Thanks to many thoughtful people contacting our State Senators the bill to eliminate the county Growth Plan has been sent for study to TACIR (Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations). Senator Briggs told his fellow senators that the matter is more complex than at first thought and it merits more study. The committee (Local and State Government) voted to ask TACIR study the matter and make recommendations.

Many thanks to all of you who contacted our senators.

Followers –
Please take a look at this enlightening article from today’s Compass.

When the County mayor’s plan to weaken the Knox County Growth Plan by amendment failed, a pro-development commissioner suggested a new approach.

The hour was running late at last Tuesday’s work session of the Knox County Commission when the body turned its attention to agenda item 56: “Discussion item regarding the process of Knox County having their own Planning Office/Board.”
How can Knox County best prepare for and guide its future growth?
The issue was raised by Commissioner Brad Anders, who represents the fast-growing 6th District, home to Karns and Hardin Valley in the northwestern corner of the county. He was talking about possibly changing the way the Knoxville-Knox County Planning Commission is structured.
“I think we need a board that has the county in mind,” Anders told his colleagues. “I think we should always think regionally, but sometimes we’ve got to think for ourselves.”
The conversation Tuesday night was brief, with no particular resolution. Anders said he planned to meet with county Law Director Bud Armstrong to review legal options, which he would bring back to Commission.
But it raised questions about how Commission can best respond to issues that most of its members have repeatedly cited as major concerns: updating planning countywide, making sure that infrastructure is able to accommodate new growth, and balancing a push for more development with the protection of rural areas and natural resources.
Kim Frazier, a longtime advocate for better planning and infrastructure in Hardin Valley and a founding member of the citizens’ group Knox County Planning Alliance, said in an email last week, “I am open to hearing and considering their thought process behind the suggestion of splitting the Planning Commission, as long as they are willing to consider that the structure of the planning body and the plans that are produced by the Planning Commission may not be the problem.”
A Joint Commission
What was previously called the Metropolitan Planning Commission was established in Knox County in 1956, under a state law that enables the creation of regional planning commissions.
Since then, the agency has served both the city and county governments, with a 15-member Planning Commission made up of eight citizens appointed by the county mayor and seven appointed by the city mayor.
The agency is funded by annual contributions from both the city and county, along with user fees and federal grants (which primarily fund the regional Transportation Planning Organization). You can see a budget breakdown here.
Its staff prepares long-term general and sector plans for all parts of the city and county, with the exception of Farragut, which created its own Municipal Planning Commission after incorporating in 1980. The staff also reviews subdivision and development plans and requests for rezoning, and makes recommendations on them to the Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission’s recommendations in turn go to City Council and County Commission, either of which can (and sometimes do) override the planning body.
The state’s three other large urban counties have variations on the same arrangement. Metro Nashville has a unified Planning Department, in keeping with its combined city-county government. Shelby County has a Land Use Control Board with 10 members, five each appointed by the mayor of Memphis and the Shelby County mayor. And the Chattanooga-Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission is nearly identical to Knox County’s set-up.
In a follow-up interview to last Tuesday’s discussion, Anders said he thinks the current planning body is more oriented toward the city than the areas outside it.
“Every time we ask why they’re doing something, they say, ‘Well, we refer back to the city,’ or, ‘This is what the city does,’” he said.
But he said he was less interested in creating a completely separate agency than a separate planning commission made up only of county appointees. He suggested, for example, that there could be a nine-member body made up of one appointee from each County Commission district.
Anders and fellow Commissioner Randy Smith have been outspoken about wanting to roll back the state-mandated Growth Policy Plan that currently imposes development limits on designated rural areas. They argue that it is actually encouraging sprawl by prohibiting denser development where it makes sense.
But Anders said his goal is not just to allow more development everywhere. “I want a pro-county planning commission, not a pro-developer planning commission,” he said.
Smith made a similar argument Tuesday night.
“I know a lot of people look at me and they think I’m the ‘Build everywhere’ guy. I am not,” Smith said. “I am for smart growth. And we need to take charge of our own destiny to make sure we can provide that to the citizens of this county for the next 10 years, and the next 20, and the next 30.”
