Lenoir City appears ready to fig

Lenoir City Council and Mayor Tony Aikens doubled down last week in their dispute with Loudon County over property annexed by the city for Belle West subdivision.

Aikens told a packed meeting room Jan. 23 at the Lenoir City Municipal Building the city was not trying to grab land when in 2020 it annexed properties outside an established Urban Growth Boundary that were owned by Belle West Pointe LLC and WNW Properties LLC.

The legality of the annexations have been the subject of debate between the county and city since late last year.

Kyle A. Baisley, an attorney with Long, Ragsdale & Waters, P.C., a Knoxville law firm representing the county, sent a letter to the city Dec. 21 indicating both properties were annexed without approval from Loudon County Commission as required by a 2005 Interlocal Agreement between the two entities. He added that neither annexation conforms with applicable state law.

Another letter sent Jan. 19 to Lenoir City Attorney Walter Johnson outlines that Baisley was instructed by commission to demand the city take “official action invalidating the resolutions” of the annexations, zoning designations and plans for services.

Several residents spoke against the annexation and expressed concerned about the city’s urban sprawl during the open comment segment of the city meeting. Residents charged notice of the annexations were not published in a legal newspaper publication per state law.

Aikens referred to 2007 action by the city to place a water tank on properties belonging to the Ross family to serve the area in question and the lawsuit that followed. He said the road was taken into city limits as part of the lawsuit and doesn’t remember any controversy about the tank other than from the Ross family.

As part of the agreement, Aikens said the then director of Loudon County Planning Commission sent a letter to the city indicating the property could be annexed. Aikens said he believes the Belle West property adjoins the road annexed in 2007.

Aikens also refuted the idea the annexation wasn’t properly noticed, calling The Daily Edition — a small, photocopied newsletter with limited distribution — a legal newspaper publication. He said the annexation went through proper procedures with the planning commission and was properly advertised and posted on the city website.

He added the annexation was known to County Commissioner Van Shaver through emails with City Administrator Amber Scott Kelso.

“There’s nobody trying to hide anything then or now,” Aikens said. “But I wanted to say that and not trying to throw anybody under the bus. I’m just telling you how it is and everybody went through the proper procedure, and we believe and the city attorneys believe that it was properly annexed after looking at everything.”

Johnson said after watching previous commission meetings online, a person might think there is a war between the city and county. He suggested such an assertion “could not be anything further” from the truth.

Both properties were requested for annexation by landowners, Johnson said, adding the $11 million Belle West project already has infrastructure investments by Lenoir City Utilities Board.

He also said the 2005 agreement between the city and county is not enforceable.

“In conclusion, let me just say this, I am not going to try to usurp the authority of this city council,” Johnson said. “They decide everything. It is a political decision that they have to make or what to do in this matter. I can only make my recommendation. My recommendation is to fight. Fight them down to the dirt. They’re wrong. Totally and completely wrong. If they want to sue us, we’re ready.”

Baisley said after the meeting there is no statue of limitations on the matter and he believes the interlocal agreement remains valid. He emphasized the properties in question are outside the UGB.

“At the end of the day, annexation is created by Tennessee statute,” Baisley said. “Those statutes were not adhered to in the annexation of these properties, and I believe that they were done improperly.

“We’re asking them to voluntarily acknowledge that and essentially unwind what was never properly done to begin with,” he added. “If they refuse to do so, Loudon County Commission is having another hearing on Feb. 6 to decide if they’re going to vote for authorization for me to file litigation, and if they do I’ll be doing just that. We’ll put their legal theories and defenses to the test. Let the courts decide.”

Loudon County Mayor Rollen “Buddy” Bradshaw said after the meeting commissioners could have different opinions on the matter. He said there was healthy conversation about the controversy during the last commission workshop and he is confident the matter will come up again Monday.

“To reiterate what Mayor Aikens said, I think we’re better working together,” Bradshaw said. “I’m hoping we can find a common ground that we can settle this without going to court. Hopefully litigation can be avoided and I guess time will tell if we can do that.”