Church Files Lawsuit Against Cody, Wyoming (Zoning/Planning Bd)

[Calm]

20 minutes ago, bluebell said:

This is probably because these are communities of only a few thousand people, and everyone really does know everyone else.  They really are friends and family and neighbors, not just in spirit but literally.  It makes it easier to be kind to each other I think, because it's not just anonymous people interacting.  It's people you work with, see in the grocery store every week, frequent their businesses, sit next too at the high school sporting events, etc.  I think that makes a difference.

Is it generally agreed among the locals that the ambiguity of government rulings is driving a great deal of the trouble? It does seem logical given what is reported that there are multiple view and reactions.

[bluebell]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

Is it generally agreed among the locals that the ambiguity of government rulings is driving a great deal of the trouble? It does seem logical given what is reported that there are multiple view and reactions.

I haven't heard that, but honestly I haven't heard anyone discussing the reasons that it's such a mess.  I do think it would be hard for Cody residents who are members to think badly of the board in general, because that's their town board and community members in these towns are pretty supportive of their local leadership.

**but they could be saying that and I just haven’t heard it.  While some people might hesitate to speak ill of the board openly, that doesn’t mean it’s not being talked about behind closed doors or privately.

I also heard that one member of the board who is a member voted against the temple because they didn't like how the church was handling things.  I can't say if that's true or not though.  The member I spoke to insisted it was and they should know, but I have no other references to support it.  And there have been lots of non members who have vocally supported the temple plans, both at meetings and in Facebook comments.

**I should clarify that by “lots” I mean 3 or 4 that I know of specifically. Considering the number of people openly addressing the issue overall, that seems like a lot to me. Others might not see it the same. 

Edited August 17, 2023 by bluebell

[Calm]

12 minutes ago, bluebell said:

because that's their town board and community members in these towns are pretty supportive of their local leadership. 

I admire anyone willing to serve their community (unless it is for selfish reasons). It seems like a job where you learn through trial and error.

Edited August 17, 2023 by Calm

[Thinking]

9 hours ago, bluebell said:

There is nothing else in that whole town that is made out of red brick like that though.

Earlier you referenced the Episcopal Church with the attached picture.

9 hours ago, bluebell said:

How western is their Episcopal Church?  Does anyone care that it's not western?  Is it hurting the town that it's not western?  Of course not.  

If you go to its website you will see a slideshow of pictures, two of which are at better angles to show the sides which have a LOT of red bricks.

https://www.christchurchcody.org/

Edited August 17, 2023 by Thinking

[Malc]

8 hours ago, bluebell said:

And I personally know a lot of members who were upset that he said that and did not agree with him.  It caused a little bit of a scandal.  

And please note that I didn't say that there weren't members that believe they are being persecuted (I'm sure there are).  I said that you didn't know what you were talking about when you claimed that the saints in this area would coalesce and become more resolved through a shared persecution complex.  From what I've seen they are becoming more unified and strong in the sharing of their testimonies and outward support of the church and temple, but that is a much different thing than bonding over an 'us vs. them' mindset.

I've actually been really impressed with the members.  The local papers have shared multiple stories on this on facebook and I haven't yet see any members be unkind when addressing the negative comments.  I could have missed some but if I did they were few and far between.  I was mentioning to my mom how impressed I was by people on both sides of the issue actually.  Almost everyone has been really well behaved.

This is probably because these are communities of only a few thousand people, and everyone really does know everyone else.  They really are friends and family and neighbors, not just in spirit but literally.  It makes it easier to be kind to each other I think, because it's not just anonymous people interacting.  It's people you work with, see in the grocery store every week, frequent their businesses, sit next too at the high school sporting events, etc.  I think that makes a difference.

It must put members in a bit of a bind, then, to find themselves in disagreement not only with the church as represented by lawyers and the building department, but also as represented by their own local leader.

It makes me wonder how much of the bishop's statement conforms with his belief and feelings about the situation, and how much is "from above".

