Church: Rockaway Twp. limits are biased But mayor counters that rules are lawful Friday, November 10, 2006 BY PAULA SAHA Star-Ledger Staff
Some of the restrictions im posed by Rockaway Township when it approved a Montclair mega-church's plans to build on Green Pond Road violate state and federal religious discrimination laws, church officials said.
The restrictions prohibit Christ Church from holding Friday and Sunday evening events, require a two-hour interval between Sunday services, require that Bible study be held on Wednesdays, cut the number of parking spaces the church can build and limit other uses of the facility, church officials said. The church formally opposed the restrictions in a letter sent earlier last month to the planning board.
"They placed conditions that are just not possible for the church to fully conduct its activities," church spokesman Marc Weinstein said. "They basically have tied both hands behind their back. And it's unfair, because the issue here is that none of these conditions are being placed on any other religious institutions in Rockaway Township."
But Mayor Louis Sceusi said this week that the township's conditions were lawful, and came di rectly from testimony provided by the church's pastor, the Rev. David Ireland, and others.
"As long as we do it based on the evidence that was presented, we are within our legal rights, and actually, we're following our obliga tion just as we followed our obliga tion to approve the application," Sceusi said. "We've tried our best to balance the interests of the town also, and to mitigate the strain that it's going to create on the township."
Christ Church has been a controversial project that involved nearly three years of hearings be fore township boards. Many residents were upset about the project's size, the additional traffic it would bring to town, its environmental impact and the fact that the church is a tax-exempt organization.
Some of the debate already has entered the courts. In the midst of planning board hearings, the church filed a federal lawsuit against the township, alleging religious discrimination. Additionally, the town sued the state after the Department of Environmental Protection gave the church an exemp tion to build in the environmentally sensitive Highlands core. That exemption is being reviewed by the state, and a decision is still pending.
Last month, the church made some headway in its project when the planning board approved the church's plans for a sanctuary for some 2,500 people, a K-5 school and other amenities.
But the approval came with dozens of conditions, some of which, Berger writes, are contrary to the U.S. Constitution and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, or RLUIPA, a federal law that prohibits land use decisions that discriminate against religious organizations. The law is among those cited in the church's federal lawsuit against the township, which is still pending.
The planning board still has to formalize its approval in a written resolution, which will detail the conditions, and Berger asks that the board reconsider a number of the conditions before that happens.
The requirement that there be two-hour intervals between services was to ensure proper traffic flow and safety, Sceusi said, noting that there were no restrictions on how many services could be held.
Allowing just 900 parking spaces, which town officials believe will cut impervious coverage on the environmentally sensitive site, falls in line with the same township or dinances that govern every development, Sceusi said.
Ireland, in a message sent through Weinstein yesterday, said the site already has 1,100 parking spaces. "Is the church supposed to spend money and destroy 200 spaces?" he asked.
Ireland also disputed the notion that the conditions came from his testimony. For example, he said, "When the planning board asked me about midweek functions, I mentioned that we have Wednesday night Bible study," he said. That's not the same, he added, as letting the town dictate when the church can hold Bible study.
"What happens if we decide to change the day of our study? Or if we decide not to have a weekly Bible study, how is that an issue with local government?"
Ireland said the planning board's conditions would not allow the church to have "Good Friday services, Christmas musicals on Friday nights or other High Holy Day events on Friday night."
"This violates RLUIPA," he said, "and our constitutional rights."
Paula Saha covers Rockaway. She may be reached at psaha@star ledger.com or (973) 539-7910.
Unfortunately folks, ireland is 100% correct on the law here. We can not limit his rights to practice his religion however he wants based on RLUIPA.
The solution to this would have been the use of Eminent Domain early on in this proces or the denial of the application. But that is all water over the dam and the floodgates are now fully open.
I respectfully disagree that the town cannot limit Ireland's practice of religion in any manner he choses. The town must balance the reasonable exercise of religion with adverse effects on the town, the environment and safety. For example, if Ireland's church's belief was that they could only pray to God while driving in a bus doing 80 mph on Route 80 (of course not during rush hour) they would legally not be allowed to do so. Religion is not a carte blanche for causing environmental damage, unsafe conditions, etc.
I believe that the answer to your question is that a judge will determine what reasonable is and whether the town correctly placed reasonable restrictions on the church's activities. There have been many court decisions posted on this site in which judges have sided with towns. Considering the environmental sensivity of that site, the limitations of the roads, and public safety concerns I would guess that thoseemitations imposed by the PB are absolutely reasonable. In the end, a judge may have to decide the issue. That's fine.
I agree that a Judge or Judges will make that decision. Given the nature of the restrictions, I seriously doubt that any reasonable judge will uphold them. We definitely shall see because more litigation is guaranteed.
My prediction:
Most, if not all of the restrictions will be knocked out by the coutrs. More fines will also be levied against the township as a result.
No, but they probably will be; remember the litigation that is still pending from before the PB decision? Liarland is not likely to drop that. He sees more $$$$ to keep those suits in play and that makes his eyes light up.
RT will probably settle out of court for 5 Megs or so - - - a nice down payment for his prime contractor.
---------------------------
Isn't it nice that we not only provided the proper political environment for him to build his circus, but also to have provided some nice funding for him too? And then of course, there is the infrastructure that we will have to build for him not to mention the tax revenue loss.
Who says that we do not have state sponsered religion in this country?
