When it comes to abiding by land use and zoning laws, many religious assemblies and institutions face hurdles. Depending on the circumstances, meeting a city’s parking requirements can be a big one.
The City of Chicago’s parking requirements, for example, seemed to be the only hurdle that prevented the Immanuel Baptist Church from purchasing a property and operating it as a church.
The property consisted of a worship center and classrooms, which the Church had leased and used since 2011. But in 2016, after the Church decided to purchase the property, its lender requested a determination regarding the City’s legal requirements for parking.
Because the Church was a “religious assembly,” it was required to have “one parking space per eight seats in the auditorium.” Although street parking was widely available, the property did not offer any on-site parking spaces for its members and attendees. Accordingly, the Church sought several avenues to solve this problem, like leasing a vacant lot to provide off-street parking. Unfortunately, when the Church’s attempts turned unsuccessful, the lender did not provide the financing needed to purchase the property.
Because the City’s parking requirements prevented the Church from continuing its operation, it launched a federal lawsuit against the City of Chicago, asserting an as-applied RLUIPA claim in its amended complaint. Specifically, the Church alleged that the City’s parking requirements, governed by the Chicago Zoning Ordinance, were being applied in a manner that violates the equal terms provision.
Generally speaking, when a religious assembly believes that it is being treated worse than secular institutions, it is not necessary to demonstrate unequal treatment in all respects. Rather, it is sufficient to show that another secular institution is similarly situated in all relevantrespects.
The Church asserted that the Rudy Lozano Branch of the Chicago Public Library (the “Library”) was a similarly situated nonreligious assembly that was being treated more favorably than the Church when it came to parking requirements.
The Library was a few blocks away from the Church and is approximately 18,000 square feet. The Library also had two meeting rooms which allowed groups of 60 and 20 persons to assemble, as well as general seating capacity for 150 patrons. Under the City’s ordinance, the Library was required to have 14 off-street parking spaces. It turned out, however, that the Library had none.
Before any discovery of evidence took place, the City filed a motion to dismiss the complaint and argued that the Church failed to allege facts sufficient to state a claim under RLUIPA.Specifically, the City argued that because the Library is not similarly situated to the Church in all relevant respects, the Church’s claim must be dismissed.
On September 26, 2018, the Court rejected the City’s argument and denied its motion to dismiss.
Citing a Seventh Circuit decision, the Court found that both the Church and the Library generate “groups of people coming and going at the same time.” The Church pointed out that the Library’s meeting rooms allowed up to 60 people to assemble, and that the Library itself held several weekly events. Thus, it was argued that the City provided the Library with ample exceptions to the parking requirements, by allowing it to have no off-street parking spaces, but refused to do the same for the Church.
The Court ultimately found that, according to the factual allegations in the Church’s amended complaint, it is plausible that the Church and Library’s respective parking needs are the same, and that the City treated the Library more favorably than the Church.
It is important to note that simply pointing out comparators to the court is not enough. Although certain factual allegations in support of an equal terms claim could be sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss, as was found in Immanuel Baptist Church v. City of Chicago, moving forward in the litigation process requires a lot more than simply drafting a plausible complaint.
If you are in the process of purchasing or leasing a property to use as a place of worship, feel free to reach out to the experts in RLUIPA and religious land use at Dalton & Tomich PLC.
The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) contains what is known as the equal terms provision. The equal terms provision prohibits any governmental entity or official from imposing or implementing a land use regulation “in a manner that treats a religious assembly or institution on less than equal terms with a nonreligious assembly or institution.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc(b)(1).
The City of Chicago filed a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)—failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Dalton & Tomich, PLC is the national leader in successfully helping churches, other religious institutions and their insurers defend their rights in land use and zoning matters under RLUIPA, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. We have helped clients win cases against municipalities and other local government bodies from coast to coast, with experience serving both as general counsel and special litigation counsel.
In 2015, Hope Rising Community Church experienced extreme opposition, the kind that would force it to close its doors and leave behind the families and youth it was so passionate about reaching. As the lead pastor I felt helpless, inferior and as if I had no […]Read More
Dalton & Tomich’s assistance in our RLUIPA matter has paved the way for our church to continue serving the community and for new churches in the area to thrive in the future. Thank you from the bottom of our hearts for your stand for religious […]Read More
The Urban Church will be forever grateful to Dalton & Tomich plc for navigating it through a difficult land use issue. Let them give you honest and caring advice because that’s exactly what they’ll do.Read More
Dalton & Tomich, PLC defended a complicated case at a church we insure. Not only is the firm professional, they understand how church business runs and work well within church leadership.Read More
Dalton & Tomich, PLC helped us immensely in the areas of litigation and negotiation! Their professionalism and understanding of church policy helped our church be victorious in a modern day religious land use battle. RLUIPA Religious Land Use Case: Lighthouse Community Church of GodRead More
Dalton & Tomich, PLC serves as General Counsel for the 144 churches within the Church of God in Michigan. The firm provides the legal expertise we need in dealing with the issues that arise during the course of fulfilling our ministry.Read More
I met Dan Dalton during a dark time for our church. He was recommended as the leading RLUIPA attorney in the nation. He demonstrated wisdom, expertise, a gentle nature, a calming inter-relational skill, genuineness, and a humble demeanor, while at the same time, being sharp, […]Read More
Mr. Dalton’s expertise and experience helped us through a very difficult legal journey, ultimately achieving a favorable outcome. His personal interest in helping our church went “above and beyond” just the call of duty. His understanding of both legal and spiritual matters seems to uniquely […]Read More