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Malc said:

and how much is "from above".

My guess is not that much, if any.  More likely “above” suggested they remind their ward members to be good neighbors. Higher ups are likely more aware that such comments are not helpful due to more experience in a leadership position with nonmembers. 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Malc said:

It must put members in a bit of a bind, then, to find themselves in disagreement not only with the church as represented by lawyers and the building department, but also as represented by their own local leader.

 

It is not uncommon in my experience for members to be unhappy about the choice of location for a temple. I have heard quite a few opine about better locations over the decades. 

[bluebell]

7 hours ago, Thinking said:

Earlier you referenced the Episcopal Church with the attached picture.

If you go to its website you will see a slideshow of pictures, two of which are at better angles to show the sides which have a LOT of red bricks.

https://www.christchurchcody.org/

Guys, come on. I wasn’t saying that brick buildings don’t exist in western towns.

But not that orange red brick.  Just regular bricks, in 1980s and 1990s styles. Not in the pioneer style of building like the vernal temple.  The vernal temple was made from a pioneer era building. The Utah pioneers, especially in that area, built unique architecture out of uniquely colored bricks that are not mirrored in Wyoming western towns.  Tacenda said that the church should build a temple that looks like the vernal temple in Cody Wyoming. The style is nowhere near anything else in Cody Wyoming.  Utah pioneer architecture and material does not equal “western”.  😊

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, Malc said:

It must put members in a bit of a bind, then, to find themselves in disagreement not only with the church as represented by lawyers and the building department, but also as represented by their own local leader.

It makes me wonder how much of the bishop's statement conforms with his belief and feelings about the situation, and how much is "from above".

It should also be known that the bishop wasn’t quoted responding to just the general disagreement happening on zoning issues and site approval. He was responding to a series of signs that someone put up all over the town saying really horrible things about “Mormons”, on the back of signs that were put up by the group that doesn’t want the temple in their neighborhood.

That group swears that they did not put the anti-Mormon stuff on the back of their signs and have alluded that it was probably a Mormon, who did it to make them look bad. Most members that I’ve heard from agree that it probably wasn’t that group, but they also don’t think it was a member.

After I drop my kids off from school, I’ll see if I can find the article that shows what some of the signs said.

[Chum]

On 7/19/2023 at 2:36 PM, ksfisher said:

On 7/19/2023 at 2:17 PM, smac97 said:

So the stated concerns are:

1. The "architectural integrity" of the neighborhood;
2. Light pollution;
3. Traffic concerns;
4. Intrusion into wildlife area; and
5. Height of temple (which substantially contravenes the city's Master Plan).

These all seem like valid concerns.  I would hope that as we build temples in new areas that we could be seen as the best of neighbors.  While some change is unavoidable with new construction, if a temple was being built in my neighborhood I would be concerned about all of the above as well.

The housing crisis seems to have defused any auto-triggering I might have had (excepting maybe light pollution). I find I'm more accepting of many types of construction now.

[Tacenda]

19 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Guys, come on. I wasn’t saying that brick buildings don’t exist in western towns.

But not that orange red brick.  Just regular bricks, in 1980s and 1990s styles. Not in the pioneer style of building like the vernal temple.  The vernal temple was made from a pioneer era building. The Utah pioneers, especially in that area, built unique architecture out of uniquely colored bricks that are not mirrored in Wyoming western towns.  Tacenda said that the church should build a temple that looks like the vernal temple in Cody Wyoming. The style is nowhere near anything else in Cody Wyoming.  Utah pioneer architecture and material does not equal “western”.  😊

I agree with you, I was totally thinking more pioneer-ish like I see in Utah, we're not Wyoming. An aside here, I was on Zillow looking at the homes/land, I've always dreamed of a ranch there. But the most I could even hope for is a small cabin (shack) or something. But that's my dream, not my husband's. How cool that you've had that opportunity to live in Wyoming! 

