A three-judge panel sided with Nashville on Thursday, agreeing with the city’s argument against a new state law that sought to pave the way for NASCAR upgrades at The Fairgrounds Nashville. The law, a push by lobbyists to secure a city contract for regional racetrack operator Bristol Motor Speedway, would have lowered the threshold for approving major improvements to the fairgrounds to 21 Metro Council votes, down from 27.
The city’s response — led by Metro legal director Wally Dietz and city attorney Allison Bussell — argued successfully that the law violates the Tennessee Constitution’s Home Rule Amendment, which protects jurisdictions from being specific targets of the Tennessee General Assembly. In other words, it is too preemptive in that the law is sufficiently narrow to target a single jurisdiction without allowing the city final say. Nashville sued in May, two weeks after Gov. Bill Lee signed the legislation into law, telling the court that the specific voting threshold tweak “applies and will only ever apply” to Nashville. The NASCAR push has since stalled, but proponents indicate they will revive efforts sometime during the upcoming council term.
Nashville has faced a rash of targeted legislation from state lawmakers in the past year, including moves to halve the size of the city council, establish a superseding airport authority and wrest control of Nashville’s Sports Authority. City lawyers have sought relief from the state, citing constitutional protections against targeted lawmaking, which has led to dual airport authorities and widespread frustration among members of the Metro Council. The fairgrounds ruling is the latest success for the city, which, according to Dietz, is considering filing another suit to shield the Metro Sports Authority from state takeover.
Gov. Lee, state House Speaker Cameron Sexton and Lt. Gov. Randy McNally were all named by Nashville in the suit, which asked the court to stop the law from going into effect.
“Clearly, the General Assembly may pass laws that are local in form and effect,” reads the court’s judgment, which granted relief to the city against the law, legally titled Chapter 364. "But the Tennessee Constitution commands that if it does, the legislation must include a provision for local approval. Chapter 364 does not include a local approval provision. Therefore, the Court concludes Chapter 364 violates the Local Legislation clause of the Home Rule Amendment."
Suits by outgoing Councilmembers Colby Sledge and Bob Mendes and current District 30 Councilmember Sandra Sepulveda were consolidated by the court with the city’s case earlier this summer.
"Any lawyer with a license knows that the reason appellate courts exist is because trial courts — even three-judge trial courts — get it wrong," said Jamie Hollin, attorney for driver Howard Tucker, who has sought to support the 21-vote threshold in court. "And that's the case here."
