Was My Mormon Ancestor'S Tithing Used To Build City Creek Mall?

[Jaybear]

To my knowledge that assurance has never been rescinded.

Do you have information to the contrary? I mean something more substantial than your own conjecture?

Conjecture? Huh?

I offered no conjecture. Rather, I asked a simple but obvious question in light of the date of the statement.

I take it the answer my question, to the best of your knowledge is no.

Btw, the statement was not an "assurance", but a statement of fact. Assurance will include the words .... we can assure you that .... or we promise to you that .....

For someone who works at a newspaper, you read too much into what others write .... conjecture.

[Scott Lloyd]

Conjecture? Huh?

I offered no conjecture. Rather, I asked a simple but obvious question in light of the date of the statement.

I take it the answer my question, to the best of your knowledge is no.

Btw, the statement was not an "assurance", but a statement of fact. Assurance will include the words .... we can assure you that .... or we promise to you that .....

For someone who works at a newspaper, you read too much into what others write .... conjecture.

The conjecture was your insinuation that because the economy went south the Church could no longer afford the project without dipping into tithing funds. That doesn't necessarily follow. The Church tends to live within its means and avoid debt, just as it counsels its members to do.

And the assurance I had in mind was the one given by the president of the Church from the general conference pulpit.

Edited March 28, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[JAHS]

That was in 2007, before the real estate market collapsed, and the stated estimated cost in the article was $1Billion. Anything more recent?

Here's a more recent article:

"The residential towers were built by City Creek Reserve Inc., a for-profit firm owned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The church is a multibillion-dollar organization with tentacles in business and real estate.

The church paid for City Creek Center with cash and says no member tithing was used."

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765561778/Mormon-church-hopes-mall-helps-Salt-Lake-downtown.html

[Jaybear]

The conjecture was your insinuation that because the economy went south the Church could no longer afford the project without dipping into tithing funds. That doesn't necessarily follow. The Church tends to live within its means and avoid debt, just as it counsels its members to do.

And the assurance I had in mind was the one given by the president of the Church from the general conference pulpit.

Since your church doesn't publish its financials, I don't know (nor do you) if its real estate holdings had sufficient liquidity to cover the cost of the construction, in the face of substantial cost overruns and the plummeting value of real estate. Likewise, even if I assumed that answer was no, I am aware that your church has substantial other non real estate assets ... radio stations, stocks, etc. ... at its disposal.

So, for the second time, I made no such insinuation.

I asked the question whether the statement made 5 years ago, that the cost would be funded by "OTHER REAL ESTATE VENTURES" had been updated since the statement was made before the collapes of the real estate market.

Again, simple question.

[wenglund]

True, the church is not legally or scripturally required to be transparent. But why on earth wouldn't it want to be as transparent as possible?

They are as transparent as prudently possible to those with whom it is their business. They aren't transparent to the busy-bodies because: 1) it isn't their business, and 2) transparency to busy-bodies only creates more problems than it solves.

If some people aren't joining the church because of the lack of imprudent transparency, then that tells me they don't understand what the gospel is really about, and it is probably best that they don't join until they do understand. That way, they won't be committing themselves to something they lack basic understanding about, and the church won't be adding more busy-bodies than they already have to rolls, which means that in the end there will be less vocal disgruntled former members since that group is comprised mostly, if not exclusively of busy-bodies.

In short, the Church isn't imprudently transparent to busy-bodies because that wouldn't be in anyone's interest--not that the busy-bodies would understand.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

That was in 2007, before the real estate market collapsed, and the stated estimated cost in the article was $1Billion. Anything more recent?

It wouldn't matter if there was because, as previously intimated, the busy-bodies will not be denied their gripes and complaints and ax grinding.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Okrahomer]

Since your church doesn't publish its financials, I don't know (nor do you) if its real estate holdings had sufficient liquidity to cover the cost of the construction, in the face of substantial cost overruns and the plummeting value of real estate.

Are you just assuming this project suffered from "substantial cost overruns," or do you have evidence to support the assertion? The Great Recession of recent years (especially in the construction industry) would seem to dictate a rather opposite conculsion, as do these published reports:

http://www.standard....ty-creek-center

http://www.deseretne...e-downtown.html

Edited March 28, 2012 by Okrahomer

[Scott Lloyd]

They are as transparent as prudently possible to those with whom it is their business. They aren't transparent to the busy-bodies because: 1) it isn't their business, and 2) transparency to busy-bodies only creates more problems than it solves.

If some people aren't joining the church because of the lack of imprudent transparency, then that tells me they don't understand what the gospel is really about, and it is probably best that they don't join until they do understand. That way, they won't be committing themselves to something they lack basic understanding about, and the church won't be adding more busy-bodies than they already have to rolls, which means that in the end there will be less vocal disgruntled former members since that group is comprised mostly, if not exclusively of busy-bodies.

In short, the Church isn't imprudently transparent to busy-bodies because that wouldn't be in anyone's interest--not that the busy-bodies would understand.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I would only add to this my observation that the busybodies nearly always do their carping from behind a screen of anonymity.

[Jaybear]

Are you just assuming this project suffered from "substantial cost overruns," or do you have evidence to support the assertion? The Great Recession of recent years (especially in the construction industry) would seem to dictate a rather opposite conculsion, as do these published reports:

http://www.standard....ty-creek-center

http://www.deseretne...e-downtown.html

Its an educated assumption. The original article published in the LDS CHURCH owned Dnews said the estimate was $1B or more. I recall earlier estimates placing the cost at $800M. The ones you just cited say $2B. I have seen other estimates at $5B.

But its an assumption, nonetheless. I am fairly sure the LDS Church will never disclose the original budget or the actual costs. That would be out of character.

