Hoosiers - Marion County to have ecig ban
- Thread starter LaceyUnderall
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
thejager and Lethalp, please see this thread -- http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ncludes-e-cigs-possible-january-9th-vote.html
You should contact your representative, the sponsors of the ordinance, and the at-large representatives.
You should contact your representative, the sponsors of the ordinance, and the at-large representatives.
Here is the link to CASAA's Call to Action Page for the Indianapolis Smoking/vaping Ban. It contains the email addresses for all of the Indianapolis City Councilors. I urge all of the everyone to make their opposition known. It doesn't matter where you live, because these bans are coming to city/state governments near you. Let them know about your success with PV's & that vapor is not smoke.
Thank you for your help!
http://www.casaa.org/CTA/article.asp?articleID=222&l=a&p=
Thank you for your help!
http://www.casaa.org/CTA/article.asp?articleID=222&l=a&p=
Last edited:
The Indianapolis Star made a short video of me concerning the proposal to Ban vaping in Public Places.
http://www.indystar.com/videonetwork/1384135159001/Indy-vapor-shop
http://www.indystar.com/videonetwork/1384135159001/Indy-vapor-shop
I sent an email to all listed on the CASAA site yesterday. I have received one reply from Pam Hickman saying "Thank you so much for you comments and observations.
Pam Hickman
Below is the email I sent. I hope they come to their senses about this issue. I have not seen anything about when the vote has or will be taken. Any news on that?
I am 50 years old and have smoked since I was 20. I have recently discovered the electronic cigarette. I was very skeptical about this so I did some research on the item. After finding out that there are +6000 chemicals in regular cigarette smoke 32 of which are carcinogenic but the vapor produced by an electronic cigarette only contains 4 none of which are carcinogenic I was impressed. I gave them a try and was able to easily stop smoking. I have noticed reduced blood pressure and overall better general health. I have also been able to convince some of my coworkers to try the e-cigarette and some of them have also quite smoking regular cigarettes.
I understand that you have received information about e-cigarettes but cannot understand why the proposed ban still includes them. I would think that you would find a way to encourage the use of the e-cigarette to help improve the health of Hoosiers rather than ban them.
Please help support the health of Hoosiers by removing “the use of an electronic cigarette (also known as an e-cigarette)” from the definitions Section 616-102 item K.
Pam Hickman
Below is the email I sent. I hope they come to their senses about this issue. I have not seen anything about when the vote has or will be taken. Any news on that?
I am 50 years old and have smoked since I was 20. I have recently discovered the electronic cigarette. I was very skeptical about this so I did some research on the item. After finding out that there are +6000 chemicals in regular cigarette smoke 32 of which are carcinogenic but the vapor produced by an electronic cigarette only contains 4 none of which are carcinogenic I was impressed. I gave them a try and was able to easily stop smoking. I have noticed reduced blood pressure and overall better general health. I have also been able to convince some of my coworkers to try the e-cigarette and some of them have also quite smoking regular cigarettes.
I understand that you have received information about e-cigarettes but cannot understand why the proposed ban still includes them. I would think that you would find a way to encourage the use of the e-cigarette to help improve the health of Hoosiers rather than ban them.
Please help support the health of Hoosiers by removing “the use of an electronic cigarette (also known as an e-cigarette)” from the definitions Section 616-102 item K.
I for some reason can't get the video. I see where it should be. Any ideas? GOT IT!
Also, did you talk with Barb on Moday? Did she give any indication of when her article might run?
Also, did you talk with Barb on Moday? Did she give any indication of when her article might run?
I think the article is scheduled for Sunday the 22nd. I met her at Indy Vapor Shop yesterday to do a photo shoot & the video.
Try a different browser...Chrome works.
I also had issues the first two times I tried to get it to load and I was using Chrome. The third time it loaded up fine.
Save the date.
January 17th, the Indy City Council will hear Proposal 18 in the Rules & Public Policy Committee. 5:30 PM.
January 17th, the Indy City Council will hear Proposal 18 in the Rules & Public Policy Committee. 5:30 PM.
The Indianapolis Star ran a full page story today on electronic cigarettes in the health section.
It was very fair and accurate.
Link to part of the story:
E-cigarette users cry foul at proposed city ordinance which would ban 'vaping' in public places | The Indianapolis Star | indystar.com
Several forum members are quoted in the article.
It was very fair and accurate.