[bluebell]

12 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I agree with you, I was totally thinking more pioneer-ish like I see in Utah, we're not Wyoming. An aside here, I was on Zillow looking at the homes/land, I've always dreamed of a ranch there. But the most I could even hope for is a small cabin (shack) or something. But that's my dream, not my husband's. How cool that you've had that opportunity to live in Wyoming! 

Wyoming will always be home.  Hopefully we'll get to move back someday soon. 

Edited August 17, 2023 by bluebell

[bluebell]

Smiley actually linked to the article when he quoted the bishop, though didn't mention the context of the quote.  If you go into the article, you'll see some of the signs in question.  They are really weird and confusing and both sides were not in favor.

Vandalized Yard Signs...

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

I agree with you, I was totally thinking more pioneer-ish like I see in Utah, we're not Wyoming. An aside here, I was on Zillow looking at the homes/land, I've always dreamed of a ranch there. But the most I could even hope for is a small cabin (shack) or something. But that's my dream, not my husband's. How cool that you've had that opportunity to live in Wyoming! 

The housing market in the area is almost as bad as it is in Utah. I really don’t know who’s buying these super expensive properties since there’s not a lot of industry in the region. The major employers are the hospital and medical field. There’s oil and gas in the area but nothing big. Mostly it’s small businesses or farming and ranching. Very modest living’s for the most part.  

[smac97]

Cody Mayor Blocks On-Again, Off-Again Plan To Build Mormon Temple

Quote

Cody Mayor Matt Hall wants everyone to pump the brakes a little on moving forward with building a proposed Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints temple in his city.

“We’re exhausting all options,” he told Cowboy State Daily about the controversial temple plan that was finally approved last week by the city’s Planning and Zoning board following months of debate and protests.

After city staff had prepared to move ahead with allowing construction to begin, Hall temporarily blocked the building permit for the more than 100-foot-tall building. 

Hmm.

Quote

The main purpose of the delay is to allow Cody City Council to review the site plan and conditional use permit for the project, Hall said.

“I wanted to have (city) council confer as to what has happened with Planning and Zoning and see where the issue was resting,” he said.

 But Hall also said he isn’t sure what action, if any, the council can or will take on the matter, as the temple has already technically been approved when the planning board gave the OK to the church’s site plan and conditional use permit.

“As far as the decisions P&Z has made with the site plan and conditional Use Permit, we can’t revert those back. In effect, the city has made those decisions.”

Hall confirmed the temple was the topic of discussion for a council executive session Tuesday.

Interesting.

Quote

Ambiguous 

Hall said there’s significant ambiguity about what exactly the Planning and Zoning board passed, specifically on the topic of the temple’s height, which has been the most contentious aspect of the project.

The board never came to a final determination of the issue of height, which some on P&z saw as giving it a green light, while others say it was a rejection. City staff decided to allow the project to move forward because it hadn’t specifically been denied.

Planning and Zoning Board Chair Carson Rowley told Cowboy State Daily last week he saw the approval as accepting the height, while his fellow board member Kim Borer saw it as a rejection. Both the city attorney and city planner also say it was an affirmative decision.

Wow.  Confusion in a small town.

Better get a judge involved.  To clear the air.

Quote

The Public Speaks

More than 15 opponents and supporters of the project spoke to the council Tuesday.

Noma Walton, a member of the church who lives near where the proposed temple will be built, said she’s looking forward to having it there.

“I’m very in favor of this temple and very excited about it,” she said. “To me, it’s one of the most exciting things that has the potential to happen in the 26 years I’ve lived in Cody.”

An experienced temple-goer, Walton said these types of facilities are beautiful, quiet and peaceful. 

Preserve Our Cody Neighborhoods, a group opposed to the proposed temple location, said in a letter sent to Hall and council members that the church should never have been allowed to work around height scrutiny by pulling its special exemption permit on the project.

