Posted on 05/30/2002 2:36:26 PM PDT by staytrue
Because if costco were not interested, the city would be much less interested in the land.
Your implication is 100% on the money. Christianity is fair game, because it is an established mainstream religion. Not by government, mind you, but established nonetheless.
The property in question was designated as a Redevelopment Zone in 1990, a full eight years before the Cottonwood folks began purchasing parcels. Redevelopment Zones are notorious for the vast restrictions upon the building use and construction.
If you have the time or the interest to browse through the city's redelopment plan you will see that they have layed out two other projects in the Redevelopment Project Area. In those areas retail outlets will be either restricted or prohibited. The designated area for retail is in the zone in question here.
The city needs the sales tax revenue to service the needs of the community. The Cypress community supports redevelopment and has voted, with over a 67% majority, to form an assessment district to tax themselves to achieve the goals of the Revelopment Project. It is the out of town church that is attempting to disrupt an on going process.
The city has never implied to Cottonwood that they could build a 17+ acre church/school/TVstudio campus on the property. Notice that while Cottonwood has produced copies of what they have written (at their website), it never produces a copy of this "letter" that wherein they claim the city makes these representations. What is written in "stone" is that nothing is written in stone. Every single project must be submitted in it's entirety and approved by the city. Most diligent enttities do this prior to closing escrow on the property. These were the rules prior to Cottonwood purchasing the property.
In essence the city, with the help of the voters of that city, took control of that property in 1990. The owners of the property at that time had a right to complain and file suit but didn't. They encouraged the redevelopment zoning. So now the Cottonwood people show up creating a furor and crying discrimination because they couldn't bully a community.
Having said that, Cottonwood owns some valuable property and they should be allowed to keep it, build retail outlets, lease to Costco whatever the zoning allows. That may affect their non-profit protection, though. How does a non-profit church produce television programs, bus parishoners from out of town to city council meetings, buy $13 million in property, build a 17+ acre campus, etc.? I would not waste sympathy on this "church" looking to do tax free business in a community that has said "no thanks" to them from the beginning.
Way down at the bottom I do address that. Saying that Cottonwood should be allowed to keep the property for it's legal uses. Every use is subject to city approval, they knew that prior to purchase. So we agree that they should be allowed to keep the property. We may disagree on the use issues.
At the risk of disagreeing with Hugh Hewitt, I believe the City is acting reasonably, ethically and in compliance with the law. Whether this ever comes to an eminent domain issue will depend on Cottonwood. I am certaint that the City will bend over backwards to not go that route, but it will require cooperation from Cottonwood. I'd say the chances of that are slim to none given the "holy war" stance the folks at Cottonwood have chosen to take. I can tell you as one who lives in that community Cottonwood is bringing a great deal of shame to the cause of Christianity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.