Link to part of the story:
E-cigarette users cry foul at proposed city ordinance which would ban 'vaping' in public places | The Indianapolis Star | indystar.com
Several forum members are quoted in the article.
nice article. so what if i bring a fog machine into a public place and use it? no ban on that. But if i inhale that vapor then it is bad
Tonight the Indianapolis City Council Smoking ban goes for a vote.
Quote from the Star:
"The City-County Council is scheduled to vote on a smoking ban proposal at 7 p.m. today in the Public Assembly Room on the second floor of the City-County Building, 200 E. Washington St."
Councilman Vaughn has put forward an amnedment that would remove e-cigarettes from the proposal but Councilwoman Mansfield is trying to go without the amendment. Mayor Ballard say he'll veto it without the amendment for another included component of exempting private clubs (American Legion, VFW).
Here's a link
Indy Mayor Greg Ballard threatens to veto smoking ban set for council vote tonight | The Indianapolis Star | indystar.com
Quote from the Star:
"The City-County Council is scheduled to vote on a smoking ban proposal at 7 p.m. today in the Public Assembly Room on the second floor of the City-County Building, 200 E. Washington St."
Councilman Vaughn has put forward an amnedment that would remove e-cigarettes from the proposal but Councilwoman Mansfield is trying to go without the amendment. Mayor Ballard say he'll veto it without the amendment for another included component of exempting private clubs (American Legion, VFW).
Here's a link
Indy Mayor Greg Ballard threatens to veto smoking ban set for council vote tonight | The Indianapolis Star | indystar.com
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 68
I sent the following letter to all council members. If you haven't done so, please send them a letter ASAP (as they may vote on exempting e-cigarettes and/or the entire ordinance at this evening's meeting). You can also send them a note at Contact Us
From: Bill Godshall
To: Leroy Robinson ; Pamela Hickman ; Zach Adamson ; Benjamin Hunter ; Jeff Miller ; John Barth ; Aaron Freeman ; Jack Sandlin ; Jeff Cardwell ; Jason Holliday ; Frank Mascari ; Vernon Brown ; Mary Moriarty Adams ; Brian Mahern ; Vop Osili ; Marilyn Pfisterer ; Mike McQuillen ; Steve Talley ; William Oliver ; Joseph Simpson ; Monroe Gray ; Janice McHenry ; Virginia Cain ; Christine Scales ; Angela Mansfield ; Jose Evans ; Ryan Vaughn ; Maggie Lewis
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 5:44 PM
Subject: Eliminate e-cigarettes from proposed smoking ban, then enact the ordinance
Indianapolis Marion County Council Members,
Please remove electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) from the proposed smokefree workplace ordinance since e-cigarettes emit NO smoke and pose no harm to nonusers, and because more than a million smokers have quit smoking and/or significantly reduced cigarette consumption by switching to these far less hazardous smokefree alternatives.
Since the proposed smokefree ordinance would ban smoking in just several hundred workplaces (primarily bars) in Marion County (that currently allow smoking), but would ban e-cigarette use in hundreds of thousands of workplaces, the proposed ordinance could do more harm than good for public health unless e-cigarette use is removed from the definition of "smoking".
Besides, it is insincere to falsely define "smoking" as including the use of smokefree e-cigarettes, but that's what the proposed ordinance does.
As one who has campaigned to ban smoking in workplaces for the past 25 years, I've also been urging smokers to switch to e-cigarettes and/or other smokefree tobacco/nicotine products since they are far less hazardous than cigarettes and because they pose no health risks to nonusers (unlike cigarettes). Although some anti tobacco extremists want to ban the use of all tobacco/nicotine products, that is an entirely different matter than banning indoor smoking.
In 2006, I coauthored a comprehensive scientific report "Tobacco harm reduction: an alternative cessation strategy for inveterate smokers" at HRJ | Full text | Tobacco harm reduction: an alternative cessation strategy for inveterate smokers and in 2007 the Royal College of Physicians
issued a similar report "Harm reduction in nicotine addiction; Helping people who can't quit" at
http://www.tobaccoprogram.org/pdf/4fc74817-64c5-4105-951e-38239b09c5db.pdf. Epidemiology studies have consistently found that cigarette smoking poses 100 times greater morbidity and mortality risks than use of smokeless tobacco products in the US and Sweden, and the available evidence indicates that all noncombustible tobacco/nicotine products (including e-cigarettes, nicotine gums, lozenges, patches) are also about 99% less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes.
