(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...As we hear more and more by more and more people regarding the new temple that we are all anticipating with excitement, I believe that some statements or claims about the temple and adjacent planned housing development need to be addressed one more time.
First, regarding the choice for the temple site. I’m somewhat angered by those who imply that if we get in the way of the housing development project, the temple will be built someplace else.
Have these inferences been approved by President Nelson, or are they just being used to keep us local peons in check? We are being asked to believe that the selection of the site for the Tooele temple was dependent on the number of houses that can be crowded around the temple and not just the site itself. I don’t remember hearing words from President Nelson like, “The site for the temple has been chosen because of all the houses we can build around it.”
My faith says that the temple site was chosen by inspiration from the Lord. The site is perfect. As people drive by it on SR-36, their eyes will see its beauty and become better because of it and many will “feel” its presence. These are the real and only eyes we need on the temple.
Now, if for some reason the Lord decides to choose another site, then so be it. But for now, this current site was chosen and those who are pushing so hard to attach it to a 446 housing development should cease and desist immediately.
Second, we are being asked to believe that in order to serve the physical needs of the temple, 446 lots with 446 houses must be sold, and that income would be needed to build two pipe lines from the temple to the Stansbury Park system, one for sewage and the other for water, plus the building of the grounds around the temple. But consider the addition of the water needs of 446 houses to the Stansbury Park system. I don’t think it will handle them without being given precious water rights to them. Surely the church hasn’t done that. Surely another big chunk of precious Erda water rights hasn’t been swallowed up by and transferred to that hungry giant on our north.
It seems to me that all that income from the sales of all those homes is really needed mainly to provide the needs of 446 houses. “Oh and by the way Mr. Temple, if you are nice we will let you hook up to our system.” I can understand the need for the sewage line. But why wouldn’t the church want to be independent of Stansbury Park’s water system? Isn’t it possible that in the near future water usage will have to be reduced by everyone connected to their system because of their continued expansion of their city?
Surely no one believes that there is an infinite amount of water in our aquifers and that we can continue to draw more and more water without consequences. Even now the water level in our wells is dropping. The time will come when we have overdrawn our water bank and we will suffer because of that. Wouldn’t it be better for the church to have their own water system for the temple and its surroundings? It’s a simple matter for the experts to design a water system to do that, starting by digging another well just as many of us have done in Erda.
If the church gets approval to build 446 new houses, Erda as we know it will be no more. All our local friends, the developers, will grab all the remaining flat spots in Erda and we will become nothing but rooftops and blacktop.
So, for me, the bottom line is this: If Erda must be “destroyed” in order to have a temple here, then that price is way too much for me to accept to have a temple here. I love that site. But I must withdraw my support for its building there if that means we must also support the building of 446 new houses.
Dwight Clark
Erda
