As others have reported: Voters in Tooele, Utah soundly rejected fluoridation once again on November 8 (How many times do they have to say no?); as did voters in Xenia, and Springfield, Ohio.
 

Voting in Bellingham, WA is still considered too close to determine after the promoters spent a reported $260,000 in their campaign (How many toothbrushes would that buy?), but is currently tilted to fluoridating.

In Mt Pleasant, I believe that the support for a win for fluoridation on November 8 will be deemed voter fraud, or ultimately stopped as a bait-and-switch, for asking voters to say "Yes"  to delivering a sodium fluoride that has been approved by the FDA in order to get around a water quality ordinance that was approved by voters last year, when in fact the FDA has clarified for Congress that they have never approved any fluorine-containing substance intended to be ingested for the purpose of reducing tooth decay.

Not yet reported: another community has pro-actively enacted a protective water quality ordinance.

With a landslide voter approval of 72% on November 8, the work of Debie Schnadt and others in Mammoth Lakes, California resulted in the passage of the Safe Drinking Water Initiative, a water quality criteria ordinance, that prohibits the addition of any substance to the public drinking water that is intended to treat people that has not been specifically approved for safety and effectiveness by the U.S. FDA for the full range of human consumption for all adverse and cosmetic effects, as well as restricting contaminants of the health treatment additives to concentrations not to exceed California Public Health Goals and U.S. Maximum Contaminant Level Goals, the scientifically derived points of safety for lifetime ingestion.

As the local newspaper is a weekly, we do not have an immediate media report.