The strange case of Carolyn McKnight of CEIDC

By Greg Ritchie

Messenger Reporter

CROCKETT – Amid all the turmoil surrounding the Crockett Economic and Industrial Development Corporation (CEIDC), one name has gotten lost in the crowd. The Messenger hesitated to report on that person in greater detail so as not to add further weight to what has surely been a difficult year and a half of her paid administrative leave. Following recent action to end Executive Director James Gentry's paid administrative leave, it's time to introduce our readers to one of the missing, but most important, pieces of the CEIDC puzzle: Gentry's Executive Assistant Carolyn McKnight.

McKnight was implicated in the CEIDC scandals from the start, was not charged with anything, but was placed on paid administrative leave along with Gentry in early 2023. She began working for Gentry in May 2018, during another push to reform or even abolish the company. She had worked with and for Gentry all along until the paid administrative leave left her in limbo – and recent events have not cleared things up.

McKnight has stubbornly refused to speak officially to The Messenger, despite our multiple contact with her to provide her with a platform to tell her side of the story. No records have surfaced showing that she was ever interviewed by officials from the state's Attorney General's Office during the investigation – which seems odd considering she kept the books for CEIDC for several years and certainly has a unique perspective on the whole matter.

McKnight's name never came up during the lengthy debates over Gentry's fate, leading some to speculate why she was not returned to work along with Gentry. During the most recent CEIDC meeting, Third District Councilwoman NaTrenia Hicks moved to adjourn the issue of what to do with McKnight and asked for time to consider whether McKnight could switch sides and work for the city. It was clear to all that Gentry and his allies did not want to see McKnight return to CEIDC, although the reasons remain unclear.

During the subsequent City Council meeting, council members voted to revoke McKnight's paid leave and allow her to return to work, but after a long and confusing debate.

“Mayor and Council,” Hicks said at the council meeting, “I move to revoke the paid administrative leave of CEIDC Executive Assistant Carolyn McKnight and transfer her to a position as a City of Crockett employee in a department with similar duties to those she currently performs. Nominated by the Crockett City Manager and approved by the Crockett City Council.”

The motion was quickly seconded by Second District Councilman Darrell Jones before Hicks had even read the entire motion.

Crockett's city manager himself, John Angerstein, seemed confused.

“What do you mean, 'nominated'?” Angerstein asked Hicks. “You're saying you're going to move her and force me to nominate her…”

“To move her to another position,” Hicks interrupted. Angerstein then asked which position.

Hicks suggested perhaps the city's water department, to which Angerstein replied, “Do you think the same job description or qualifications apply to a utility clerk position?”

Responding “Similarly,” Hicks seemed to fail to understand the implications of “transferring” an employee from one unit to another. Crockett Mayor Dr. Ianthia Fisher began to explain that the jobs were not even close to the same before being interrupted by Jones.

“We have a motion and a second vote in the plenary,” Jones interjected.

“We also have a mayor,” Angerstein replied, whereupon the mayor continued her explanation and informed the council that they could not simply transfer an employee paid with CEIDC funds to the city because the money came from the city budget.

“A person would have to be laid off from CEIDC and then apply for an open position with the city,” Fisher said. “They are two different entities; it is not legal to simply transfer a person from one to the other.”

“We would have to follow EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) rules,” Angerstein explained. “We would have to advertise the position, conduct interviews and hire the most qualified person for the job.”

Angerstein recommended that the council revoke McKnight's paid administrative leave, and explained that the CEIDC board could later decide her fate with Gentry. Angerstein explained that this would prevent the city from interfering in the internal affairs of the CEIDC.

After a long pause, Hicks said she would leave her motion unchanged. Angerstein said he recommended the council not vote for an illegal motion.

“Maybe it’s not illegal,” Hicks said.

“I guarantee you that,” Angerstein replied. “That's what I'm paid for, to give you the right advice.”

“I want her (McKnight) to get her job back,” said Fourth District Councilman Elbert Johnson.

Only Hicks and Jones voted for the motion, which was defeated. Hicks read her motion again, with the mayor correcting the second part about the “lateral” job change, whereupon the mayor repeated, “That's illegal – you can't do that.”

Johnson made a simple motion to remove McKnight from paid administrative leave, which First District Councilman Dennis Ivey agreed to. Hicks and Jones didn't bother to vote no, which was still counted as a no vote, and Mayor Fisher broke the deadlock and gave McKnight the green light to return to work.

CEIDC had put the request on hold, but the city had approved it. What did that mean? Was McKnight fit to work or not? After consulting with city leaders, it turned out that only the city (and not CEIDC) could rescind the request, since it was the city that had placed her on paid administrative leave, and that is what it did. Now it is up to CEIDC and Gentry herself to decide what to do with her.

The questions still pile up, though. The Messenger has learned that McKnight contacted Gentry and asked when and where she should report to work, but was told to wait until an office was prepared. Is she still being paid, or is she now considered “absent without pay” unless she is called to work? Was she brought back to work only to be shunted to a position in the city, or is the plan to fire her entirely?

Gentry's own status is still very vague; The Messenger has reached out to city officials to ask if he is taking over the CEIDC office in the Crockett Civic Center. Rumors persist that Gentry has taken over an office elsewhere, but it is unknown if that has been approved and if or when he plans to return to the CEIDC's official offices. Angerstein responded late Tuesday, August 13, that he did not know the location of Gentry's office because he is not taking up the official office in the Civic Center, and referred us directly to Gentry for clarification.

We asked if the CEIDC's phones were manned in case a prospective business person wanted to contact the CEIDC and were informed that all calls to the CEIDC would continue to be routed through City Hall and that city officials would contact Gentry via his cellphone.

We also asked if Gentry has an official city or CEIDC email address, as sources say Gentry uses a personal email address for public correspondence. Angerstein confirmed this and told us he also contacts Gentry via personal email.

Messenger will update this story as events develop.

You can reach Greg Ritchie at [email protected]