Chancellor J.B. Cox is weighing whether a 2025 zoning amendment is legally valid after Gateway at Lynchburg argued Moore County failed to provide proper public notice and follow the required procedures.

DUANE CROSS
MCO Publisher•Editor

On Monday, Jan. 12, Chancery Court Judge J.B. Cox said he would consider a motion that could overturn a zoning ordinance amendment at the heart of Gateway at Lynchburg LP’s lawsuit against Metro Moore County.

Gateway, which develops affordable and senior housing, wants the court to void a 2025 zoning amendment. The company says the county did not give the required public notice before passing changes that stopped a planned 42-unit affordable housing project.

At Monday’s hearing, Gateway’s lawyer listed several problems with the process, starting with the county's use of a blog-style news post as notice of the zoning amendment.

Gateway's Argument

Gateway says Moore County did not publish a formal legal notice about the ordinance’s first or second reading in a newspaper of general circulation. The county also did not post notice in the statewide public notice repository run by the Tennessee Press Association, as state law requires.

Instead, the county pointed to an April 23, 2025, online post that summarized a Metro Council meeting. Gateway argued that, based on Tennessee Court of Appeals precedent, unpaid news items do not meet the legal notice requirements for zoning changes.

Gateway also says the post did not have a caption or a full summary of the ordinance, which state law requires. It also did not give the minimum notice period set by Moore County’s zoning code.

State law requires at least 15 days’ notice before adopting a zoning amendment, but Moore County’s rules require 30 days. Gateway argued that the stricter local rule applies, and even if the blog post counted as notice, it was published less than 30 days before the council’s May 19 vote.

Gateway also raised concerns about the public meeting agenda. The company says the proposed zoning amendment was not put on a public agenda, which violates the Tennessee Open Meetings Act. That law requires agendas to be available at least 48 hours before a meeting.

Moore County's Response

Metro Moore County’s lawyers responded that Gateway’s request for a judgment is too early and that there are still facts in dispute. The county denied that notice was improper and said that, under Tennessee rules, denials and statements of not knowing enough must be accepted as true when deciding on the motion.

The county also said that proper notice was published and that The Lynchburg Times is a newspaper of general circulation. The Chancellor mentioned this issue but did not make a decision about it during the hearing.

At the hearing, the Chancellor asked if the main issue is what the right solution should be, since the county has not yet made a decision on Gateway’s zoning application. Gateway replied that if the ordinance is voided, their application should be reviewed under the old zoning rules.

The Chancellor did not make a decision right away, saying he needed more time to review the county’s response and the legal details. He will issue a written decision later.

Gateway has said throughout the case that the Tennessee Housing Development Agency identified Moore County as an area with a high need for affordable housing. The company also relied on several approvals, such as utility capacity confirmations and letters from county officials, before the zoning amendment was proposed.

The Chancellor’s final decision will determine whether the zoning amendment remains in place and whether Gateway’s proposed development can proceed under the old zoning rules.