FAIRVIEW, Texas — The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is determined to take legal action against the town of Fairview over the denial of its permit request for the construction of the McKinney Texas Temple, raising the stakes in an increasingly contentious local dispute.
On January 27, the church issued a letter through attorney Eric Pinker, formally notifying the town of its intent to file suit. The church argues this denial infringes upon its rights to freely exercise its religion as protected by the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.
"While it continues to be the Church's hope this matter can be worked out amicably, the face of continued and unreasonable opposition, it appears the Church has no choice but to defend its rights in court," the letter asserts. The dispute follows an August vote where town officials rejected the original application for the temple, prompting mediation efforts to seek a resolution.
Initially, the church proposed plans for a two-story temple reaching up to 174 feet. Following public objections, it agreed to significant concessions, including reducing the size of the building from 44,000 square feet to nearly 30,000 square feet and lowering the proposed steeple height to 120 feet. Church spokesperson Melissa McKneely emphasized the need for the temple, stating, "Some drive more than three hours to get to the Dallas temple, the only one operating in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. We need the temple. A temple allows us to do ceremonies and worship differently."
The strained relationship between the church and the Fairview government has brewed distrust. Despite arriving at what was thought to be a "nonbinding settlement" last November, town officials, including Fairview's Mayor Henry Lessner, have reportedly voiced skepticism about the agreement's enforcement and expressed concerns following public backlash.
At the time of the settlement, the church anticipated the modifications satisfactorily addressed the town council's concerns. McKneely remarked, "The Church understood these modifications fully satisfied any concerns previously raised by the Town Council." Yet, as negotiations continued, Mayor Lessner indicated the settlement was merely an initial compromise and suggested the church should downsize again due to local public sentiment.
The town's Zoning Defense Fund, created to defend against potential litigation, highlighted the community's apprehension toward the church's original temple plans. Public meetings have revealed deteriorated morale, with some residents encouraging the town to withstand any repercussions, believing strongly against the temple's size. "Bring it on!" urged Fairview resident Alycia Kuehne during discussions, expressing unwavering support for town officials to challenge the church.
Church representatives are concerned the town will not uphold the commitments they reached during mediation, citing public statements from town officials and previous discussions with residents as inconsistent with promises made. A letter dated January 17 from the town's attorney argued the church had passed the deadline for its new application and urged adherence to the standard public hearing process.
The legal framework surrounding this dispute falls under the umbrella of federal and state laws which protect religious institutions from unreasonable zoning requirements. The church has underscored its commitment to cooperating with Fairview to avoid litigation, yet it appears the current impasse may lead to court intervention.
"We came to mediation to be good neighbors," McKneely said. Nonetheless, the standoff continues, with the church insisting on its right to construct the temple with the original specifications, as it believes the larger facility is necessary to serve its growing congregation.
The clash reflects broader tensions between urban development and community identity, with Fairview residents divided over the aesthetics and potential impact of the temple on their town. Proponents for the temple assert it symbolizes inclusion and faith within the community, contrasting sharply with residents fearing loss of neighborhood character.
While the church maintains its readiness to comply with necessary changes, the failure to reach consensus means the McKinney Texas Temple might soon become the subject of courtroom deliberations. Whether the town can withstand litigation from one of the wealthiest religious organizations, known for its extensive resources, remains uncertain.
The dispute marks another chapter of tension between local governance and religious rights, as both sides prepare for either potential compromise or confrontation through the legal system.