Uninhabited roof projections are do not "work around height scrutiny."  I'm not an expert on this point of law, but I'm pretty sure the opponents of the temple's spire are going to lose on this.

Quote

It also says city staff changed its stance on the special requirement during the approval process.

The group said the city should not approve any building permits for the temple while two lawsuits challenging the project are pending and “must not issue permits pursuant to an application whose legal status is undetermined.”

Absent a court order, authorized construction of a building can typically proceed.

Quote

‘Quite The Summer’

The temple debate has roiled Cody over the summer during five well-attended and emotionally charged public meetings.

“It’s certainly given people something to talk about,” Hall said. “It distracts from a lot of the other things we have going on.”

Hall expressed a little disappointment that city and county budget meetings were barely attended by the public, a sharp contrast from the hundreds of people who came out for the temple hearings.

Luke Hopkin, a member of the church, said these discussions weighed heavily on him and all of those who have taken an interest in the project.

“It’s been a lot. It’s been a lot of personal time on folks, and a lot of time away from family figuring things out,” he said.

“One thing we can all agree on is this has been quite the summer,” Walton said, adding she was encouraged to recently have had a friendly conversation with someone who opposes the temple.

“That’s how Cody is,” she said.

Hall has a slightly more pessimistic perspective. Although he said it’s been “exciting” for many people in town, he also believes some people have taken advantage of the debate to fuel divisiveness. 

“That will take a little time to overcome,” he said. “We’ll have to build some of those bridges back.”

Yep.  Bummer, that.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

Oi: Those against the LDS Temple sue the City of Cody

Quote

The group seeking to stop construction of a The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) Temple in a Cody neighborhood has filed a lawsuit in district court.

The Preserve Our Cody Neighborhoods organization filed the petition Monday to review the Conditional Use Permit issued by the Cody Planning and Zoning Board in June.

Group spokesman Terry Skinner said they plan to file another appeal against the Board’s recent approval of the Temple site plan soon.

Skinner said they were reluctant to file the appeal, but felt the Planning and Zoning board had violated city codes. Skinner said the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints’ plans to build the Temple with a 101 foot high lighted tower in the Skyview neighborhood presents several issues:

He listed, “…traffic, taking up viewscapes in neighborhoods, dark night skies, and ignoring zoning rules of Cody an the Cody masterplan.”

I will be interested to see how this pans out (though I'm personally bummed that things are turning out this way).

I suspect this lawsuit will not be successful.  From what I've read of the city code, the steeple is a "roof projection."  It's not habitable space, and such projections are frequently allowed to exceed the normative height limitations (apparently several houses near the temple site have roofs that also have projections which exceed the height restriction).

Quote

His group gathered nearly 1,000 signatures in a petition against the Temple location.

LDS church members say it is their constitutional right of freedom of religion to build the Temple. But, Skinner said his group is not against the construction of a Temple in Cody. He said they are opposed to the construction of the Temple in the Skyview neighborhood.

NIMBYism is not a very good legal argument, particularly when it comes to religious edifices.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

17 hours ago, smac97 said:

From what I've read of the city code, the steeple is a "roof projection."  It's not habitable space, and such projections are frequently allowed to exceed the normative height limitations (apparently several houses near the temple site have roofs that also have projections which exceed the height restriction).

City code could end up being rewritten though to clarify that for new buildings it’s a no go.

[Calm]

17 hours ago, smac97 said:

NIMBYism is not a very good legal argument, particularly when it comes to religious edifices.

But it may help explain motivation…or hide it.

[JAHS]

20 hours ago, smac97 said:

Oi: Those against the LDS Temple sue the City of Cody

I will be interested to see how this pans out (though I'm personally bummed that things are turning out this way).

I suspect this lawsuit will not be successful.  From what I've read of the city code, the steeple is a "roof projection."  It's not habitable space, and such projections are frequently allowed to exceed the normative height limitations (apparently several houses near the temple site have roofs that also have projections which exceed the height restriction).

