Kingsport Spirit

Tennessee’s 2026 certified population figures offer more than another round of “who is bigger?” comparisons. They reveal how Northeast Tennessee is organized—and point to one of the most consequential challenges facing the region’s future growth.

Kingsport’s certified population includes 54,660 residents in Sullivan County and 2,870 in Hawkins County, for a combined total of 57,530. Johnson City’s population is divided among Washington, Sullivan and Carter counties, totaling 74,943.

Those split figures remind us that city and county lines do not necessarily reflect how communities function. People cross them daily to work, shop, attend school, receive medical care, and enjoy parks, entertainment, and cultural amenities.

Here is the hotter take: the largest population category in the six-county table is not a city at all.

Unincorporated Sullivan County has 78,267 residents—more than either Johnson City or Kingsport. Unincorporated Washington County has 61,529, also more than Kingsport. Neither is a single community, of course. Each includes suburbs, rural areas, crossroads, and neighborhoods with different identities. Still, the numbers demonstrate the growing importance of county government.

Across Sullivan, Washington, Greene, Hamblen, Hawkins and Carter counties, the combined population is 559,891. Of those residents, 299,470—or 53.5 percent—live outside incorporated municipalities.

That population pattern has major implications because Tennessee substantially changed its annexation laws in 2014. Cities can no longer expand through unilateral annexation as they once did. Annexation now generally requires property-owner consent or approval through a referendum.

The result is a mismatch that will shape Northeast Tennessee for decades.

Cities have traditionally provided much of the infrastructure that makes urban development possible, including public water, sanitary sewer and professional fire protection. Yet most of the region’s remaining developable land lies outside municipal boundaries.

As subdivisions and commercial development move into those areas, county governments will inherit responsibilities that are more complicated than they may first appear.

County highway departments will be responsible for reviewing, inspecting and eventually maintaining new streets and roads. More urban development may also bring sidewalks, curbs, gutters, storm drainage systems, intersections and traffic-control needs once associated primarily with cities.

Each new development creates a long-term public obligation. A street approved today may require resurfacing, drainage repairs and traffic improvements for generations. Poorly designed stormwater systems can create flooding and maintenance problems far beyond the original development.

Meanwhile, cities may be asked to extend water and sewer lines beyond their boundaries without receiving the full property-tax revenue associated with the development those utilities make possible. Fire protection may require new stations, equipment, hydrants, and staffing, even when growth occurs outside the city providing the service.

And a patchwork of utility districts with varying degrees of capability to support development further complicates matters.

It’s important to note that city residents are also county taxpayers. They pay municipal taxes to maintain city streets and services, as well as county taxes that support county responsibilities, including roads outside the cities. County highway departments generally do not maintain municipal streets, but municipal taxpayers still contribute to county government.

This does not mean city residents should not support county services. They benefit from county school funding, courts, elections, records, licenses, and other countywide functions. But as development becomes more urban outside city limits, it is time to take a closer look at public finance, public services, and how costs are shared among municipal residents, unincorporated residents, cities, counties, developers, and utility systems.

Counties that rise to the occasion will need more than accommodating zoning policies. They will need professional planning, engineering expertise, strong construction standards, utility partnerships, capital-improvement programs and a clear understanding of the long-term costs created by today’s development decisions.

The population is already tilted toward unincorporated areas, and most future developable land is there as well. The counties that successfully accommodate growth, coordinate with their cities and fairly distribute its costs will not merely respond to the region’s future.

They will control it.