Does anyone know anything Crossroads Church?

[EagleDad]

For some reason, they are starting to attract my attention.

For many months the land they own has been sitting unused, with big ugly piles of dirt on it. Is there a plan for this land? Why was all the dirt moved if nothing is happening? What are they doing and when? The Drive-in got attacked and dismantled for being an eyesore, but not this?

Week after week there is a door hanger from them on my door, despite my unmistakable "No Solicitors" sign and the Aurora ordinance passed this year.

This week's was entitled "Back to school, Back to church" seems as though they were implying strong association with our public schools. Shouldn't this be avoided? I think they are already having weekly services at Neuqua HS. Is this starting to cross the line of separation, or is it just me?

[EagleDad]

I understand Crossroads rents the space at Neuqua for a fee. I 'd like to clarify that I have no issues with them, or any other organization using the unused space. I supportleveraging our taxpayer paid public facilities as much as possible for all kinds of community events , including churches, scouting, and all kinds of organizations. I am glad that our community can help Crossroads get started.

I just hope they can get started without plastering my front door with junk every week. I've contacted thier pastor, and let him know they are violating they ordinance. They probably just didn't know about it. Hopefully they do now

[wvhsparent]

Wow...their site plan is HUGE...they must have a lot of members.....

www.ccc4christ.org
www.ccc4christ.org/coloredsiteplan.pdf

[bob]

The only problem I have is that that rate the SD is charging them. I think it is really cheap. With the amount of money they make in donations using our facilties, we should be getting a cut or raising the rent.

Also, you can't stop them from putting fliers on the door. It is protected by the First Amendment.

[EagleDad]

Actually Bob, with a No Solicitors sign clearly posted, it is in violation of City of Aurora Code Section 32. Your first amendment rights end on my private property.

City of Aurora Code Section 32-7 provides that “No person
shall distribute, deposit, place, throw, scatter or cast
any commercial or noncommercial handbill upon any
premises if requested by anyone thereon not to do so, or
if there is placed on such premises, in a conspicuous position
near the entrance thereof, a sign bearing the words
“No Trespassing”, “No Peddlers or Solicitors”, “No Advertisement”,
“No Unsolicited Newspapers” or any similar notice
indicating in any manner that the occupants of such
premises do not desire to have their right of privacy disturbed,
or to have any such items left upon such premises.”
A violation of the Code is punishable by a fine not to exceed
$1,000 and the violator may be banned from peddling,
soliciting or otherwise doing business in the City of
Aurora for up to one year.

I'm not making a federal case out of it though, I contacted their pastor, asked them to lay off, at least at my house. I wouldn't be suprised if they didn't know about the ordinance as it's fairly recent. It went into effect Mar 26, 2006. Even though it was after the referendum, I knew it had been passed and respected it when I was distributing referendum materials.

Do you know how much they are paying to rent the school facilities? I would hope it is a good amount, and generates significant revenue for the school.

[Arch]

eagledad said:

Do you know how much they are paying to rent the school facilities? I would hope it is a good amount, and generates significant revenue for the school.

I don't know the specific dollar amount, but the fees do differ depending on the activity. Section 830_01 of policy says that for religious purposes the fee is to cover the cost. (IE: how many janitors do you want? 1 suffices in almost every case)

In short, they pay next to nothing.

[bob]

archwinsome said:

I don't know the specific dollar amount, but the fees do differ depending on the activity. Section 830_01 of policy says that for religious purposes the fee is to cover the cost. (IE: how many janitors do you want? 1 suffices in almost every case)

In short, they pay next to nothing.

This should be a income generator for the SD. The church has no incentive to build that campus when we charge them basically nothing. Those campus plans were made in 2003 and what has been done, nothing. So in a way, we are helping them subsidies those advertisements.

Also, when I talked to the Naperville Mayor office about my no solicitation sign, they said it does not apply to religious groups like the Jehovah Witness' or their leaflets.

[EagleDad]

Bob, Naperville has different soliciting rules than Aurora. Theay can not leave door hangers, under Chapter 32, article 4 of the Aurora ordinance:
library4.municode.com/mcc/home.htm?doc_key=27fb9e0514f1e315673eb24488fccea1

I've verified this with my alderman.

Also, I'm glad you brought up the income generation costs. I am concerned that if they are just covering the cost of a janitor, the taxpayers may be subsidising their religious fundraising.

All would be fine with me if there was a plan to build out that property. They have owned the land for over 7 years. I think they should focus on erecting a modest sanctuary, and not the marketing campaigns to their non-members. They should also consider building just the church's first, and not the more grandiose plans for outdoor stadiums, paintball/volleyball courts, amusment rides, concession stands, etc

I'd like to see a plan for moving forward which is why I started this thread. I was hoping someone who knows this church could fill me in, because I may be running on uninformed data.

