In the absence of a showing that the City acted arbitrarily in ways suggesting actual discrimination, the fact that there may be no other properties available to which the Church can expand its operations in the specific way it wants does not mean that the City's zoning code imposes a substantial burden on the Church. Moreover, the evidence provided by ICFG to support its claim that no other suitable properties exist is not sufficient to create a triable issue as to substantial burden.The court rejected the church's claim that RLUIPA's "equal terms" provision was violated by the zoning code's differentiation between "assembly uses" and uses for commercial recreation and entertainment activities, saying: "ICFG cites to nothing in the legislative history indicating the intent of Congress that the legislation abrogate all local zoning regulations that distinguish between private or nonprofit assemblies and institutions, and commercial or for-profit gatherings of multiple persons." The court also concluded that: "ICFG cannot maintain a claim under the 'total exclusion' provision [of RLUIPA] based simply on the fact that the Church has decided that the only property that will suit it is one that the City will not zone for assembly use." (See prior related posting.)
Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Tuesday, January 06, 2009
California Church Loses Challenge To Rezoning Denial
In International Church of the Foursquare Gospel v. City of San Leandro, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105525 (ND CA, Dec. 22, 2008), a California federal district court rejected RLUIPA, First Amendment, due process and equal protection challenges to San Leandro, California's refusal to rezone industrial property a church had agreed to buy to "assembly" use. Rejecting a claim that the denial imposed a substantial burden on the church's exercise of religion in violation of RLUIPA, the court said: