On Monday, February 24, 2003, the Cypress City Council voted 4-0 to approve a settlement agreement that will allow Cottonwood to build its new church on other property in the same redevelopment area. (see details and media links below)
The story of how officials in Cypress, California used subterfuge, delay and stunningly unethical tactics to take away property owned by the Cottonwood Christian Center is an extraordinary account of abuse of governmental power and cavalier disregard of basic constitutional rights.
Cottonwood is a large non-denominational church in Orange County, California that was established in 1983 with a membership of just 50 people.Over the years, it has grown rapidly and now hosts some 4,000 adults at worship services, and another1,200 children at Sunday school, each week. Its existing facility in the City of Los Alamitos has a seating capacity of only 700, and it must hold two services on Saturday and four on Sunday to accomodate its congregants. Even then it must turn worshipers away because of limited space.
Several years ago, church members raised funds to purchase property to build a much larger facility. They spent more than a year buying up parcels from multiple landowners, finally sewing up a 17.9 acre property in a redevelopment area near the Los Alamitos Race Course at a cost of $13 million. The property purchased by the church had been largely vacant for decades.
They drew up plans for a 300,000 square foot worship center with seating for more than 4,700, a youth center, daycare center, gymnasium, and other facilities to serve the congregation.
In October 2000, Cottonwood filed an extensive application for a Conditional Use Permit ("CUP"), that went well beyond the city's requirements. But a few weeks later, the city rejected it, citing omission of a Preliminary Design Review, despite the fact that the application itself states that such a review is optional. The following day (a Friday), the city sent the church a letter—by ordinary mail—informing them of a City Council meeting on Monday, at which it would adopt a moratorium on any new permit applications in the redevelopment area.
The moratorium lasted more than a year, during which the city sought interest from potential commercial developers. Finally, having secured interest from Costco Corporation, the big warehouse retail store chain, in February 2002 the City Council conceded that it had improperly rejected Cottonwood's CUP application. But at the very same time, the Council approved an "Exclusive Negotiation Agreement" with Costco, and in April, the Redevelopment Agency selected a development proposal from Costco despite the fact that it doesn't own the land, and that a retail outlet is not a permitted use under current zoning for the property.
On January 15, 2002, Cottonwood Christian Center filed a lawsuit against the City of Cypress in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, charging violations of RLUIPA and the U.S. and California Constitutions.
On April 8, 2002, the Cypress City Council voted 3-0 to begin eminent domain proceedings under which it would take the land and then sell it to Costco for construction of a new retail warehouse store.
On April 16, 2002, the Director of Community Development for the City of Cypress, David Belmer, sent the church a letter giving notice of the Cypress Redevelopment Agency's intent to "adopt a resolution of necessity" that would allow the city to forcibly acquire the property.
On May 28, 2002, at a meeting attended by hundreds of supporters of Cottonwood (most of whom had to watch the proceedings on TV monitors outside), the City Council (voting as members of the Redevelopment Authority) adopted the "resolution of necessity."
During testimony presented before the vote, Pastor Conley told the Council, "I have a Costco card, and I like Costco. But I think for it to take away land that belongs to a church is morally wrong."
Later, the Council voted 4-0 to take the property, after Council member Anna Percy compared the Council members to "parents" who have responsibility to make important decisions, and city residents and church members as "kids" who don't have all the information to make such decisions.
On June 24, 2002, Cottonwood filed a motion for a preliminary injunction that would bar the City of Cypress from proceeding further in its attempt to take the church property, including a bar on taking physical possession of the property. The City of Cypress filed a reply brief on July 22, and Cottonwood filed its own reply brief on July 29.
Following a hearing on the motion for a preliminary injunction, Judge David O. Carter issued a toughly worded 36 page order granting the motion and barring Cypress from seizing the Cottonwood property on August 6. He held that the church was likely to succeed on the merits of its claims under the First and Fifth Amendments, as well as under RLUIPA. "Preventing a church from building a worship site fundamentally inhibits its ability to practice its religion. Churches are central to the religious exercise of most religions. If Cottonwood could not build a church, it could not exist," the judge wrote. More selected excerpts from the order make clear the breadth of the court's finding that "the public interest is decidedly in favor of granting the injunction."
Anxious to avoid additional legal setbacks, the City of Cypress agreed to settlement negotiations. After many months of talks, an agreement allowing Cottonwood to build on other land (previously used as a golf course) in the same redevelopment area was concluded. The Cypress City Council voted 4-0 to approve the settlement on Monday, February 24, 2003.
The main provisions of the agreement include:
Cottonwood Christian Center was represented by The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and by the firm of Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton.