This article has been updated with additional information. 

CLARKSVILLE, TN (CLARKSVILLE NOW) – A proposal that could change the land size requirements for agricultural (AG) zoning drew extensive debate at the Montgomery County Commission Monday night.

The resolution, sponsored by County Commissioner Michael Lankford, would request that the Regional Planning Commission study and amend the requirements for AG zoning, increasing the minimum parcel sizes from 1.5 acres to 5 acres. That means parcels below 5 acres would have to seek residential zoning when being broken up and developed. Currently, that can be done 1.5 acres at a time.

However, after several residents and county commissioners shared concerns about the implications for local farmers, the commission voted to table the discussion.

‘The current regulation is being somewhat abused’

Last week at the commission’s informal meeting, Lankford provided some background on what he was trying to accomplish.

“I feel like the current regulation is being somewhat abused,” Lankford said last week. “Currently, if we have a parcel that’s 1.5 acres and meets certain minimum criteria, it’s basically rubber-stamped, so to speak. It’ll still go through a certain process, but it’s pretty easy to get that done. So, I’m asking for that number to be raised. Currently, we’re seeing a lot of land split into smaller and smaller lots. Not for true AG use, but to get as many lots out of a particular piece of property as possible, creating pockets of development that skirt the intent of zoning.”

Essentially, 1.5-acre and 2-acre parcels that are used for houses are keeping AG zoning, when Lankford contends they should have residential zoning.

Lankford said by increasing the lot size, the county reinforces the principle that density should stairstep from the Planned Growth Area, “not jump sporadically into rural land.”

“And this adjustment will help us preserve the AG character in the county and help us with our long-term land use goals. Just to be clear, this isn’t about stopping growth, but it’s about guiding it responsibly. It’ll allow us to maintain the integrity of our rural areas and still allow for proper planning for future growth.”

‘Affordability is a serious concern’

Several residents spoke against the resolution, which included Christian Black on behalf of the Clarksville-Montgomery County Home Builders Association. Black said while he understands the intent, the change may hurt a number of people the County Commission serves.

“Let’s visualize this acreage: This entire courthouse is on about 1 acre, a 28,000-square-foot building,” Black said. “An NFL football field is also about 1 acre. The current AG zoning requires one and a half times that amount. The new proposal will make it five times that amount. That’s a huge amount of land for a home, especially for working-class families.”

| DOWNLOAD THE APP: Sign up for our free Clarksville Now app

Black asked if Montgomery County needs this change. “According to the MLS, only 28 new homes were sold on lots between 1.5 and 4.9 acres in the county over the last year — 28 homes,” he said. “Those are spread out across Clarksville, Southside, Cunningham, Palmyra and Woodlawn. That’s certainly not the kind of alarming growth that overwhelms the county services or infrastructure.

“Affordability is a serious concern; not everybody wants or can afford to maintain 5 acres. To build a $200,000 home on 1.5 acres requires about $60,000 a year in household income.” When you get to 5 acres, the entry level price jumps to $550,000, which requires $170,000 household income, Black said.

“This prices out 90% of our residents from being able to own a house on a couple acres in the county,” he said. “Who does this hurt? The workforce, the teachers, bus drivers, law enforcement, military families; it hurts young people who want to return to their communities after finishing school or finding a job. And it hurts retirees looking to come back home to their roots.”

‘We need to know where the growth is happening’

Lankford said that’s a mischaracterization of what the resolution is asking for. He said all the proposal looks to do, moving forward, is if you have an AG parcel that is less than 5 acres and you want new construction, go through the residential rezoning process that every other new build goes through, and let the commission have some insight on where growth is happening.

“I think the home builders had said this spreads growth out over the county, and I think that’s exactly what we’re trying to prevent,” Lankford said. “When we’re making decisions on where to buy that $3 million fire truck, or build that new school, or hire these teachers … we need to know where the growth is happening, and that’s what this is asking for.”

He said this resolution doesn’t hurt farmers, but makes the process easier for them. Lankford said the resolution ties in with county code as well.

| DON’T MISS A LOCAL STORY: Sign up for the free daily Clarksville Now email newsletter

Commissioner William Frye confirmed that this resolution refers to the rural area of the Growth Plan and spoke in favor of the proposal.