Smokers who switch to smokefree tobacco/nicotine products reduce their health risks nearly as much as smokers who quit all tobacco/nicotine usage, and several million smokers in the US have already switched to smokeless tobacco products, e-cigarettes and/or NRT products.
More than one million smokers in the US have quit smoking or sharply reduced their cigarette consumption by switching to or substituting smokefree e-cigarettes. To date, there is no evidence that e-cigarette usage has harmed anyone, which is logical since the products emit a tiny amount of vaporized nicotine (similar to nicotine inhalers that are marketed as smoking cessation aids) and water vapor. All of the dozen plus laboratory tests conducted on e-cigarettes found that e-cigarettes emit no hazardous levels of any constitutents, and that levels of nitrosamines in e-cigarettes are nearly identical (i.e. very little if any) to those in nicotine gums and patches.
http://www.healthnz.co.nz/RuyanCartridgeReport30-Oct-08.pdf
http://www.starscientific.com/404/stepanov tsna in.pdf
http://www.healthnz.co.nz/DublinEcigBenchtopHandout.pdf
http://www.casaa.org/files/Study_TSNAs_in_NJOY_Vapor.pdf
Lab Reports / E Liquid Facts / Totally Wicked
http://cdn.johnsoncreeksmokejuice.com/downloads/JCE_GCMS_Report.pdf
http://www.libertystix.com/LibertyStixLabAnalysis072309.pdf
http://truthaboutecigs.com/science/8.pdf
http://www.casaa.org/files/Exponent Response-to-the-FDA-Summary.pdf
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/centers-institutes/population-development/files/article.jphp.pdf
Taylor & Francis Online :: ANALYSIS OF ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE CARTRIDGES, REFILL SOLUTIONS, AND SMOKE FOR NICOTINE AND NICOTINE RELATED IMPURITIES - Journal of Liquid Chromatography & Related Technologies - Volume 34, Issue 14
A Literature Review for Glycerol and Glycols for Entertainment Services & Technology Association also found no health risks to humans http://tsp.plasa.org/tsp/working_groups/FS/docs/HSE.pdf, while new pharmacology, pharmacokinetic and toxicology studies at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300483X11002095 found that laboratory animals were not harmed by very high levels of propylene glycol aerosol.
E-cigarettes also have been found to contain/emit similar or lower levels of nicotine than nicotine gums and lozenges
http://www.healthnz.co.nz/2010 Bullen ECig.pdf and http://www.casaa.org/files/Virgiania Commonwealth University Study.pdf. This indicates that e-cigarettes emit enough to satisfy the cravings of smokers, but may not emit enough nicotine to addict nonsmokers. There is no evidence that any youth or non-tobacco users have become addicted to e-cigarettes.
Many published surveys have confirmed that e-cigarettes satisfy the cravings of smokers, help many smokers quit and/or sharply reduce cigarette consumption, and provide perceived health benefits to users who switched from cigarettes.
Sign In
http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2458-10-231.pdf
THR2010. (tobaccoharmreduction.org) (see chapter 9)
http://ectoh.org/documents/3B.5 Ett...ation satisfaction and perceived efficacy.pdf
http://www.ajpmonline.org/webfiles/images/journals/AMEPRE/AMEPRE3013.pdf
Electronic cigarettes (e-cigs): views of af... [Int J Clin Pract. 2011] - PubMed - NCBI
Electronic Cigarettes
A Japanese study similarly found e-cigarettes to be effective for decreasing cigarette consumption SEIKATSUEISEI : Vol. 55 (2011) , No. 1 p.59-64, while a recent case study found e-cigarettes effective for smoking cessation among depressed patients Paper: Smoking Cessation with E-Cigarettes in Smokers with a Documented History of Depression and Recurring Relapses.
A recent e-cigarette clinical trial on smokers at CASAA.org found that 22.5% of participants remained smokefree after 24 weeks and another 32.5% of participants reduced daily cigarette consumption by 50%, including 12.5% who reduced daily cigarette consumption by 80%.
Former FDA Commissioner David Kessler has also acknowledged the benefits of smokeless tobacco, dissolvables and e-cigarettes as less hazardous alternatives for cigarette smokers at http://www.westport-news.com/busine...-Commissioner-talks-about-tobacco-1735433.php by stating "there's no doubt that in terms of risk of death there are some advantages to that substitution."
