Planning should run on facts, not water worries

Water loss, water availability are not the same thing. Distinction matters as Moore County weighs long-term growth.

#Opinion • 2:45 p.m. May 16, 2026

Moore County should take water loss seriously.

No one can shrug at a utility report showing 42.6% non-revenue water. No one can pretend that treated water disappearing before it reaches a paying customer is harmless. That water costs money to pump, treat, move, and monitor. Even when some of it can be explained by flushing, firefighting, in-house use, or known leaks, it still matters.

But water loss and water availability are not the same thing.

Two Different Questions. That Matters.

That distinction matters right now because Planning and Zoning has used water availability as a red flag during discussions with The Gateway Companies about the proposed apartment complex on Main Street behind the Moore County Co-Op. MUD Manager Ronnie Cunningham has said water is not a concern. More specifically, Cunningham said water loss is not a factor in this discussion.

That should carry weight.

Planning and Zoning should not slow or block growth over water when the water department says water availability is not the problem.

And no, that does not mean the utility’s job is simply to “sell taps,” as one line of criticism suggests. That is too cute by half. Ask any member of the utility: MUD’s job is to provide water to customers. There is a difference. Selling taps is a transaction. Providing water is a public utility function. The MUD board understands that, inconveniently enough, that is its job.

That does not mean P&Z should stop asking questions. They should ask hard ones. They should ask whether the lines are adequate. They should ask whether sewer capacity is adequate. They should ask whether fire flow, pressure, roads, schools, traffic, and stormwater can handle a project.

That is Planning and Zoning’s job.

But if the question is water availability, then the answer should come from the people responsible for the water system.

Water Loss Is Real. So Is Context.

MUD has already acknowledged the water-loss issue. The department’s official water-loss figure remains 42.6%, above Tennessee’s excessive water-loss threshold. Internally, MUD has begun separating known non-revenue water from water it still cannot explain, bringing the unknown-loss figure to 29.8%. That does not erase the official number, but it does sharpen the picture. It tells officials where the problem may be and where crews need to look next.

That is not denial. It is the beginning of the diagnosis.

The new Kamstrup meters are part of that work. MUD officials have said the system is helping identify underground leaks that might not show up on the surface. Cunningham cited one leak on Merrell Lane that appeared to have been running since October, with water going down instead of bubbling up in the road or ditch.

That kind of information matters. A utility cannot fix what it cannot see. Better meters give MUD a better chance to find leaks, document losses, and tighten the system over time.

MUD is also looking past the immediate problem. The board has voted to buy land for a proposed new water treatment plant. Officials have said the land would be needed for clearwell and lagoon expansion, and engineer Bryant Griffin previously said the upgrades could reduce the plant’s capacity usage from roughly 80% to about 50%. That would give Moore County more room for long-term growth.

Water loss should stay on the public’s radar. It should not become a magic phrase that ends a land-use discussion before the facts are in.

Schools Need Planning, Not Panic

At the May 5 Planning and Zoning meeting, Director of Schools Chad Moorehead gave the commission a clearer picture of another pressure point: student enrollment. Moorehead said the district gained 44 students this school year compared with the same time last year. The average graduating class runs between 65 and 75 students. The MCHS Class of 2026 has 55 students. Moore County Schools now has about 865 students.

If enrollment pushes past 1,000 students, Moorehead said, the district will begin feeling space pressure more sharply, especially at the elementary school, where class-size requirements leave less flexibility.

That is a real concern.

But it is not a reason for Planning and Zoning to freeze housing. It is a reason for the Metro Council to plan.

District 2 Council member Douglas Carson said as much in a 2025 op-ed piece for the Observer: "For far too long, Moore County has operated without foundational five- or 10-year plans. Decisions have often been made reactively rather than proactively, resulting in inefficient spending and missed opportunities."

Carson followed up during the Metro Council meeting on Jan. 19, 2026: “We needed 3-, 5-, 10-year plans to departments as far as budget sources, plan for the future.”

He was right.

The problem is that the topic has not been mentioned in a council meeting since.

Apparently, long-term planning is easier to praise than to schedule.

That is where the frustration should land. Not for families who may need apartments. Not every developer who walks into the room. And not on Planning and Zoning, trying to make policy by saying no to housing.

Long-term school capacity is a Metro Council problem. It requires budget planning, capital planning, land-use planning, and an honest conversation about what kind of county Moore County is becoming.

Put Fire Flow On Paper

Fire protection belongs in the facts column, too.

At the same Planning and Zoning meeting, interim fire chief Hunter Case said an engineering review would be needed to determine the required fire flow for a development of that type and whether the county’s system could support it while still meeting daily demand.

That is exactly the right way to handle it.

Do the engineering review. Get the fire-flow requirement. Compare it against the system. Make the developer answer the technical questions. Set conditions for approval if needed.

But do not let one commissioner’s concern become a substitute for facts.

Golden raised water capacity as a concern, but the meeting did not produce a technical finding that water availability should stop the project. That matters. The utility manager did not treat water loss as relevant to the development question. The fire chief asked for engineering. The school director gave enrollment context.

Those are different lanes.

Moore County needs to keep them separate.

A Bad Feeling Is Not A Finding

Growth should still be measured. Gateway should still have to answer for traffic, density, design, drainage, public safety access, neighborhood fit, and infrastructure impact. The burden remains on the developer to prove the project works for that part of Moore County.

But Planning and Zoning should not use water as a broad veto if MUD says water availability is not the issue.

There is a difference between caution and obstruction.

Caution says: Show us the utility letter. Show us the pressure data. Show us the fire-flow analysis. Show us the connection plan. Show us whether the existing system can serve this project without hurting current customers.

Obstruction says: We have a bad feeling about water, so the discussion stops here.

Moore County cannot afford the second approach.

The county needs places for people to live. It needs housing options for workers, young families, seniors, teachers, first responders, and people who already have ties here but cannot find a place they can afford. Saying no to growth because growth feels uncomfortable is not planning. It is delay dressed up as prudence.

Put The Accountability Where It Belongs

At the same time, MUD cannot expect the public to ignore the water-loss number. A 42.6% official loss figure is serious. It deserves regular public updates, plain-English explanations, and proof that the number is moving in the right direction.

But that accountability belongs where it belongs.

The MUD board should answer for the water system. Planning and Zoning should be responsible for land use. The Metro Council should be held accountable for broader policy and growth decisions. The school board should keep sounding the alarm when enrollment trends point toward future space needs. Fire officials should require the engineering review needed to protect life and property.

Those roles overlap, but they are not interchangeable.

If MUD says the county has enough water for a proposed development, Planning and Zoning should not substitute its own anxiety for the utility’s technical judgment.

Ask the questions. Demand the documentation. Require the studies. Place conditions on approval where justified.

But the premise that Moore County’s water capacity should drown out development cannot carry the day when the utility says water availability is not the problem.