Growing Problems
Not everyone agrees that the planning agency is an obstacle in that effort. On Tuesday night, Anders expressed frustration with two issues outside the planning body’s control: the county’s efforts to loosen restrictions under the Growth Policy Plan and its decision to not include rural areas in a newly created “Planned Development” ordinance, that would allow developers some leeway in overriding existing zoning.
But the Growth Policy Plan is mandated by state law, not the Planning Commission, and it was the Town of Farragut’s Board of Mayor and Aldermen that put the brakes last month on County Mayor Glenn Jacobs’ proposal to loosen it.
And Gerald Green, executive director of Knoxville-Knox County Planning, noted that both planning staff and the Planning Commission had recommended including rural areas in the Planned Development ordinance. County Commission itself voted to remove them, at the request of members of the Knox County Planning Alliance.
Green also said that issues on the Planning Commission rarely break down along strictly city-county lines.
“Often when there’s a split vote, it’s some county appointees on either side and some city appointees on either side,” he said.
Commissioner John Schoonmaker, whose 5th District includes Farragut and Concord just south of Anders’ district, said last week he hadn’t had time to dig into Anders’ ideas. (He’s busy running for re-election in the March 3 Republican primary.) But he said the issues could maybe be addressed at the agency’s staff level, by having some planners specifically designated to handle and think about growth issues outside city limits.
“Even if you had a couple planners who just did county, and a couple planners who just did city, I could see that,” he said.
Green said that logistically, his staff could probably serve two different planning commissions, if the county elected to go that route. They’re already used to administering the separate city and county zoning ordinances.
But he said what the county really needs is an updated General Plan and a clear sense of where it wants to go, in terms of its growth and infrastructure.
“I think what they really need is a vision for the county,” Green said.
That has also been the position of the Knox County Planning Alliance. Alliance member Diane Montgomery, a member of the Northshore Corridor Association, said of Anders, “Shouldn’t he be conferring first with the other parties involved to see if there is another, more effective and cost efficient path forward — for example revising the Growth Plan maps -— together, as has already been suggested by the Farragut aldermen?”
Abbey Harris, a spokeswoman for Jacobs, said the county mayor didn’t have a position on Anders’ suggestion of a separate county planning commission, “but is open to any discussion regarding planning.”
Next Steps?
Anders said he would explore the legalities of changing the organization of the Planning Commission.
It appears that it would require amending the interlocal agreement between the city and county governments that governs the planning agency. There would probably also have to be some level of state approval.
Christina Magráns, a staff attorney with the City of Knoxville, said in an email that the agreement can be changed by a vote of both City Council and County Commission. But, she added, “It is important to note, though, that if the County wanted to dissolve the current Planning Commission and create a new one, the State Department of Economic and Community Development and the State Local Government Planning Advisory Commission likely would have to review and approve the change.”
Meanwhile, one thing that is clear and uncontestable about growth in Knox County is that it’s happening.
In the 2010 U.S. Census, the county’s population was 432,226. This year’s Census will provide a definitive update, but estimates based on sample surveys in the intervening years put the current count at about 465,000 — the equivalent of adding a town of 30,000 people, the size of Oak Ridge, to the county during the past decade.
Current projections for future growth prepared by the Boyd Center for Business and Economic Research estimate the population to clear a half-million people by 2030 and 540,000 by 2040.
Those trends could be affected by any number of things, from economic downturns to natural disasters to worldwide plagues, but assuming they continue on their current tracks, the county faces a few fundamental questions: Where will they all live? And what impact will they have on the resources and infrastructure of the surrounding communities?
In addressing those, Frazier, of the Planning Alliance, said, “I think that all perspectives should be considered including the long history of decisions to ignore and or dismiss the guidelines and recommendations set forth in the plans; the idea that changes or formations of ordinances could also provide desired outcomes such as mixed use and clustered development; agricultural areas could benefit from higher density allotments with specific use determinations; and that county planning affects both city and county residents.”
She added that she didn’t think any of that would necessarily require structural changes of the kind Anders is proposing. “I believe that under our current leadership we can effectively determine processes that take into account the best interests of all Knox County residents,” she said.