As for the recession reducing costs. With the real estate having already been purchased, not sure what you mean.

[Jaybear]

I would only add to this my observation that the busybodies nearly always do their carping from behind a screen of anonymity.

Can you give me an example of the "carping" that you have seen on this thread. A specific quote would be helpful.

I have notice that you often seem to taken offense where none is expressed or intended.

[LeSellers]

Can you give me an example of the "carping" that you have seen on this thread. A specific quote would be helpful.

I have notice that you often seem to taken offense where none is expressed or intended.

The repeated asking of the question is "carping" (or "harping", the two overlap considerably).

It is no one's business. The Church has a statement saying the money did not come from tithing funds, and specifying where it did originate.

It is not "offensive" (to me, at least), but it is "tiresome" and "wearying". Both goals some people might have in carping on the matter.

Lehi

Edited March 28, 2012 by LeSellers

[Okrahomer]

As for the recession reducing costs. With the real estate having already been purchased, not sure what you mean.

Perhaps I misunderstood you then, and I apologize if I did. I thought your previous reference to "substantial cost overruns" was an indication of higher-than-expected construction costs. An educated guess (considering this economy) would be exactly the opposite. It also does not follow from either of the published reports:

"Built during the recession, which lowered construction costs, City Creek Center is the only large mall of its size — around 700,000 square feet — scheduled to open in the country this year, officials said."

Edited March 28, 2012 by Okrahomer

[Okrahomer]

Its an educated assumption. The original article published in the LDS CHURCH owned Dnews said the estimate was $1B or more. I recall earlier estimates placing the cost at $800M. The ones you just cited say $2B. I have seen other estimates at $5B.

I believe you (and several others) have mistakenly mingled "estimates" here. The $5B figure comes from the Salt Lake City Chamber of Commerce and has reference to multiple investments designed to revitalize downtown Salt Lake City--not just the City Creek Center.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_Creek_Center:

"The City Creek Center is part of an estimated $5 billion^[2] sustainable design project to revitalize downtown Salt Lake City.^[3] The City Creek Center project itself has been estimated to cost around $1.5 billion^[4]."

[Scott Lloyd]

Can you give me an example of the "carping" that you have seen on this thread. A specific quote would be helpful.

I have notice that you often seem to taken offense where none is expressed or intended.

I haven't followed this thread from the beginning and have no inclination to comb through it now, but I have in mind in general the incessant complaining on this board, in online reader comment sections and elsewhere from those who do not pay tithing and have no intention of ever doing so but still have a whole lot to say about how the Church chooses to allocate its resources, whether it be for City Creek or some other place the complainer thinks the money ought to go to.

And what you call offense is hardly more than bemused annoyance.

[Verum]

Why is it so important for you to believe that no tithing funds were used in the mall? Particularly since the church has NO other souse of income, other than.

1. Tithing
   
2. Income from investments on tithing
   
3. Other non-tithing donations ie…little old ladies who donate their houses to the church rather than her children when they die.
   

What about income from garment sales, and deseret book (Deseret Management Corporation), Deseret morning news, and Bonneville international?

[Jaybear]

I haven't followed this thread from the beginning and have no inclination to comb through it now, but I have in mind in general the incessant complaining on this board, in online reader comment sections and elsewhere from those who do not pay tithing and have no intention of ever doing so but still have a whole lot to say about how the Church chooses to allocate its resources, whether it be for City Creek or some other place the complainer thinks the money ought to go to.

And what you call offense is hardly more than bemused annoyance.

I asked for a quote, because you have an annoying tendency to misread comments from other posters, especially me. Here is the first comment I made on the subject, which still remains my view.

The LDS Church can spend its money on whatever it wants, regardless of source of the funds. Its a free country.

Frankly, as a SL resident, I am glad they spent $5billion to construct luxury condominiums and a downtown mall. Its been great for the local economy. When I get older, I might even look into moving into one of the condos.

[Scott Lloyd]

I asked for a quote, because you have an annoying tendency to misread comments from other posters, especially me.

So apparently you were trying to pick a personal fight then.

[Scott Lloyd]

What about income from garment sales, and deseret book (Deseret Management Corporation), Deseret morning news, and Bonneville international?

It's obvious Craig Paxton is highly ignorant about the extent of the Church's commercial and real estate holdings.

Incidentally, it's not the Deseret Morning News anymore. We've switched back to just being the Deseret News.

[Jaybear]

So apparently you were trying to pick a personal fight then.

I asked you to provide a reference to substantiate a vague claim you made about critics on this board.

You refused to respond to the CFR ("no inclination to comb through it now"), and then repeated the vague claim("I have in mind in general the incessant complaining on this board.")

Nothing to write home about.

[Scott Lloyd]

I asked you to provide a reference to substantiate a vague claim you made about critics on this board.

You refused to respond to the CFR ("no inclination to comb through it now"), and then repeated the vague claim("I have in mind in general the incessant complaining on this board.")

Nothing to write home about.

It's like issuing a CFR that the sun rises in the east.

Edited March 28, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[KevinG]

I think someone is upset there are no adult book stores allowed in the new mall.

[Brian 2.0]

At least it's spelled correctly unlike "Provo Towne Centre" (if that's still there. It was built during my BYU days and I always laughed and the pseudo sophistication of the name).

[KevinG]

At least it's spelled correctly unlike "Provo Towne Centre" (if that's still there. It was built during my BYU days and I always laughed and the pseudo sophistication of the name).

Ye olde strippe malle

[wenglund]

...you have an annoying tendency to misread comments from other posters, especially me.

CFR (hint: a single post will not a tendency prove)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited March 28, 2012 by wenglund

[KevinG]

Scott, Have you learned nothing from LDSToronto... Its not complaining or whining. Its just "observations".