Homeowners file lawsuit against approval of Fairview Temple construction
The construction of the Fairview temple has been a hot topic of debate in the town for the past year. After and a new design for the temple was proposed, the town council approved the temple for construction on with a 5-2 vote.
However, this lawsuit is alleging that due to Texas law, the council did not have enough votes to approve the permits. Because residents voiced their protests against the construction, the council needed to have a supermajority (75%) of votes to approve the variance, the lawsuit said.
TIMELINE: The year-long debate surrounding the now-approved Fairview Texas Temple
According to the lawsuit filing obtained by ABC4.com, three homeowners are named in the suit against the town. They allege that 'out of an abundance of caution,' they appealed the council's decision with Fairview's Zoning Board of Adjustments.
Though the Zoning Board has not ruled on their appeal, the lawsuit alleges that in a recent town council meeting, representatives for the town questioned whether the Zoning Board had the authority to overturn the town council's decisions.
The lawsuit states that the homeowners believe that the Zoning Board does have the authority, but they have filed the suit in the case that the Zoning Board is found not to have the authority, or if the Zoning board agrees with the council.
According to the suit, when a certain number of property owners who will be affected by the permit file a written protest, the permit can only be approved by a supermajority of the governing body, in this case, the Fairview Town Council.
Per Texas Local Government Code § 211.006(d), the protest must be signed by 20% of the owners of the 'immediately adjoining the area covered by the proposed change and extending 200 feet from that area.'
PREVIOUS COVERAGE: 'Serious inaccuracies': Texas town mayor responds to LDS Church letter in ongoing temple dispute
The lawsuit is alleging that the people who signed the protest against the temple construction permits own 20% of the land extending 200 feet from the area where the temple will be built, or the 'protest zone.'
However, the issue is that the land the temple is set to be built on adjoins the neighboring city of Allen, Texas, and part of the protest zone could include land in Allen.
The lawsuit is arguing that any land in Allen should not be included in the protest zone, because people who own property outside of Fairview cannot file protests with the Town of Fairview, because they are not included on Fairview's tax rolls.
If you exclude any land outside of Fairview, then the protest was signed by 20% of the property owners within the protest zone, according to the homeowners, and then the town council's approval would not be valid because they did not have a supermajority.
Fairview Mayor Dr. John Hubbard issued a statement in response to the lawsuit filed against the town council.
'The Town of Fairview maintains that the area of the 'protest zone' was calculated correctly,' he said. 'The Town Council acted based on the information available at the time and in what was believed to be in the best interest of Fairview. Every resident has the right to pursue any legal remedy if they believe the Council did not follow proper procedures in approving the Conditional Use Permit (CUP).'
He also stated that the issue is not opposing the construction of the temple. The issue, he said, 'has always been about the size of the building and the height of the steeple.'
'While the LDS Church has graciously reduced the steeple height to 120 feet, many residents believe that a structure of that scale is incompatible with a district zoned for a 35-foot height limit,' he continued,
PREVIOUS COVERAGE: Texas town mayor responds to LDS Church letter in ongoing temple dispute
He concluded by sharing that he believes a path to compromise is possible without getting the courts involved.
'I believe litigation could be avoided if both the LDS Church and the appellants are willing to compromise further on the height,' he said. 'A lower steeple would allow the town to avoid costly legal proceedings, the church to build the temple it needs, and the community to preserve the small-town character that makes Fairview unique. This is a path where everyone can win.'
If the court rules in favor of the homeowners, the Fairview Town Council will have to vote on the temple's construction permit again, and a supermajority of council members must vote in favor in order to approve the permit.
The homeowners requested that the court wait to hear their case until the Zoning Board has ruled on their appeal. They are also requesting that the court pay their attorneys' fees.
In April, the to approve the construction of a temple for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
'This has been an extraordinarily difficult decision, how to deal with this… None of us are pleased with this, but it is what we think we need to do,' a councilmember said. Other council members also voiced their displeasure with the decision, but they still voted to approve the construction of the temple — with provisions.