Many comments from NCA followers express frustration – a sense that those in power are not serving Knox County citizen needs.

THE REAL POWER IS WITH THE VOTERS. Please go and cast your vote.

County Commission and Planning meetings are broadcast on the public access channel. All meetings are open to the public. County websites announce the meetings in advance.

On Tuesday a bill will be considered in the state legislature to ELIMINATE the Knox County Growth Plan! This is a bad bill, pushed by a handful of politicians and developers that removes citizen control of their own communities and opens the door wide for rampant over-development.

WE NEED YOU TO CONTACT THE MEMBERS to let them know KNOX COUNTY RESIDENTS OPPOSE SB 2221 the ill-conceived bill that would remove restrictions (i.e. density) on use of most remaining land in Knox County.

Please write the legislators below with 2-3 quick sentences. Ask them to Vote No on HB2306/SB2221!

sen.steven.dickerson@capitol.tn.gov
sen.richard.briggs@capitol.tn.gov
sen.todd.gardenhire@capitol.tn.gov
sen.ed.jackson@capitol.tn.gov
sen.brian.kelsey@capitol.tn.gov
sen.shane.reeves@capitol.tn.gov
Sen.Dawn.White@capitol.tn.gov
sen.ken.yager@capitol.tn.gov
sen.jeff.yarbro@capitol.tn.gov
rep.dale.carr@capitol.tn.gov
rep.john.crawford@capitol.tn.gov
rep.yusuf.hakeem@capitol.tn.gov
rep.mark.hall@capitol.tn.gov
rep.esther.helton@capitol.tn.gov
rep.gloria.johnson@capitol.tn.gov
rep.bob.ramsey@capitol.tn.gov

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1osKEY-X56PC6zqIIysDMUy0HQqlPsPCSOigLcH95x9U/edit?fbclid=IwAR05tnsMNys3gsZMs-EldOajkO1R3K5tXxepjEjE2hPD2z2Igs7_u9lt1-A#gid=0

Supporters,

As mentioned we have been reaching out to the candidates. On several occasions, we have reached out to Clayton Wood via his Facebook page Clayton for Commission. There we have posted a set of questions, following up on his interview with Jesse Mayshark of Compass. We were inquiring about Mr. Wood’s positions on the Knox County Growth Plan and on his participation/attendance at commission, planning and BZA meetings as well as other matters. Each time, we posted our questions disappeared without response. This morning we reposted those and received a response (see it here at the end of this post).

Early voting for the Republican primary is in progress. We strongly urge you to vote.

Some of you have asked which candidates we support. As an organization, we are not endorsing candidates but are providing the information we have so you can choose.

Last year a group of dedicated professionals, city planners, engineers, former county officials and others became concerned about zoning and land use issues in Knox County when the then new mayor proposed to remove key provisions of the county’s Growth Plan.

It was commonly believed the mayor was being pressured by a group of aggressive developers and that he might not fully understand the complex set of protections and rules governing development nor the consequences of removing the vital protections for taxpayers and property owners.

The group believed that if the mayor’s proposal were successful a chaotic, wild wild west of unplanned, unregulated development would occur. The consequences to the county would be irreversible. To help the mayor avoid a bad mistake, the volunteers donated hundreds of hours researching, documenting and outlining a better path. They presented the mayor a fair, cogent, alternative plan. The mayor continued to pursue elimination of the key restrictions of the Growth Plan. There is now proposed legislation pending in Nashville to completely eliminate Knox County’s Growth Plan along with those across the state.

