DCPCUP-0000-01224 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

It appears that misrepresentations have been made by the Re-formed Congregation throughout this process. The application for the C.U.P. had several areas of concern including misnaming the owners of the property. They also misstated the name of their church as the "Reformed. Congregation" rather than as it is legally incorporated as "Re-Formed Congregation of the Goddess". The group specifically requested that immediate action be taken by the Zoning and Natural Resources Committee which I believe to be an attempt to railroad this permit through the legal process before anyone had a chance to catch what was actually happening. At the first hearing by the Town of Oregon Planning Commission, the Real Estate agent gave very little information about the plans of the church but there were several substantially different number provided - at this meeting than in subsequent meetings. Also at the original planning commission meeting, the "owner" of the 5 acre parcel in the middle of the land in question, NormaJean Bunton spoke. She represented herself as the sole owner of this property and indicated that the real estate agent for the church had come to her to explain what was proposed and she felt that it was not going to negatively affect her property. She indicated that she had no connection with the group and had just recently been apprised of the application for a conditional use. In looking at the public records, Ms. Bunton purchased the land as power of attorney for Samantha Rivers, the pas • e c urc an. •of s e an• 's xiver `igned the mortgage__.for-"the 5 ■ acre p: - . - - - a. not app- - y--even-cans tdered what would be used' for a sewage system on this property for the gatherings, it seems apparent that they intended to use the house already on a portion of the property. The members of the church did not come to any of the legally posted meetings in the Town of Oregon. I believe this was intentional in that they really did not want to let anyone know who they were or what they actually planned for this property. Now they are screaming discrimination in an attempt the apply undue and unnecessary pressure on the Town and County to approve a C.U.P. that is realistically and justifiably deniable. I 1 R `1 'i Y � ' ,.S � �.1 h ,V..Yt 7. { 7 a t v '','•'c.• I + 'e j , ',NV t 4 t}. V�♦ s. J. )4 lc '�.= i.. i l01::/,:-...-.: -.,,;,,,,,,...;04,,,,f.:a : S: P�4 +1 l 1 +r ! { i i' ?,;.,.A,,, J ° s k i?�f ' ' i l ( y e 1 y.0 1 %-.• 1 ', ,_ :,,, , y r, )' 1'. s 5,+ .it.t',c,',$,,,fir' 1 • t o • 1 k. - R� �. 4'.k4 � l�•S�•+.r y .: 4 ..'t 'sr fit• A �' � L ,.:•.,..k.