Please read Lenoir City mayor, Tony Aikens, newsletter before reading the rest of this story.

The Fall/Winter issue of the Lenoir City News Letter, or as some call it, the tax payer funded Aikens Propaganda sheet, hit mailboxes last week. In the "From The Desk Of The Mayor" section, Aikens once again goes into his talking points about the annexation lawsuit brought by the county against Lenoir City for their illegal annexation. Apparently, Aikens believes if he says the same thing long enough and enough times, it will become true.

Lenoir City council, supported by Aikens, passed two illegal annexations. There is no question about that. They don't even deny it. So now, the mayor thinks the county should just drop the lawsuit because the property owners/developers may or may not agree to some development arrangement. It doesn't matter what anyone does or doesn't agree to, the county can not allow the Aiken's illegal annexations to stand. It wouldn't matter if both properties were turned into perpetual tree farms, the annexations would still be illegal. That's what we're fighting about. If the county doesn't stop it here, there wouldn't be a property safe from his annexations in the future.

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. That's not how the law works.

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. They've been too irresponsible with the current UGB land.

Here's a question for city council, why did your body pass two illegal annexations? Did you know they were illegal when you voted for them?

I do agree with the mayor on one point, spending tens of thousands of dollars on this lawsuit is a waste of money. That money could certainly have been used for other purposes. Unfortunately, Tony Aikens has left the county no option but to pursue the legal action, as far as needed, to protect county residents and property owners from any future illegal annexations. There is nothing more important to the people of the fifth district, right now, than stopping the illegal annexation.

Since the mayor's newsletter came out suggesting people "voice their opinion" to the fifth district commissioners, I have had many opinions voiced to me, all saying the same thing, do not give into mayor Aikens, don't let him talk his way out of this one. Let me assure mayor Aikens and his council, the residents of the fifth district including the city residents overwhelmingly support the county's actions against the city. Let me also assure the mayor and his council that Lenoir City residents in the fifth district and the rest of the city are fed up with all the actions by him and his council, most especially the absurd over development they continued to allow in the city.

Aikens had multiple opportunities, over many 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? Because they've hired Aikens right hand man, attorney T. Scott Jones to handle the lawsuit for the city. Wonder why?

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. Or in fact, four members of the council could end it even without Aikens approval, immediately, if they had the guts to.

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

Big ego maybe?