Below is the volunteer group’s plan for updating and revising the Knox County Growth Plan.

ETCPA Position on Proposed Growth Policy Plan Amendment
April 18, 2019

East Tennessee Community Planning Alliance (“ETCPA”) is a coalition of citizens and community group representatives that advocate effective planning for future growth in Knox County, Tennessee. We support thoughtful planning processes that take into account the
concerns of all stakeholders, the cumulative impacts of development, and the need for fiscally-responsible plans for future growth. If adopted, the proposed Growth Policy Plan (“GPP”) amendment1 would:
1. Transfer control of zones allowed in the Rural Area to the Sector Plans;
2. Remove density limits for Planned Residential; and
3. Eliminate requirements for cumulative traffic impact analysis.
ETCPA is extremely concerned about delegating long-term planning to the Sector Plan process, a process that sees amendments approved almost monthly at MPC and County Commission. ETCPA supports the decision to reconvene the Growth Plan Coordinating Committee (“GPCC”) but recommends the following approach:
● Alter the proposed amendment. Reinstate the Plan without deleting sections 3.2 – 3.6. This maintains the status quo and eliminates the confusing legal status of the mandatory and optional portions of the Plan.
● Update the 1999 Land Capability Analysis2 with current data . This report provides information on projected population growth, development and economic activity, agricultural and constrained land, and projected land usage requirements. It is woefully out-of-date for current planning purposes.
● Develop replacements for the lengthy vision and aspirational sections of the GPP. In particular, streamline the mandatory policies, especially in light of Tennessee annexation law changes.
● Require fiscal impact analysis . For rezonings and concept plans filed in the Rural Area, require a fiscal impact analysis to determine the cost of extending transportation, utilities, schools, parks, and other services to that area.
● Assess the current PGA and Rural Area boundaries and update if appropriate.
● Provide robust protections for the Rural Area to protect agriculture, set aside land for future economic development, while concentrating current economic, commercial, and residential development into designated Planned Growth (“PGA”) areas.
1
https://knoxgov.net/…/2019.2.28%20-%20Mayor%20Jacobs%20Requ…
ties%20Convene%20to%20Discuss%20Knoxville-Farragut-KnoxCountygrowth.pdf
2 https://archive.knoxmpc.org/…/L4-K75E_MPC_Land%20Capability…
ETCPA Position Paper on Proposed Growth Policy Plan Amendment – Page 1
● Amend and adopt an updated and streamlined GPP, and then update and streamline the Knoxville – Knox County General Plan.
● Revisit the Growth Policy Plan every three to five (3-5) years. We believe the updated Growth Plan, if properly done, will:
● Provide certainty to the market, developers, businesses, government, and citizens. This allows developers to focus on realistic projects, while residents can focus on building communities and their own businesses, instead of fighting developers and land speculators. Strong planning and zoning helps businesses and residents feel confident that their investment will be protected – with other high quality developments, and with infrastructure and community amenities (schools, parks) that are not oversubscribed.
● Encourage business development instead of real estate development. Real estate development converts our remaining land resources into profits for the developer, without regard to the long-term viability of the area for the citizens.
● Protect Knox County soils and agriculture, which – as noted below – contribute $3.0 billion a year in economic impact. Once land is developed, it won’t return to agriculture.
● Stabilize the county’s financial model by focusing growth dollars (transportation, schools, emergency services, stormwater) in higher density, planned growth area projects and containing expenditure growth in the Rural Area.
● Increase affordable housing by concentrating all housing closer to places of employment, which results in lower commuting costs for residents.