The Fairview Texas Temple is not allowed to exceed a height of 44 feet and 7 inches from the ground up to the roof, and the spire will not be allowed to exceed 120 feet from the ground. The building itself will be limited to roughly 30,700 square feet, and the town council also placed restrictions on the exterior lighting of the building.
The original plan for the temple was for a 44,000-square-foot building with a reported 174-foot spire. Current plans are for a 30,000-square-foot building with a 120-foot-tall spire on 8.61 acres in Fairview.
Utah Alzheimer's Disease advocates visit Washington, D.C.
Homeowners file lawsuit against approval of Fairview Temple construction
Kouri Richins: New trial date set for Kamas mom accused of killing her husband
Fire burning on Navajo Mountain in San Juan County
Hazy sunshine expected through the weekend
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Your kid is getting a ‘Trump account.' Should you put your money in it?
Republicans' 'big, beautiful bill' includes a gift to millions of families: $1,000 in an investment account for every eligible newborn. The new savings vehicles, akin to Individual Retirement Accounts, are designated for children who are U.S. citizens born from 2025 through 2028. In addition to the one-time government contribution, parents and others can chip in as much as $5,000 a year to the accounts, which beneficiaries can access at 18, with some constraints. Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post. The seed money is a boon for recipients and will grow tax-deferred. Financial planners say parents and guardians might do better putting their money into existing investment vehicles such as a 529 plan, a savings plan designed to cover college expenses. But 529s are limited to education, while backers say the new accounts can help their recipients beyond college. Republican lawmakers call the accounts 'Trump accounts,' though the Senate's plan to officially name them after the president did not make it to the final version of the legislation, which was signed Friday. They deliver on an idea that both Democrats and Republicans have floated for years: to invest money for all children at birth. Withdrawals from a 529 are not subject to state or federal taxes as long as the funds go toward qualified education expenses - a feature the new investment accounts don't share. And in the new accounts, parents' deposits don't qualify for a tax deduction, notes Greg Leiserson, a senior fellow at the Tax Law Center at New York University. 'You have this very slight or minimal-to-nonexistent tax benefit,' he said. 'What is the point here?' Financial adviser Amy Spalding of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, said she will continue to steer her clients to 529s. 'It's better from a tax standpoint,' Spalding said. 'And there are more investment options. And then there's a higher contribution limit.' (For 2025, a single person can deposit as much as $19,000 a year into a beneficiary's 529, while married couples can contribute as much $38,000.) Jeremiah Barlow, a financial planner in Santa Barbara, California, said the new accounts could benefit a family that has hit the maximum on their child's 529 and wants to save more, or who like the idea of setting up a fund for their child's first home or as an economic safety net. 'It would likely appeal to our families who want more flexibility for more general-purpose savings for their child's future,' Barlow said. 'You shouldn't rush to just use it because it's out there.' Leiserson cautioned that account holders should understand the tax implications, noting that withdrawals will be taxed at typical income rates, not at the capital gains rate of a taxable brokerage account. 'For most people, this is going to be worse than what they could do in a taxable account,' he said. Though parents don't get a tax deduction when they contribute to a new account, employers can claim a tax break for contributions on behalf of their workers' children or their teenage employees. Nonprofits also can contribute to they accounts. The law requires the new investment accounts to track a U.S. stock index, which means account holders have fewer options than they would in a brokerage account or a 529 plan, which generally offer a range of investment options with varying levels of risk, including stocks, bonds and mutual funds. Leiserson noted that all-stock portfolios come with their own risks, because they're tethered to market conditions. 