Can a Tennessee county mayor veto who the soil conservation district appoints to the county growth-plan coordinating committee?

Plain-English summary

Title 6, Chapter 58 of the Tennessee Code requires every county to develop a comprehensive growth plan to direct the orderly development of the local government, addressing land use, transportation, infrastructure, housing, and economic development. The growth plan is built by a county coordinating committee with a statutorily prescribed composition: the county mayor (or designee), the mayor of each municipality in the county (or designee), members appointed by the largest municipally-owned utility, the largest non-municipally-owned utility, the soil conservation district, the largest local education agency, the largest chamber of commerce, plus two members appointed by the county mayor and two by the largest municipality's mayor.

Rep. Frank Niceley asked the AG whether the county mayor has authority to veto the soil conservation district's appointee to that coordinating committee. The mayor presumably wanted to push back against a particular appointee but had to ask whether the mayor could legally do so.

The AG's answer was direct: no. The statute lists each appointing authority and specifies who gets to make each appointment. The county mayor's appointments are the mayor's own two members. The soil conservation district board's appointment is a separate slot, made by a separate body. Nothing in Title 6, Chapter 58 gives the mayor veto power over anyone else's appointments. The AG also checked Title 5, Chapter 6 (the general county-mayor powers chapter) and Title 43, Chapter 14, Part 2 (the soil-conservation-district powers chapter). Neither contains language authorizing the mayor to block the district's appointment. With no statutory grant of veto authority, the mayor simply does not have it.

The structural reasoning fits standard Tennessee local-government law. County mayors have substantial executive authority within the powers the legislature has granted, but they do not have a residual veto over decisions delegated to other bodies. When the legislature gives a specific appointment power to a specific body (here, the soil conservation district board), the legislature has spoken; another official's preference does not override that statutory delegation.

What the opinion establishes is narrow: the mayor has no legal mechanism to veto or block the district's coordinating-committee appointee. The opinion does not prescribe what the mayor should do instead; it only resolves the veto question in the negative.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2010. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Title 6, Chapter 58 has been amended at various points since 2010. The structural principle (mayor cannot veto other bodies' specified appointments without express statutory authority) remains general Tennessee local-government law, but the specific composition of the growth-plan coordinating committee should be checked against the current statute.

Common questions

Q: What is a county growth plan?
A: A comprehensive land-use and development plan required for every Tennessee county under Tenn. Code Ann. § 6-58-107. It addresses land use, transportation, infrastructure, housing, and economic development. The plan is intended to direct the coordinated, efficient, and orderly development of the local government and its surrounding area.

Q: Who builds the growth plan?
A: A county coordinating committee, composed under Tenn. Code Ann. § 6-58-104(a). The committee includes the county mayor, municipal mayors, utility representatives, the soil conservation district appointee, the largest LEA's appointee, the chamber of commerce appointee, two mayor's appointees, and two appointees of the largest municipality's mayor. The committee develops the initial recommended growth plan, which then goes through additional approval steps.

Q: Why is the soil conservation district on the committee?
A: Growth plans necessarily address land use and rural-urban boundary issues, where agricultural land conservation and floodplain management are important inputs. The soil conservation district has technical expertise on these issues and represents agricultural interests in the county.

Q: Can the county mayor refuse to seat the soil district's appointee?
A: No. The mayor has no statutory veto power. The district's appointment is final once the district makes it.

Q: What if the soil district appoints someone the mayor thinks is unqualified?
A: The opinion does not give the mayor a legal tool to block the appointment. It addresses only the veto question and concludes the mayor has no statutory authority to override the district board's choice.

Q: Can the county legislative body block the appointment?
A: The opinion does not address that. Under standard Tennessee local-government law, the county legislative body has only the powers the General Assembly has granted it. Tenn. Code Ann. § 6-58-104 lists each appointing authority and does not give the county legislative body any veto power over the soil district's appointment. So almost certainly the answer is also no.

Q: What is a "soil conservation district board"?
A: Under Tenn. Code Ann. tit. 43, ch. 14, pt. 2, a soil conservation district is a Tennessee subdivision of state government formed to conserve soil and water resources within a defined geographic area. Each district has a governing board with statutory powers including making appointments under various other Tennessee statutes.

Background and statutory framework

Title 6, Chapter 58: County growth plans. Tennessee requires every county to develop a comprehensive growth plan. The statutory scheme has several pieces.

• § 6-58-107: Purpose. Growth plans are to "direct the coordinated, efficient, and orderly development of the local government and its environs" and address land-use, transportation, public infrastructure, housing, and economic development.

• § 6-58-104(a)(2): The coordinating committee develops the initial recommended growth plan.