Why is the Growth Policy Plan Important?
The GPP provides a high level, 20-year direction about where development is encouraged, and what constraints are placed on areas we consciously set-aside for forest, agriculture, wilderness, and potentially future growth. It gives developers, planners, government officials, and citizens a level of certainty. When the rules and framework are clearly laid out and followed, markets perform more predictably (and less speculatively). The GPP is the only document and process that brings together many key stakeholders across
the county: Knox County government, City of Knoxville, Town of Farragut, major utility providers, schools, economic development (Chamber of Commerce), agriculture and environment (Soil Conservation District), and citizens. It provides the framework for development that all of the other, more detailed plans can leverage – for example, utility, school, and transportation planning. The plan is based on detailed analysis, not the latest political leanings of each legislative body. But, it is an expression of local control – all of the Coordinating Committee members are local citizens, and the plan’s approval is through the local legislative bodies. ETCPA Position Paper on Proposed Growth Policy Plan Amendment – Page 2

A robust growth plan aids both economic development and conservative fiscal planning. Businesses and employers considering where to do business prefer communities with strong, effective planning that offers them predictability needed for their cost models, and provides quality of life that attracts employees. Conservative fiscal planning by local government officials is only possible if they can anticipate where and when new or expanded public services will be needed.

Problems and Potential Solutions
Our GPP has not worked for several reasons:
1. It is a 20 year planning document, adopted in 2001, and has never been updated.
2. The GPP provisions for the Rural Area don’t encourage conservation. Allowing one du/acre in Agricultural-zoned land simply creates large-lot residential sprawl. As for specifying agricultural conservation – there is only one parcel, of 131 acres, in the entire county with a Sector Plan designation of “Agricultural Conservation”, and no property is yet zoned “Rural Preservation.”
3. It contains many policy and vision statements that are duplicated in the General Plan, thus making it unwieldy to update either document. (To avoid conflict, you have to make updates in two places, using two different amendment processes.) The Proposed Amendment, if enacted, will do more harm than good. It will:
1. Rely on the General Plan and Sector Plans, which are primarily vision and guidance documents. The plans contain numerous recommendations, but very few “shall” and “must” statements that MPC and county commission must comply with.
2. Place full control of the allowed zones, and density, of the Rural Area in the hands of the County Commission through the Sector Plan process. This leaves out key stakeholders, such as schools and utilities. Plan amendments can occur any month, increasing the involvement level of any parties that wish to participate in long-range planning.
3. Create uncertainty. Developers and businesses abhor uncertainty and instability. Rural area development policies can be changed at the whim of an applicant and the County Commission. This politicizes a decision-making process and creates instability for government and utility budget planning.

What’s this Really About?
Scattershot Development is Expensive for Knox County Government
Development in Knox County is leapfrogging; it is not meshing with planned improvements of transportation, utilities, schools, emergency services, and public parks. Scattershot development in the Rural Area makes new and heavy demands on local government and
utilities, straining their budgets and competing for funding with projects in the Planned Growth Area. Taxpayers and ratepayers – not the developer – bear the infrastructure costs for new or enlarged roads, schools, emergency services, parks, and utilities.
ETCPA Position Paper on Proposed Growth Policy Plan Amendment – Page 3

The development pressure in the Rural Area comes from single family residential development, not commercial enterprises that bring jobs, higher property tax revenue, and additional sales tax revenue. Today the county is operating a real estate development model rather than an economic development model. The real estate development model consumes large swaths of land and actually works against business development – it consumes land that could be used by revenue-producing agriculture or reserved for future economic development. Reusing existing land, buildings, and infrastructure is more cost efficient. While homebuilders may market their ability to build houses less expensively at higher density, this doesn’t create affordable housing. It’s actually less affordable:
– For the residents: who pay more in increased transportation costs (time, fuel).
– For the government, schools, and utilities: which actually end up spending more for each person in a single family residence than it receives from property and sales tax revenue.
Related to affordability – the cost of transportation. According to the MPC 2017 Workforce Housing Report by MPC , most county residents spend more than the 3 recommended 15% of income on transportation costs. More than 95% of residents living in the Northeast Sector commute to a place of work outside that sector4, yet this is an area the homebuilders are looking to develop in the next ten (10) years.
3 https://knoxmpc.org/…/Technical-Report-Series-Workforce-Hou…
4 2015 Northeast County Sector Plan, page 1 , https://archive.knoxmpc.org/northeastcounty/necounty.pdf
ETCPA Position Paper on Proposed Growth Policy Plan Amendment – Page 4

