"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has filed a second lawsuit against the City of Cody’s Planning, Zoning, and Adjustment Board related to the proposed temple project....In this motion, the Church is requesting judicial review of the Planning, Zoning and Adjusting Board’s June 15 meeting and the June 27 meeting."

https://mybighornbasin.com/lds-church-files-a-second-lawsuit-against-the-city-of-cody/

The Church of Mormon, once again being a good neighbor.

The city of Cody is just begging for ghawd to go all Laban on their asses!

And then Mormons wonder why nobody seems to like them.

Suing the city sure makes great relations.

The big corporation loves to throw its weight around. I’m sure they try and butter up the board officials while they sue to get what they want. All this for a temple nobody will use.

Ahh yes I remember from Luke 12:17 when Jesus filed a law suit against the Roman governor. That was a great story.

Like so much else with US politics today, the Church is mask off and not even pretending to be caring organization. If the were trying to force a shelter or something on the city they could claim to be on the side of the angles here, but instead it is a building that will be open a few days a week for those well off enough to pay to use it.

The Church is the religious version of Biff Tanner.

It sounds like the church really wants to mormonize big sections of Wyoming. Utah is running out of water and land, there are few places where young families can plop down into a new mormon neighborhood. Southeast Idaho has been controlled by mormons since Brigham Young sent converts to Bear Lake and Franklin Idaho. Development is already booming in that area and the church built a temple in Montpelier Idaho which is at the North end of Bear Lake.
I think they see Wyoming as a good growth area for members of the church. There is water, clean air and affordable land that direction.
They don't care about the locals. God gave them the money and power to do this.

Mormons couldn’t vote in Idaho because of polygamy. They were not very welcome in the state.

What surprise! The cult expressing their righteous indignation at their grand plan being challenged...boo...friggin hoo...

I like that they question if the planning Commission has the power and authority to do its job.

Basically they are crying and running to the state to get what they want.

They did the same in Heber City. Ran crying to the county when the city said no.

Showing their hypocrisy about obeying the local laws.

The church gave Belmont, Massachusetts a hard time as well about the Boston temple. Belmont is a small town, and very tall buildings or spires are simply not appropriate there. But heaven forbid that a town or small city has a better idea than the Mormon church about what works for them.

    I think that it is very
    unlikely that anyone can
    be guilted out of a course
    of action that they insist
    ghawd told them needed to
    be accomplished for their
    eternal progression...

    All though, how a lighted
    tower has current, along
    with eternal consequences,
    is difficult to fathom.
    

Could a tall lighted steeple attract grizzly bears to the neighborhood?

---between Cody and Yellowstone is prime real estate for big brown grizzly bears.

that's the title of this column from the SL Trib and this link


https://religionnews.com/2023/08/07/mormons-behaving-badly/

"The locals have repeated many times in the media that it’s not the fact of the temple they are objecting to. They’re fine with Latter-day Saints building a temple in their town. They are only questioning the location, specifically why this one religious group is getting an exemption to build in a neighborhood that is zoned for residential use only.

I can imagine that church leaders have been surprised by the pushback. Cody is a tiny community of barely 10,000 residents, with fewer than 30,000 in all of Park County. There are just 3,890 LDS Church members on the official rolls, or about 13% of the county’s population.

Local newspapers have covered the ways that some local Mormons have stolen or defaced the signs by the committee that is questioning the location of the proposed temple. At least one sign was vandalized with a crude drawing of Satan, implying that anyone who would question the height of a spire on an LDS temple must be in league with the devil.

Another defaced sign depicted blood dripping from the words of the sign, as though challenging the location of a temple implies that retributive violence could occur.

Mormonism has long thrived on having a very well-developed persecution complex, and it seems as though some local residents are tapping into that history. Some of the disfigured signs suggest they are simultaneously claiming to be a beleaguered minority and the group that is primarily responsible for founding the town. “We made Cody,” one reads.

Latter-day Saints did not found Cody, as the local newspaper notes, and in fact did not settle there until the 1920s, several decades later.

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."

The Church had one heck of a time building a temple in Nasville and had to relocate it several times. And then they sued and lost. The Temple got built finally in Franklin right next to the Stake center. It definitely was a case of unmormon like behavior and the church cut its
loses instead of pursuing more legal actions.

Is it just me, or does anyone else find it strange or suspicious that two members of the zoning board (who would presumably have voted "no") just *happened* to be absent for that one critical meeting, turning a 3-3 tie (effectively a loss, would need 4 votes) into a 3-1 win?

Do board members typically miss hugely important votes like this? Quite the coincidence, it seems.