Surprise! 2020 Infrastructure Chair Can’t Vote: Family Conflict

It was a surprise when JP Justin Knight (R, Dist. 1), Infrastructure Committee Chair, abstained from voting on the first of two amendments during the reallocation discussion at last night’s Quorum Court meeting.

We were more surprised about halfway through the meeting when he explained his inaction as the second amendment came up. Knight, who attended online, told the room

I’d like to explain why I abstained earlier and why I’ll abstain further tonight.

Due to a potential conflict of interest with family members who work for Rogers Group I’m going to abstain from voting on the ordinance and resolutions tonight.

It’s more than unfortunate that his constituents missed his representation on this key vote supporting law enforcement and animal control; however, FCR agrees that recusing from those votes was the right thing to do.

We also note that if Knight’s conflict correctly prevented him from voting last night, he should not have been serving on the Infrastructure Committee — certainly not as Chair of that Committee — and he should have disclosed that conflict when Judge Jim Baker named him to that position in January, 2019.

The Committee deals with roads and infrastructure; the County Road Department contracts all the County asphalt work to Rogers Group.

Did Knight inform the Judge of his conflict? If the Quorum Court had not been voting on reallocation last night, would Knight have informed the Court of this ethical breach, this direct conflict of interest? When Knight voted with the majority on August 4 to advance the reallocation issue to the full, regular Quorum Court meeting, was that vote also in conflict?

Did other JPs know that Knight’s family members work for Rogers Group? Certainly, none of the JPs on the Infrastructure Committee had any idea.

Whether legally a conflict of interest or not, Knight should be replaced on the Infrastructure Committee.