Developing in the Rural Area also reduces land available for agriculture. The 2015 UT Extension Service analysis estimated the agricultural economic impact in Knox County was $1.9 billion, and with multiplier effects, a total of $3.0 billion . During the same 5 period, there were 4,940 workers directly employed in agriculture in Knox County, and with multiplier effects, an estimated 12,807 jobs. Since 2001, 3,208 acres of land have been rezoned to non-Agricultural uses in the Rural Area. 1,210 acres of that were soils that are Prime Farmland or Locally Important – soils that are permanently lost. In the same time period, in the Planned Growth Area, another 3,164 acres of prime farmland and locally important soils were rezoned away from Ag.

Conclusion
The proposed amendment can be modified to reaffirm and reinstate the Growth Plan without modifying sections 3.2-3.6. After this amendment is approved, then there is an opportunity to thoughtfully revise and update the Growth Plan. A Growth Plan, regularly updated, with input from all governments, utilities, schools, and the community will help:
● Provide certainty to the budgets for governments, schools, and utilities;
● Shift our growth from developing real estate to developing businesses and our economy;
● Protect Knox County soils and agriculture; and
● Increase affordable housing by concentrating all housing closer to places of
employment, which results in lower commuting costs for residents.
5 https://extension.tennessee.edu/…/ANRCE…/KnoxCounty_W595.pdf
ETCPA Position Paper on Proposed Growth Policy Plan Amendment – Page 5

We hope you will read the interviews below by Jesse Mayshark of Compass. An important contrast between the two candidates is their positions on the Knox County Growth Plan NCA feels is critical to orderly planned growth while protecting neighborhoods. Take a look.

Primary 2020: 5th Commission District
In Farragut and Concord, an incumbent with roots in homeowners’ groups faces an energetic and well-funded challenger.

BY JESSE FOX MAYSHARK • FEBRUARY 11, 2020

CLAYTON WOOD, LEFT, IS RUNNING AGAINST INCUMBENT JOHN SCHOONMAKER IN THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARY.

Knox County’s 5th District is in the densely populated southwestern corner of the county, taking in most of the area west of Pellissippi Parkway between the Tennessee River and Interstate 40.

Growth and infrastructure are on the minds of many West Knox voters.
It includes all of incorporated Farragut, as well as the Concord area stretching along Northshore Drive by the river. It is among the most affluent areas of the county, with median household incomes ranging from the mid-$60,000s up to nearly $140,000 in some areas near the Loudon County line.

John Schoonmaker has represented the district on County Commission since 2015, when he was appointed by Commission to serve out the remainder of Richard Briggs’ term, after Briggs was elected to the state Senate.

Schoonmaker, whose political roots are in the powerful Council of West Knox County Homeowners, easily won re-election to a full term in 2016. His initial partial term doesn’t count against him under the county’s term limits law, so he is seeking a second full term this year.

He is facing a vigorous Republican primary challenge from political newcomer Clayton Wood, a pastor and lawyer who runs the nonprofit organization Thrive Lonsdale and has raised a lot of money, including from some GOP heavy-hitters. The winner of the primary will face Democrat Kimerly Peterson in the Aug. 6 general election.

Schoonmaker: Eyes on the Roads

Schoonmaker was already a familiar face in county civic life when Commission appointed him to fill out Briggs’ term in 2015.

Schoonmaker settled with his family in the 5th District in the 1980s, after moving to Knoxville for a job. He worked in sales, first for a furniture manufacturer and then later for a binocular manufacturer.