Other public health organizations that have extensively studied e-cigarettes have also endorsed their use by smokers, including The American Association of Public Health Physicians Regulations.gov and the American Council on Science and Health NEJM editorial: e-cigarette users should resume smoking for their own good > Facts & Fears > ACSH.
In sharp contrast to indoor smokefree policies/laws (which are largely self enforced because of broad public support), please note that it is also impossible to enforce an e-cigarette usage ban (since the products can be used discreetly without anyone else knowing). By simply waiting two seconds before exhaling, no visible vapor is exhaled by e-cigarette users, and as such, nobody will know that anyone is even using an e-cigarette. Enacting unwarranted and unenforceable regulations also would reduce the public credibility of the Indianopolis Marion County Council.
Once again, please remove the use of e-cigarettes from the proposed ordinance's definition of "smoking", and then enact the smokefree ordinance.
Sincerely,
William T. Godshall, MPH
Executive Director
Smokefree Pennsylvania
1926 Monongahela Avenue
Pittsburgh PA 15218
412-351-5880
smokefree@compuserve.com
From: Bill Godshall
To: Leroy Robinson ; Pamela Hickman ; Zach Adamson ; Benjamin Hunter ; Jeff Miller ; John Barth ; Aaron Freeman ; Jack Sandlin ; Jeff Cardwell ; Jason Holliday ; Frank Mascari ; Vernon Brown ; Mary Moriarty Adams ; Brian Mahern ; Vop Osili ; Marilyn Pfisterer ; Mike McQuillen ; Steve Talley ; William Oliver ; Joseph Simpson ; Monroe Gray ; Janice McHenry ; Virginia Cain ; Christine Scales ; Angela Mansfield ; Jose Evans ; Ryan Vaughn ; Maggie Lewis
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 5:44 PM
Subject: Eliminate e-cigarettes from proposed smoking ban, then enact the ordinance
Indianapolis Marion County Council Members,
Please remove electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) from the proposed smokefree workplace ordinance since e-cigarettes emit NO smoke and pose no harm to nonusers, and because more than a million smokers have quit smoking and/or significantly reduced cigarette consumption by switching to these far less hazardous smokefree alternatives.
Since the proposed smokefree ordinance would ban smoking in just several hundred workplaces (primarily bars) in Marion County (that currently allow smoking), but would ban e-cigarette use in hundreds of thousands of workplaces, the proposed ordinance could do more harm than good for public health unless e-cigarette use is removed from the definition of "smoking".
Besides, it is insincere to falsely define "smoking" as including the use of smokefree e-cigarettes, but that's what the proposed ordinance does.
As one who has campaigned to ban smoking in workplaces for the past 25 years, I've also been urging smokers to switch to e-cigarettes and/or other smokefree tobacco/nicotine products since they are far less hazardous than cigarettes and because they pose no health risks to nonusers (unlike cigarettes). Although some anti tobacco extremists want to ban the use of all tobacco/nicotine products, that is an entirely different matter than banning indoor smoking.
In 2006, I coauthored a comprehensive scientific report "Tobacco harm reduction: an alternative cessation strategy for inveterate smokers" at HRJ | Full text | Tobacco harm reduction: an alternative cessation strategy for inveterate smokers and in 2007 the Royal College of Physicians
issued a similar report "Harm reduction in nicotine addiction; Helping people who can't quit" at
http://www.tobaccoprogram.org/pdf/4fc74817-64c5-4105-951e-38239b09c5db.pdf. Epidemiology studies have consistently found that cigarette smoking poses 100 times greater morbidity and mortality risks than use of smokeless tobacco products in the US and Sweden, and the available evidence indicates that all noncombustible tobacco/nicotine products (including e-cigarettes, nicotine gums, lozenges, patches) are also about 99% less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes.
Smokers who switch to smokefree tobacco/nicotine products reduce their health risks nearly as much as smokers who quit all tobacco/nicotine usage, and several million smokers in the US have already switched to smokeless tobacco products, e-cigarettes and/or NRT products.