“If you remember last year we were presented with the new Growth Plan that the RPC put together for us,” Frye said. “By virtue of adopting that, we all kind of said, ‘Hey, this rural area is the area where we expect the county not to grow.’ So, that should be our position tonight too, that we don’t want growth happening that is kind of flying under the radar. Doing it in a way that’s not intended.”

‘Seems like more government regulation on farmers’

Other commissioners still had concerns. This includes County Commissioner Joe Smith, who said he would be directly affected.

“I’m going to be on the opposite end of the spectrum from my fellow commissioners who represent areas outside the city limits, and the reason being is I’m using myself as a prime example,” Smith said. “I have 18 acres in Fredonia, and if I want to give my children a piece of land, and this resolution does go forth to the RPC and comes back and it is a minimum of 5 acres, that would take me out of the Greenbelt. I use my farm to cut hay, three times a year right now, and sell it to local cattle farmers. But if I decide I have five children and I want to give one of them (some land) even, that’s going to take it down below what I have for the Greenbelt.

“To me, that isn’t fair and seems like more government regulation on farmers. It may not affect some big farmers, but for anybody who has a 10- to 20-acre plat, it’s going to affect them,” he said.

Smith asked about the county residents with plats in the rural areas that are already 3 to 4 acres. “Are they going to have to come in and reapply for a zoning change?” he asked. “Do you know how much a zoning change is? $2,000 roughly. So, you’re adding another burden on our citizens, which would be a government regulation at that point again. So, while I agree with the spirit of the resolution, to try and protect farmland, I feel like as a conservative myself, it’s more government overreach and causing people to go through more process to do what they want with their land.”

He said he also doesn’t understand the timing of the resolution with the zoning regulations being rewritten in 2025. “Why are we trying to force this down at this moment, while they are right in the middle of rewriting those zoning regulations that could come out with something that could spare some farmland or have an ability to do those sorts of things?” he said.

Smith said there are already things in place in Tennessee to protect farmland, such as the Tennessee Land Trust Act. “But to sit here and force another regulation on our citizens does not make sense to me,” he said.

Motion to table discussion passes

Smith proposed an amendment to reduce the acreage from 5 acres to 2.5. He also proposed for the timeline for the RPC to be extended from Aug. 1, 2025, to January 2026. “I want the RPC to at least have time to look at every avenue and all of the data of what this change would affect,” Smith said.

However, before voting on the amendment, the County Commission voted 17-4 on the motion to table the discussion. Voting no were Lankford, Frye, Nathan Burkholder and Jorge Padro. No date has been established to bring it back to the floor.

Lankford told Clarksville Now on Tuesday, while the commission voted to table the resolution, he still believes the proposal has merit and addresses real challenges around how we grow as a county.

“Over the past week, I’ve had the opportunity to meet with many residents, builders, real estate professionals and stakeholders. Some meaningful points came out of those conversations, and I appreciate the respectful and constructive dialogue. One of my top priorities has always been making sure that the voices of the people who live here—and who fund our community through their tax dollars—are considered in decisions that shape how and where we grow. That doesn’t mean stopping growth; it means being thoughtful about how we manage it. If we’re going to move forward with a change like this, it must be accompanied by an educational component—one that is unbiased, thorough, and rooted in real-world experience. It cannot be the kind of education where only selected facts or pieces of evidence are presented to push a specific narrative. True understanding comes from seeing the full picture, not just what supports one viewpoint.

“It’s also important to remember that we already have zoning minimums in place today. This proposal was simply about adjusting those minimums to reflect current growth patterns, infrastructure capacity, and long-term planning goals. It’s not about government overreach—it’s about aligning our regulations with the principles we already have on the books, especially in areas zoned for agricultural preservation. If this is considered government overreach, then every zoning decision the commission has ever made, including accepting the Comprehensive Plan and Growth Plan, would fall under the same label—but no one seemed concerned until now.”

Lankford said the community clearly supports the idea of more intentional growth, but getting there will take time, communication, as well as trust. “I remain committed to working toward that goal,” he said.

| MORE: County Commission OKs using $350,000 health grant to expand Greenway southeast of Clarksville