Maryland city declares Constitution void

From the DelMarVa Daily Times...

The city of Salisbury issued a $1,000 zoning fine to Bethany Lutheran Church last week for using their $135,000 house for Bible study and other organized gatherings.

The Rev. Kevin Wackett received a letter from the city on Dec. 3 with two citations issued Nov. 17 and 24 for unauthorized use of a facility. After purchasing the home in 2002, Wackett said the church applied for a special exemption to use the home for religious purposes and was granted approval by the city, Wicomico County and the state of Maryland.

However, Bill Holland, director of the Department of Building, Permits and Inspections claims the church didn't complete the approval process, which would have included public meetings to discuss the congregation's use of the property.

"The church never received approval from the Board of Zoning Appeals to use the home for anything more than a single-family dwelling," Holland said.

Except the Constitution very clearly says that Congress (and the liberal/socialists have twisted that to mean all levels of government, Federal, state and local) shall make no law respecting (meaning regarding or about) the establishment of religion. So apparently the city of Salisbury has declared the US Constitution void, and is now making up its own laws.

DuvaFiles writes...

The whole controversy about whether the church did or did not jump through a series of bureaucratic zoning hoops misses the central point; to wit, the church quite likely is, by virtue of federal legislation which predates its acquisition of the property in question, exempt from the zoning restrictions the city seeks to impose.

In a nutshell, the federal act prohibits the imposition of a land use regulation "in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a religious assembly.." ( subject to exceptions that do not facially appear relevant here).

The church uses its property for bible study; the city is trying to ban that use categorically. It is difficult to perceive a more "substantial burden" than that.

This case has federal court written all over it.It has attracted the attention of the governing body of the church, which, by definition, is in a vastly superior position to litigate the matter than the city. Furthermore, there is a possibility that the U.S. Justice Department could pick up the ball.

Someone commented at Duvafiles...

am convinced we still do not know the entire story, such has who has angered whom? Are we really expected to believe that this structure is the only non-traditional religious building in this area that is holding bible studies and small group meetings? Why have they been singled out?

This smells of the typical sanctioned revenge that seems to be the standard operational tactic of this city. It appears at face value to be a foolish exercise of governmental control, but then most cases that end up in higher courts are foolish when looked at closely.

Someone commented in reply to the article...

The "underlying issue" is largely this: One neighbor has not been happy with the church since it bought the Parish House. She has made it her mission, in collaboration with a couple of city officials and one or twof [sic] other disgruntled neighbors, to make life difficult. She monitors every movement at the Parish House, including the now-famous Bible Study and the carrying in of covered dishes for a Saturday luncheon. The fact of the matter is that the federal government permits a church to do whatever it wants with any property it owns (as long as the activities are legal, of course). The city, apparently, does not know the law or chooses to ignore it in order to pacify the complainer. Some have suggested that the church just "go through the hoops" the city has imposed. The "hoops," however, do not apply to churches. Therein lies the rub.

I really hope that the church not only demands the city pay for their legal defense, but for rent for the time the building was not allowed to be used as the church wished. It'd also be nice if the people in that town decided having an idiot for a zoning official is probably not a good idea, and tossed the bum.

Posted by Danny Carlton at December 14, 2007 8:39 AM