pf10-006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Understanding RLUIPA — the Unreasonable Limitations and Ex... http://www.attorneysforlanduse.com/RLUIPABIog/?p=79 �.. ..,. can say you are taking property off the ta�c rolls." Indeed, if a city's interest in maintaining property tax levels constituted a compelling governmental interest, the most significant provision of RLUIPA would be la bely moot, as a decision to deny a religious assembly use of land would almost always be justifiabl� on that basis." (citations omitted) 291 F. Supp. 2d at 1093. These claimed interests were also shot down in �et►innrese Bcrdd{risrn Snedv Temp/e, where the City of Garden Grove's ordinance ("GGZO") permitted nonreligious assemblies to opc;rate as a matter of right in zones where religious assemblies were completely forbidden. 460 F. Supp. 2d at 1166. One of these zones was the office professional zone where the Temple's prope►ty was located. The Temple was forced to completely shut down, and sou�ht a prelimin�y injunction against the Garden Grove to allow the conoregation to assemble and practice their faith on the property. 'The court found that the Temple put forth sufficient evidence to mal:e a prima f'acie claim of an equal terrns violation, and thus the city's facial differentiation between religious and nonreligious assemblies subjected its ordinance to strict scrutiny. The primary concerns raised in the City Plannin� Commission's denial of the Temple's applications were increased traffic, increased on-street parking, and loss of revenue. The court found that "[tjhese three concerns simply do not justify facially unequal treatment between a church and a private club: '!d. at l 174. The court reasoned: "[I)f a tax exempt non-pro[it private or=anization decides to purchase property in the office professional zone, the City would suffer the same loss of revenue as it would if a religious association operated the property as a church. The City has not shown that a church or religious assembly would have a demonstrably different impact on the office professional zone than would a private club or lodge. This strongly su�gests that the zonin� ordinance impermissibly pursues Garden Grove's interests only against concluct motivated by religious belief:' Id. at 1175. The court preliminarily enjoined the city from enforcing those provisions of the GGZO a�ainst the Temple. In sum, where there is an ordinance that excludes religious uses from a roning district (unless a spec;ial land use permit is obtained), while private clubs, lodge halls, social and similar or�anizations, including assembly or rental halls and even funeral homes are all permitted as of right an exclusion or unreasonable limitations claim may arise. Regards , Dan Tags: dan dalton, Exclusions, institutionalizcd pe.rsons act, local community, reli�ious �overnance, KLUIPA, Unreasonable Limit�itions This entry w•as post��l on Monday, March lst. 2010 at 1:57 pm and is hled under Exrlucion�. RLUlP.1, tinrea.unahl� l.iimitatic�ns. You can follow any rosponses to this enW throu,h the RSS 2.� feed. You can lea�r a res��iise, or trackb.ick from your own site. One Response to "Understanding RLUIPA — the Unreasonable Limitations and Exclusion Clauses" l. Tur,� Sctn nrc��n says: March 14, 2010 at 8:23 an� Thanks for the info... i'll put it to gocxi use � Leave a Reply Namc (reyuiced) Mail (will not be published) (required) 2 of 3 3/20/ 10 10:48 AM