ÿWPCç …# VUNa %¯ 0(µbÝw.å4 ' 6 0l> 0Dª 0Jî 0T8 0^Œ 0hê 0rR 0|Ä 0†@ 0Æ 1uV 0dË U>/B)mDC– AMÙU*&Pv~avÓß D3² Bå 0@ AOBÆ‘ 0DW D/› BʘHP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡- ù-ÿ#D$D$D$P$D$Ó€$DÒ x93|x$((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÔ€$ÔÔ€$ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€$XÔÌÌNovember€13,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPt HHøHÿöÿòV,(ühhØ hd'0ÿÎÿºF ® Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Geneva ÒÒ  BA Op Geneva Ò,,,,'ÿÿdxd d("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€64XXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  Ñò ò›J.€M.€TUCKER,€ARCHIEà àà àà à)à àÌRICHARDSON,€CURTIS€OWENS,à à)ÌPRESTON€W.€CARROLL,€and€C.€N.€à à)ÌWHICKER,à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiffs/Appellants,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHumphreys€ChanceryÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àCase€No.€22„29ÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAppeal€No.ÌÙ€€ÙœßL€#%";+'h|İ` ç `€€Lß›à àà àà àà àà àà à)à à01A01„9605„CH„00208ÌHUMPHREYS€COUNTY,€TENNESSEE,à à)Ìand€HUMPHREYS€COUNTY€BOARDà à)ÌOF€COMMISSIONERS,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendants/Appellees.à àà à)Ìó óÌò òÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OFÏTENNESSEEÌà@ àMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€HUMPHREYS€COUNTY€ÌÓ  ÓCHANCERY€COURT€OF€WAVERLY,€TENNESSEEÌÓ  ÓÌà@ àHONORABLE€LEONARD€W.€MARTIN,€JUDGEÌó óÌÌFrank€M.€FlyÌP.O.€Box€398ÌMurfreesboro,€Tennessee€37133ÌÌBarry€TurnerÌDeputy€Attorney€GeneralÌEnvironmental€DivisionÌ450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌNashville,€Tennessee€37243ÌATTORNEYS€FOR€PLAINTIFFS/APPELLEESÌÌKeith€McCordÌMcCord,€Troutman€&€Irwin,€P.C.Ì1300€First€Tennessee€PlazaÌP.O.€Box€2046ÌKnoxville,€Tennessee€37901ÌÌClifford€K.€McGown,€Jr.Ì113€North€Court€SquareÌWaverly,€Tennessee€37285ÌATTORNEYS€FOR€PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTSÌÌÌÓ  Óò òAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDó óÌÓ  ÓÌÌà àà àà àà àà àHENRY€F.€TODDÌà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€MIDDLE€SECTIONÌCONCUR:ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEÌBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEÌÌÓ  Óò òJ.€M.€TUCKER,€ARCHIEà àà àà à)à àÌRICHARDSON,€CURTIS€OWENS,à à)ÌPRESTON€W.€CARROLL,€and€C.€N.€à à)ÌWHICKER,à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiffs/Appellants,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHumphreys€ChanceryÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àCase€No.€22„29ÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à01A01„9605„CH„00208ÌHUMPHREYS€COUNTY,€TENNESSEE,à à)Ìand€HUMPHREYS€COUNTY€BOARDà à)ÌOF€COMMISSIONERS,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendants/Appellees.à àà à)ÌÓÓó óÌÔ€ „Ôà@ àòòò òO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óÔ€ XÔÌà àThe€complexity€of€this€suit€and€this€appeal€is€demonstrated€by€the€issues€presented€onÏappeal€by€plaintiffs,€which€issues€are:ÌÓÓà àà àI.à àWhether€the€Trial€Court€erred€as€a€matter€of€lawÌà àà àin€€holding€€that€defendant,€Humphreys€County,€had€€the€Ìà àà àauthority€€in€€May€€of€€1993€€to€€approve€€or€€disapprove€Ìà àà àPlaintiffsðð€€landfill€under€T.C.A.ðððð€68„211„701€€throughÌà àà à708€(ð ðLocal€Approval€Lawðð).ÌÌà àà àII.à àWhether€€the€€action€of€the€Humphreys€€County€Ìà àà àBoard€€of€€Commissioners€€€in€€voting€€€to€€€€disapproveÌà àà àplaintiffsðð€€landfill€€€at€€a€€public€€hearing€€called€€at€€€theÌà àà àrequest€€of€€€€ð ðinterested€€personsðð€€pursuant€€to€€T.C.A.€Ìà àà àðð€68„211„703(e)€€is€€null€€and€€void€and€€violated€T.C.A.Ìà àà àðð€68„211„704(a)€€and€€T.C.A.€ðð€5„5„105€as€€a€matter€of€Ìà àà àlaw.ÌÌà àà àIII.à àWhether€€the€failure€of€€the€Humphreys€€CountyÌà àà àBoard€€of€€Commissioners€€to€€approve€€or€€€disapprove€Ìà àà àPlaintiffsðð€€€proposed€€€landfill€€as€€required€€€by€€€T.C.A.Ìà àà àðð€68„211„704(a)€€constituted€€approval€of€the€landfill€asÌà àà àa€€matter€€of€€€law,€€thereby€€entitling€€the€€€plaintiffs€€€toÌà àà àproceed€€with€€the€€permitting€€of€€the€€landfill€€with€theÌà àà àTennessee€€€€€€Department€€€€€of€€€€€€Environment€€€€€and€Ìà àà àConservation.€ÌÌà àà àIV.à àWhether€€€the€€Trial€€Court€erred€€as€a€matter€ofÌà àà àlaw€in€holding,€at€the€€insistence€of€€the€defendant,€€that€Ìà àà àthe€scope€of€judicial€review€under€T.C.A.€ðð€68„211„704Ìà àà à(c)€was€by€common€law€writ€of€certiorari€(T.C.A.€ðð€27„Ìà àà à8„101)€€rather€€than€€a€€de€novo€€trial€on€all€issues€in€the€Ìà àà àchancery€court.ÌÌà àà àV.à àWhether€€€the€€€€Trial€€Court€€erred€€in€€€denyingÌà àà àplaintiffsðð€€motion€€in€€limine€€to€€exclude€€or€€€limit€€and€Ìà àà àrestrict€€the€€admissibility€and€€use€€at€€trial€€as€€evidenceÌà àà àcertain€statements€and€documents€which€€appear€€in€€the€Ìà àà àtranscript€of€the€public€hearing,€in€re:€òòLandfill€€Proposalóó,Ìà àà àconducted€€on€€May€11,€1993,€€and€€thereafter€€€allowedÌà àà àsuch€€statements€€and€€documents€€to€€be€€introduced€€as€Ìà àà àevidence€over€objections€of€plaintiffs.ÌÌà àà àVI.à àWhether€the€Trial€Court€erred€as€a€matter€of€law€Ìà àà àin€holding€€€that€€the€€Humphreys€€€County€€€€Board€€€€of€Ìà àà àCommissioners€€€€had€€€the€€€discretionary€€€authority€€€to€Ìà àà àapprove€or€disapprove€plaintiffsðð€landfill€under€€the€localÌà àà àapproval€law.