Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Real Property topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Knox County commission approves first reading of ordinance barring discrimination against U.S. citizens in real-property transactions

Knox County Commission · December 16, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Knox County Commission approved on first reading an ordinance (O2512102) proposed by Commissioner Andy Fox that would prohibit denying the sale or purchase of county real property on the basis of U.S. citizenship; the measure passed a roll-call vote and returns for a second reading in January.

Commissioner Andy Fox moved on first reading to adopt Ordinance O2512102, creating Chapter 53 of the Knox County Code to prohibit discrimination against United States citizens in the sale or purchase of real property in Knox County. Fox said he planned a narrow amendment to Section 2(a) to add the phrase “or other entity,” closing what he described as a potential loophole in the draft language. The commission seconded the motion and proceeded to a roll-call vote.

Two members of the public spoke in favor of the county measure during the public forum. Alex Moody, a District 9 resident, told commissioners he was “shocked” by reporting about property covenants in Loudoun County that allegedly restricted sales to U.S. citizens and urged local action. Chris Treadwell said the proposed county ordinance is different from a recent state law and argued local rules are still needed to address particular property-sale practices; his remarks cited national news coverage about foreign purchases adjacent to sensitive sites.

On the roll call, the clerk recorded ayes from Commissioners Rawls, Durrett, Oster, Jackson, Russell, Hill, Lee, Thompson, Fox and Frazier; Commissioner Jay recorded a “no.” The chair said the ordinance will return to the commission for a second reading in January. The measure advanced on first reading; no final adoption or county-code change is effective until the required second reading and any additional actions required by county rules.

Opponents in the meeting were limited to a single recorded dissenting vote; no staff legal opinion was read into the record at first reading. Commissioner Fox characterized the amendment as a technical tightening of language suggested by a resident and said it would prevent entities from exploiting a drafting gap. The commission did not take a final adoption vote at this meeting.