Cornerstone and pastor contemplate Hobart lawsuit
By Lynn Zerschling Journal staff writer | Posted: Thursday, February 21, 2008
SIOUX CITY -- City Councilman Aaron Rochester said Wednesday he does not intend to sue Mayor Mike Hobart over statements Hobart made about campaign donations from a political action committee.
However, Cary Gordon, who formed PeaceMakers PAC with his wife and is associate pastor of Rochester's church, Cornerstone World Outreach, said he and church officials are still contemplating legal action.
Meanwhile, Hobart apparently tried to resolve the debate over Rochester's spoken-prayer initiative behind the scenes, according to e-mails obtained by the Journal. The matter is due for discussion at Monday's council meeting.
On Jan. 30, Hobart e-mailed Rochester, who proposed Jan. 14 that the council switch from silent to spoken prayer at the start of council meetings: "I would ask that you consider not putting it on the agenda unless you have a good faith belief that you have the votes. This could be a divisive issue and we have very important issues on the budget that should be taking our time and energy over one that could be disruptive."
Last Friday, Hobart had questioned during his weekly news conference whether PeaceMakers' donations to Rochester's and Councilman Brent Hoffman's campaigns involved a promise to support spoken prayer. Rochester and Hoffman have emphasized repeatedly they did not trade their votes for the money. They demanded an apology.
At Tuesday night's council meeting, Hobart apologized to the citizens of Sioux City for the public furor over his comments. However, he did not tell Rochester and Hoffman he was sorry he had raised those questions. As a result, the council by a 4-0 vote passed a motion admonishing Hobart, who abstained. He said he maintained his right of free speech but also said he might have misspoken when he linked Cornerstone to the PAC.
On Wednesday, Rochester said: "I personally never planned on filing any kind of lawsuit against anybody. My concern was for the other organizations (his church and the PAC). I would never do anything to have the city pay out money."
Gordon said: "Our position as a church remains the same -- that Mr. Hobart made incorrect, false statements about our ministry tantamount to breaking federal law. We demand he correct his statement and apologize in an honorable, respectful way. All options are on the table. ... For me personally, I have the same stand. ... We are consulting with our attorneys and have made no decision on how we would proceed."
City Attorney Andrew Mai declined to comment about the potential viability of a possible lawsuit, saying: "I'm not going to comment on lawsuits that are possibly pending. As far as I know, no one's filed a lawsuit yet. I can't weigh the merits of any case until somebody actually files one. If they do, we'll respond."
On Sunday, Gordon wrote an angry e-mail to council members in which he noted he was not speaking on behalf of the church but as president of PeaceMakers Institute. His comments were aimed at Hobart.
Gordon pointed out that he and Rochester formed the PAC that lobbied for the direct election of the mayor, which resulted in Hobart's election last fall.
"It does neither me, nor this great city that I love so much, any service, to see you make mistakes of biblical proportions -- in public media events," Gordon wrote.
"Personally, I am fed-up, beyond imagination, with the ungodly hostility and dishonor that my friends, family and church have experienced at the hands of the likes of you! ... Finally, I'm tired of uninformed people getting elected, only to become 'constitutional wrecking-balls' because they don't understand {M3fundamental American historical realities... THAT is my 'stealth agenda', {M3to replace and defeat such people, and I hope you'll share that with all of your coffee buddies who successfully pushed you out on this limb -- because I am very inclined to CUT-IT-OFF!
"You, sir, and the poor political counselors you apparently keep, are the embodiment of WHY I run a political action committee," Gordon's e-mail continues. "You are on the WRONG SIDE of the American culture war! You are WRONG about prayer, WRONG about me, WRONG about Cornerstone, WRONG about Mr. Rochester. WRONG about Brent Hoffman and WRONG about the proper way to handle downtown partners.
"You have 4 years ahead of you. I truly hope you will get 'RIGHT' real soon. I mean that with every connotation that is possible. I would never have imagined that someone who so desperately needed the power of prayer would act so unreasonably opposed to its free exercise."
On Friday, Hobart said he would vote against spoken prayer. And in a Feb. 7 e-mail to Councilmen Rochester, Hoffman, Jim Rixner and Dave Ferris and City Manager Paul Eckert, Hobart said the council's current procedural rules allow people to pray out loud, and he sees no reason to amend them.
"Maybe it will be unnecessary to place it on the agenda if we can agree on a current interpretation of the Rules as written," he e-mailed on Jan. 30.
Rochester replied later that day: "It will be on the agenda because there is no leniency with our current procedure. ... This is not a big change to our procedures so lets not be so immovable on something that will only help and is seen by many as very important for the future of this great city."
Lynn Zerschling may be reached at (712) 293-4202 or lynn.zerschling@lee.net
However, Cary Gordon, who formed PeaceMakers PAC with his wife and is associate pastor of Rochester's church, Cornerstone World Outreach, said he and church officials are still contemplating legal action.
Meanwhile, Hobart apparently tried to resolve the debate over Rochester's spoken-prayer initiative behind the scenes, according to e-mails obtained by the Journal. The matter is due for discussion at Monday's council meeting.
On Jan. 30, Hobart e-mailed Rochester, who proposed Jan. 14 that the council switch from silent to spoken prayer at the start of council meetings: "I would ask that you consider not putting it on the agenda unless you have a good faith belief that you have the votes. This could be a divisive issue and we have very important issues on the budget that should be taking our time and energy over one that could be disruptive."