ÌÌà àà àVII.à àWhether€the€Trial€Court€erred€as€a€matter€of€lawÌà àà àin€holding€that€the€defendant,€Humphreys€County€BoardÌà àà àof€€Commissioners,€€did€€not€act€€arbitrarily,€capriciously,€Ìà àà àillegally€or€unreasonably€in€refusing€to€approve€plaintiffsðð€Ìà àà àproposed€landfill€under€the€local€approval€law.à àÌà àà àÌà àà àVIII.à àWhether€the€Trial€Court€erred€as€€a€matter€of€€lawÌà àà àin€€failing€€to€€find€€that€€the€€€plaintiffs€€were€€€entitled€€€to€Ìà àà àapproval€of€€their€landfill€€under€€the€€€local€€approval€€law€Ìà àà àbased€€€upon€€€the€€€preponderance€€€of€€€€the€€€undisputed,€Ìà àà àadmissible,€€material€€and€€relevant€€evidence€€and€€€if€€€so,€Ìà àà àwhether€€the€€plaintiffs€are€entitled€€to€a€€judgment€in€€this€Ìà àà àcourt€holding€that€the€defendant€was€required€to€approve€Ìà àà àplaintiffsðð€landfill€under€the€local€approval€law.ÌÌà àà àIX.à àWhether€€€the€€Trial€€Court€€erred€€in€€€dismissingÌà àà àplaintiffsðð€claims€challenging€the€constitutionality€€of€€theÌà àà àlocal€€approval€law€€and€€T.C.A.€ðð€68„211„105(h)€on€the€Ìà àà àgrounds€€that€€the€chancery€court€lacked€€subject€€matter€Ìà àà àjurisdiction.ÌÌà àà àX.à àWhether€€the€€local€approval€law€(T.C.A.€ðððð€68„Ìà àà à211„701,€€et€seq.)€€€and€€T.C.A.€€€ðð€68„211„105(h)€€€€are€Ìà àà àunconstitutional.ÌÓÓÌà àPlaintiffððs€brief€states:ÌÓÓà àà à€€€€All€€€evidence€€€introduced€€€in€€€the€€trial€€court€€was€Ìà àà àdocumentary€€evidence.€€€No€€witnesses€€testified.€€The€Ìà àà àmaterial€facts€are€undisputed€and€were€admitted€in€€the€€Ìà àà àpleadings€and€other€documents€filed.ÌÓÓÌà àBecause€of€this€statement€the€facts€stated€hereafter€will€be€only€those€which€areÏsupported€by€citation€of€pleadings€or€documents€in€the€record.ÌÌà àAs€material€to€the€issues€presented,€the€law,€facts€and€procedure€were€as€follows:ÌÌà àT.C.A.€ðððð€68„211„101€et€seq.,€the€Tennessee€Solid€Waste€Disposal€Act,€vests€in€theÏTennessee€Department€of€Environment€and€Conservation€the€authority€to€regulate,€superviseÏand€control€solid€waste€disposal,€including€the€issuance€of€permits€to€construct€and€operateÏsolid€waste€disposal€facilities.ÌÌà àT.C.A.€ðððð€68„211„701„708,€the€ð ðLocal€Approval€Lawðð€grants€local€governing€bodiesÏthe€power€to€approve€or€disapprove€the€construction€of€private€solid€waste€landfills€within€theirÏjurisdiction€prior€to€consideration€of€such€landfills€by€the€State€authorities€if€no€zoningÏordinance€€is€in€effect€in€the€jurisdiction€and€if€the€governing€authority€has€by€2/3€vote€acceptedÍsuch€authority.€€No€zoning€ordinance€has€been€adopted€in€Humphreys€County.€€On€DecemberÏ9,€1991,€the€defendant€Board€duly€accepted€said€authority€by€ð ðResolution€43.ððÌÌà àOn€February€17,€1993,€plaintiffs€submitted€to€the€Board€an€ð ðApplication,€PublicÏNotice,€and€Fact€Sheet€for€Proposed€Landfill€in€Humphreys€Countyðð€and€ð ðPreliminary€OpinionÏof€Site€Feasibility€for€Private€Municipal€Solid€Waste€Facility€in€Humphreys€County.ððÌÌà àOn€April€16,€27€and€30,€1993,€defendants€duly€published€notice€that€a€public€hearing€inÏrespect€to€said€application€would€be€held€on€May€11,€1993.€€The€notice€concluded€as€follows:ÌÓÓà àà à€€€€The€€Purpose€€of€€€the€€meeting€€will€€€be€€to€€fulfill€€€the€Ìà àà àrequirements€€of€€€TCA€€68„211„703€€et€€seq.€€and€€TDECÌà àà à1200„1„7,€and€to€gather€facts€in€order€for€€the€HumphreysÌà àà àCounty€Commissioners€to€make€a€decision.ÌÌà àà à1.€€The€Hearing€shall€be€recorded.Ìà àà à2.€€Any€person€speaking€will€come€forth,€state€€their€name,€Ìà àà àaddress,€and€speak€into€the€microphone.Ìà àà à3.€€The€€Humphreys€€County€€Commissioners€€will€only€be€Ìà àà àallowed€to€ask€questions€of€the€investors.Ìà àà à4.€€Each€€person€€speaking€€will€€be€sworn€in€by€€the€CourtÌà àà àClerk.€Ìà àà à5.€€Each€side€shall€have€one€designated€speaker€€and€€shall€Ìà àà àbe€€allowed€one€hour€each.€€Then€each€side€shall€€have€€an€Ìà àà àadditional€fifteen€minutes€for€rebuttal.€The€Commissioners€Ìà àà àwill€then€hold€their€meeting.ÌÓÓÌà àOn€May€7,€1993,€the€defendants€published€notice€of€a€Board€meeting€to€be€held€on€MayÏ13,€1993€to€consider€the€following€business:ÌÌÓÓà àà à1.€€Resolution€on€a€$2,200,000.€€School€Capital€Outlay€NotesÌà àà à2.€€Resolution€for€the€Buffalo€Mall€ProjectÌà àà à3.€€Voting€on€a€private€LandfillÌÓÓÌà àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€public€meeting€on€May€11,€1993,€the€Board€voted€on€a€motionÏto€reject€the€application€of€plaintiffs.€€The€vote€was€11€yeses,€1€nay,€one€pass,€one€absent;€andÏthe€motion€was€declared€carried.ÌÌà àNo€action€was€taken€on€the€proposed€landfill€at€the€May€13,€1993,€meeting.€€ÌÌà àOn€June€10,€1993,€plaintiffs€filed€with€the€State€Environment€Department€an€applicationÏfor€approval€of€the€landfill.€€ÌÌà àOn€the€same€date,€June€10,€1993,€plaintiffs€filed€the€present€action€against€the€CountyÏand€Board.ÌÌà àThe€complaint€sought€a€declaratory€judgment€that€the€action€of€the€Board€on€May€11,Ï1993,€was€null€and€void,€œand€that›€the€failure€of€the€Board€to€timely€act€upon€the€applicationÏconstituted€an€approval;€that€the€Court€grant€a€de€novo€review€as€provided€by€T.C.A.