[EagleDad]

Well, here's part of the response I received from KT Luna:

Thank you for your email. We are a ministry with integrity, and if you would like to give me a fax number, I would forward you a copy from the distribution company as to our rights, according to the First Amendment, to distribute our information. Also, if you would like to forward your address, I will ask the distribution company to stop the delivery of the next door hanger.

Oh well, I tried to ask for them to stop, and was offered to be faxed a copy of the first amendment by their distribution company. How helpful

I'm not giving them my address. The ordinance seems pretty clear on this. It says nothing about my needing to give my address to distribution companies.

No person shall distribute, deposit, place, throw, scatter or cast any commercial or noncommercial handbill upon any premises if requested by anyone thereon not to do so, or if there is placed on such premises, in a conspicuous position near the entrance thereof, a sign bearing the words "No Trespassing", "No Peddlers or Solicitors", "No Advertisement", "No Unsolicited Newspapers" or any similar notice indicating in any manner that the occupants of such premises do not desire to have their right of privacydisturbed, or to have any such items left upon such premises.

[EagleDad]

As if it couldn't get any better, I let Ms Luna know that I was aware of the first amendment (didn't need it faxed to me), and here's the reponse I got:

I was not referring to the First Amendment article, I am referring to our distribution company's letter from their attorneys regarding the distribution of materials. Being that we are a religious, nonprofit organization, we are exempt from such local regulations. "Any attempt to stop or prohibit us from providing our services may subject you to an injunction or monetary damages."

If I am not mistaken, I think I was just threatened with an “injunction or monetary damages” - in my own home.

[EagleDad]

I just got faxed a letter explaining that their disrtibution company feels they are "NOT A SOLICITOR", and as such they feel they are protected by the first amendment and cannot be regulated by local governments.

Their distribution company is "Door-To-Door Direct, Inc.", and the contact is Ron Zink, General Manager.

Somebody help me out here. Why does Door-to-Door Direct sound very familiar? And that name, Ron Zink seems to ring a bell too.....

[wvhsparent]

eagledad said:

I just got faxed a letter explaining that their disrtibution company feels they are "NOT A SOLICITOR", and as such they feel they are protected by the first amendment and cannot be regulated by local governments.

Their distribution company is "Door-To-Door Direct, Inc.", and the contact is Ron Zink, General Manager.

Somebody help me out here. Why does Door-to-Door Direct sound very familiar? And that name, Ron Zink seems to ring a bell too.....

Did'nt they handle some of the VoteNo flyers?

[wvhsparent]

I say the next time someone sees them posting/distributing call the police...let them sort it out.

[EagleDad]

Sure enough...
King Development & Construction LLC 3108 State Route 59 Suite 124-157
Naperville, IL 60564 $3,630.00
3/14/2006 In-Kind Contribution
Citizens for Options mailing Door to Door Direct 8102 Lemont Rd.
Woodridge, IL 60516

They were the vendor for the CFO mailers in the 206 referendum.

[wvhsparent]

OK Lawyers help us lay folk out here!!!
This is from the Aurora Municipal Code


DIVISION 2. CHARITABLE SOLICITATIONS CAMPAIGN

Sec. 32-35. Permit required, exemption.
It shall be unlawful to conduct any charitable solicitations campaign in any public place or by house to house canvass in the city unless the person conducting same and responsible therefore shall first have obtained a permit in compliance with the terms of this chapter; provided, however, that the provisions hereof shall not apply to any solicitor that has an income tax exemption from the Internal Revenue Service for charitable, religious or educational purposes, when it solicits from its own members or from its own assemblies not using public places for such purposes.
(Ord. No. 006-03, § 1(32-14), 1-24-06)

Sec. 32-36. General provisions.
No person shall conduct or share in the proceeds of any charitable solicitations campaign unless he shall conform to the following requirements:
(1) He shall, and shall for not less than thirty (30) days prior to his application hereunder, have been actually engaged during such period in charitable, religious, political or educational activity commensurate with the stated purpose of the current charitable solicitations campaign.
(2) A permit received pursuant to this chapter shall be personal to the person so registered, and shall not be assigned or transferred. The recipient of a permit hereunder shall be responsible for the acts of his authorized representatives in connection with such campaign.
(3) All persons engaged in a charitable solicitations campaign shall have the permit received pursuant to this article on their person at all times while soliciting.
(4) All forms and permits issued under this division shall be public records.
(Ord. No. 006-03, § 1(32-15), 1-24-06)