I have never before published two "Jellico News/Mayor's Column" in the same week. But I felt that I needed to do so this week due to a couple of issues that we are facing in Jellico and the Jellico area at the present time. One issue has arisen over the past four or five days and the other issue has been around now for several years.

Due to damages being incurred to city sidewalks and with little or no funds available for repairs, the Jellico City Council on June 15, 1995 passed a resolution banning all vehicles from parking on city sidewalks. The motion was passed on third reading with Council Members Alvin Evans, June Maiden, Allen McClary, Gary Owens and Charles Violet all voting in favor. (Councilman Howard Asher was absent due to illness.) But after some half-hearted attempts to enforce the regulation, it was soon virtually forgotten - or at least few citations were issued.

However during the last election for mayor and city council, citizen after citizen complained about the lack of sufficient sidewalks and the complete absence of sidewalks in some areas where they are badly needed. Candidates responded to those requests by promising to work toward improving existing sidewalks and adding additional sidewalks if grants and/or other funds could be located for that purpose. Shortly after his election, Councilman Clarence Gene Beck went to work to keep that commitment and contacted the East Tennessee Development District (ETDD) and asked for their help in securing a grant that would accomplish those objectives.

ETDD soon sent a representative to Jellico to look over our situation and he was taken on an extensive tour of our town. During that tour, he was able to see our needs in that area but became very concerned when he saw that vehicles were parked on sidewalks in several places.

He emphasized that no grant could be approved for sidewalks as long as we allow the potentially damaging parking of vehicles on them. No immediate action was taken upon his advice. But the recent parking of a large bus on Kentucky Street led to complaints from at least two neighbors and some other area residents who stated that it was blocking their view and also blocking the view of motorists coming down Cumberland Avenue - thereby constituting what they considered to be a safety hazard. Some others felt that the bus was too big to be parked there.

The police were dispatched to follow up on the complaint as they always are. Upon arrival they stated that they found the wheels on one side of the bus sitting totally on the sidewalk. They wrote a "warning" ticket which carried with it a minimal fine of $ 5.00 and placed it on the bus. Owners of the vehicle were upset and attended last Thursday night's meeting of the City Council. They explained the fact that if they parked the bus correctly, that it would extend out into an already narrow street with two way traffic - and in their opinion creating an even bigger problem. They also said that they wanted the bus next to their home so they could watch it and the expensive sound equipment that it contains very closely. And they insisted that there are areas all over town where vehicles are parked on the sidewalk and that the ordinance must be enforced against everyone or that discrimination would exist.

I was out of town over the weekend visiting relatives and returned to learn that warning tickets and some with fines had been written for numerous vehicles including some parked at a local church while their owners were attending services on Sunday. I also received calls from two others stating that they had been given citations in the amount of $ 97.50 although they had never even received a warning ticket. And reportedly a second citation had been written to the owners of the bus - also in the amount of $ 97.50.. These actions were in all probability, brought about by the question as to whether the law is to be enforced equally upon all of our citizens.

I certainly cannot disagree with members of Council who are doing their best to improve our town through hard work and the enforcement of long standing regulations designed to bring about those improvements. Nor can I find fault with police officers who sometimes are criticized when they enforce the law even more than they do when they do not enforce it. It's a "catch twenty-two" situation and police officers are like mayors and members of Council in that almost every complaint that we follow up on usually brings a reaction from someone else who takes the opposite position on whatever the issue happens to be.

But on this issue I think we need to pause and take a good look at the situation. There is no question that we need to repair and add sidewalks. And I greatly appreciate the work being done by some members of Council who are attempting to find funds with which to get that done. But on the other hand, there are streets including Kentucky Street where it is almost impossible to park your vehicle close enough to the curb to prevent its being hit. The same thing is true on South Main Street and nobody knows that better than me. (I once legally parked my car on that street only to have the entire side damaged almost beyond repair by a passing vehicle. Not to be outdone, I began parking well upon the sidewalk in that area. But even that did not completely solve the problem. I still had my rear bumper dented and a taillight knocked out with my car sitting almost completely out of the lane.)

Our present problem was certainly intensified by the fact that little or no advance warning was given that the ordinance would be enforced. (And the situation with the bus developed so quickly that there was not time to give adequate warning.) But to insure fairness and equity in enforcement of the law, it would be my recommendation that all tickets written to date be disregarded and the public informed of the fact that the ordinance will be enforced at some date in the future - irrespective of individual, time or place. I believe that if that action is taken, that most of our citizens will understand and do their best to cooperate with the spirit of the law.

