After nearly 80 years of prohibition, Barbourville voters have spoken. Their answer was “Yes” to permit alcohol sales during a referndum vote in the town Tuesday.
“Everybody that worked for Team Yes needs a congratulatory hand tonight,” said Dr. Bob Dunaway, who submitted the original petition for a special election on October 26. “I think we did it well, I think we did it the right way, and I’m proud of the way we did it so far.” Others were not so sure. “We’re very disappointed. Everybody lifted a little, it just wasn’t enough to bring us victory this time,” said Reverend Leonard Lester, who had a strong voice in the Vote No campaign. “When you’re trying to protect what you love, you can’t give up, so we’ll be back in three years.”
“I’m excited about the outcome,” said Tamara Sanborn, a member of Barbourville Tourism Commission. “Alcohol is already here, the bigger issue is the drug problem that we have. I just want a great future for my children. I want my daughter to want to move back home from Lexington. Now, there is more opportunity here and I think its going to be a big plus for out economy”
A total of 931 votes were cast. “Yes” voters won by a margin of 65 votes. 498 voted in favor of alcohol sales and 433 voted against. 33 percent of city residents who were eligible cast a vote.
“We actually had a better turn out than I expected,” said Barbourville Mayor David Thompson. The issue stirred many people to action. Union College Student Mikalya Durham cast her first vote ever in Tuesday’s elections and became the first in her family to vote since the Nixon administration.
“This is an issue that everyone should vote on. It impacts our whole community,” said Durham. “To have to your opinion heard, you have to vote.”
So, what does this really mean for Barbourville.
“It will definitely put money into the town,” said Mayor Thompson. “From what I know, based on research found by myself and staff, is that the tax money collected from alcohol sales will go to the police department. But, that’s money that the town itself doesn’t have to put into the department.”
Another looming question is how the vote could eventually impact the city of Corbin which has enjoyed revenues to the tune of around $800,000 annually following a vote by citizens to allow expanded sales of alcohol in 2012.
Corbin Mayor Willard McBurney said it’s too early to predict exactly what the impact will be.
“Our liquor stores will still be here, but it will take some of the sales away. It’s just natural that would happen,” McBurney said. “It’s just something we will have to wait and see what the impact is. It’s a little premature to say is going to be X amount this or X amount that.”
Another vote on package liquor will take place in London at the end of January. If citizens there decide to go “wet” as well, reversing their decision against the idea from three years ago, then the impact on Corbin could be even greater.
“It’s a good thing to have, but it’s not a panacea,” McBurney said. “A lot of people think you can just use it to build sidewalks and infrastructure in your city and you can’t … it’s not designed like that.”
The topic of alcohol sales has long been controversial in Knox County. A special election was also held back in February of 2012, to decide if alcohol sales would be permitted within the city. Voters then rejected that choice with 591 votes against, to 484 votes in favor.
This time around, the issue was equally heated as it made its way to social media. Facebook pages were made representing both sides, and Yes votes appeared to out-number those opposed. 688 people joined the Vote Yes, while 449 represented the Vote No campaign.
In addition, an online poll conducted by The Mountain Advocate, showed 319 out of 501 to be in favor of alcohol sales.
Overall the election ran smoothly.
“It’s was quite and peaceful,” said election official Bobby Carmack. “Everything went alright.”
Election officers Karen Frazier and Koral Garland described the voting at Jessie D. Lay elementary as steady. “We maybe went 20 minutes all day without having at least someone in line.”
The night was not without any complications, however.
As the polls closed at G. R. Hampton, and the election officials attempted to print out the final numbers, they discovered a problem. A faulty printer prevented them from viewing the official results. After several attempts to reconnect power, Knox County Sheriff Mike Smith brought a new power cord. Officials were still unable to print the results. Finally, an official technician was called to bring a new printer. Finally, 30 minutes after the polls closed, the results were in. 32 in favor, 19 against for G. R. Hampton.
“I would like to thank my staff, the election officers and the Board of Elections,” said Knox County Clerk Mike Corey. “They did an excellent job at keeping credibility throughout the election process.”
