City of Knoxville: Vote Against Charter Amendment No. 2

If Approved, This Amendment Would Effectively Eliminate District-Level Representation On The Knoxville City Council.

Image Credit: Canva

Submitted by Jennifer Hay [Knoxville Nobility] –

In addition to candidate elections, voters in the City of Knoxville will see two proposed amendments to the City’s charter on their ballots. I don’t have a strong opinion on the first amendment, but voters should definitely vote against Charter Amendment No. 2.

Both amendments on the ballot pertain to how members are elected to the Knoxville City Council, which comprises three “at-large” seats and six district seats. Council members serve four-year terms.

Charter Amendment No. 1 would align the election schedule for the Fifth District to that of the other districts by invoking a one-time, two-year term for that council member, followed thereafter by regular four-year terms. (Presently, elections for the Fifth District are held along with those for the three “at-large” seats.)

Charter Amendment No. 2 seeks to make all city-council members—even those who represent specific districts—elected city-wide. If this amendment is approved, a candidate who seeks to represent District X must live in District X, but he or she must campaign city-wide and win a majority of votes from all city residents, not just the residents of District X. In fact, such a candidate would not have to win a majority of votes from his own district.

If Charter Amendment No. 2 is rejected, then the council member representing District X will be elected only by residents of District X, in both the primary and general elections. The three “at-large” seats will continue to be elected city-wide.

Democracy works best when representatives have to answer directly to the people they represent. Charter Amendment No. 2 would make district city-council members answerable to every voter in the city, thus diluting the influence of voters in their own district.

Some have argued that people should vote for Charter Amendment No. 2, because it will give everyone the right to vote for council members for all six districts, not just one’s own district. However, a person’s vote doesn’t have a fixed inherent value. A person’s vote carries greater weight when it can have a greater influence on public policy between elections. It’s no bargain to attain the right to vote for six times as many people if, in so doing, the influence of that vote is diluted by at least the same factor.

So you gain the right to vote for representatives from all six districts. What does this buy you, if those representatives must then consider the opinions of six times as many people? Knoxville citizens will be better served by maintaining a stronger influence over the council member from their own district. This is accomplished by limiting who can vote for district-level candidates to those who actually live in the same district as those candidates.

Other proponents of Charter Amendment No. 2 have argued that it will increase unity. Well yes, one way to increase unity is to mute dissenting voices, but is that really what we want? Might it be better to hear from everyone, through district-level council members, so as to achieve win-win solutions? Such genuine unity is hard-won but worthwhile.

As a practical matter, Charter Amendment No. 2 will tend to mitigate the influence of poorer districts in Knoxville by motivating candidates to please voters in other districts which have more money and influence.

As another resource, readers should consider this excellent opinion piece by Hancen Sale recently published by the Knoxville News Sentinel. (This piece is also available on Elaine Davis’s Facebook page.)

Whether Democrat, Republican, or Independent, residents of the City of Knoxville should vote for a stronger influence over their own district council member by voting against Charter Amendment No. 2.