Zoning Rules Test Faiths : Church-City Rifts Raise Questions of Religious Rights

The notice from the city of Fountain Valley smacked of religious persecution to Pastor Mariano Yeo.

The congregation of about 30 Filipino and Chinese immigrants was ordered to “immediately cease” religious activity in their tiny storefront location or face jail time and thousands of dollars in fines.

“It sounds like I’m living in a communist state,” Yeo remembered thinking. “This is America.”

The tiny church, the Shalom Alliance Fellowship, had been ensnared by a local zoning ordinance forbidding religious institutions in commercial areas, a law crafted in part to maximize the city’s tax base. The Fountain Valley situation is a good example of an increasingly common dispute around the Southland that is pitting residents intent on preserving the quality of life in their neighborhoods against worshipers who are seeking to build a place to pray.

From a San Fernando Valley mosque that was forced to look like a California mission to a Buddhist temple that was blocked by residents who didn’t want more traffic and noise, the land-use battles have mobilized an alliance of libertarians and religious conservatives alike, who say that nothing short of their religious freedom is under fire.

“It is the single biggest battle of religious liberty in America today,” said Steve McFarland, director of the Center for Law and Religious Freedom, a Virginia-based association made up of 4,000 Christian lawyers. “Among the significant religious liberty infringements in our country, it is the most widespread, pernicious and disturbing.”

Land-use laws regulate everything from the size of buildings and the number of parking spaces at a mini-mall to the type of business that can move into a neighborhood.

The regulations also can affect churches, synagogues and other houses of worship, often dictating where they can be built, what they should look like and even when they can operate.

Religious leaders contend that these laws--however well-meaning--often end up sapping their ability to worship where and how they please.

City officials insist religious discrimination plays no role in their decisions. In fact, they say, they treat churches just like everyone else.

Local regulation of religious groups is needed to preserve the quality of life in communities, said Brian Fisk, Westminster planning director. Traffic, parking, aesthetics and an adequate commercial base are all legitimate concerns.

“There’s religious activities that you do in your own home that don’t impact other people,” Fisk said. “But when you invite other people and they start to congregate in that neighborhood, that starts to impact other people.”

The local church-city battles have reached such proportions that state and federal lawmakers have intervened.

Sen. Joe Baca (D-Rialto) has introduced state legislation that would bar local governments from imposing land-use laws on religious groups unless they can demonstrate a “compelling governmental interest” to do so. In Congress, the House passed a similar religious freedom measure in July. The bill now awaits Senate approval.

Here is a look at some of the impassioned church-and-state clashes playing out in city council chambers and courtrooms:

* A Palos Verdes church sued the community of Rolling Hills Estates this year over the right to purchase a vacant theater and convert it into a place of worship. City officials had banned churches from commercial areas in favor of tax-generating businesses.

* It took nine years of wrangling before the Islamic Center of Northridge was permitted to build a mosque in the San Fernando Valley, but there was a catch: The building had to be stripped of its cultural symbols. Muslims were forced to forgo a traditional dome and ordered to build a mosque using Spanish-style architecture to better blend into the neighborhood.

* A Culver City-based Muslim group has battled for the last four years to rehabilitate a run-down building as a mosque. Leaders of the King Fahd Mosque agreed to a host of concessions, including one involving the minaret--the tower from which Muslims are traditionally called to prayer. During the holy month of Ramadan, devout Muslims look for a lighted minaret to signal the breaking of the day’s fast. But city officials argued that a lighted minaret would be an eyesore and insisted that it remain dark. The mosque has been completed but still stands empty, pending yet another city decision on whether the group can tear down an interior wall to expand a prayer area.

* In Los Angeles, the City Council sparked controversy two years ago when it ordered a group of about a dozen Orthodox Jews to stop holding prayer services inside a Hancock Park home. Area residents had complained that the services would set a precedent and add to neighborhood traffic concerns. A lawsuit has since been filed against the city, alleging that the ban violated religious rights.

* Four years ago, Burmese Buddhists from the Myanmar Society of America sought to build a monastery on a five-acre site next to a Mormon church in Yorba Linda. The group won the approval of the Planning Commission, but the City Council voted against the project due to intense opposition by residents who feared the monastery would bring unwanted traffic and noise.

A year later, the Buddhists went through the same roller coaster process, this time in an area near Chino. Again, they found an ideal location and secured the blessing of technical experts, only to be rejected by the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors.

The group has now given up hope of constructing anything that resembles the temples of its homeland and is settling for converting the interiors of two residential homes in Azusa into a prayer and meditation space.

“It’s a pity,” said Tin Htoon, a spokesman for the group. “People should be happy to see people more religious.”

City zoning codes in Southern California vary, with some limiting religious groups to certain areas and others permitting them everywhere, subject to a conditional use permit.

The problem, experts say, is that when municipalities draw up land-use guidelines, religious freedom is not typically factored in.

“[Planning boards] are so used to looking at things through the filter of what they’re used to regulating that when religious value comes into play, it’s given no weight, or not the heightened weight that it really deserves,” said Cole Durham, a law professor from Brigham Young University who specializes in religious freedom issues.

Many conditions imposed on religious groups are legitimate, Durham said. But cities must be careful to make sure that mere “inconvenience” does not end up hampering “some of the highest values of the republic,” he added.

Experts point to a number of causes for the growth in church-and-state zoning conflicts.

In California, the passage of Proposition 13, which limits the property tax revenue reaped by cities, left many strapped for cash and reluctant to give up valuable commercial space for non-tax-generating churches.

The increasing pluralism of religious groups also makes it less likely that government decision makers will appreciate and, therefore, accommodate the specific needs of different religious groups, especially minority groups, said Tony Arnold, a law professor and zoning issues expert at Chapman University in Orange.

A study conducted at Brigham Young University found that Jews, small Christian denominations, nondenominational churches and other minority faith groups are vastly over-represented in reported church zoning complaints.

Most groups beset by burdensome zoning requirements elect not to pursue legal action because of the expense and out of a desire to keep the peace.

“Our purpose is to teach people and show people goodness,” said Osman Kaldirim, a board member of the King Fahd Mosque in Culver City. “That’s what we are all about.”

But in the Fountain Valley case, Yeo called on attorneys for the American Family Assn., a national conservative Christian organization. With their help, Yeo filed suit against the city, arguing that other secular facilities, such as meeting halls, lodges and fraternal organizations, were permitted in commercial zones, while churches were excluded.

City officials backed down and ended their ban on churches. Yeo and his congregation have since returned. The victory, however, is barely perceptible against the backdrop of the entire country, advocates said.

“Often, people talk glowingly of religious freedom, but they don’t think carefully of the nitty gritty of what it means,” Durham said. “Part of what it means is having a secure place where you feel proud of to go to and worship. If that is denied to you, there is nothing that can make you feel more excluded from a community, and it can literally exclude you from a community.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Homeless Temple

Two cities over three years have rejected plans by a group of Burmese Buddhists hoping to build an Asian-style monastery. They have now given up any hope of constructing a temple and have settled on converting the interiors of two homes in Azusa into a prayer and meditation space. The plans for the original temple in Yorba Linda:

Source: Myanmar Society of America