€ðð€68„211„704(c)€and€grant€the€application;€and€that€the€Court€review€the€actions€of€the€Board€andÏreverse€them€as€arbitrary,€illegal,€capricious€and€discriminatory.ÌÌà àThe€Board€answered€admitting€the€facts€alleged€but€denying€plaintiffsðð€right€to€relief.€ÌÌà àOn€December€2,€1994,€plaintiffs€moved€for€summary€judgment.€€On€March€27,€1995,Ïthe€Trial€Court€entered€an€order€overruling€the€motion€and€stating:ÌÓÓà àà à€€€€On€€the€€issue€of€whether€the€de€novo€review€by€€theÌà àà àCourt€€pursuant€€to€€T.C.A.€ðð€68„211„704(c)€is€€limitedÌà àà àto€€a€€de€€novo€review€of€the€record€of€€the€proceedingsÌà àà àbefore€the€County€Commission€without€the€€instructionÌà àà à(sic)€of€additional€evidence,€or€whether€the€hearing€will€€€Ìà àà àbe€completely€de€novo€without€regard€€€to€€the€€actionsÌà àà àtaken€€at€€the€€County€Commission€€level,€the€Court€has€Ìà àà àconcluded€€that€€the€€Court€will€€conduct€€a€€completelyÌà àà ànew€hearing€with€each€party€having€the€right€to€present€Ìà àà àtestimony€from€witnesses€and€€other€€evidence€€materialÌà àà àto€€the€€€issues€€from€€which€€the€€Court€€will€€render€€its€Ìà àà àdecision€€based€€upon€€the€€evidence€€presented€€€at€€€the€Ìà àà àhearing.ÌÓÓÌà àOn€June€21,€1995,€in€response€to€a€ð ðmotion€to€reconsider,ðð€the€Trial€Court€entered€anÏorder€stating:ÌÓÓÌà àà à1.€€Plaintiffððs€oral€€Motion€€to€€Amend€€the€Complaint€€inÌà àà àthis€cause€to€include€a€challenge€€to€€the€constitutionalityÌà àà àof€the€Jackson€Law€is€hereby€granted.ÌÌà àà à2.€€Defendantððs€€Motion€€€to€€Reconsider€the€€method€€of€Ìà àà àJudicial€review€prescribed€by€the€Jackson€Law€is€€herebyÌà àà àgranted.ÌÌà àà à3.€€The€Court€€holds€€that€€the€method€of€€judicial€€reviewÌà àà àprescribed€€by€the€Jackson€law€shall€be€€by€Common€LawÌà àà àWrit€of€Certiorari€on€the€record€produced€€from€the€JointÌà àà àPublic€€Hearing€€and€€Meeting€of€€the€€Humphrey€County€Ìà àà àCommission€held€on€May€11,€1993€to€determine€whetherÌà àà àor€not€the€Humphreys€County€Commission€acted€illegallyÌà àà àor€beyond€the€scope€of€its€authority.ÌÌà àà à4.€€Final€hearing€in€this€cause€is€scheduled€for€October€2,Ìà àà à1995€at€9€a.m.ÌÓÓÌà àOn€August€7,€1995,€plaintiffs€filed€an€ð ðAmended€and€Supplemental€Complaintðð€whichÏadded€paragraphs€to€the€original€complaint.€€An€amended€complaint€supersedes€and€replacesÏthe€original€complaint.€€In€substance,€œhowever,€the›€pleading€was€an€ð ðamendment€of€the€originalÏcomplaint€and€supplemental€complaint.ðð€€The€August€7,€1995€pleading€alleged€that€T.C.A.€ððÏ68„211„701€was€unconstitutional.€€Notice€of€the€pleading€was€served€on€the€Attorney€GeneralÍand€Reporter€who€moved€to€dismiss€because€plaintiffs€had€not€exhausted€their€administrativeÏremedies.€€The€defendants€joined€in€the€motion.ÌÌà àA€hearing€on€the€motion€was€held€on€September€12,€1995.€€On€September€12,€plaintiffsÏfiled€a€ð ðmotion€in€limineðð€to€exclude€all€evidence€offered€by€opponents€of€the€application€at€theÏMay€11,€1993,€public€meeting.ÌÌà àOn€November€3,€plaintiffs€filed€a€ð ðSecond€amended€and€Supplement€Complaint,ððÏalleging€that€Resolution€43,€whereby€the€Board€accepted€the€Local€Approval€Law,€was€invalid.€ÏNo€order€is€found€granting€leave€for€this€pleading.Ì€€Ìà àOn€November€3,€1995,€the€Trial€Judge€orally€overruled€the€motion€in€limine€andÏconducted€the€final€hearing.ÌÌÓÓà àOn€November€6,€1995,€the€Trial€Judge€ordered:ÌÌà àà à€€€€It€€is€€hereby€ORDERED€that€the€Attorney€GeneralððsÌà àà àmotion€€to€€dismiss€€the€€claims€€in€€plaintiffððs€€€amended€Ìà àà àcomplaint€is€granted€and€plaintiffs€shall€not€be€permittedÌà àà àto€challenge€the€constitutionality€of€the€ð ðJackson€LawððÌà àà àIn€this€pending€action.ÌÓÓà àà àÌà àOn€December€26,€1995,€the€Trial€Court€entered€Final€Judgment€stating:ÌÓÓÌà àà à€€€€The€Court€finds€and€concludes€that€said€Resolution€No.€43Ìà àà àis€valid,€has€not€expired,€and€is€in€full€force€and€effect.ÌÌà àà à€€€€It€€is€€hereby€€ORDERED,€ADJUDGED€AND€DECREEDÌà àà àthat€€the€Complaint€filed€by€Plaintiffs€in€this€cause€be,€and€the€Ìà àà àsame€is,€here€dismissed,€the€Court€having€concluded€that€theÌà àà àDefendant,€€Humphreys€€County€€€Commission,€€did€€not€€act€Ìà àà àillegally,€€arbitrarily€€or€€capriciously€€in€€denying€approval€of€Ìà àà àPlaintiffððs€€€application€€to€€construct€€€a€€€private€€€landfill€€€in€Ìà àà àHumphreys€€County,€€Tennessee,€€on€May€11,€1993,€and€that€Ìà àà àthere€€is€€sufficient€€material€evidence€in€the€record€to€support€Ìà àà àthe€€Defendantsðð€€decision€€to€€disapprove€€the€location€of€the€ÌÓÓà àà àlandfill€in€Humphreys€County.Ìœ›œÌÌÌÌÓ  Óò ò›FIRST€ISSUE€„€òòVALIDITY€OF€RESOLUTION€43óó.ó óÌÓ  Ӝ̛à àà àPlaintiffs€insist€that,€on€December€9,€1991,€the€date€of€said€resolution,€theÏstatutory€provision€for€it€had€expired.€€T.C.A.€ðð€68„211„708€provided:ÌÓÓà àà à€€€€This€part€shall€remain€effective€until€the€approval€andÌà àà àeffective€€implementation€€of€€the€plan€as€set€forth€in€the€Ìà àà àð ðTennessee€€Solid€€Waste€€Planning€and€Recovery€Act,ððÌà àà àcompiled€€in€€part€€6€€of€€this€€chapter,€or€June€30,€1994,€Ìà àà àwhichever€shall€first€occur.ÌÓÓÌà àDecember€9,€1991,€occurred€before€June€30,€1994;€hence€the€only€ground€to€deny€theÏauthority€of€the€Board€to€pass€Resolution€43€was€the€prior€ð ðapproval€and€implementation€of€theÏplan€as€set€forth€in€Tennessee€Solid€Waste€Planning€and€Recovery€Actðð€compiled€in€Part€6€ofÏthis€chapter.