The Emma Caucus is taking the Pitkin Board of County Commissioners
to court over their recent decision to settle a long-standing lawsuit
and allow a large, controversial church to be built in the rural
midvalley.
“We don’t consider Pitkin County an
adversary,” Emma Caucus attorney David Kelly, an Emma resident and a
plaintiff in the case, told reporters at a press conference Thursday.
“But we hope if they hear enough voices from the community, they’ll
reconsider their actions. We don’t think this land-use approval can
stand.”
The lawsuit, filed in Pitkin County District
Court Jan. 31, claims that the Board of County Commissioners failed to
follow county land-use code and “abused its discretion, exceeded its
authority, and lacked jurisdiction” when it approved a settlement Jan.
9 that will allow Grace Church of the Roaring Fork Valley to build
15,500 square feet of church buildings and a 197-space parking lot on
an 18.5-acre Emma sheep ranch that is zoned for one 5,750-square-foot
residence per 10 acres.
The development, which would abut federal
land and two massive conservation easements held by Pitkin County, has
raised concerns among Emma residents about preserving the area’s
pastoral character and open spaces, as well as about traffic safety at
an already dangerous intersection with Highway 82, Emma resident George
Newman said.
“I think Grace Church will try to characterize
this as an antichurch movement,” added Kelly. “But the county has
rejected at least two other commercial (scale) applications (in Emma).
This is just not the right place for that level of development.”
Grace Church is also a defendant in the case.
In addition to the Emma Caucus and Kelly, plaintiffs include Richard
Bird and Michael Ernemann, both of whom own property adjacent to and
near the Grace Church parcel, respectively.
Commissioners originally denied Grace
Church’s application in 2005 because, they said, it violated the
land-use code, and was at odds with the rural, agricultural character
of the neighborhood. That move landed the county in federal court when
Grace Church sued the commissioners for violating the congregation’s
civil and constitutional rights, and for violating the Religious Land
Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000, or RLUIPA. RLUIPA
precludes local governments from imposing land-use regulations that
create a “substantial burden” on religious practices and institutions,
unless there is a “compelling” public interest to do so.
RLUIPA has held up in every appeals court
ruling to date. Worried they would not win the lawsuit, commissioners
entered the settlement to maintain as much control as possible over
development on the Grace Church parcel. In addition to allowing the
church to build, the settlement limits development on the property
under a 10-year covenant, and requires the county to pay at least
$350,000 and an undisclosed sum for attorneys’ fees.
As it stands, said Emma resident Parker
Maddux, the commissioners’ decision sets a dangerous precedent under
which the “erosion or destruction of local zoning would be inevitable.”
The caucus’s suit seeks to reverse the
county’s commitment to the settlement, Kelly explained. The caucus
believes the county could ultimately prevail in court, he said. Barring
that, he said, the suit could buy time to find another parcel of land
for Grace Church, or find a solution that is less burdensome for Emma
residents. So far, the Emma Caucus has not approached Grace Church
formally to seek alternative solutions, Newman conceded.
County Attorney John Ely was out of the
office Thursday and could not be reached for comment on the Emma
Caucus’s lawsuit. No Pitkin County commissioners had returned phone
calls for comment as of press time Thursday.
Grace Church attorney Robert Lees said he is reviewing the lawsuit. “We will have a response to it by Monday,” he said.
sarah@aspendailynews.com
