Lenoir City changes judge ordina

Lenoir City Council approved Monday the second and final reading regulating the qualifications for city judge, but not before discussion between Mayor Tony Aikens and Judge Robin McNabb.

Councilmen Mike Henline and Jim Shields motioned and seconded, respectively, to make the ordinance update. The vote passed 6-0.

The ordinance change was one of four passed for the final reading after a first vote Jan. 25.

According to the changed ordinance, a person must reside within Tennessee for five consecutive years, be within the judicial district the municipal court is located for one year immediately before being elected, be at least 30 years old and have a license to practice law in Tennessee.

“Periodically I review and look through the municipal code to see if there are any ordinances that need to be repealed or amended, whether they be antiquated or so forth, and this, among three other ones, was one of those,” Amber Scott, city administrator, said. “I consulted with (Municipal Technical Assistance Service) and (attorney general’s) office, which MTAS consulted with. They concluded that our current ordinance, based on the AG opinion that was published Oct. 2, it basically says that a municipal judge must reside in the specific county within the judicial district that they serve.

“In our case Lenoir City is located within Loudon County, therefore the judge must reside in Loudon County for one year preceding the date of the election,” she added.

Prior to getting into the meeting agenda, Aikens read an email McNabb sent Monday morning to Scott requesting information from MTAS and/or the state attorney general’s office stating Lenoir City’s judge qualifications are unconstitutional. Scott said a response with the information requested was provided within 27 minutes.

In her email, (See Full Text Below) McNabb said nothing she requested was covered by attorney-client privilege.

“‘The information as it was presented in your statements to the News-Herald is directly in conflict with my reading of the constitutional requirements for a municipal court exercising concurrent general sessions jurisdiction’,” Aikens read from McNabb’s email. “‘It also conflicts with MTAS’ previous published analysis of this topic. I do not want to risk my law license by doing anything that might violate the Tennessee Constitution. I would hope that the city carefully vetted this ordinance rather than risk losing the hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue brought in by the city court each year.”

“... ‘Apparently it is common knowledge that current town officials are rooting for Mr. (Lenoir City attorney Gregg) Harrison to become city judge in 2022’,” the email continued. “‘However, I hope that the bias does not run so far as to require me to invoke state law to get information about my job. It would have been very courteous if a city official had given me heads up about the ordinance before it appeared on city council’s agenda. Even now though, on the day of the second and final vote, no one from city hall has broached me with the subject’.”

Aikens went through the letter in response, claiming city officials were not saying the city judge was “unconstitutional in any way.”

“Matter of fact, she was voted in by the citizens of Lenoir City and they made that decision and certainly she is the city judge at this time,” Aikens said. “Second part in the first paragraph, if we were to discuss anything with the city attorney, it would be an attorney-client privilege, however, this is certainly not the case, and it didn’t matter.”

McNabb in 2016 beat Walter Johnson and Porsche Shantz for the elected position.

Aikens said no one was asking for McNabb to jeopardize her law license.

“Of course it goes on in paragraph 3A that I that wanted to answer, I don’t know what you’re talking about as far as losing lost revenue,” Aikens said. “Paragraph seven, maybe there is a lack of communication that’s on both sides, your honor. And I would ask what judge in the state of Tennessee doesn’t live within the jurisdiction in their district that they serve?

McNabb was given an opportunity to speak after Aikens.

“Mayor, the first meeting that I had with you after I was elected judge with you and Mr. (Jim) Wilburn, I believe that among other things there was a request that we all work together and we resolve any differences outside of the public eye, and I respect that, and I would have thought that would have been what happened in this case and it wasn’t,” McNabb said.

While not required, she felt it would have been courteous of the city to inform her of the change.

“You made that decision. You apparently researched it as carefully as you feel you should,” McNabb said. “After that decision, I just have to do what I believe is in accordance with the constitution. If you had wanted my opinion you would have asked for it before now, so I think that’s fairly all I needed to say. I just needed to make sure that you were going to carry forward but you already threatened — or, sorry, took the first vote to do and I will let you get to it.”

In other news, Lenoir City Council:

• Amended an ordinance designating program director for Occupational and Health Program.

• Repealed an ordinance for “motion picture films and video cassettes.”

• Amended an ordinance regulating the sale of beer.

• Adopted a resolution authorizing issuance, sale and payment of up to $3.6 million in aggregate principal amount of revenue bonds of Lenoir City and making provision for operation of the water and sewer system and the collection and disposition of its revenues.

• Adopted a resolution authorizing issuance, sale and payment of a revenue bond not to exceed $505,000 and making provision for the operation of the gas system and the collection and disposition of its revenues.

Below is the full email sent to city administrator, Amber Scott from Judge McNabb:

Ms. Scott,

Would you provide me with the written information from MTAS and/or the Tennessee Attorney General's office which states that the current city ordinance regarding qualifications for Lenoir City judge is unconstitutional? In addition, include all correspondence between City officials, MTAS, and/or the AG's office regarding this matter, as well as names and contact information for employees/representatives of these two entities with whom City officials (including yourself, Mayor Aikens, and/or Mr. Harrison) discussed this situation. None of this is covered under an attorney-client privilege and is all subject to disclosure under public law if necessary.

The information as it was presented in your statements to the News-Herald is directly in conflict with my reading of the constitutional requirements for a municipal court exercising concurrent General Sessions Court jurisdiction. It also conflicts with MTAS's previous published analysis of this topic.

I do not want to risk my law license by doing anything that might violate the Tennessee Constitution. I would hope that the City carefully vetted this ordinance, rather than risk losing the hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue brought in by the City Court each year. If so, the information I asked for above should be easy to provide.

To that end, I am also hereby requesting a copy of the proposed new ordinance that City Council plans to approve tonight (for the second time).

I would appreciate receiving this information and the requested documents by 1 p.m. today. I expect they should all be close at hand, given that this topic has already been voted on once and is on the agenda again this evening.

Let me know if the City is unwilling to provide these documents voluntarily, such that I need to make a public records request to get them. Apparently it is common knowledge that current Town officials are rooting for Mr. Harrison to become the city judge in 2022. However, I hope that bias does run so far as to require me to invoke state law to get information about my own job.

It would have been courteous if a City official had given me a heads up about the ordinance before it appeared on the City Council's agenda. Even now, though, on the day of the second and final vote, no one from City Hall has broached the subject with me.

I look forward to your prompt reply.

Robin M. McNabb