NOM

I was listening today to John Dehlin's Ex-Mormon state of the union speech/podcast. In part two he mentions that part of the driving force behind building new temples, even in areas where membership is is decline, is land speculation by those in the know.

Leaders, knowing in advance where temples will be built can buy, or have family/friends/companies buy land/realestate in that area. Once the temple is announced, members are drawn to that area to be near the temple, non-members are drawn in by the beautiful buildings and nice neighborhoods, and realestate values go up resulting in a nice wind fall to all involved.

I have never heard of this theory before. It makes sense, and I wouldn't put it past anyone with the opportunity and means to take advantage like that. But, is there any source to back this up?

Do we have financial records tieing church leaders or their families or their companies to anything like this? Anything?

The location of the Draper Temple was chosen for such a reason. Either that or divine inspiration was given to build right on an earthquake fault in an area with limited access. Each nearby house had an extra million dollars added on to its asking price. Sandy City had offered a the Church a very large area to build the Temple for free and it had major transportation access. However, the area was not ideal for luxury home construction and insiders did not already own property in that location.

Of course, having a Temple located in an area of affluence helps to ensure that no wild-eyed religious itinerant will wander in and upset the tables of the Temple money changers.

The Church also bought a chunk of Arizona real estate from a member of the Church Finance Committee for three times the valued worth back in 2008, so the Finance Committee member would not take a loss when the market collapsed back in 2008.

moksha wrote: ↑Wed Dec 19, 2018 3:00 am The location of the Draper Temple was chosen for such a reason. Either that or divine inspiration was given to build right on an earthquake fault in an area with limited access. Each nearby house had an extra million dollars added on to its asking price. Sandy City had offered a the Church a very large area to build the Temple for free and it had major transportation access. However, the area was not ideal for luxury home construction and insiders did not already own property in that location.

That is some strong circumstantial evidence, but not really provable right? I'm sure they're too savvy with all of this to get caught now, but I'd really like to see some amount proof of this type of activity. That might be enough to tip my wife past the edge of reconsidering the amount we pay in tithing every goram month.

moksha wrote: ↑Wed Dec 19, 2018 3:00 am The location of the Draper Temple was chosen for such a reason. Either that or divine inspiration was given to build right on an earthquake fault in an area with limited access. Each nearby house had an extra million dollars added on to its asking price. Sandy City had offered a the Church a very large area to build the Temple for free and it had major transportation access. However, the area was not ideal for luxury home construction and insiders did not already own property in that location.

Of course, having a Temple located in an area of affluence helps to ensure that no wild-eyed religious itinerant will wander in and upset the tables of the Temple money changers.

I can see a similar pattern like this along the Wasatch that began with Bountiful, then moved on to Timp, Oquirrh, Pason, etc. Whereas temples used to be built downtown, now they look to the nice Bonneville shoreline areas where the biggest tithe payers are. Almost forgot to mention the Las Vegas temple.

græy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:34 am

moksha wrote: ↑Wed Dec 19, 2018 3:00 am The location of the Draper Temple was chosen for such a reason. Either that or divine inspiration was given to build right on an earthquake fault in an area with limited access. Each nearby house had an extra million dollars added on to its asking price. Sandy City had offered a the Church a very large area to build the Temple for free and it had major transportation access. However, the area was not ideal for luxury home construction and insiders did not already own property in that location.

That is some strong circumstantial evidence, but not really provable right? I'm sure they're too savvy with all of this to get caught now, but I'd really like to see some amount proof of this type of activity. That might be enough to tip my wife past the edge of reconsidering the amount we pay in tithing every goram month.

Well... That info is coming from Dear Penguin, so it's hard to tell if he's being his Dear Penguin sarcastic self, or if there is actually some truth in those statements. Well... On second thought, there is definitely some truth in those statements, but actual proof? Well: Ya just gotta have faith.

(I know, blind faith is completely useless. Even if it is faith in Penguin.)

As I understand it, the penguin was simply operating off of information he had read in the Salt Lake Tribune. Such information must be considered suspect since the Tribune at that time was not even indirectly owned by the Church and has been labeled as being "anti-Mormon" by LDS Church Apologists. Best to doubt the Tribune before you enter the bowls of apostasy!

However, even ardent Church apologists will acknowledge that Sandy City offered the Quarry Bend property to the Church for Temple Construction and some apologists might even concede that earthquake faults exist, although they will argue that this is not the case with the Draper Temple since God himself sat on the selection committee and if the roads need to be widened then the non-worrisome earthquake faults could then be utilized by the Lord.

I don’t want to doxx myself so I’ll try to share this with few details. I understand if you read this with skepticism. My relative was a real estate agent for many many years. He was Uber TBM. He would repeatedly pray about land that the church could use and would offer to represent the church at no cost to attain it. Several times he was told they were not interested in the land only to reach out to another more prominent member and have them arrange the deal and pay finders fees or commissions to that member. My TBM relative was frustrated and eventually stopped helping find property but still is TBM.