€€Part€6€of€this€chapter€is€entitled€ð ðSolid€Waste€Planning€and€Recoveryðð€and€isÏcomposed€of€Sections€68„211„601€through€608.€€Section€68„11„603€requires€the€state€planningÏoffice€to€establish€by€January€1,€1991,€a€comprehensive€solid€waste€management€plan€for€theÏState.€€It€also€requires€the€State€and€development€districts€to€prepare€and€adopt€regional€solidÏwaste€plans,€but€no€time€frame€is€prescribed.€€Succeeding€sections€provide€for€developmentÏand€distribution€of€guidelines,€functions€of€the€Department€of€General€Services,€andÏDepartment€of€Transportation,€and€disposal€of€batteries.ÌÌà àNo€evidence€is€cited€or€found€that,€on€December€9,€1991,€Part€6€of€Chapter€211€of€TitleÏ68€of€the€code€had€been€effectively€implemented.€€Plaintiffs€insist€that€Part€6€was€effectivelyÏimplemented€by€the€enactment€of€Part€8,€the€ð ðSolid€Waste€Management€Actðð€(T.C.A.€ðððð€68„211„801€et€seq.)€in€1991.€€Plaintiffsðð€brief€does€not€explain€how€Part€8€effectively€implementedÏPart€6,€and€it€is€apparent€to€this€Court€that€it€did€no€do€so.ÌÌà àPlaintiffs€next€insist€that€the€effect€of€Resolution€43€expired€prior€to€May€11,€1993,Ïbecause€€that€it€stated:ÌÓÓà àà à€€€€Sections€€3€€through€€6€€of€Chapter€515€of€the€Public€Acts€Ìà àà àof€1989,€are€hereby€adopted€by€the€required€two„thirds€(2/3)Ìà àà àvote€and€shall€be€operative€in€accordance€with€the€provisionsÌà àà àof€€Chapter€€515€of€the€Public€Acts€of€1989€from€the€time€ofÌà àà àpassage€and€approval,€the€public€welfare€requiring€it.€ÌÓÓà àà àÌà àThe€above€discussion€of€the€meaning€of€the€statute€disposes€of€any€argument€thatÏreference€to€it€created€any€limitations€invalidating€the€Resolution.ÌÌThe€first€issue€is€resolved€in€favor€of€the€defendants.ÌÌÓ  Óò òSECOND€ISSUE€„€òòVALIDITY€OF€ACTION€OF€BOARD€ON€MAY€11,€1993.óóó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àPlaintiffs€next€insist€that€the€action€of€the€Board€on€May€11,€1993,€disapprovingÏplaintiffððs€application€was€void€because€it€was€not€timely€executed.ÌÌà àT.C.A.€ðð€68„211„704(a)€reads€in€pertinent€part€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓò òà àà à€€€€Time€limit€for€determination€„€Criteria€considered€„ó óÌà àà à(a)€Within€€thirty€€(30)€days€after€notice€and€an€opportunityÌà àà àfor€€a€€€public€€hearing€€€as€€provided€€in€€ðð€68„211„703,€€the€Ìà àà àcounty€€legislative€€body,€€the€€municipal€governing€body€orÌà àà àboth€such€entities€shall€approve€or€disapprove€the€proposedÌà àà ànew€€construction€€for€solid€waste€disposal€by€land€filling€orÌà àà àsolid€waste€processing€by€land€filling.ÌÓÓÌÓ  ÓÓÓò òà à„€„€„ÌÓ  Óó óÌà àà àÌÓÓà àð ðWithin€30€days€after€notice€and€opportunity€for€a€public€hearingðð€must€be€interpretedÏin€the€light€of€ðð€68„211„703.ÌÌÓÓà àPertinent€requirements€of€ðð€68„211„703€are:ÌÌà à1.à àPublic€noticeÌà à2.à à30€days€or€more€œfor›€commentsÌà à3.à àA€public€hearing€if€required€within€the€30€day€comment€period.Ìà à4.à à15€days€notice€of€the€public€hearing.ÌÌÓÓà àAs€above€stated,€plaintiffsðð€application€was€filed€with€the€Board€on€February€17,€1993,Ïand€the€first€notice€was€published€by€the€Board€on€April€16,€some€two€months€later.€€It€may€beÏargued€that€this€was€an€unreasonable€delay,€but€the€statute€does€not€set€a€time€frame€for€theÏpublication.€€Thus,€this€delay€does€not€affect€the€validity€of€the€action€of€the€Board.ÌÌà àThe€date€of€the€last€publication€was€April€30,€which€was€11€days€before€the€publicÏhearing,€but€the€first€publication€on€April€16€was€some€25€days€before€the€hearing.€€This€was€aÏsatisfactory€compliance€with€ðð€68„211„703.ÌÌà àThe€opportunity€for€public€hearing€occurred€on€May€11,€1993,€without€undue€delay,Ïand€the€action€of€the€Board€took€place€on€the€same€date,€so€that€it€clearly€took€place€within€30Ïdays€after€opportunity€for€public€hearing€and€was€timely€under€the€statute.ÌÌà àPlaintiffsðð€next€complain€that€the€Board€was€not€validly€called€to€meet€on€May€11,Ï1993,€citing€T.C.A.ðð€5„5„105€as€follows:ÌÓÓÌà àà à€€€€€ò òSpecial€meetingó ó.€„€(a)(1)€The€county€executive€has€Ìà àà àthe€€power€€to€€convene€€the€€legislative€body€in€special€Ìà àà àsession€€when,€€in€€the€€county€€executiveððs€opinion,€the€Ìà àà àpublic€necessities€require€it.Ìà àà à€€€€€(2)€€The€€call€€or€notice€shall€specify€the€objects€and€Ìà àà àpurposes€€for€which€€such€€special€session€is€called,€andÌà àà àno€€other€€business€€but€€that€embraced€in€such€call€shallÌà àà àbe€transacted€during€such€special€session.€€Ìà àà àÌÓÓÌà àNo€prohibition€is€found€against€a€single€notice€of€a€public€hearing€and€a€special€meetingÏof€the€Board€on€the€same€subject€matter.€€The€notice,€quoted€above,€served€the€dual€purpose€ofÏnotification€of€the€public€and€the€Board€of€the€hearing€and€meeting.ÌÌà àNo€ground€of€reversal€is€found€in€plaintiffsðð€second€issue.̛̜œÌ›œÌ›Ìò òTHIRD€ISSUE€„€òòAPPROVAL€BY€INACTIONóóó óÌÌà àPlaintiffsðð€third€issue€is€predicated€upon€the€premise€that€the€May€11,€1993,€action€ofÏthe€Board€was€invalid.€€As€explained€above,€this€Court€finds€that€it€was€valid.€€It€is€thusÏunnecessary€to€discuss€the€insistence€that€plaintiffsðð€application€could€be€automaticallyÏapproved€by€failure€of€the€Board€to€timely€disapprove€it.ÌÌÓ  Óò òFOURTH€ISSUE€„€òòNATURE€OF€JUDICIAL€REVIEWÌóóó óÌà àT.C.A.