More than one million smokers in the US have quit smoking or sharply reduced their cigarette consumption by switching to or substituting smokefree e-cigarettes. To date, there is no evidence that e-cigarette usage has harmed anyone, which is logical since the products emit a tiny amount of vaporized nicotine (similar to nicotine inhalers that are marketed as smoking cessation aids) and water vapor. All of the dozen plus laboratory tests conducted on e-cigarettes found that e-cigarettes emit no hazardous levels of any constitutents, and that levels of nitrosamines in e-cigarettes are nearly identical (i.e. very little if any) to those in nicotine gums and patches.
http://www.healthnz.co.nz/RuyanCartridgeReport30-Oct-08.pdf
http://www.starscientific.com/404/stepanov tsna in.pdf
http://www.healthnz.co.nz/DublinEcigBenchtopHandout.pdf
http://www.casaa.org/files/Study_TSNAs_in_NJOY_Vapor.pdf
Lab Reports / E Liquid Facts / Totally Wicked
http://cdn.johnsoncreeksmokejuice.com/downloads/JCE_GCMS_Report.pdf
http://www.libertystix.com/LibertyStixLabAnalysis072309.pdf
http://truthaboutecigs.com/science/8.pdf
http://www.casaa.org/files/Exponent Response-to-the-FDA-Summary.pdf
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/centers-institutes/population-development/files/article.jphp.pdf
Taylor & Francis Online :: ANALYSIS OF ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE CARTRIDGES, REFILL SOLUTIONS, AND SMOKE FOR NICOTINE AND NICOTINE RELATED IMPURITIES - Journal of Liquid Chromatography & Related Technologies - Volume 34, Issue 14
A Literature Review for Glycerol and Glycols for Entertainment Services & Technology Association also found no health risks to humans http://tsp.plasa.org/tsp/working_groups/FS/docs/HSE.pdf, while new pharmacology, pharmacokinetic and toxicology studies at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300483X11002095 found that laboratory animals were not harmed by very high levels of propylene glycol aerosol.
E-cigarettes also have been found to contain/emit similar or lower levels of nicotine than nicotine gums and lozenges
http://www.healthnz.co.nz/2010 Bullen ECig.pdf and http://www.casaa.org/files/Virgiania Commonwealth University Study.pdf. This indicates that e-cigarettes emit enough to satisfy the cravings of smokers, but may not emit enough nicotine to addict nonsmokers. There is no evidence that any youth or non-tobacco users have become addicted to e-cigarettes.
Many published surveys have confirmed that e-cigarettes satisfy the cravings of smokers, help many smokers quit and/or sharply reduce cigarette consumption, and provide perceived health benefits to users who switched from cigarettes.
Sign In
http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2458-10-231.pdf
THR2010. (tobaccoharmreduction.org) (see chapter 9)
http://ectoh.org/documents/3B.5 Ett...ation satisfaction and perceived efficacy.pdf
http://www.ajpmonline.org/webfiles/images/journals/AMEPRE/AMEPRE3013.pdf
Electronic cigarettes (e-cigs): views of af... [Int J Clin Pract. 2011] - PubMed - NCBI
Electronic Cigarettes
A Japanese study similarly found e-cigarettes to be effective for decreasing cigarette consumption SEIKATSUEISEI : Vol. 55 (2011) , No. 1 p.59-64, while a recent case study found e-cigarettes effective for smoking cessation among depressed patients Paper: Smoking Cessation with E-Cigarettes in Smokers with a Documented History of Depression and Recurring Relapses.
A recent e-cigarette clinical trial on smokers at CASAA.org found that 22.5% of participants remained smokefree after 24 weeks and another 32.5% of participants reduced daily cigarette consumption by 50%, including 12.5% who reduced daily cigarette consumption by 80%.
Former FDA Commissioner David Kessler has also acknowledged the benefits of smokeless tobacco, dissolvables and e-cigarettes as less hazardous alternatives for cigarette smokers at http://www.westport-news.com/busine...-Commissioner-talks-about-tobacco-1735433.php by stating "there's no doubt that in terms of risk of death there are some advantages to that substitution."
Other public health organizations that have extensively studied e-cigarettes have also endorsed their use by smokers, including The American Association of Public Health Physicians Regulations.gov and the American Council on Science and Health NEJM editorial: e-cigarette users should resume smoking for their own good > Facts & Fears > ACSH.
In sharp contrast to indoor smokefree policies/laws (which are largely self enforced because of broad public support), please note that it is also impossible to enforce an e-cigarette usage ban (since the products can be used discreetly without anyone else knowing). By simply waiting two seconds before exhaling, no visible vapor is exhaled by e-cigarette users, and as such, nobody will know that anyone is even using an e-cigarette. Enacting unwarranted and unenforceable regulations also would reduce the public credibility of the Indianopolis Marion County Council.
