Jump to content

A Second Sikh Temple Faces Opposition In Sacramento County


Recommended Posts

A second Sikh temple faces opposition in Sacramento County

By Brad Branan

bbranan@sacbee.com

Published: Sunday, May. 25, 2014 - 10:25 pm

A second proposed Indian temple is facing community opposition in unincorporated Sacramento County, and questions of racism are again part of the debate.

Sri Guru Ravidass Temple wants to replace its existing Sikh prayer hall with a 12,000-square-foot building with gold domes in a rural neighborhood near Dry Creek Road and G Street in Rio Linda. Neighbors have twice shown up before a community planning board to oppose the project, citing concerns about drainage and parking, among other things.

The Community Planning Advisory Council is scheduled to hear the proposal for a third time at 7 p.m. Wednesday at the Rio Linda Depot Visitors Center. The council will make a recommendation on the project, with the final decision coming from the county Planning Commission or zoning official.

Opposition in Rio Linda comes only a month after residents near Galt persuaded the Board of Supervisors to reject construction of another Indian temple, Mishra Gathering Place.

Temple supporters in both communities question whether race has played a role in the opposition, especially since other churches have had relatively few problems getting projects approved in the county.

Project opponents and county officials deny claims of racism in Rio Linda or the Galt area. County officials say the complaints raised by project opponents are not unusual when development is proposed in rural areas.

Ramesh Banger of Antelope said he has wondered about opponents motives since applying for county approval of the Rio Linda temple in 2011. He said he has repeatedly met the county requirements, only to be told of new ones.

When someone keeps complaining without reason, then you might guess that racism is the reason, Banger said.

Charlea Moore, a member of the Community Planning Advisory Council, said neighbors have legitimate concerns about the project, but she said she thinks they can be resolved. Residents raised complaints about how the temple would use properties adjacent to the prayer hall, so the council asked project supporters to return with a plan for all their land. The temple complied.

At a subsequent meeting, neighbors complained about drainage on the temple property, because flooding is a perennial concern in Rio Linda, Moore said. They also asked how parking would be handled.

The projects supporters have since addressed those concerns with plans for a detention pond and shuttle bus service when large events are scheduled, said Tricia Stevens, principal planner for the county.

Neighbors in Rio Linda dont appear to be as opposed to the temple as those near Galt were, Stevens said. Rio Linda residents seem focused on fixing the project, instead of outright opposing it, as was the case near Galt, she said.

The Community Planning Advisory Council responsible for the area near Galt recommended denial of Mishra Gathering Place. The Planning Commission, however, unanimously approved the project, only to have the advisory council appeal the project to the Board of Supervisors.

The board held a contentious hearing lasting more than five hours before rejecting the project, calling a compromise plan fashioned by the Planning Commission unworkable. During the meeting, about 120 Indian and Fijian backers of the temple sat on one side of the chambers, and about 40 white opponents sat on the other side. Supporters repeatedly accused opponents of racism; opponents said the temple was loud and clashed with the rural environment.

In the last 15 years, churches have occasionally faced neighborhood opposition when proposing expansions, according to records on the county planning division website.

But of the 22 projects receiving a final decision, only two have been rejected Mishra Gathering Place and Missionary Gospel Church.

Like the Indian temple, Missionary Gospel Church faced opposition to its planned expansion in Rio Linda. The Community Planning Advisory Council, citing problems that would come from large church events, recommended denial, and the Board of Supervisors supported that decision when the church appealed.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2014/05/25/6432214/a-second-sikh-temple-faces-opposition.html#storylink=cpy

post-10438-0-67586400-1401104026.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use