The location of the Tucson temple pretty much goes against the normal land speculation of other temple locations. The land was already zoned for a commercial or religious purpose and the surrounding residential properties are 1+ acres and are pretty much already built up. There might be apartment properties available, but no huge tracts for subdivisions. It is, however, in a very nice location overlooking the city. They did have to follow the height restrictions and design covenants of the area and maybe it look south western, hence the fact that it looks very similar to the San Xavier mission.

moksha wrote: ↑Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:01 pm Best to doubt the Tribune before you enter the bowls of apostasy!

First - where can I find a bowl of apostasy? Sounds like it would be great to eat cereal out of.

Second - I also heard about the land speculation for the first time on John's podcast. My first thought was things like the multi-million dollar high rise apartments the church has recently grown fond of. My second thought was of the Yuba City temple announcement.

Having lived there for several years, I assumed that they were going to build the temple on the stake ball park property immediately behind the stake center. When I mentioned it to family still in the area though, I learned that they gave/sold that property to the city for a police department expansion or something.

I don't think the exact location has been announced yet, but I will be very curious to see what land changes hands, and for whom, when they eventually announce the location. I've got an aunt that works in real estate there, so I think I can get some insight about it when it happens.

IT_Veteran wrote: ↑Thu Dec 20, 2018 9:23 am

moksha wrote: ↑Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:01 pm Best to doubt the Tribune before you enter the bowls of apostasy!

First - where can I find a bowl of apostasy? Sounds like it would be great to eat cereal out of.

Yes, that would be appropriate. Eating cereal with milk (before meat) is the usual diet of empty calories served in church.

Corsair wrote: ↑Thu Dec 20, 2018 10:24 am

IT_Veteran wrote: ↑Thu Dec 20, 2018 9:23 am

moksha wrote: ↑Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:01 pm Best to doubt the Tribune before you enter the bowls of apostasy!

First - where can I find a bowl of apostasy? Sounds like it would be great to eat cereal out of.

Yes, that would be appropriate. Eating cereal with milk (before meat) is the usual diet of empty calories served in church.

You guys immediately spotted the misspelling of bowels. Bowls of hell could possibly be some dish laced with an abundance of Sichuan peppers and served with a side dish of Jell-O salad.

HighMaintenance wrote: ↑Thu Dec 20, 2018 8:25 am The location of the Tucson temple pretty much goes against the normal land speculation of other temple locations. The land was already zoned for a commercial or religious purpose and the surrounding residential properties are 1+ acres and are pretty much already built up. There might be apartment properties available, but no huge tracts for subdivisions. It is, however, in a very nice location overlooking the city. They did have to follow the height restrictions and design covenants of the area and maybe it look south western, hence the fact that it looks very similar to the San Xavier mission.

I agree with this. I think they wanted to be by Sax Fifth Avenue and on the hill.

It took a lot of arm twisting to get the rezone approved. Tucson is a big city that likes to pretend it is small, business takes forever to get done.

Also, the neighborhoods around there are very rich, luckily the TBM HOA president stepped in and persuaded the neighborhood to give in (probably showed them the before and after affects of property values when a temple moves in). It is a nice looking temple, I would ride my bike past it and my friends would ask me about it.

græy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:34 am That is some strong circumstantial evidence, but not really provable right? I'm sure they're too savvy with all of this to get caught now, but I'd really like to see some amount proof of this type of activity. That might be enough to tip my wife past the edge of reconsidering the amount we pay in tithing every goram month.

It really does not matter whether the evidence is circumstantial or otherwise. We were all taught to avoid the appearance of evil. We got taken aside when we bought hot chocolate at Starbucks or went camping with a co-ed group. It looked bad and the church would not approve. (I know that's not what the scripture really means, but it's how it's commonly interpreted.) So we see the church with a lot of appearance of evil. The leaders could diminish that appearance by being financially transparent, but that's not even an approved topic of discussion. This makes me angry. It also takes away some of the guilt in telling the bishop I don't pay tithing. It certainly appears that I paid enough that ended up helping out affluent, faithful church members. I request that the church avoid the appearance of evil just like we were taught.

blazerb wrote: ↑Fri Dec 21, 2018 10:05 am It really does not matter whether the evidence is circumstantial or otherwise. We were all taught to avoid the appearance of evil. We got taken aside when we bought hot chocolate at Starbucks or went camping with a co-ed group. It looked bad and the church would not approve. (I know that's not what the scripture really means, but it's how it's commonly interpreted.) So we see the church with a lot of appearance of evil. The leaders could diminish that appearance by being financially transparent, but that's not even an approved topic of discussion. This makes me angry. It also takes away some of the guilt in telling the bishop I don't pay tithing. It certainly appears that I paid enough that ended up helping out affluent, faithful church members. I request that the church avoid the appearance of evil just like we were taught.

FWIW, I completely agree with you. Sadly, today is an angry day for me. Why does "God's one true and living church" require so much secrecy? Just like the spiteful god who hid the dinosaur bones in the Earth to throw us off track and test our faith, the Mormon god who hides what happens with the money we give in his name, is a dick.

Anon70 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:17 pm Several times he was told they were not interested in the land only to reach out to another more prominent member and have them arrange the deal and pay finders fees or commissions to that member. My TBM relative was frustrated and eventually stopped helping find property but still is TBM.

Well, so much for honesty - or even compassion.

If it had happened to me, I would have left the corp a lot sooner than I did.