'If you're saying, 'Okay, I'm going to start school in the fall' - if the market falls over the summer, the planning you were doing about how you were going to pay for college is totally messed up, because the money you thought would be there, isn't." The White House said the accounts 'will afford a generation of children the chance to experience the miracle of compounded growth and set them on a course for prosperity from the very beginning.' While some experts appreciate the premise of the accounts, they also see flaws in the design, such as the requirement that parents opt-in to the account on their tax return, which means people who don't know this might miss out. In addition, the law includes a penalty of at least $500 if a parent mistakenly claims an account, which could scare off some parents. During the grinding process of crafting the massive tax and spending legislation, the accounts changed both superficially - they were renamed from MAGA accounts to Trump accounts to a yet-to-be-determined name - and in substance. Legislators dropped plans to give account withdrawals favorable tax treatment similar to a brokerage account. Account withdrawals will be taxed at ordinary income tax rates, not capital gains rates. Congress also discarded rules that would have prescribed how beneficiaries could spend the money - on college at 18, on starting a business at 25, on buying a house at 30. Instead, account holders cannot touch the funds until they turn 18. After that, the rules are the same as those of an individual retirement account - withdrawals are taxed like income, plus an additional 10 percent tax penalty on any withdrawals before age 59½ except for certain qualified uses. Those uses include paying for college, supporting themselves if they become disabled, or recovering from domestic abuse or a natural disaster. Beneficiaries also can withdraw as much as $10,000 to buy their first home, and up to $5,000 when they have a new baby themselves. Even one of the Trump accounts' biggest proponents in Congress, Rep. Blake Moore (R-Utah), said in an interview that for many parents, the new account design offers more benefits for retirement than for college expenses. 'I would argue that the tax implications of a 529 are far more favorable,' he said, but noted that most families don't have the disposable income to invest in a 529, and the new accounts' $1,000 from the government can benefit people at all income levels. If the account saw a 6 percent rate of return for 18 years, it would be worth $2,854; if the stock market does well, it could be worth even more. 'The most beneficial thing in my opinion about these is that … you're investing from birth into an IRA,' Moore said. 'Most people start investing in an IRA at 30 …. We're talking at birth or at 30. The benefits of investing early into that IRA are significant.' Moore has four sons, and while none will qualify for the government's $1,000 seed money contribution for newborns, the law allows him to open a Trump account as a parent. He says he'll be putting money in it: 'I want my kids having a Trump account so they can take it out when they're 50 or 60 years old.' - - - Jacob Bogage contributed to this report. Related Content Arthur Ashe's knack for reinvention led him to history at Wimbledon Newlywed detained by ICE freed after 141 days and two deportation attempts The Met opens a dazzling wing of non-European art Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk says he's formed the 'America Party.' Mark Cuban and Anthony Scaramucci are interested.
Elon Musk said on X that he's forming a new political party amid a feud with President Donald Trump. He said it would be called the "America Party." Musk has publicly criticized Trump's spending bill, which the president signed on July 4. Elon Musk declared on X the formation of a new political party amid his ongoing feud with President Donald Trump over the "Big Beautiful Bill." "Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom," Musk wrote in an X post on Saturday afternoon. The Tesla CEO had said Friday on his social media platform that one way the new party could work is to focus on winning just a handful of Senate seats and House districts that could serve as the "deciding vote" on "contentious laws," given the "razor-thin legislative margins" in Congress. Fellow billionaire Mark Cuban appeared — not for the first time — to support the idea of a new party, replying to Musk's Saturday announcement with a series of fireworks and fire emojis. He added in a separate post: "I work with @voterchoice. They will help you get on ballots. That is their mission." SkyBridge Capital founder Anthony Scaramucci, who briefly served as White House communications director under Trump in 2017, also appeared interested in the party. "I would like to meet to discuss. My DMs are open," he replied to Musk. Musk's "America Party" announcement came after he conducted a July 4 poll, asking X users if they want "independence" from the two-party system. About 65% of the 1.25 million participants voted "Yes." Musk, who was a staunch supporter of Trump's 2024 reelection bid, has been publicly critical of the president's "Big Beautiful Bill," a sweeping domestic policy bill that includes extensive tax cuts and could add more than $3 trillion to the national debt, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Musk