His road into local politics began like many before, through involvement with his local neighborhood group, in this case a homeowners’ association. From there he eventually ended up as an officer of the Council of West Knox County Homeowners, a group that has been advocating for area residents since 1971. He was president of the organization for 12 years.

“We helped homeowners and homeowners’ associations navigate through Knox County government,” Schoonmaker, who is 65, said in an interview at Vienna Coffee House in the Regas Building. “We dealt with a lot of zoning issues that were coming around.”

As a homeowners’ representative, he was deeply involved in the long process of formulating the county’s Growth Policy Plan, which was mandated by state law in the late 1990s. The plan, which had to be approved by Commission, Knoxville City Council, and the Farragut Board of Mayor and Aldermen, has been in the news again in the past year as County Mayor Glenn Jacobs has sought to amend it.

Growth and its consequences are much on the minds of 5th District residents, who see daily traffic back-ups on roads from Northshore to Campbell Station.

“I think our biggest problem now is our road infrastructure,” Schoonmaker said. He noted that it took three years to get a $7 million improvement to Canton Hollow Road through the county’s capital spending plan, and that’s just one of many needs in and around the district.

“We have got to do something with Campbell Station interchange north to Hardin Valley, but the problem is, there’s been no action taken,” he said.

Schoonmaker said he’s not anti-growth or development, but he thinks the county has to do a better job of balancing growth with existing infrastructure and resources.

“I’m a firm believer, as most people are in Tennessee, that you have a right to sell your property,” he said. “The next part of that is, it’s got to be within the guidelines of what it’s zoned for. If a development is zoned for three homes per acre, and it has been that way, then that makes sense to me. But what happens now is the developers are coming in and saying they have to have five. Well, then again you’re back to the infrastructure.”

Schoonmaker often votes on the side of homeowners when there are zoning disputes with developers. Recently, for example, he reversed course on a provision he had originally supported to allow a microbrewery into a Neighborhood Commercial zone. He said he was concerned that a late-night bar could create a disturbance for nearby residents.

He has sometimes ended up voting with a coalition of commissioners in support of Law Director Bud Armstrong in Armstrong’s legal disagreements with Jacobs. But Schoonmaker said he’s not part of any faction, and he scoffed at the idea that he is beholden to Knoxville Focus publisher Steve Hunley, a staunch Armstrong supporter. “He doesn’t own a newspaper in the Farragut district,” Schoonmaker said of Hunley.

He is active in the Tennessee County Commissioners Association and chairs Commission’s Government Affairs Committee, which often places him in a liaison role with the county’s state legislators. If re-elected, he said he would continue pushing for a bill at the state level he has been working on for a few years, which would return a portion of the state fee imposed for sales tax collection to local cities and counties.

He is also eager to see the results of the state’s new approach to collecting and distributing online sales tax, which Schoonmaker believes will be a boon to Knox County. He thinks the county should consider designating new revenue from online sales to a special infrastructure fund.

“Say that new portion should go towards engineering and public works, whatever we need to do,” he said. “It shouldn’t just be, let’s throw it over here and spend it for whatever.”

In his Jan. 31 financial disclosure, Schoonmaker reported that he had raised no money for his re-election. He had $1,245 on hand from prior funds.

Wood: Following a Calling

In contrast, Wood reported raising $15,425 in last month’s financial disclosure. Donors included Haslam family member David Colquitt, developer Scott Davis and former school board Chair Doug Harris, as well as investor Jordan Mollenhour, Wood’s campaign treasurer.

Wood graduated from college at the age of 19 and sometimes it seems like he’s barely slowed down since. A conversation with him at First Watch on Lovell Road was wide-ranging and fast-paced.

He grew up in Sevier County’s Wears Valley, where his parents ran — and still run — Wears Valley Ranch, a Christian children’s home and school. His father is a pastor with a daily radio show on SiriusXm.