NIMBYism is not a very good legal argument, particularly when it comes to religious edifices.

Thanks,

-Smac

Chances are an alternate neighborhood would also oppose it like this is one is. I wonder if any alternate sites have been proposed by anyone?

[JustAnAustralian]

On 8/25/2023 at 11:41 PM, JAHS said:

I wonder if any alternate sites have been proposed by anyone?

That's what I was wondering when I saw the "put it somewhere else in Cody" comments. If it's not in that spot then it might not be in Cody at all. There are two other townships within half an hour heading north along the highway.

[bluebell]

11 hours ago, JustAnAustralian said:

That's what I was wondering when I saw the "put it somewhere else in Cody" comments. If it's not in that spot then it might not be in Cody at all. There are two other townships within half an hour heading north along the highway.

I'm assuming you're talking about Powell and Lovell.  Both are much smaller in size (Powell is 5,000 and Lovell is barely 3,000 I think) so I'm not sure how viable they are.  Lovell though was actually settled by pioneers sent by Brigham Young so they have a huge population of members for their size.  Their church takes up a whole city block and has two chapels inside of it.  They have been lobbying for a temple for over a decade.  When the Billings temple was being proposed and getting a ton of pushback, Lovell leaders suggested that they just move the temple to their area and got a stern talking to about it.  

(Also, fun fact about Lovell and for anyone who watches Sister Wives, this is where the Brown family is from originally and where Cody grew up and went to school.  The area has a small population of polygamists but not the FLDS kind).

[JustAnAustralian]

6 hours ago, bluebell said:

Powell and Lovell

I was thinking of Ralston and Powell going off google maps, but any of the townships along that stretch of highway would be fine to mention.

I'm not really sure township size would matter so much as it's not a capital city or first in the state temple. It might just be that they wanted a temple in the area, and they had the land available in Cody. We have precedence with the Erda->Tooele move that they are happy to just change the township a temple will be in if it gets too difficult. It'll still be the same people attending the only thing that might change is which local shops get the benefit of the post endowment desire for nibbles.

Edited August 27, 2023 by JustAnAustralian

[bluebell]

24 minutes ago, JustAnAustralian said:

I was thinking of Ralston and Powell going off google maps, but any of the townships along that stretch of highway would be fine to mention.

I'm not really sure township size would matter so much as it's not a capital city or first in the state temple. It might just be that they wanted a temple in the area, and they had the land available in Cody. We have precedence with the Erda->Tooele move that they are happy to just change the township a temple will be in if it gets too difficult. It'll still be the same people attending the only thing that might change is which local shops get the benefit of the post endowment desire for nibbles.

Ralston is only a gas station, a bar and a post office.  Their population is probably under a hundred.  I don't think the town is even a mile long when you are driving through it.  But you are right in that size doesn't really matter that much.  The roads between these towns though do close in the winter because of blizzards sometimes (we don't call them townships but I'm guessing it's the same thing?) so having it in the biggest town in the area might make staffing in the winter easier?  I'm not sure though.

I think the main reason they picked Cody is because it is on a main highway.  The other two are on alternate routes which means the traffic is much less because they are not really considered major routes through the state.  But I couldn't say for sure if that was the reason or not.

[Tacenda]

Another temple having controversy:

https://www.kpcw.org/wasatch-county/2023-09-07/lds-temple-may-need-to-dewater-hundreds-of-thousands-of-gallons-of-groundwater-daily

[bluebell]

27 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Another temple having controversy:

https://www.kpcw.org/wasatch-county/2023-09-07/lds-temple-may-need-to-dewater-hundreds-of-thousands-of-gallons-of-groundwater-daily

Hopefully they can get it figured out.  The church needs to be good stewards of the land.  

My question is, how does the groundwater currently benefit Heber Valley?  I'm not arguing with the woman quoted in the article (and maybe it said somewhere in there and I missed it) but I have no idea how groundwater works in terms of benefiting the area where it's in the ground.