€ðð€68„211„704(c)€provides:ÌÓÓà àà à€€€€Judicial€review€of€the€legislative€bodyððs€€determinationÌà àà àshall€€be€€a€€de€novo€review€before€the€chancery€court€for€ÌÓÓà àà àthe€county€in€which€the€landfill€is€proposed€to€be€located.ÌÓ  Óà àà àÌÓ  Óà àAs€above€indicated,€the€Trial€Judge€considered€that€the€ð ðde€novo€reviewðð€provided€by€Ìðð€68„211„704(a)€was€the€limited€review€allowed€by€T.C.A.€ðð€27„8„102€which€reads€asÏfollows:ÌÓÓà àà àò ò27„8„102.€€Cases€in€which€writ€lies.ó 󀄀Certiorari€lies:Ìà àà à(1)€On€suggestion€of€diminution;Ìà àà à(2)€Where€no€appeal€is€given;Ìà àà à(3)€As€a€substitute€for€appeal;Ìà àà à(4)€Instead€of€audita€querela;€orÌà àà à(5)€Instead€of€writ€of€error.€€€ÌÓÓÌà àPlaintiffs€insist€that€the€reference€to€ð ðde€novo€reviewðð€in€ðð€68„211„704(c)€implies€aÏbroader€review,€involving€a€new€trial€before€the€Court€of€all€issues€presented€to€the€Board.ÌÌà àThe€expression€ð ðde€novoðð€has€varied€meanings€in€different€contexts.€€An€appeal€fromÏGeneral€Sessions€Court€to€Circuit€Court€involves€a€complete€new€trial€of€the€issues€withoutÏreference€to€evidence€introduced€in€General€Sessions€Court€unless€re„introduced€on€appeal.€ÏSee€òòTeague,€Estx.€V.€Gordóó,€206€Tenn.€291,€333€S.W.2d€1€(1959);òò€Hohenberg€Bros.€Co.€V.ÏMiccourióó,ÌPac.€R.€Co.,€Tenn.€Appr.€1979,€586€S.W.2d€117.€€Apparently€plaintiffsðð€desire€such€aÏreview.€€To€grant€such€a€judicial€review€in€the€present€case€would€substitute€the€discretion€ofÏthe€courts€for€that€of€the€County€Commissioners,€which€is€clearly€not€the€legislative€intent.ÌÌà àThe€expression,€ð ðde€novoðð€is€used€in€provisions€for€appeals€from€certain€boards€andÏcommissions.€€In€òòFrye€v.€Memphis€State€Universityóó,€Tenn.€1984,€671€S.W.2d€467,€a€tenuredÏfaculty€member€sought€statutory€ð ðde€novo€reviewðð€of€his€discharge.€€The€Trial€Court€limitedÏthe€evidence€to€that€which€showed€illegal,€arbitrary€or€capricious€conduct€of€the€administrativeÏagency,€and€excluded€evidence€of€veracity€and€credibility€of€testimony€before€the€agency.€€TheÏSupreme€Court€reversed€and€said:ÌÓ  ÓÓÓà àà à€€€€In€€affirming€€the€€decision€€of€€the€€administrative€body,Ìà àà àthe€Chancellor€noted€that€issues€of€veracity€and€credibilityÌà àà àof€€€the€€witnesses€€were€€€involved,€€and€€that€€there€€€wasÌà àà àconflicting€€evidence€€on€€several€€points.€€He€€specificallyÌÓ  Óà àà àdeclined€€€to€€review€€€such€€issues€€or€€to€€ð ðsubstitute€€my€Ìà àà àjudgmentðð€€for€€that€€of€€the€€hearing€€committee€€and€€theÌà àà àuniversity€officials.ÌÌà àà à€€€€In€our€opinion€this€was€error.€œð ðde›€novo€judicial€reviewÌà àà àin€€this€€statute€€and€context€€means€€a€€new€hearing€in€the€Ìà àà àchancery€€court€based€upon€the€administrative€record€and€Ìà àà àany€€additional€€or€€€supplemental€€evidence€€which€€eitherÌà àà àparty€€wishes€€to€€€adduce€€€relevant€€€to€€any€€œissue.Ô€ ,Ô1Ô€ XÔ›€€€The€Ìà àà àChancellor€may,€of€€course,€confine€new€€evidence€to€thatÌà àà àwhich€€€is€€€truly€€€supplemental€€€or€€additional€€and€is€notÌà àà àrequired€to€hear€all€of€€the€evidence€€anew€€if€€he€does€not€Ìà àà àfind€€this€€€necessary.€€€Otherwise€€€there€€would€€be€€€littleÌà àà àneed€€€for€€€the€€administrative€€transcript.€€€However,€€€heÌà àà àmay€€permit€€introduction€€of€€any€€and€all€evidence€whichÌà àà àhe€deems€necessary€to€enable€him€to€dispose€of€the€issues€Ìà àà àpresented.ÌÌà àà à€€€€On€€remand,€€the€€parties€€should€€be€allowed€to€put€onÌà àà àany€€additional€€or€€supplemental€proof€which€they€desire,Ìà àà àrelevant€to€any€of€the€issues.€€The€Chancellor€should€then€Ìà àà àreview€both€the€administrative€record€€and€any€additional€Ìà àà àevidence€€brought€€before€€him€€and€determine€the€weight€Ìà àà àof€€€€evidence€€€and€€€its€€€preponderance,€€€including€€€the€Ìà àà àcredibility€and€veracity€of€witnesses.€He€must€then€decide€Ìà àà àwhether€€cause€€for€€termination€€is€€shown€€ð ðby€clear€and€Ìà àà àconvincing€evidence€€in€the€record€considered€as€a€whole€Ìà àà à....ðð€T.C.A.€ðð€49„8„303(a)(4)€œÔ€ ,Ô2›Ô€ XÔÌÓÓÌÓÓà àœ›œà à›œÔ€ ôÔ1.Ô€ XÔ€€Ô€ ôÔThis›€€does€€not€€necessarily€€mean€€a€€complete€€repetition€of€€all€of€œÌà àà àthe›€œevidence,›€€because€€obviously€€the€administrative€record€is€required€€œÌà àà àto€€€be›€€transcribed€œand€›€œtransmitted.›€€œT.C.A.€ð𛀜49„8„304(b).›€œ›€ð ðReviewðð€Ìà àà àrather€€€than€€€ð ðtrialðð€€€is€€€the€€working€€€used€€€in€€€the€€statute.€€€€T.C.A.€Ìà àà àðð€49„8„304(a).€€But€it€does€not€specify€de€novo€review€ð ðconfined€to€the€Ìà àà àadministrative€recordðð€nor€does€€it€provide€€for€€review€merely€by€some€Ìà àà àform€œ€of€›€certiorari.€€òòCfóó.€Rule€13(d)€T.R.A.P.€where€review€in€appellate€Ìà àà àcourts€in€œnon„jury€›€cases€is€ð ðde€novo€upon€the€record€of€the€trial€courtðð€Ìà àà àunless€otherwise€provided€by€statute.Ô€ XÔÌÌà àà àœÔ€ ôÔ2.Ô€ XÔ€òòÔ€ ôÔCfóó.›€òòCase€œv.Carneyóó,›€213€Tenn.€597,€376€S.W.2d€492€€(1964).€œThere›€Ìà àà àstatutes€provided€for€ð ðtrial€de€novoðð€in€the€ð ðcertiorariðð€€review€of€beer€Ìà àà àlicense€proceedings.€€T.C.A.€ðð€57„5„109(d).€Where€the€record€clearly€Ìà àà àshowed€€that€€a€€more€€narrow€€review€€was€€accorded,€€the€€cause€was€Ìà àà àremanded€with€instructions€to€the€Chancellor€ð ðto€€weigh€€the€evidence.€€Ìà àà à213€Tenn.€At€607,€376€S.W.2d€492.