After Wood’s early graduation from the University of Tennessee, a high score on the LSAT entrance exam was enough to convince him to try law school.

“I borrowed a pencil to take the LSAT,” he said with a laugh. “My mom actually signed me up for it. I was a senior English lit major.”

He attended Washington & Lee University in Virginia, where he nurtured an interest in constitutional law. This was partly thanks to a friend of his parents who became a professional mentor: attorney Jay Sekulow, who has been in the news a lot lately as one of President Donald Trump’s personal lawyers. (He helped lead the president’s defense in the just-concluded Senate impeachment trial.)

After law school, Wood said, he worked in various capacities for Sekulow for 10 years. He started as a sort of office assistant and took on duties that over time included writing briefs for major cases.

“Jay’s won a ton of Supreme Court cases, I was involved in a few of them,” Wood said. “I loved it.”

He helped Sekulow open an office in Nashville, which is where Wood met his wife, Danielle. They now have five children, ages 3 to 10.

A stint with a tech company in Atlanta followed, and then Wood’s career took an unexpected turn. Partly because of his parents’ experience running the children’s home, he was recruited to work in international children’s care, advising organizations and orphanages around the world.

“God sent me to do that,” Wood said plainly. He traveled extensively, often in poor countries in Africa and Asia. “It was just, over and over, going where I didn’t think I was going to go, where I really, in my flesh, didn’t want to go, and then seeing that God was using that time in a really beautiful way.”

From that job, it wasn’t much of a stretch to Thrive Lonsdale. Wood was already volunteering at the Christian organization, which runs after-school and summer programs for low-income students in the Lonsdale neighborhood.

He took the reins as executive director in 2012, when the organization was struggling to maintain a $200,000 budget. Now, he said, it has a $1.2 million budget and 16 full-time employees, and it serves 180 children in Lonsdale and in a smaller program in Parkridge.

The ministry offers homework help, snacks and Bible study, with programming tailored to all grade levels from elementary to high schools. In his eight years with Thrive, Wood said with satisfaction, “We’ve had no kids arrested from our program.”

His civic engagement came initially from all the contacts with local officials he made in the course of his work in Lonsdale. Although Thrive receives no public money, Wood is active as an advocate for the neighborhood.

County Commission first piqued his interest more from a legal than a pastoral standpoint. He was bothered by Law Director Bud Armstrong’s lawsuit challenging the county pension system; Wood supported Jacobs’ efforts to dismiss the suit.

“If you want to know one of the ways we could save money in our county, it’s by not suing ourselves,” Wood said during a Commission candidates’ public forum at the News Sentinel last week.

He also supports Jacobs’ efforts to amend the county’s growth plan, which he said would lead to more efficient, less sprawling development. In talking to 5th District voters, he said he’s gotten a good sense of their priorities.

“Low taxes, good schools and infrastructure,” Wood said. “Those are the consistent themes that people talk about.”

He adds a shout-out for another county amenity: “The library system is just a jewel, and I love it,” he said. “My kids literally every week are in our libraries. Every single week.”

One thing Wood said he is not running to do is be an evangelical voice on Commission. Although he spoke strongly in favor of religious release time at the Knox County school board’s December meeting, Wood said that was because he thought people were misconstruing the legalities of the issue.

“I’m not eager to make that a big platform for county government,” he said of his pastoral work. “Part of that has to do even with job (recruitment). Corporate culture is pretty hostile to Christianity, and will increasingly be. It’s not the right place and time. It’s like, my calling is over here, my nonprofit doesn’t take any money from the government. On the other side over there, I think the government has important roles that are vital and matter a lot.”

With more rain headed our way today and the rest of the week, Knox County Engineering and Public Works alongside First Utility District, are at Keller Bend Road installing temporary piping to help lower Bluegrass Lake.

https://www.facebook.com/MayorGlennJacobs/videos/185856869299923/?t=15