But critics said board members broke a pledge to keep government open by approving an ordinance that they wouldn't show to political opponents.

"It is not open government to hold a hearing on an unpublished ordinance and to vote on an ordinance that no one has seen," said Dallas Woodhouse, a spokesman for Americans for Prosperity-North Carolina, a group that opposes moratoriums.

The wrangling Monday suggests that the long fight over how to handle exploding growth in the county is far from over.

In the past few years, nearly 15,000 new homes have been approved by Chatham County and Pittsboro. Chatham officials say the county needs time for schools, utilities and other services to catch up with growth.

Frank Thomas, who represents the Home Builders Association of Durham, Orange and Chatham Counties, said he knew the moratorium was coming, so he made several requests to the county, including one in writing, for a draft copy of the moratorium ordinance. But he was not given one until he pressed the county manager Monday after the vote, Thomas said.

County officials had earlier given a copy to the head of the Chatham Coalition, a slow-growth group that raised campaign money for many of the board members.

Chatham Coalition Chairman Jeffrey Starkweather said the county's interim attorney gave him a draft copy. But he would not say when he received it.

"I was just looking at it as a lawyer," said Starkweather, who frequently accused the previous board of doing business out of the public eye.

Commissioner George Lucier said the details of the county's ordinance have been discussed publicly for months and that the document approved Monday contained no surprises.

The commissioners announced early last month that the moratorium could last as long as 12 months and would apply only to new residential subdivisions of 26 or more units. Commercial development as well as development in Pittsboro and Siler City will not be affected.

On Monday, commissioners' Chairman Carl Thompson said he thought a draft of the moratorium had been placed on the county's Web site, but County Manager Charlie Horne said the document was not posted because a county attorney was revising it until Friday.

"I assumed there would be some form of the document available for public review even though it was subject to change," Thompson said.

On Monday, Thomas would not say whether his group will sue the county.

"It would require an injured party, which would be a landowner, and there are lots of landowners in the county," he said.