Ô€ XÔÌÓÓÌœ›œ›à àThe€fact€that€the€legislature€saw€fit€to€authorize€de€novo€judicial€review€is€persuasiveÏevidence€that€the€authority€conferred€upon€the€defendant€Board€was€administrative€and€notÏlegislative.ÌÌà àPlaintiffsðð€argue€that€the€Trial€Court€failed€to€follow€the€formula€of€Fryeòò€v.€MemphisÏState€Universityóó€involved€the€discharge€of€a€tenured€teacher.€€T.C.A.€ðð€49„8„303(a)(4)Ïprescribed€the€ð ðclear€and€convincing€standard€which€is€not€applicable€to€the€present€case.€€CaseÏv.€Carney,€213€Tenn.€597,€376€S.W.2d€492€(1964)€was€a€certiorari€from€the€denial€of€a€beerÏlicense€by€a€city€beer€board€under€T.C.A.€ðð€57„298(d)€which€provided:ÌÓÓà àà à€€€€(D)€€The€€action€€of€€such€agency€€in€connection€€with€€the€Ìà àà àissuance€of€any€order€of€any€kind,€€including€€the€€revocation€Ìà àà àor€€suspension€€of€€€a€€license€€or€€permit€€or€€€the€€€refusal€€to€Ìà àà àgrant€a€license€€or€permit€€under€ðððð€57„5„105,€57„5„108€€and€Ìà àà àthis€section,€may€be€reviewed€by€€statutory€writ€of€certiorari,€Ìà àà àwith€a€trial€de€novo€as€a€substitute€for€an€appeal,€the€petition€Ìà àà àof€€certiorari€to€be€addressed€to€the€circuit€or€chancery€court€ÌÓÓà àà àof€the€county€in€which€any€such€order€was€issued.ÌÌà àIn€the€cited€opinion€the€Supreme€Court€said:ÌÓÓà àà à€€€€(7)€€€In€€the€€case€€at€€bar,€€œthe€›€€opinion€€and€€decree€œ€of›€œ€the›Ìà àà àChancery€€œCourt€›€show€affirmatively€€that€€œthe€›€Chancellor€œ€did›Ìà àà ànot€weigh€the€evidence€before€him,€œbut€›€œsimply€›€found€that€theÌà àà àBoard€€did€€œ€not›€€€act€€ð ðillegally,€€œ€arbitrarily,›€€capriciously€€and€Ìà àà àunreasonablyðð€in€refusing€to€issue€the€permit.ÌÌà àà à€€€€Under€€T.C.A.€sec.€57„209,€the€œ€appellant€›€was€entitled€to€a€Ìà àà àtrial€€œde€novo›€€œand€›€œwas€›€entitled€to€have€the€Chancellor€weighÌà àà àœthe€›€evidence€œ€and€›€œdecide€›€œthe€›€case€œ€upon›€œ€the›€œ€merits›€without€Ìà àà àœregard€›€to€œ€what€›€action€œ€the›€œ€Board€›€may€œ€have€›€œtaken€›€œon€›€œthis›Ìà àà àapplication.€€Therefore,€the€petitioner€has€œnot€›€had€the€Judicial€Ìà àà àœreview€›€œof€›€his€application€œfor€›€a€license€to€which€he€is€entitledÌà àà àunder€the€existing€law.ÌÌà àà àThe€case€is€reversed€and€remanded€œ€to›€the€Chancery€Court€of€Ìà àà àDavidson€County€to€the€end€that€œa€›€trail€de€novo€of€the€issuesÌà àà àœbe€›€had€œ€upon›€œ€such›€œ€proof€›€as€œthe€›€appellant€and€the€appelleesÌà àà àmay€desire€to€introduce€pursuant€œto€›€the€provisions€of€T.C.A.ÌÓÓà àà àsec.€27„911.̛̜Ìà àCode€Section€27„911€(now€27„9„111),€is€part€of€Title€27,€Chapter€9€entitled€ð ðReview€ofÏBoards€and€Commissions,ðð€pertinent€portions€of€which€are:ÌÓÓà àà à€€€€ò òRight€of€review.€ó 󀄀€Anyone€€who€€may€€be€€€aggrieved€€by€€anyÌà àà àfinal€order€or€judgment€€of€€any€€board€or€commission€€functioning€Ìà àà àunder€€the€€laws€€of€€this€€state€€may€€have€€said€order€or€€judgment€Ìà àà àreviewed€by€the€courts,€where€not€otherwise€specifically€€providedÌà àà àin€the€manner€provided€by€this€chapter.€ÌÌà àà à€€€€ò òHearing„Findingsó ó.€„€(a)€At€€the€€expiration€of€€ninety€(90)€days€Ìà àà àfrom€€the€€filing€€of€€said€€transcript,€the€€cause€shall€€stand€for€trial,Ìà àà àand€shall€be€heard€and€determined€at€€the€earliest€practical€date,€asÌà àà àone€having€precedence€over€other€litigation,€except€suits€involvingÌà àà àstate,€county€or€municipal€revenue.ÌÌà àà à€€€€(b)€The€hearing€€shall€€be€€on€€the€€proof€€introduced€œ€before›€the€Ìà àà àboard€€or€€commission€€contained€€in€the€transcript,€and€œ€upon›€such€Ìà àà àother€€evidence€€as€€either€party€may€desire€to€introduce;€œ€provided,›€Ìà àà àthat€€all€proof€shall€be€taken€and€filed€within€seventy„five€(75)€days€Ìà àà àfrom€€the€date€upon€which€the€transcript€was€filed,€and€said€period€Ìà àà àfor€€taking€€depositions€shall€not€be€extended€by€the€court€withoutÌà àà àapplication€€made€€in€€writing,€under€oath,€showing€good€cause€for€Ìà àà àthe€extension€or€continuance.€à àà àÌÓÓÌà àUnder€ðð€27„9„111,€a€person€aggrieved€by€the€action€of€a€beer€board€had€the€soleÏremedy€by€the€circuit€or€chancery€court€by€the€statutory€writ€of€certiorari€with€trial€de€novo€as€aÏsubstitute€for€appeal€with€the€cause€being€tried€as€if€it€had€originated€in€said€court,€and€the€TrialÏJudge€is€required€to€make€an€independent€judgment€for€that€of€the€board.€€òòCantrell€v.€DeKalbÏCounty€Beer€Boardóó,€213€Tenn.€568,€376€S.W.2d€480,€1964.ÌÌà àThis€is€the€relief€requested€by€the€plaintiffs€in€the€present€case,€but€this€is€not€a€beerÏboard€case,€and€is€not€subject€to€the€provisions€of€the€code€provisions€for€review€of€beer€boardÏcases€where€the€applicant€has€a€right€to€a€license€unless€specified€facts€exist,€and€judicial€reviewÏde€novo€reviews€the€question€of€whether€such€prohibitory€facts€exist.ÌÌà àThe€present€case€presents€a€different€situation€wherein€the€statute€requires€the€Board€toÏconsider€specified€criteria,€but€does€not€confer€upon€the€applicant€the€right€to€a€permit€œif›€one€orÏmore€prohibitory€conditions€exist.ÌÌà àNevertheless,€the€ð ðsubstantial€and€material€evidence€ruleðð€and€the€ð ðarbitrary€orÏcapricious€ruleðð€require€that€some€substantial€reason€be€proven€for€refusing€the€permit€beforeÏthe€Board€may€validly€refuse€the€permit.€€T.C.A.