has characterized the bill on X as a form of "debt slavery." Just days after stepping away from his work at the White House DOGE Office, which was tasked with cutting spending and reducing the deficit, Musk in June called the legislation a "massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill." Musk then proposed the idea of forming a new political party that represents the "80% in the middle." Musk's repeated attacks on the bill led to a spectacular public fallout between him and the president. Trump even suggested that his office would look into possibly deporting Musk, a South African immigrant. Musk's July 4 poll on X came the same day Trump signed the bill into law. Musk and a White House spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. Musk's back-and-forth regarding his involvement in political affairs has been followed by volatile times for the CEO of Tesla, his EV company. Wall Street analysts, including Tesla bull Dan Ives, have said that Musk's politics could lead the company astray if the chief executive doesn't snap back into focus. Earlier in June, Baird analysts downgraded the Tesla stock, noting that the Musk-Trump spat adds "uncertainty to TSLA's outlook. Read the original article on Business Insider
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
NY Times addresses backlash over report on NYC mayoral candidate Mamdani's college application
The New York Times seems to be in damage control after the paper's story about New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani identifying as Asian and African American on his college application upset some of its readers, leading to an editor from the outlet attempting to clear up the controversy on social media on Friday. The article claimed that Mamdani, when asked his race on his 2009 college application to Columbia University, checked the boxes for "Asian" but also "Black or African American," in their article published on Thursday. The Times' assistant managing editor for Standards and Trust, Patrick Healy, put out a lengthy statement on X the following day after receiving "reader feedback" on the article. Resurfaced Video Shows Nyc Mayoral Hopeful Saying He Wants To Replace Private Homes With Communal Living "Our reporters obtained information about Mr. Mamdani's Columbia college application and went to the Mamdani campaign with it. When we hear anything of news value, we try to confirm it through direct sources. Mr. Mamdani confirmed this information in an interview with The Times," he wrote. Healy explained that the New York City mayoral candidate felt limited by the options listed in the application's racial identity boxes — and since he was born in Uganda, decided to write in the country on his application. Read On The Fox News App Mamdani's application was made available to The Times after a cyberattack on Columbia University in late June led to some of the school's sensitive information being exposed to the hackers. Healy stated that although the outlet received the information after it was stolen in a cyberattack, "The Times does not solely rely on nor make a decision to publish information from such a source," and verified the application with Mamdani himself before publishing the story. Regarding the feedback, he added, "We believe Mr. Mamdani's thinking and decision-making, laid out in his words, was newsworthy and in line with our mission to help readers better know and understand top candidates for major offices." Liberal critics, such as Keith Olbermann, lashed out at the Times on X. He stated, "Your absolute abrogation of the NYT standards would in a better era there have led the full range of you in management to resign. Utter failure. Then again, if you don't realize NYT is perceived as actively campaigning against Mamdani, you're all lost anyway." Another aspect of the article that some readers took issue with was The Times' source, who sent them Mamdani's 2009 college application. New York Times Columnist Admits That Trump Is A 'Normie Republican' An opinion columnist for the outlet took to the social media platform Bluesky to slam his own publication for the story. Jamelle Bouie, a columnist for The Times, slung personal insults at the reporters on social media as well. Responding to a Bluesky post slamming one of the Times reporters, Benjamin Ryan, the columnist had this to say: "Everything I have seen about him screams a guy with little to no actual brain activity." Shortly after publicly slamming The Times' story, Bouie deleted the posts and issued a short statement on his Bluesky account. "I deleted several posts about a Times story because they violated Times social media standards," he said. The New York Times did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment on this matter. Fox News Digital also reached out to Bouie for article source: NY Times addresses backlash over report on NYC mayoral candidate Mamdani's college application