Once again, please remove the use of e-cigarettes from the proposed ordinance's definition of "smoking", and then enact the smokefree ordinance.
Sincerely,
William T. Godshall, MPH
Executive Director
Smokefree Pennsylvania
1926 Monongahela Avenue
Pittsburgh PA 15218
412-351-5880
smokefree@compuserve.com
Last edited:
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 68
Here's the e-mail list (that can be cut and pasted in your To: line of your e-mail) for those who want to send a quick e-mail to Indy council members.
Comma separated email list:
zach.adamson@indy.gov, jbarth53@hotmail.com, pahickman@gmail.com, leroy.robinson@indy.gov, info@evansforindy.com, angelamansfield@aol.com, vaughnforcouncil@gmail.com, cscales_2000@yahoo.com, CainforCouncil@aol.com, jfmchenry@iquest.net, maggie.lewis@indy.gov, monroe.gray@indy.gov, joseph.simpson@indy.gov, william.oliver@indy.gov, talleyjs@aol.com, mike@mikemcquillen.com, cpfist1061@aol.com, voposili@gmail.com, brian@mahern.net, mmadams@iquest.net, VABrown2022@yahoo.com, jeff030167@indy.rr.com, frank.mascari@indy.gov, bdhunter@sbcglobal.net, jasonholliday131@aol.com, jcardwell@cardwellhomecenter.com, jack.sandlin@att.net, aaronfreemanlaw@gmail.com
Semi-colon separated email list:
zach.adamson@indy.gov; jbarth53@hotmail.com; pahickman@gmail.com; leroy.robinson@indy.gov; info@evansforindy.com; angelamansfield@aol.com; vaughnforcouncil@gmail.com; cscales_2000@yahoo.com; CainforCouncil@aol.com; jfmchenry@iquest.net; maggie.lewis@indy.gov; monroe.gray@indy.gov; joseph.simpson@indy.gov; william.oliver@indy.gov; talleyjs@aol.com; mike@mikemcquillen.com; cpfist1061@aol.com; voposili@gmail.com; brian@mahern.net; mmadams@iquest.net; VABrown2022@yahoo.com; jeff030167@indy.rr.com; frank.mascari@indy.gov; bdhunter@sbcglobal.net; jasonholliday131@aol.com; jcardwell@cardwellhomecenter.com; jack.sandlin@att.net; aaronfreemanlaw@gmail.com
Comma separated email list:
zach.adamson@indy.gov, jbarth53@hotmail.com, pahickman@gmail.com, leroy.robinson@indy.gov, info@evansforindy.com, angelamansfield@aol.com, vaughnforcouncil@gmail.com, cscales_2000@yahoo.com, CainforCouncil@aol.com, jfmchenry@iquest.net, maggie.lewis@indy.gov, monroe.gray@indy.gov, joseph.simpson@indy.gov, william.oliver@indy.gov, talleyjs@aol.com, mike@mikemcquillen.com, cpfist1061@aol.com, voposili@gmail.com, brian@mahern.net, mmadams@iquest.net, VABrown2022@yahoo.com, jeff030167@indy.rr.com, frank.mascari@indy.gov, bdhunter@sbcglobal.net, jasonholliday131@aol.com, jcardwell@cardwellhomecenter.com, jack.sandlin@att.net, aaronfreemanlaw@gmail.com
Semi-colon separated email list:
zach.adamson@indy.gov; jbarth53@hotmail.com; pahickman@gmail.com; leroy.robinson@indy.gov; info@evansforindy.com; angelamansfield@aol.com; vaughnforcouncil@gmail.com; cscales_2000@yahoo.com; CainforCouncil@aol.com; jfmchenry@iquest.net; maggie.lewis@indy.gov; monroe.gray@indy.gov; joseph.simpson@indy.gov; william.oliver@indy.gov; talleyjs@aol.com; mike@mikemcquillen.com; cpfist1061@aol.com; voposili@gmail.com; brian@mahern.net; mmadams@iquest.net; VABrown2022@yahoo.com; jeff030167@indy.rr.com; frank.mascari@indy.gov; bdhunter@sbcglobal.net; jasonholliday131@aol.com; jcardwell@cardwellhomecenter.com; jack.sandlin@att.net; aaronfreemanlaw@gmail.com
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
