County ordered to turn over disputed Bible Park documents on The Murfreesboro Post

Sidebar Ads

County ordered to turn over disputed Bible Park documents

Related Articles

Rash of burglaries allegedly solved

RuCo to consider special redistricting committee

Major changes in store for RuCo Farmers’ Market

Southern Rutherford County sees rash of burglaries

Ketron will not run for 4th District seat

Community Celebration set for February

Home sales strong during fourth quarter

Avoid foreclosure through education

Read To Succeed announces essay contest

Another Republican enters road superintendent race

View All

By: MICHELLE WILLARD, Post Staff Writer

Posted: Thursday, September 25, 2008 4:29 pm

The County Attorney was ordered to submit all disputed documents requested by the Sheltons under seal to the court, Chancellor Robert Corlew ordered Friday morning.

But the judge faces a time crunch with the trial date set for Wednesday in the Sheltons’ lawsuit against Rutherford County in the Bible Park USA rezoning dispute.

The Sheltons and their representative Taylor Harris requested County Attorney Jim Cope to turn over around 20 different documents that were withheld because of attorney-client privilege.

“From Sept. 3 until today, we’ve been denied these documents,” Harris said.

Attorney for the county C. Dewees Berry argued the documents meet the standard for attorney-client privilege and should not be admitted into evidence, because Cope “anticipated litigation as early as Feburary 2008.”

In the end Corlew decided the documents should be turned over for him or another judge to review over the weekend and decide whether any should be admitted into evidence.

“The appropriate thing to do is to file the documents under seal,” Corlew said during the hearing.

At the center of the controversy is a letter date Feb. 21, 2008 written by County Attorney Jim Cope to County Commissioner Trey Gooch, who represents the Blackman community, explaining how landowner protest petitions should be worded and explaining Section 4.05 of the county’s zoning resolution.

Section 4.05 of the resolution allows 20 percent of surrounding landowners to submit a notarized petition opposing development. If the petition is deemed valid, then proposed development requires a two-thirds majority vote for approval.

Witness and Blackman resident Gloria Shelton (no relation) said in her deposition the letter was shown to her in an attempt to get her sign a petition in protest of the Bible Park’s rezoning request.

Cope has refused to turn the letter over as evidence in the case, claiming attorney-client privilege because he was acting in his capacity as County Attorney and giving legal advice to a client, in this case a representative of county government.

The Shelton family, which owns the 240 acres optioned by BPU Holdings, LLC for the development of Bible Park USA, filed suit against Rutherford County in June challenging the county’s denial of the park’s rezoning request.

In May, the landowner petition forced a two-thirds majority vote by the county commission for rezoning and conditional-use permit request by BPU Holding, LLC, the developer behind Bible Park USA. The vote fell in two short of the 14 needed to approve the park’s plans.

The lawsuit requests the landowner petition be corrected, the zoning application approved and attorney’s fees be paid by the county. No specific damages were requested.

Last week, California-based Entertainment Development Group announced plans to option 113 acres north of Interstate 40, between the Murfreesboro and Watertown exits in Lebanon the future site of Bible Park USA. The property’s sale is contingent on project approval by the Lebanon and Wilson County governments.

Michelle Willard can be contacted at 615-869-0816 or mwillard@murfreesboropost.com.

Tagged under BPU, RUCO

Member Opinions:

By: diddlede on 9/26/08
There should not be anything wrong with Attorney Cope giving a Commissioner the regulations and guidelines that were required for filing a petition requiring the 2/3 vote on a rezoning. This is his job and this is what he is suppose to do. I believe the letter will show that he was explaining the law as it is on the books in Rutherford County. Nothing wrong with that.

By: diddlede on 9/26/08
Must add, if it is not permissiable for the County Attorney to give his opinion when asked, in writing or verbally, then our Mayor and all county commissioners would be left in the dark on everything. When asked he gives his opinion and that is what he is suppose to do. I'm confident that this is exactly what he did in this case.

By: lightchick on 9/26/08
When will the madness end??????

By: 5014 on 9/27/08
Can't we all just take a trip to the Hard Rock in SC and work this thing out?? We could all eat at a nice Bennigan's on the way there.

By: justdance on 9/30/08

Benningan's......Yummmmmm.....Shrooms'