City Council, part 2

(Please refer to my blog entry of January 2, 2011 for background information relating to this entry.)

On Monday, June 13, 2011 my wife and I attended a session of the Mission, Texas City Council. The Council was scheduled to discuss and vote on an application by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for a permit for a meeting house to be built on property that is located on the corner of Bryan Road and Two Mile Road. I am including, as part of this entry, a newspaper article from the McAllen Monitor regarding this meeting, after which I will add my own comments.

Mormons' 2nd try for a church in North Mission fails
June 15, 2011 7:57 AM
Gail Burkhardt
The Monitor

MISSION — A wide range of emotions marked two long congregations’ second failed attempt to build a church in a residential area here.

Several representatives for the two congregations of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, commonly known as the Mormon Church, spoke at a packed public hearing Monday night, asking for the city to allow them to build a church at the corner of Bryan and Mile 2 roads.

Area neighbors who oppose building the church also spoke, saying they would like to keep the area residential.

The proposed site — zoned as agricultural land — is owned by Martin Garza Jr., assistant chief of Mission police. He did not attend Monday’s hearing. Nine of the 12 property owners within 200 feet the proposed site signed a petition against the church building on the property. That meant council approval for the zoning required “yay” votes from four of the five members — instead of the normal three-fifths majority.

The result was the same as when the church requested the zoning permit in December. Both times, the Planning and Zoning commission, which is a council-appointed board, approved the building and then when it went in front of City Council, Councilwomen Norie Gonzalez Garza and Maria Elena Ramirez voted against it.

Something did change from the last public hearing in December, however. The Latter-day Saint members hired a lawyer. Representatives for the congregation sent a letter to the city citing the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act and other constitutional rights they believe are being violated by not allowing the church to build on that site, said Sharon Amaguer, the local attorney for the congregation.

When asked if the church would sue the city, Amaguer said she had no comment.

The church should not have been up to reapply for the zoning permit until June 20, but after receiving the letter the Planning and Zoning board waived the typical six-month waiting period, said Sergio Zavala, the city’s planning director.

George Powell, an attorney who has land near the proposed site, said that because the church has other options to build in Mission, the city is not violating the congregations’ right to worship just by denying them from building on a specific location.

Brice Chandler, who is the stake president for the eight Mormon congregations in the area, said during the hearing that the location was the only one that met the criteria, which included being in a noncommercial area, having 5 or more acres of land, accessibility to members, the right price and a spiritual component.

“It may be difficult for someone not of our faith to understand that we affirm that we in fact do receive divine direction on important matters such as the location in our house of worship,” he said.

Along with Chandler and Powell, many other proponents of both sides put in their 2 cents before the council deliberated.

Members spoke about how the two Mission congregations along with two other congregations share one building in McAllen. The building is overcrowded and too far away, members said.

One member who works with the youth ministry, Maria Susana Reyna, choked up when speaking about the difficulty of scheduling youth programming in an overcrowded building.

“On an ordinary school day, our youth have early morning Bible study at 6 a.m.,” she said. “Currently they have to drive to McAllen before 6 a.m., then at 7 a.m., they have to drive back to Mission for school, and when they have evening activities, they have to drive back to McAllen.”

Neighbors talked about how they did not want any type of building much larger than their houses in the area. They said they want to keep the area residential and others have been interested in purchasing the property to do just that. One resident spoke about how she has invested into her house for her retirement and she cannot afford to lose that property value, which she believes would happen if the church came in.

Ivan Melendez expressed his frustration that the church had reapplied for the zoning permit and the city’s Planning and Zoning commission voted for it, when it was clear that the neighbors did not want it.

Why would the church “have specific and special privileges to go to a community where they’re not welcome?” he said, explaining that the church has other options for locations in Mission.

Councilwoman Ramirez said she voted against the permit again because she felt the neighbors needed to be protected.

After the meeting, Chandler said he was surprised the permit was denied a second time given that Mission is a faith-based community. He said he did not know what the church’s next move would be, but they are considering “all options,” including legal action. (End of Article)

My first comment is that I understand the residents’ desire to have the Church’s application denied. I have to agree that a large church building on the corner of the intersection will effect a major change in the neighborhood. Traffic will be greatly increased on Sundays and Wednesdays every week for meetings held on those days as well as at other times when the Church holds other activites.

Sergio Solis, a member of the Mission 2 Ward and a life long Mission resident stated during the meeting that Mission is a growing city and that residents of the neighborhood should not expect to be able to keep progress from changing the area.

I understand the residents’ fear that property values may be lowered because of the meetinghouse, even though these fears may be unfounded. Property values go up and down for a number of reasons, even in areas where no church buildings are located. I would suggest to the woman that purchased her property in the hope of using its subsequent sale as a nestegg for her retirement that, in contrast to times past, real estate is a very risky investment nowadays.

Attorney George Powell stated that “…the city is not violating the congregations’ right to worship just by denying them from building on a specific location.” Ivan Melendez argued “…that the church has other options for locations in Mission.” But is that really the case?

“Brice Chandler, who is the stake president for the eight Mormon congregations in the area, said during the hearing that the location was the only one that met the criteria, which included being in a noncommercial area, having 5 or more acres of land, accessibility to members, the right price and a spiritual component.”

If the property at Bryan and Mile 2 Roads is the only one that meets the criteria, then the Church really does not have any other options for locations in Mission, and, therefore, the Church’s rights are, in fact, being violated.

At the time of this writing, I don’t know whether or not the Church will continue to attempt to have this property re-zoned. I know that the Lord knew beforehand the results of this most recent hearing. I do believe that President Chandler was instructed by the Lord to reapply for re-zoning despite the fact that the Lord knew the attempt would fail. I don’t know the mind of the Lord in this matter, but I do know that when the Lord is ready for us to erect a meetinghouse in Mission, Texas, He will either clear the way for it to be erected on this property or He will make another lot available to be used.