Last Friday, Hobart had questioned during his weekly news conference whether PeaceMakers' donations to Rochester's and Councilman Brent Hoffman's campaigns involved a promise to support spoken prayer. Rochester and Hoffman have emphasized repeatedly they did not trade their votes for the money. They demanded an apology.
At Tuesday night's council meeting, Hobart apologized to the citizens of Sioux City for the public furor over his comments. However, he did not tell Rochester and Hoffman he was sorry he had raised those questions. As a result, the council by a 4-0 vote passed a motion admonishing Hobart, who abstained. He said he maintained his right of free speech but also said he might have misspoken when he linked Cornerstone to the PAC.
On Wednesday, Rochester said: "I personally never planned on filing any kind of lawsuit against anybody. My concern was for the other organizations (his church and the PAC). I would never do anything to have the city pay out money."
Gordon said: "Our position as a church remains the same -- that Mr. Hobart made incorrect, false statements about our ministry tantamount to breaking federal law. We demand he correct his statement and apologize in an honorable, respectful way. All options are on the table. ... For me personally, I have the same stand. ... We are consulting with our attorneys and have made no decision on how we would proceed."
City Attorney Andrew Mai declined to comment about the potential viability of a possible lawsuit, saying: "I'm not going to comment on lawsuits that are possibly pending. As far as I know, no one's filed a lawsuit yet. I can't weigh the merits of any case until somebody actually files one. If they do, we'll respond."
On Sunday, Gordon wrote an angry e-mail to council members in which he noted he was not speaking on behalf of the church but as president of PeaceMakers Institute. His comments were aimed at Hobart.
Gordon pointed out that he and Rochester formed the PAC that lobbied for the direct election of the mayor, which resulted in Hobart's election last fall.
"It does neither me, nor this great city that I love so much, any service, to see you make mistakes of biblical proportions -- in public media events," Gordon wrote.
"Personally, I am fed-up, beyond imagination, with the ungodly hostility and dishonor that my friends, family and church have experienced at the hands of the likes of you! ... Finally, I'm tired of uninformed people getting elected, only to become 'constitutional wrecking-balls' because they don't understand {M3fundamental American historical realities... THAT is my 'stealth agenda', {M3to replace and defeat such people, and I hope you'll share that with all of your coffee buddies who successfully pushed you out on this limb -- because I am very inclined to CUT-IT-OFF!
"You, sir, and the poor political counselors you apparently keep, are the embodiment of WHY I run a political action committee," Gordon's e-mail continues. "You are on the WRONG SIDE of the American culture war! You are WRONG about prayer, WRONG about me, WRONG about Cornerstone, WRONG about Mr. Rochester. WRONG about Brent Hoffman and WRONG about the proper way to handle downtown partners.
"You have 4 years ahead of you. I truly hope you will get 'RIGHT' real soon. I mean that with every connotation that is possible. I would never have imagined that someone who so desperately needed the power of prayer would act so unreasonably opposed to its free exercise."
On Friday, Hobart said he would vote against spoken prayer. And in a Feb. 7 e-mail to Councilmen Rochester, Hoffman, Jim Rixner and Dave Ferris and City Manager Paul Eckert, Hobart said the council's current procedural rules allow people to pray out loud, and he sees no reason to amend them.
"Maybe it will be unnecessary to place it on the agenda if we can agree on a current interpretation of the Rules as written," he e-mailed on Jan. 30.
Rochester replied later that day: "It will be on the agenda because there is no leniency with our current procedure. ... This is not a big change to our procedures so lets not be so immovable on something that will only help and is seen by many as very important for the future of this great city."
Lynn Zerschling may be reached at (712) 293-4202 or lynn.zerschling@lee.net
Story Comments
Read More and Post Comments 191 comment(s)
Please note: The following are comments from readers. In no way do they represent the views of The Sioux City Journal or Lee Enterprises. We will not edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to not post or to remove comments that violate our code of conduct. No comment may contain potentially libelous statements; obscene, explicit or racist language; personal attacks, insults or threats. Terms of Service
billball wrote on Feb 27, 2008 8:12 PM:
I guess ANYONE can PICK and CHOOSE BIBLE verses. :-D "
Tuesday'sGone wrote on Feb 27, 2008 4:52 PM:
Why is it only about you? Do the councilmen only represent you? Are the laws and policies made only concerning Christians? If that's the case, then let's let everyone else run amok because apparently what goes on in the council chambers only applies to the Christians. Why is it that some of you are failing to comprehend this very basic principle?
The good thing is that the council's vote DID get it and that's how it is. "
to "me" wrote on Feb 27, 2008 4:48 PM:
I am well aware that the Declaration of Independence references God, etc.
Good! Many of our religions practiced around here do worship the same God, but that does not mean we all pray the same. Would we say a Catholic prayer, a Protestant prayer, Muslim prayer, and on and on with all the possibilities... That is the point. We need our councilmen to represent all of us, not just some of us.
That is my main point here and that's what I'll focus on, which, I think is indeed the main issue.
Thanks for your open minds,
Tuesday'sGone "
United wrote on Feb 26, 2008 9:28 PM:
v92cruiser wrote on Feb 26, 2008 7:38 PM: