In the midst of a tumultuous lawsuit, the Town of Farmington unanimously voted to pass an amendment favoring the Shalom Wildlife Zoo.
The current lawsuit filed against Shalom alleges that the zoo is not following the Town of Farmington’s conditional use permit as they move forward with plans to expand their operations.
The amendment passed by Farmington’s town board is changing the municipalities zoning regulations. Zoological activities will now be permitted throughout the entire town. That means it has allowable use permissions instead of the previous conditional use requirements.
The zoning ordinance amendment was passed with a 3-0 vote. It defines zoological activities as “breeding of animals, hosting visitor centers, offering trails, selling food and beverages, and hosting special events such as weddings.”
Shalom has been limited in their ability to release public information about the case because it is still ongoing. However, on Tuesday, December 9, the zoo shared some information that helped alleviate some of the worries shared by them and the community:
“There is still much work ahead of is in the lawsuit, but this was a big step forward. Our hope is that this new ordinance will moot out the claims raised against us in the lawsuit by our neighbors. Because our business is now allowed to engage in zoological activities, we no longer need to seek a conditional use permit to operate. So the neighbors who have sued us have no reason to say we cannot operate.”
The lawsuit is still ongoing, with the next court date scheduled for early February.
Shalom has been operating in the community since 1979 and currently has 800 animals on its more than one hundred acre plot of land. Their efforts to expand their property to allow for more buildings, such as special events spaces and picnic areas for school field trips, have been met with pushback from a handful of nearby Farmington residents.
The lawsuit alleges that the permit given to Shalom is invalid. Astatement filed by the attorney representing the group suing Shalom stated that “The legal filing is not about shutting down the Zoo, but rather about protecting our family’s safety and privacy and ensuring that local ordinances are applied fairly for all residents, particularly around the expansion of the zoo and the addition of a new event space/wedding venue on a residential property.”
