In an unrelated News Herald article, Lenoir City mayor, Tony Aikens made a statement about the lawsuit.

After the meeting, Aikens said he, Loudon Mayor Jeff Harris and Loudon County Mayor Rollen “Buddy” Bradshaw met recently to discuss Loudon County’s intent to pull out of the interlocal agreement that supports and funds Loudon County Economic Development Agency.

Aikens said he asked Bradshaw to set up an executive session meeting with members of Loudon County Commission and both city councils to talk about a lawsuit between the county and Lenoir City, the situation with the EDA and urban growth boundaries. Aikens said he believes all those subjects are related.

Regarding the lawsuit, Aikens said property owners involved have agreed to build to 2020 county standards but want to remain in the city. He emphasized the county would get a portion of the school facilities tax.

“What are we fighting about when the property owners have agreed to the 2020 standards?” Aikens said. “Just because it’s inside the city?”

He said the lawsuit is causing both governments to spend money that could have gone elsewhere.

“It’s just like I said from the start, and I tried to prevent it, I did everything in my power to try and persuade county commission not file litigation against Lenoir City,” Aikens said. “When governments start suing governments, there’s only one loser and that’s the taxpayers.” News Herald 8/2/23

There's a lot to unpack here.

First, an executive session, closed door meeting, among all the members Aikens wants would be as illegal as their annexations. By law, executive sessions may only be be held with an attorney and can only be used for elected officials to ask questions of their attorney and and receive answers from the attorney. Discussions of any topic among elected officials is prohibited.

This is typical of Aikens wanting to do business behind closed doors and in secret. Apparently, this is common practice in Lenoir City. Elected officials are prohibited, by law, to discuss, deliberate or reach conclusions outside the confines of a called public meeting. It's called the Sunshine Law.  City council rarely has workshops before their voting meetings but somehow they all seem to know how to vote on every issue, yet we're to believe that the mayor and council members haven't already discussed the agenda topics before the meeting? Please. Of course county mayor, Buddy Bradshaw, isn't going to call for an executive session as Aikens wanted. Bradshaw knows that would be illegal and knows the county commission would never participate in any such illegal meeting. County government doesn't operate the way Aikens and the city work.

I guess the argument could be made that mayor Aikens telling the council members how to vote on every issue isn't really discussing, deliberating or reaching conclusions, it's just "do what I tell you to do."

Aikens feels the lawsuit, the EDA and UGB's are all somehow tied together. The EDA, Jack Qualls, was involved in developing a huge tax break, PILOT, for the original developers of the Belle West project but that's all gone when the first developer bailed out. Loudon has nothing to do with Lenoir City's illegal annexation.

Then Aikens seems to think that because the developer of the property, involved in the lawsuit, has agreed to build to county standards somehow makes the city's illegal annexations somehow OK? Of course, that's ridiculous. Both the Belle West and the WNW annexations were 100% illegal under state law, no way around it, and Aikens knows it. The county couldn't agree to allow the two properties to remain in the city if they wanted to.

No city in the state is allowed to annex property outside their Urban Growth Boundaries, UGB, except in very narrow circumstances, which do not apply to either of these two illegal annexations. There is a procedure where city's can expand they're UGB's but that requires the county to agree to the expansion of the UGB and the county will never agree to expanding Lenoir City's UGB.

One thing Aikens got right in his statement is, the lawsuit will cost a lot of money, all because of his actions to get his council to vote for the two illegal actions. To be fair, I really doubt most of the council members even knew they were voting for illegal annexations. But that's what happen when the council blindly does whatever the mayor tells them to do, without question.

Aikens had multiple opportunities over several months to have avoided any litigation. He was told by the county mayor, his annexations were illegal, he was told by two attorneys his annexations were illegal yet he refused to correct his illegal actions leaving to county no option but to sue the city. Curiously though, the city has a full time, highly paid attorney, why would the city need to spend any money on outside council? 

Aikens can end all the litigation in a matter of minutes at his next city council meeting if he really wanted to. All he has to do is have his council withdraw the two illegal annexations and it's over. Just that simple.

So why doesn't he do that? Why is he bound and determined to play this all the way through the courts knowing he can't win?        

On June 27, 1987, Ronald Reagan said, "Mr. Gorbachev, Tear Down This Wall".

On August 7, 2023, the Loudon County Commission says, Mr. Aikens, Withdraw This Annexation.