€ðð€68„211„704(c)€requires€the€reviewing€courtÏto€consider€all€evidence€presented€to€the€Board,€plus€any€relevant€evidence€presented€to€theÏCourt€and€to€decide€de€novo€the€factual€question€of€whether€a€fact€or€facts€exist€which€justifiedÍthe€Board€in€refusing€the€permit.€€Upon€appeal€(T.R.A.P.€Rule€13d)€this€Court€has€consideredÏall€relevant€evidence€presented€to€the€Board€and€the€Trial€Court,€and€has€determined€from€aÏpreponderance€of€all€the€evidence€that€facts€exist€which€justify€the€denial€of€the€permit.€€ThisÏaction€of€this€Court€corrects€any€error€of€the€Trial€Court€pointed€out€in€the€fourth€issue.€ÌÌÓ  Óò òFIFTH€ISSUE€„€òòTHE€MOTION€IN€LIMINEóóó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àPlaintiffs€argue:ÌÓÓà àà à€€€€òòAfter€€the€€Trial€€Court€€ruled€€that€the€scope€of€judicial€Ìà àà àreviewóó€would€be€limited€to€a€review€of€the€public€hearing,€Ìà àà àPlaintiffs€filed€a€motion€in€limine€to€restrict€or€exclude€€all€Ìà àà àstatements€€and€information€provided€by€opponents€of€the€Ìà àà àlandfill€€at€€the€€public€€hearing€€from€being€introduced€and€Ìà àà àconsidered€as€evidence€at€€trial.€The€Trial€Court€overruled€Ìà àà àthe€motion.ÌÓÓÌà àApparently,€plaintiffsðð€argument€is€that€the€motion€in€limine€was€precipitated€or€madeÏnecessary€by€the€Trial€Courtððs€refusal€to€consider€any€evidence€not€heard€by€the€Board.€ÏHowever,€€this€argument€is€not€made€an€issue€on€appeal€and€is€not€otherwise€supported€inÏPlaintiffsðð€brief.ÌÌà àòòFrye€v.€Memphis€State€Universityóó€requires€the€consideration€of€other€evidence€notÏpresented€to€the€agency€for€stated€purposes.€€If€€this€was€not€allowed,€the€remedy€of€œplaintiffs›Ïwas€to€tender€any€desired€evidence€and€thereby€preserve€it€for€consideration€on€appeal,ÏòòCothron€v.€Cothronóó,€21€Tenn.€App.€388,€110€S.W.2d€1054€(1938).€€It€does€not€appear€thatÏany€such€evidence€was€so€tendered.ÌÌà àInstead,€plaintiffs€complain€of€the€overruling€of€their€motion€in€limine€and€theirÏobjections€to€certain€evidence€in€the€record€of€the€public€hearing,€€which€evidence€isÏsummarized€in€plaintiffsðð€brief€as€follows:ÌÓÓà àà à€€€€In€summary,€the€information€€presented€by€DefendantÌà àà àconsisted€€of€€a€€petition€in€€opposition€containing€€7000Ìà àà àsignatures€€€€€(Ex.€€€60);€€€144€€€€letters€€€(Ex.€€58);€€€€197€Ìà àà àquestionnaires€€obtained€€by€€Bucksnort€€Riding€€Stables€Ìà àà à(Ex.€€59);€€6€€assorted€€ð ðflyersðð€€and€€newspaper€€articlesÌà àà à(Exs.€39,€40,€47,€49€&€62);€2€resolutions€from€adjoiningÌà àà àcounties€(Exs.€41€&€55);€and€€the€CAPððs€€Anti„Proposal€Ìà àà à(Ex.€€37)€€€consisting€€€of€€€€various€€€€letters,€€€€opinions,Ìà àà àconclusions€€and€€expressions€€of€€fear€€about€the€landfill.ÌÌà àà à€€€€When€€€the€€€information€€€is€€€examined,€€€it€€€will€€€beÌà àà àimmediately€obvious€€that€€it€€cannot€€€be€€considered€€as€Ìà àà àrelevant€€evidence€admissible€in€a€judicial€proceeding€on€ÌÓÓà àà àthe€issues€in€this€litigation.ÌÌà àDefendants€respond€as€follows:ÌÓÓà àà à€€€€Thus,€€the€€only€€œremaining€›€duty€œ€of›€œ€this€›€Court€is€toÌà àà àexamine€the€administrative€œ€record€›€to€determine€œ€if€›€the€Ìà àà àœcomments,€›€œreports,€›€testimony,€œ€and›€œexhibits›€offered€in€Ìà àà àopposition€€to€œ€the€›€œlandfill€›€contained€therein€do€in€factÌà àà àaddress€€the€€eight€œ€criteria›€listed€œ€in›€œ€TCA›€68„211„704,€Ìà àà àand€€then€€œdecide€›€œwhether€›€the€œ€decision›€based€thereonÌà àà àwas€clearly€illegal,€arbitrary,€or€capricious.ÌÌà àà à€€€€It€€is€€not€€necessary€€to€€repeat€€or€œ€summarize€›€said€Ìà àà àœevidence›€œis€›€included€œ€in›€the€record€and€exhibits€beforeÌà àà àthe€Court.ÌÓÓÌà àThe€items€listed€in€the€above€quotation€from€plaintiffsðð€brief€have€not€been€consideredÏbecause,€in€general,€they€appear€to€be€irrelevant,€and€defendants€point€out€no€part€of€theirÏcontent€which€would€be€relevant.€€Plaintiffs€argue€that€the€exclusion€of€this€evidence€producesÏa€record€which€is€void€of€substantial€and€material€evidence.ÌÌà àOther€parts€of€the€administrative€record€which€contain€substantial€and€material€œevidenceÏare:Ì›Ìà àDr.€William€Calvin€James,€a€professor€of€geological€science,€testified€that€particularÏtopography€of€the€proposed€location€of€the€landfill€presented€potential€leakage€problems.ÌÌà àDr.€Eugene€T.€Lampley,€an€experienced€soil€scientist,€testified€that€the€engineeringÏreports€in€the€record€indicate€that€the€soil€permeability,€ground€water€activity€and€stream€flowÏrender€the€€area€unsuitable€for€a€land€fill.ÌÌà à3.à àA€licensed€real€estate€broker€testified€that€land€values€within€a€two€or€three€mileÏradius€of€the€land€fill€could€be€devalued€up€to€60%.ÌÌà à4.à àJack€Hobbs€testified€of€the€impact€of€pollution€of€a€tributary€of€a€creek€which€isÏstocked€with€trout€by€a€state€agency.ÌÌà à5.à àJoe€Nunes€testified€as€to€the€loss€of€tourism€business€from€the€construction€ofÏthe€landfill.ÌÌà à6.à àSanders€James€testified€as€to€the€reluctance€of€natives€to€remain€in€the€countyÏafter€completing€their€education€if€the€landfill€is€built.ÌÌà à7.à àKen€Stacy,€a€resident€œwithin›€one€mile€of€a€landfill€in€another€county,€testifiedÏregarding€heavy€traffic,€spilled€garbage,€and€muddy€streams€in€the€area€of€the€landfill€in€hisÏcounty.ÌÌà à17.à àThe€Road€Engineer€of€an€adjoining€county€testified€of€the€cost€of€maintainingÏroads€used€for€access€to€a€landfill.ÌÌà à20.