1 of 4

A church congregation wanted to relocate because an increasing number of members lived in another part of town. The church found a two-story building in the target area and began considering its purchase for use as a church. The building was located in a zoning district in which churches were a permissible use. To operate as a church, however, a "certificate of occupancy" had to be obtained.

The church's pastor began meeting with the city's zoning director. The pastor claimed that the director welcomed the church's purchase of the property and assured him that the building could be used as a church. Based on these representations, the church purchased the building. The pastor later alleged that the church would never have purchased the building if the zoning director had not represented that the building could be used as a church.

Several months later, after discovering that the building was being used for church services, the city sent a letter to the pastor indicating that the church would have to vacate the building because it did not have a certificate of occupancy permitting the use of the property as a church. A state trial court later issued an order requiring the church to cease and desist using the building.

The main reason the church was unable to obtain a certificate of occupancy was that the city required 95 parking spaces and the property only had 73.

Key point. The federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act prohibits state and local governments from imposing a land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the exerciseof religion unless the regulation is in furtherance of a compellinggovernmental interest and is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.

The church filed suit in federal court, claiming that the city's denial of the certificate of occupancy violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). RLUIPA states:

No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a religious assembly or institution, unless the government demonstrates that imposition of the burden on that person, assembly, or institution—(A) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (B) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.

This subsection applies in any case in which …. the substantial burden is imposed in the implementation of a land use regulation or system of land use regulations, under which a government makes, or has in place formal or informal procedures or practices that permit the government to make, individualized assessments of the proposed uses for the property involved. 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc.

RLUIPA defines a "land use regulation" as "a zoning or landmarking law, or the application of such a law, that limits or restricts a claimant's use or development of land (including a structure affixed to land), if the claimant has an ownership, leasehold, easement, servitude, or other property interest in the regulated land or a contract or option to acquire such an interest."

next page... |  1 of 4

share this page