If Monday night’s Knox County Commission meeting demonstrated anything, it is that Commissioner Andy Fox apparently shouldn’t expect the same courtesy from some commissioners that they previously asked Commission to extend to them.
The issue was a workforce-housing development in South Knox County and a 20-year PILOT — payment in lieu of taxes — that would provide a property-tax incentive for the development.
Commissioner Fox represents the Ninth District, where the project is located. Fox said opposition from his constituents was unmistakable.
“There has been nothing but unequivocal, outspoken opposition from the citizens of District 9,” Fox said.
Yet when the votes were counted, Fox and the citizens he represents came up short.
Commissioners Angela Russell, Rhonda Lee and Adam Thompson joined Fox in voting against the proposal.
Voting FOR it were Democrats Damon Rawls, Courtney Durrett and Shane Jackson, along with Republicans Terry Hill, Larsen Jay, Vice-Chair Kim Frazier and Chair Gina Oster.
The final vote was 7-4.
But the most revealing part of the discussion may have been the exchange between Fox and Jackson.
Jackson defended the PILOT by arguing that Knox County routinely provides incentives to companies that bring jobs into the county and that government also has an obligation to provide housing.
“To me, this is not a handout to a developer,” Jackson said. “We are giving a discount, a PILOT, on the property taxes, which is passed along to the tenants who are renting this.”
Fox then reminded Jackson of something that happened much closer to Jackson’s own political backyard.
Last year, Jackson was dealing with a high-density rezoning in his West Knox County district. Jackson asked his fellow commissioners to listen to him as the elected representative of the people most directly affected.
Fox did.
Despite Fox’s personal opposition to high-density zoning, he supported Jackson on the rezoning.
Monday night, Fox essentially asked: Why doesn’t that same principle apply when the issue is in South Knox County?
“You requested that the rest of Commission listen to what you had to say about the issue,” Fox reminded Jackson. “You implored the rest of Commission to pay attention because you were the best representative to say what is best for your district.”
That is where things became interesting.
Jackson responded:
“My votes are not quid pro quo.”
Nobody said they had to be.
But Jackson’s response raises an obvious political question: If a commissioner asks colleagues to respect his knowledge of and responsibility to his district, shouldn’t he be willing to extend that same consideration when another commissioner makes essentially the same request?
Apparently not Monday night.
It brings to mind the political reputation for “flip-flopping” famously attached to former Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry: one standard in one circumstance and another when the political situation changes.
And there is another dynamic Knox County taxpayers should be watching.
Three Democrats Become Four
For the past two years, Democrats Damon Rawls, Courtney Durrett and Shane Jackson have represented three of the 11 seats on Knox County Commission.
On divided votes, those three Democratic votes can become especially important when joined by Republicans willing to create a cross-party majority.
Beginning today, September 1, that Democratic bloc grows from three commissioners to four.
Brandon Huckaby takes office representing the Third District, joining Rawls, Durrett and Jackson.
Republicans still hold a 7-4 majority on the new Commission.
But a 7-4 numerical majority doesn’t necessarily mean much if four Democrats can consistently attract two or more Republicans on closely divided questions.
And that brings us to today’s reorganization of the Knox County Commission.
Commission will choose its leadership for the coming year.
Watch the votes.
Will Rawls, Durrett, Jackson and newcomer Huckaby vote together?
Will lame-duck Commissioner Terry Hill join them?
Will another Republican provide the sixth vote necessary to elect a Commission chair who might not otherwise have the support of a majority of the Republican commissioners?
Jackson says his votes aren’t “quid pro quo.”
Fair enough.
But voters and taxpayers have every right to watch voting patterns and decide for themselves whether alliances, accommodations and political partnerships are developing inside the Commission.
Because “quid pro quo” literally means something for something.
That doesn’t automatically mean anything improper has occurred. Political bodies are built on coalitions, compromises and competing interests.
But consistency matters too.
If commissioners expect their colleagues to respect the wishes of residents in their districts, they should expect voters to notice when they refuse to extend that same consideration to somebody else’s district.
Monday night, Andy Fox reminded Shane Jackson of precisely that.
Today, with four Democrats now sitting on the Knox County Commission, we get another opportunity to watch who votes with whom — and perhaps learn a little more about how Knox County’s new governing coalition intends to operate.
#TheMegaBullhornofTruth will be watching.
