the same volume of recall petition sigs as does TN.
Among 18 other states, 14 states call for fewer recall petition sigs than does TN.
Among 18 other states, 9 states call for 8,601 or fewer recall petition sigs.

Relative to the 38,000 to 40,000 signatures Greg Mackay has explained will apply to our local effort to recall Bill Lockett, this is why I think our Knox County number is too high.