MOULTRIE — Tuesday night’s public hearing proved that the fire of opposition to countywide zoning hasn’t extinguished.

Several residents spoke against the provision that a waiver be signed when a person buys land in an agricultural zone to acknowledge that normal operation of a farm might produce smells, noise, dust, smoke and other unwanted effects.

“If some county official comes to me and asks me to sign a waiver, then I’m going to sue and take you to court,” said property owner Leland Dampier Jr.

Zoning committee Chairman Clarence Lowe, a farmer, said the zoning committee looked at ordinances of other agricultural counties in the state that take similar steps. Although the waiver might not hold up in court, he acknowledged, the intent was for property buyers to be made aware of those possibilities in an attempt to stave off complaints. County Attorney Bill McCalley advised the committee that under the principal of equal protection, the waiver might not be legally binding.

One of the examples of a complaint was if a homeowner’s garden turns brown after a crop duster sprays defoliate on a neighboring cotton field. Mark Davis, who just bought property in Colquitt County, said that crosses the line of reason.

“The good Lord gave me the ability to purchase the land. I should have the right to do with that land what I want to do with it as long it does not harm another individual,” he said. “And when you sit there and say that there is a possibility that someone might spray their toxic defoliate on my land; it might kill my child. ... No waiver is going to save them if they damage my children in the course.”

Members of the zoning committee who drafted the proposal fielded questions, and a couple of issues were brought to light through public comment that should be changed, they said. For instance, property owner Joe Taylor didn’t like a section in the ordinance that dictated that construction projects begun before the ordinance’s enforcement had to be completed within a year of its adoption.

“That’s only going to hurt the little guy,” said Taylor, who said that it takes many people years complete a house because they build when they can afford to.

Zoning committee member Jim Ward said that was not the intent of the section, adding that more research is needed to remedy Taylor’s concerns.

Davis agreed with Taylor and also believes that the proposed minimum size of houses in the ordinance would be a burden to many.

Taylor also wanted to know how much the ordinance’s enforcement will cost and how the county will pay for it. Lowe answered that enforcement will be funded by permit fees and fines, but the county has yet to release cost estimates or its intentions for fees and fines.

Lowe admitted that the draft if made law will have to be “tweaked” and changed as time goes on. County officials reminded those assembled that variances and spot zoning could be applied for and appeals can be made. There also was concern voiced by some attending that the yet-to-be-formed zoning appeals board might be influenced by money or power.