The second issue has been discussed for so long that I have almost forgotten all of the details. The Tennessee State Legislature several years ago became concerned that town and cities were annexing adjoining areas in a piecemeal fashion and with little or no prior planning. But the legislators also understood that municipalities must have the right to grow through annexation or to be forever doomed to remain at their present size. (The right to annexation has always been reserved for towns and cities in this country and even the largest cities sometimes started out as very small villages.)

To correct the situation, the Legislature enacted Public Law 1101 which required three years for implementation. Every county was directed to classify all property into three major areas (areas for urban growth, areas for county expansion of services and green spaces.) Every municipality had to individually or with outside help, develop a plan for eligible annexation to take place with a twenty (20) years period. A large and all-inclusive county-wide committee had to be established in every county to oversee and conduct the process and to consolidate further required municipal plans into an overall county plan. A long series of public meetings was required as the plans were being developed. No public officials volunteered for the task but we followed through because it was our responsibility. And failure to comply would have led to penalties such as loss of grants.

The City of Jellico worked with the Tennessee State Planning Commission to develop our plan as did a lot of other towns and cities in our county and throughout the state. Meeting after meeting was conducted here and in Jacksboro. Although we put out extensive publicity and asked folks to attend our hearings, we actually had one meeting when no one other than members of the council attended. No announced meeting ever drew any kind of crowd that we expected due to the importance and implications of PL 1101. At a meeting of the Campbell County Committee at the County Court House in Jacksboro, I was the only person in attendance from the entire northern side of our county. Those doing the work to put together the PL 1101 plan as required by the law, simply could not get folks one bit interested in the process when they had ample opportunity to give their input.

Once our plan was completed in cooperation with the state planner and given to us, we again called for public input. When little or none was offered, the previous City Council that included present Councilmen Dobson and Evans, approved the plan. (Although I could not vote on the issue, I felt that everything had been done that could be done and I too favored its acceptance.)

Our plan was then forwarded to the County Committee for its review and even more public hearings. The plans from Jellico, Lafollette, Jacksboro and Caryville were consolidated and approved by the Committee and then forwarded to the Campbell County Commission where that process was conducted all over again. Finally the Commission gave its approval and the consolidated plan was sent to the state where it was reviewed one last time and then granted full state approval - thereby giving it the full authority of state law.

But once the City Council began contemplating actually bringing about the annexation, a public clamor arose as if it was the first time that annexation had ever even been mentioned. In fact at one meeting of our Council, someone in the audience insinuated that it had been "sprung upon the people" in the areas eligible for annexation - that in spite of the three years process that had been advertised by the State of Tennessee, all counties within the state and all municipalities within the state. During the entire three years process, television programs outlined the ongoing process from one end of the state to the other, radio talk shows dealt with it at length and I dare say that there was not a publication anywhere that did not have article after article dealing with Public Law 1101 - both during its passage through the Legislature and later all of the work done in the municipalities and counties. I certainly wrote about it enough!

But regardless, it is now the law all over Tennessee!!! And as long as municipalities abide by all aspects of the law, annexation can clearly take place. Some annexations have already been challenged and heard in court and according to all the reports that we have received, all annexations carried out correctly under the regulations spelled out in PL 1101 have been upheld

I favor the annexation if the Plan of Services being developed by the State Planning Office indicates that we can fulfill all service requirements. But four votes of the Council are required and as mayor I will not have a vote. But as I wrote once before, I have been on both sides of the fence. I was annexed when I lived on Indian Mountain and I strongly recommend it to everyone.

Members of City Council must attend regular meetings; special call meetings; public hearings; meetings of boards and commissions to which they are assigned; and attend any number of various other meetings. And they must listen to never ending complaints, comments, questions, and suggestions. They sometimes get called out at unusual hours for one purpose or another and there are times when their phones ring at work as well as at home. And their wives sometimes get very tired and disgusted of the entire thing.

The members of Council - like the mayor and our citizens - make mistakes. But they are mistakes made while they are making effort. And whether they disagree with me or whether they disagree among themselves - and even if everything they do is not the popular way to do it - as long as they are working for the good of our town, they deserve our thanks and respect. JOHN CLIFTON, Mayor, City of Jellico
http://www.jellico.com/jellico/jellico.htm w/link to "Mayor"