Neighbor, volunteer celebrate judge's decision to dismiss case against Shalom Wildlife Zoo

We are not surprised by the court's decision. In December 2025, approximately ten months after we initially filed our case asking the Court to review the conditional use permit process, the Town of Farmington amended its ordinances in a way that addressed the issues raised in this case, effectively rendering the underlying dispute moot. As a result, the April hearing largely served to bring the litigation to a close after the governing ordinances had already been changed.

From the outset, this case was never about shutting down Shalom Wildlife Zoo LLC. It was about ensuring that a for-profit business could not expand onto residentially zoned property without complying with the ordinances that existed at the time. The fact that the Town ultimately amended those ordinances underscores that the concerns raised by our client were legitimate and warranted consideration.

Under the new ordinances adopted by the Town of Farmington, Shalom Wildlife Zoo LLC may pursue expansion under a different regulatory framework than previously existed. More broadly, the ordinance changes significantly limit the ability of Farmington residents to challenge zoning and neighboring property decisions before the Town Board. Those changes affect far more than this one property and represent a substantial reduction in the rights residents previously had to participate in local land-use decisions.

While we respect the court's decision, it is unfortunate that this litigation became a prolonged public spectacle. Our client faced significant invasions of privacy and legitimate safety concerns simply for seeking judicial review of a local zoning dispute. Regardless of where one stands on the underlying issue, no citizen should face those consequences for using the legal process as intended.

“We are very pleased with the Court’s ruling granting our motion for summary judgment. Once the Town of Farmington amended the Town’s Zoning Code last year, the Plaintiffs’ claims against Shalom were rendered moot. While Shalom vigorously disputed the allegations made by We Love Farmington and Andrew Willetts that Shalom had violated any ordinances, the Town’s Zoning Code now clearly permits all of the activities that the Plaintiffs were complaining about. There is nothing left of their claims, and we hope this is the end of their efforts to regulate Shalom by litigation.

Shalom is still pursuing it claims for abuse of process and injury to business against Leann Beehler, Andrew Willetts, R.J. Khan, and We Love Farmington. That part of the case will proceed, and we will continue to prosecute those claims.”