A Tennessee law requiring the 40-member Metro Nashville Council to be reduced to half its size was determined to be constitutional by the Tennessee Court of Appeals in a ruling released Tuesday.
In March 2023, the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County filed a lawsuit in the Davidson County Chancery Court against Governor Bill Lee for his signing of a bill at the time that caps the number of elected officials in the governing body of a Metropolitan government or municipality to 20.
The law was temporarily blocked by a Tennessee trial court, which initially found that Metro Nashville was likely to succeed in its constitutional challenge to subsection 1(b) of the law, which set deadlines for the council reduction.
After the August 2023 election, the trial court ruled that the challenge to subsection 1(b) was moot but held that subsection 1(a), which reduces the council size, was still valid for review.
While the court unanimously agreed that subsection 1(a) didn’t violate the state Constitution’s Consolidation Clause, a majority found it unconstitutional under the Local Legislation Clause and the Exemption Clause, issuing a permanent injunction against it.
The state appealed the trial court’s decision to the Tennessee Court of Appeals, which agreed with the trial court in its Tuesday ruling that subsection 1(a) of the law is not moot, meaning the issue remains relevant and unresolved.
Additionally, the appeals court reversed the trial court’s decision, ruling that the law does not violate the Tennessee Constitution.
The appeals court specifically found the law does not violate the Home Rule Amendment, which restricts laws targeting a single local government without local approval or the constitutional exemption that allows metropolitan governments to have more than 25 legislative members.
“We affirm the trial court’s ruling that subsection 1(a) is not moot. We reverse, however, its conclusion that the statute is barred by either constitutional provision at issue,” the majority opinion says. Appeals Court Judges J. Steven Stafford and Carma Dennis joined this opinion.
Appeals Court Judge Kenny Armstrong dissented from the majority, arguing that the Tennessee Constitution’s Exemption Clause “clearly” exempts consolidated governments like Metro Nashville from the 25-member cap on legislative bodies.
Tuesday’s ruling allows the effort to cut the Metro Nashville Council from 40 to 20 members to proceed, pending further appeals.
Tennessee House Majority Leader William Lamberth (R-Portland), who sponsored the bill in the Tennessee General Assembly, applauded Tuesday’s ruling by the appeals court, writing in an X post, “This action reins in excessive government growth while ensuring local municipalities across the Volunteer State remain accountable and responsive to their constituents. Republicans will continue to cut waste at all levels of government.”
– – –
Kaitlin Housler is a reporter at The Tennessee Star and The Star News Network. Follow Kaitlin on X / Twitter.
Photo “Nashville City Hall” by Nicolas Henderson. CC BY 2.0.
We should reduce the size of the General Assembly. What business operates with 2 competing Boards of Directors?? (House and Senate). Nebraska operates perfectly fine with a unicameral legislature and so could we.
STILL NEED TO REMOVE MANDATORY TERM LIMITS FROM THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF THE METRO COUNCIL.
The voters lost their own power to hire & fire the people whom they elect to be their voice in the making of our local laws.
At this time all elected Vouncil members are LAME DUCKS with no power, since the Executive Branch (aka Mayor) now holds power over the Council.
Additionally, the Mayor does not allow hos Department Heads to speak to Metro Council members. All Department requests must now come through the Mayor’s office.
In addition, 15 -20 thousand Metro Employees
& their families are allowed to reside & pay taxes in other counties & they can’t vote for the Council members. They have no real incentives to be “public servants” anymore here in Nashville. Why should they?
We non-government workers still have to pay for their salaries, health & pension benefits.
ITS ALL SCREWED UP.
Not what the City Charter intended.
It should challenged in court or reversed.
What incentives does our current “term limits” policy give Council Members to work their ass off or stick their necks out for their Constituents? ESPECIALLY, when the Mayir can offer their wife, or kid a job in exchange for support of the Mayor’s Agenda. An agenda like Sanctuary City.
VOTING IS TERM LIMITS