à àThe€City€Manager€of€a€nearby€city€testified€that€his€city€had€been€approachedÏregarding€accepting€the€ð ðleachateðð€from€the€proposed€œlandfill,›€but€had€not€agreed€to€do€so.ÌÌà àPlaintiffs€presented€testimony€contradictory€of€the€above.€€However,€this€Court€findsÏfrom€the€whole€record€that€the€decision€of€the€Board€is€supported€by€substantial€and€materialÏevidence.ÌÌÓ  Óò òSIXTH€ISSUE€„€òòDISCRETIONARY€AUTHORITYó óóóÌÓ  ÓÌà àPlaintiffs€take€issue€with€the€insistence€of€defendants€that€they€have€unlimitedÏdiscretionary€authority€to€veto€any€proposal€for€a€landfill€without€regard€to€its€merits€or€lack€ofÏmerit.€€Such€authority€would€be€legislative€in€nature.€€As€previously€indicated,€this€Court€holdsÏthat€the€authority€of€the€Board€in€this€instance€is€administrative€rather€than€legislative,€and€hasÏfurther€found€that€the€decision€is€supported€by€substantial€and€material€evidence.ÌÌà àPlaintiffs€cites€authority€that€total€exclusion€of€any€and€all€landfills€in€a€county€is€illegal.€ÏThere€is€no€evidence€that€the€defendants€have€totally€excluded€landfills€from€HumphreysÏCounty.ÌÌÓÓò òSEVENTH€ISSUE€„€òòARBITRARY,€CAPRICIOUS,€ILLEGALÏUNREASONABLE€à àœCONDUCTó óóó›ÌÌÌÓÓà àHaving€found€material€and€substantial€evidence€to€support€the€decision,€this€Court€findsÏthat€it€is€not€arbitrary,€capricious,€illegal€or€unreasonable.ÌÌà àPlaintiffs€complain€that€the€criteria€upon€which€the€opinions€of€Mr.€James€and€LampleyÏwere€irrelevant€because€not€included€in€the€criteria€to€be€considered€under€T.C.A.€ðð€68„211„704(b),€which€states:ÌÓÓà àà à(b)€The€following€criteria€shall€€be€€considered€€in€evaluating€Ìà àà àsuch€construction:Ìà àà à(3)€The€€projected€€impact€€on€€surrounding€€areas€from€noise€Ìà àà àand€odor€created€by€the€proposed€landfill;Ìà àà à(4)€The€projected€impact€on€property€values€on€surroundingÌà àà àareas€created€by€the€proposed€landfill;Ìà àà à(6)€The€€economic€€impact€€on€€the€county,€city€or€both;€andÌà àà à(7)€The€€compatibility€€with€existing€€development€or€zoningÌà àà àplans.€€ÌÓÓÌà àThe€criteria€of€the€challenged€witnesses€is€included€within€the€statutory€criteria.Ìœ›œ›ÌÓ  Óò òEIGHTH€ISSUE€„€òòAPPROVAL€OR€DISAPPROVAL€OF€APPLICATIONóóó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àThis€Court€finds€no€ground€to€reverse€the€decision€of€the€Board€disapproving€theÏapplication.ÌÌÓ  Óò òNINTH€ISSUE€„€òòDISMISSAL€OF€CONSTITUTIONAL€CHALLENGEóóó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àAs€previously€stated,€the€Attorney€General€and€Reporter€defended€the€challenge€to€theÏconstitutionality€of€the€Local€Approval€Law€by€asserting€that€the€plaintiffs€have€not€exhaustedÏtheir€administrative€remedy.€€€ÌÌà àT.C.A.€ðð€4„5„223,€a€part€of€the€Administrative€Procedure€Act,€provides€for€declaratoryÏjudgments€by€administrative€agencies,€but€ðð€4„5„106€provides€that€the€act€shall€not€apply€toÏcounty€and€municipal€boards,€commissions,€committees,€departments€or€officers.€€TheÏauthority€cited€in€support€of€the€motion€involved€a€state€board€and€not€a€county€agency.ÌÌà àPlaintiffs€insist€that€the€Local€Approval€Law€inherently€conflicts€with€the€Solid€WasteÏAct€and€the€public€policy€provisions€thereof€including€the€creation€of€the€Tennessee€DepartmentÏof€Environment€and€Conservation,€but€do€not€outline€the€specific€conflicts€relied€upon.ÌÌà àPlaintiffs€insist€that€the€Local€Approval€Law€violates€the€Commerce€Clause€of€theÏUnited€States€Constitution€in€that€it€exempts€municipal€and€county€owned€or€operated€landfills.€€ÏThere€is€no€showing€that€interstate€commerce€is€impeded€by€the€exemption€of€governmentallyÏowned€or€operated€landfills.ÌÌà àPlaintiffs€allege€that€the€application€of€the€law€in€the€present€case€creates€anÏunconstitutional€discrimination€against€out„of„state€interests€which€may€wish€to€import€wasteÏfrom€other€states.€€The€record€does€not€support€such€an€allegation.ÌÌà àThe€clear€purpose€of€the€law€is€to€grant€to€the€local€legislative€authority€theÏadministrative€review€of€all€applications€for€permission€to€create€landfills.€€In€the€very€nature€ofÏthe€case,€the€Board€would€be€required€to€make€the€same€decision€before€owning€or€operating€aÏlandfill€itself.ÌÌà àThere€is€evidence€in€this€record€that€landfills€are€capable€of€producing€widespread€andÏserious€damage.€€Close€control€of€location€and€construction€is€justified€in€the€public€interest.€ÏThe€legislative€has€seen€fit€to€grant€county€and€city€agencies€a€voice€in€the€allowance€of€landfillsÏin€their€jurisdiction.€€Nothing€unconstitutional€is€found€in€this€plan.ÌÌà àThe€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€and€the€resolution€of€the€defendant€Board€are€affirmed.€ÏThe€cause€is€remanded€to€the€Trial€Court€for€any€necessary€further€procedures.€€Costs€of€thisÏappeal€are€assessed€against€the€appellants€and€their€surety.ÌÓ  Óò òÔ€ ¼Ôœ›AFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDÔ€ XÔó ó€ÌÓ  Óœà à›à àà àà àà àà àÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà à_________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àHENRY€F.€TODDÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€MIDDLEÏSECTIONÌœCONCUR:›ÌÌ_____________________________ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEÌÌ_____________________________ÌBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEÌÓ  ÓÌÓÓÌà àà àÌÌà à€ÌÌ