Cody WY residents not happy about McTemple ruining views

[drumdude]

Church files second lawsuit. https://mybighornbasin.com/LDS-church ... y-of-cody/. Why don't they concede the steeple?

The brethren aren’t used to being told “no.”

[I Have Questions]

I especially loved the reported way that the local bishop, Todd Christiansen, framed what he saw as the crux of the controversy. According to him, the city enforcing this building code is the same as keeping Black (ahem, "colored") children out of public schools or forcing Jews to live in ghettos.

Todd Christensen, a bishop of a Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ward in Cody, said the message clearly is anti-church, not about building codes.

“I’m pretty sure when they say, ‘not in my neighborhood,’ the same argument has also been extended to ‘not in my town’ and in some instances ‘not in my county,’” he said. “At some point you have to put your foot down and say that’s not right.”

He believes it no different than if someone was trying to argue against Black children being allowed to attend school in their area or members of other religions from being allowed to live somewhere.

“That’s like saying, ‘It’s not about race, but I just don’t want colored kids to go to our school.’ ‘We like Jews but they should just go somewhere else,’” he said.

Would Todd Christensen agree that it’s like keeping black adults out of Mormon temples? To hear Mormons regurgitate arguments that completely lack self awareness, really irritates me.

[drumdude]

I especially loved the reported way that the local bishop, Todd Christiansen, framed what he saw as the crux of the controversy. According to him, the city enforcing this building code is the same as keeping Black (ahem, "colored") children out of public schools or forcing Jews to live in ghettos.

Todd Christensen, a bishop of a Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ward in Cody, said the message clearly is anti-church, not about building codes.

“I’m pretty sure when they say, ‘not in my neighborhood,’ the same argument has also been extended to ‘not in my town’ and in some instances ‘not in my county,’” he said. “At some point you have to put your foot down and say that’s not right.”

He believes it no different than if someone was trying to argue against Black children being allowed to attend school in their area or members of other religions from being allowed to live somewhere.

“That’s like saying, ‘It’s not about race, but I just don’t want colored kids to go to our school.’ ‘We like Jews but they should just go somewhere else,’” he said.

Would Todd Christensen agree that it’s like keeping black adults out of Mormon temples? To hear Mormons regurgitate arguments that completely lack self awareness, really irritates me.

That was 50 years ago and everyone was racist then. Aren’t you judging them by modern standards?

[I Have Questions]

That was 50 years ago and everyone was racist then.

No, not everyone was racist 50 years ago.

Aren’t you judging them by modern standards?

Okay, let’s bring it up to date. Would Todd Christensen agree it’s like saying “ We love the gays, but they should go somewhere else”?

[drumdude]

That was 50 years ago and everyone was racist then.

No, not everyone was racist 50 years ago.

Aren’t you judging them by modern standards?

Okay, let’s bring it up to date. Would Todd Christensen agree it’s like saying “ We love the gays, but they should go somewhere else”?

As long as they aren’t practicing homosexuals then they can stay.

[Rivendale]

Jana Riess covers the Cody temple fiasco. She points out Mormons did not settle Cody as local news suggests. Bringing in prefabricated sections before local codes were voted on does not look good for the Church. Only 10% of Cody's population is Mormon. https://religionnews.com/2023/08/07/m ... badly/ . Here is a new link regarding a meeting Kirton McConkie lawyers where more threats of lawsuits and religious freedom violations. https://www.codyenterprise.com/ne ... 834b.html I am not sure how lowering a steeple and changing lighting patterns infringe on religious liberty.

[Marcus]

LDS representatives also said potential litigation would be costly for the city and its citizens, who would likely lose in the courts, and cited a federal law protecting religious rights.

“It was clearly a threat,” said Terry Skinner, a member of the Preserve Our Cody Neighborhoods. “It’s a financial threat to the citizens and city of Cody.”
https://www.codyenterprise.com/news/loc ... f834b.html

Wow. I guess this is what the half trillion dollars is being hoarded for--bullying.

[Res Ipsa]

There are legitimate issues about communities using aggressive zoning tactics to keep religious organizations from building churches on valuable land, with the resulting loss of property tax revenue. There are examples of communities being so restrictive in their zoning that it becomes a substantial impediment to building any church in a community.

The Cody temple case isn't one of those cases. It's about building the temple in a residential neighborhood which isn't zoned to permit either churches or commercial buildings. Besides the issue of the steeple, which can obstruct views, the lighting is a problem in residential neighborhoods. The Church insists on lighting the exterior of the temples with bright floodlights at night, whether or not the temple is in use at that time. The light pollution is a legitimate concern for neighbors living nearby. The height of the steeples, which are also brilliantly lit, adds to the light problem.

The two current lawsuits are pretty typical land use issues that should be fairly easy to resolve by looking at the administrative codes that govern the planning board. The first is what kind of vote it takes to pass a zoning exception: a majority of the members present at a meaning or a majority of the whole board. The exception for the steeple was passed at a meeting 3-1-1, with two members not attending the meeting. So, that was 3/5 of the members in attendance, but 3/7 of the whole board. That's the first lawsuit.

The second lawsuit is about whether the full board can undo or change what the the first vote approved. Obviously, the church has to win on the first lawsuit for the second to matter. At some point in the approval process, certain rights vest in the developer so that a project developer doesn't get jerked around as the composition of a board changes over time. So, there are procedures a board has to follow to change something it has already approved and some approvals that can't be taken away once granted.

Both of these things are pretty standard conflicts that occur in land use law when significant projects are involved.

Where the church really ups the ante is when it threatens to sue under this statute: https://www.justice.gov/critical race theory/title-42-pu ... nd-welfare in my opinion, it combines a really good law (requiring government to accommodate religious beliefs of incarcerated people) with a really bad and likely unconstitutional law (imposing strict scrutiny standards on local zoning decisions involving churches). It purports to use the Commerce Clause as a basis for interfering with local zoning laws, even in situations where commerce isn't involved at all (like residential zoning). Because the strict scrutiny standard is so hard to meet, it gives the extremely wealthy LDS church a powerful economic hammer in the form of really costly litigation, against small cities and towns. I don't know whether the church has actually litigated and won a case using this law, but Cody isn't the first time it's used it as what comes down to economic extortion against small local governments that can't afford to fight the court battle.

I hope some organization will put together the resources to attack the constitutionality of the law. Churches shouldn't be discriminated against when it comes to building houses of worship. But the law goes far beyond the protection the constitution provides.

[malkie]

Thanks for the analysis, Res - very interesting, and clearly written, as always.

[Rivendale]

Church gets approval from Cody Wyoming with no restrictions. The steeple height is over 100 feet tall and no other restrictions were implimented . https://cowboystatedaily.com/2023/08 ... n-light/ .
The town council said no more meetings are planned. No wonder the church scores a -20 on yougov favorability scale. https://today.yougov.com/topics/politi ... surveys