Definition of Ordinance
Any city ordinance passed by the local governing body is binding upon the community, but it is not a “law” in the legal sense. Municipal courts have long been considered “civil” courts rather than “criminal” courts. Unless a municipal court has concurrent general sessions criminal jurisdiction, only ordinance violations can be heard in municipal court.

The Municipal Court Reform Act, T.C.A. 16-18-301 et. seq. authorizes cities to adopt ordinances that "mirrors, substantially duplicates, or incorporates by cross-reference the language of a state criminal statute, if and only if the state criminal statute mirrored, duplicated or cross-referenced is a Class C misdemeanor and the maximum penalty prescribed by municipal law or ordinance is a civil fine not in excess of fifty dollars ($50.00)." T.C.A 16-18-302(a)(2).

As such, the penalty for violating a municipal ordinance cannot exceed $50 and the municipal court cannot order imprisonment. Many cities have older ordinances in their codes that cannot be enforced, as the state offenses mirrored are not Class C misdemeanors. For example, in sample codes from decades ago, it was common to see Title 11, Chapter 1, Section 11-101 to include a reference that the city adopts all misdemeanors of the state or sometimes all misdemeanors of the state with a maximum fine of $50 but not more than 30 days in jail. If a city still has this provision in its city code, the provision is unenforceable and the city should not rely on that as the basis to establish jurisdiction for a violation in its city court.

Cities having a population of more than 150,000 may also adopt state laws for driving without a valid driver’s license, reckless driving, and adult underage purchasing or possession of alcoholic beverages. Smaller cities may no longer enforce ordinances adopting such offenses, as they are Class A and B misdemeanors under state law. See T.C.A. 16-18-302(b).

Mirroring a state law means that the ordinance reads exactly the same as the state law, and “substantially duplicating” means that the ordinance contains the same general language or intent. Adopting a state statute by reference allows the city to pass an ordinance adopting a specific state statute by referencing the “citation” number of the statute. While the full content of the state statute would be in the ordinance, any future changes in the state law would automatically be included in the ordinance.

Definition of Penalties
The Tennessee Constitution provides that no fine shall exceed $50 unless there is an opportunity for a jury trial. Municipal courts do not have statutory authority to hold jury trials. In contrast, municipal courts with general sessions jurisdiction also do not have jury trials, but T.C.A. 27-3-131 allows party to appeal from the municipal court with general sessions jurisdiction to a circuit court, and then the party may request a jury trial. Therefore, fines in municipal courts with concurrent general sessions jurisdiction can exceed $50, but only if they are prosecuted as a state criminal charge, not a city ordinance violation.

The Tennessee Supreme Court has ruled that the constitutional limitation on fines applies to penalties for municipal ordinance violations that are punitive in nature, rather than remedial as referenced in City of Chattanooga v. Davis and Barrett v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, 54 S.W.3d 248 (Tenn. 2001). In the Davis opinion, the court describes briefly the requirements that must be met in order to qualify a fine as remedial. The court also stated that while the punitive fine is capped at $50, the municipality could recover reasonable administrative expenses incurred in enforcing its municipal ordinances by provided a detailed statement of these expenses to the defendant as they were incurred in the individual case, in order to ensure it is not actually assessing a penalty in violation of the $50 fine clause in the Constitution. City of Chattanooga, 54 S.W.3d at 274, 275. The court admits that it is difficult for cities to make the distinction between remedial and punitive fines. It has been recommended that all penalties for municipal ordinance violations be limited to $50, pending further direction from the courts.

A violation of a municipal ordinance in and of itself cannot be punished by incarceration, since penalties for violations of municipal ordinances are civil in nature as seen in Bristol v. Burrow, 73 Tenn. 128 (1880); Deitch v. Chattanooga, 195 Tenn. 245, 258 S.W.2d 776 (1953); Memphis v. Smthye, 104 Tenn. 702, 58 S.W. 215 (1900); Guidi v. Memphis, 196 Tenn 13, 263 S.W.2d 532 (1953); Metro Government of Nashville & Davidson County v. Allen, 529 S.W.2d 699 (Tenn. 1975); City of Chattanooga v. Myers, 787 S.W.2d 921, 922 (Tenn. 1990); Mullins v. State, 380 S.W.2d 201 (Tenn. S.Ct. 1964); and Chattanooga v. Davis, 54 S.W.3d 248 (Tenn.S.Ct. 2001).