• § 6-58-104(a)(1)(A)-(H): The composition of the coordinating committee. Each subsection identifies an appointing authority and the number of members:

  • (A) County mayor or designee
  • (B) Mayor of each municipality (or designee)
  • (C) One member appointed by the largest municipally-owned utility's board
  • (D) One member appointed by the largest non-municipally-owned utility's board
  • (E) One member appointed by the soil conservation district board
  • (F) One member appointed by the largest LEA's board
  • (G) One member appointed by the largest chamber of commerce
  • Two appointed by the county mayor
  • Two appointed by the largest municipality's mayor

The Roman-numeral structure makes each appointing authority's role clear. The county mayor has three roles: the mayor's own seat (or a designee), and two additional appointments. The mayor does not have any control over the other seats.

Title 5, Chapter 6: County mayor powers. Tennessee's general county-mayor chapter lists the mayor's statutory powers and duties. The AG checked the chapter and found no language authorizing the mayor to veto appointments by other entities to statewide or county boards. The mayor has many executive powers, but a residual veto is not among them.

Title 43, Chapter 14, Part 2: Soil conservation districts. This part creates and sets out the powers and duties of soil conservation districts. The AG checked the part and found no language giving the county mayor a veto over district appointments to other bodies. The district's appointing power runs from the district's own governing board.

The structural conclusion. The AG's reasoning is a straight statutory exclusion: a power not granted is not held. The legislature carefully listed the appointing authorities for the coordinating committee. The county mayor's two appointments are the mayor's own; the district's appointment is the district's. Without an express grant of veto authority, the mayor cannot override the district's choice.

This is consistent with Tennessee Dillon's-Rule-style local-government doctrine. Counties and county officials have only the powers expressly granted them by statute (or necessarily implied from express grants). A veto over another body's statutory appointment power is the kind of significant control that the legislature would have to grant expressly. The AG found no such grant.

Citations and references

Statutes:

• Tenn. Code Ann. § 6-58-104 (coordinating committee composition)
• Tenn. Code Ann. § 6-58-104(a)(1)(A)-(H) (committee members)
• Tenn. Code Ann. § 6-58-104(a)(1)(E) (soil conservation district appointee)
• Tenn. Code Ann. § 6-58-104(a)(2) (coordinating committee role)
• Tenn. Code Ann. § 6-58-107 (growth plan purpose)
• Tenn. Code Ann. tit. 5, ch. 6 (county mayor duties and powers)
• Tenn. Code Ann. tit. 43, ch. 14, pt. 2 (soil conservation districts)

Source

• Landing page: https://www.tn.gov/attorneygeneral/opinions.html
• Original PDF: https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/attorneygeneral/documents/ops/2010/op10-083.pdf

Original opinion text

June 21, 2010

Opinion No. 10-83

Authority of County Mayor to Block Soil Conservation District Board's Appointment to Coordinating Committee

QUESTION

Is the county mayor authorized to veto the soil conservation district board's appointment pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 6-58-104(a)(1)(E) of a member of the county coordinating committee charged with developing the recommended growth plan for the county?

OPINION

No. We could discover no authority for the county mayor to veto the soil district board's appointment of a member of the county coordinating committee.

ANALYSIS

Title 6, Chapter 58 of the Tennessee Code requires Tennessee counties to develop comprehensive growth plans to "direct the coordinated, efficient, and orderly development of the local government and its environs" and to address such issues as "land-use, transportation, public infrastructure, housing, and economic development." Tenn. Code Ann. § 6-58-107. In each county, a coordinating committee is charged with developing the initial recommended growth plan. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 6-58-104(a)(2). The coordinating committee's membership is required to be composed of the county mayor or designee; the mayor of each county municipality or designee; one member appointed by the governing board of the county's largest municipally-owned utility system; one member appointed by the governing board of the county's largest utility system that is not municipally-owned; one member appointed by the board of directors of the county's soil conservation district; one member appointed by the board of the county's largest local education agency; one member appointed by the county's largest chamber of commerce; two members appointed by the county mayor; and two members appointed by the mayor of the county's largest municipality. Tenn. Code Ann. § 6-58-104(a)(1)(A) through (H).

While the county mayor is a member of the coordinating committee and is authorized to appoint two additional members, the statute contains no language authorizing the county mayor to veto or block the appointment of any other member, including the member appointed by the board of the county's soil conservation district. See generally Tenn. Code Ann. § 6-58-104. Moreover, we discovered no such language elsewhere in Title 6, Chapter 58. Nor did we discover such language in Title 5, Chapter 6, which creates and sets out the duties and powers of county mayors; or in Title 43, Chapter 14, Part 2, which creates and sets out the powers and duties of soil conservation districts. Accordingly, we are left to conclude that the county mayor is not authorized to block or veto the soil conservation district board's appointment of a member of the coordinating committee pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 6-58-104(a)(1)(E).

ROBERT E. COOPER, JR.
Attorney General and Reporter

CHARLES L. LEWIS
Deputy Attorney General

DOUGLAS EARL DIMOND
Senior Counsel

Requested by:

Honorable Frank S. Niceley
State Representative
113 War Memorial Building
Nashville, TN 37243-0117