Michigan RLUIPA suit

Sat Nov 10 09:59:07 PST 2007

It appears from the article, though, that this suit is being filed just
over the municipality demanding that they file for a variance, not for
refusing the variance. Does that change the analysis at all?

Ed Brayton

-----Original Message-----
From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Douglas Laycock
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2007 10:17 AM
To: Paul Finkelman
Cc: religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Michigan RLUIPA suit

In the absence of evidence that significant numbers in a local
congregation were doing what Marci describes (driving in before sundset
and parking for the entire Sabbath), the reliance on parking regs would
be pretextual.  See Orthodox Minyan v. Cheltenham Twp. Zoning Board, 552
A.2d 772 (Pa. Comw. Ct. 1989), where the Township mechanically applied
its zoning rule of 1 parking space for every 3 seats to the Orthodox
Minyan. No variance; irrelevant that most of the Minyan walked to
services. 

So the Minyan leased enough parking spaces from neighbors to meet the
formula.  Not good enough; you have to own the spaces and they have to
be adjacent to your property.  Finally the Minyan agreed to build enough
parking spaces on their own property.  Ah ha says the Township:  all
those parking spaces imply lots of traffic and you will create a traffic
problem.  Permit denied.  The court overturned the zoning board on state
law grounds.

This is the most detailed example I know, but at the RLUIPA hearings,
there was a fair amount of testimony about deliberate exclusion of
Orthodox places of worship.  They did not all have such happy endings.

Quoting Paul Finkelman <pfink at albanylaw.edu>:

> I am sure it must because it is late at night and I have been
traveling
> all day, and so I am fogged in, but I can't quite figure out how a
> parking regulation would be used against Orthodox Jews wanting to
build
> in the neighborhood since, as Doug points out, they don't drive to
> services.  I hope Doug can elaborate on this one.
>
> Paul Finkelman
> President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law
>     and Public Policy
> Albany Law School
> 80 New Scotland Avenue
> Albany, New York   12208-3494
>
> 518-445-3386
> pfink at albanylaw.edu
>>>> laycockd at umich.edu 11/09/07 10:54 PM >>>
>
>
>  Where are they parked?  "Around" the building on their own
> property? Or "around" the property on public streets that must be
> shared with others?
>
>  Reasonable parking regs generally prevail, as Ed says. But there
> are also cases where parking regs are plainly being used to get rid
> of somebody -- the most flagrant examples are Orthodox synagogues,
> where the worshipers can't drive on the Sabbath and so they never
> bring their cars at the same time.  And it is easy to imaging parking
> regs where we might not be sure of motive, but the burden on the
> religious group is severe and the public benefit is trivial.
>
>  Quoting Ed Darrell <edarrell at sbcglobal.net>:
>
>> Unless they are worshipping cars, or unless their rites include the
>
>> heavy parking of cars on streets, the religious order will have to
>> comply with local parking regulations.
>>
>> Where was the Thomas More Center when the Mormons in Virginia were
>> fighting this issue?  (Silly question -- the Thomas More Center
>> probably didn't exist prior to 1983.)
>>
>> There are safety and environmental concerns.  This is an old zoning
>
>> issue.  Are there special conditions for this case that might
> change
>> the outcome?
>>
>> Ed Darrell
>> Dallas
>>
>> Ed Brayton <stcynic at crystalauto.com> wrote:   Message
>
http://www.journalgroup.com/Northville/6343/lawsuit-accuses-township-of-
religious-harassment[1[1]]
>>
>> The Thomas More Law Center  is filing suit against a Michigan
>> municipality for demanding that a religious  order apply for a
> zoning
>> variance because of all the cars parked at and around  their
>> facility. The TMLC says this violates the RLUIPA.  Thoughts?
>>
>> Ed  Brayton
>> _______________________________________________
>> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
>> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw[2[2]]
>>
>> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed
> as
>> private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that
> are
>> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can
>> (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>>
>
> Douglas Laycock
> Yale Kamisar Collegiate Professor of Law
> University of Michigan Law School
> 625 S. State St.
> Ann Arbor, MI  48109-1215
>  734-647-9713
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
>
/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.journalgroup.com%2FNorthvill
e%2F6343%2Flawsuit-accuses-township-of-religious-harassment
> [2]
>
/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.ucla.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailm
an%2Flistinfo%2Freligionlaw
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
> Douglas Laycock
> Yale Kamisar Collegiate Professor of Law
> University of Michigan Law School
> 625 S. State St.
> Ann Arbor, MI  48109-1215
>  734-647-9713
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
>
/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.journalgroup.com%2FNorthvill
e%2F6343%2Flawsuit-accuses-township-of-religious-harassment%5B1
> [2]
>
/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.ucla.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailm
an%2Flistinfo%2Freligionlaw%5B2
>
>
>
>
>

Douglas Laycock
Yale Kamisar Collegiate Professor of Law
University of Michigan Law School
625 S. State St.
Ann Arbor, MI  48109-1215
  734-647-9713

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20071110/abb5a182/attachment.htm 