« Law - [Updated] More on Supreme Court eminent domain arguments today | Main | Law - More Supreme Court stories today »

Wednesday, February 23, 2005

Law - In landmarking, Daley believes nothing's sacred

"In landmarking, Daley believes nothing's sacred" is the headline to a story today in the Chicago Tribune. Some quotes:

Mayor Richard Daley on Tuesday sent a chill down the collective spine of Chicago's religious community, at the same time giving a boost to preservationists who want landmark status for Chicago's most distinctive houses of worship.

"People worked hard all their lives to build these religious institutions, and to see someone come by with a ball and chain and just knock them down ... ," Daley said. "You think of all the sweat and hard work and money spent for these buildings, and many of them have historical significance and architecturally have real significance."

A proposal that would permit the landmarking of churches, synagogues, mosques` and other houses of worship has caused great concern in religious circles, said one church leader who asked not to be named.

"The whole notion that the religious organization has a responsibility to maintain its buildings (as landmarks) is so alien to the way religious organizations see themselves," he said. "We don't define ourselves in terms of maintaining monuments. We define ourselves in terms of mission."

At stake are millions of dollars.

Owners of houses of worship currently are permitted to reject landmark designation, but a proposal co-sponsored by 10 aldermen would end their ability to opt out.

Experts say that at least 200 Chicago churches are of landmark quality, and the owners of any of them that were to win designation would lose the ability to tear down and be forced to maintain them in perpetuity. * * *

"I think the mayor is right when he talks about the importance to the neighborhoods of these structures," said David Bahlman, president of the Landmarks Preservation Council of Illinois. "Religious structures--churches--have always been sort of the anchor of every neighborhood even when there is demographic change and the Hispanic neighborhood becomes Polish or the Polish becomes Hispanic."

The religious opt-out provision "should be removed because the only thing it is doing is hastening the destruction of historic buildings," said Jonathan Fine, president of Preservation Chicago. "They belong to the streetscape. To demolish them demoralizes neighborhoods."

Church leaders cite the constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion to argue for the continued exemption in the city's landmarks ordinance, while preservationists contend that religious organizations should be subject to the same requirements of the law that apply to all other property owners.

Preservationists now are pushing to save St. Boniface, a shuttered Catholic church at Chestnut and Noble Streets, as Ald. Walter Burnett Jr. (27th) seeks to fashion a compromise in which a developer would purchase the building from the archdiocese, save the facade and construct condominiums on the site.

This story is not unique to Chicago. From a July 7, 2004 ILB entry:
RLUIPA. The federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act is in the news in Louisville, according to this Courier-Journal story [no longer available]. Some quotes:
The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Louisville says in a federal lawsuit that metro government is interfering with religious freedom by refusing to allow buildings to be torn down to make way for church parking.

Louisville blocked plans to provide space for parking across Shelby Street from St. Martin of Tours by granting landmark status to the buildings, once home to Tonini Church Supply Co.

The lawsuit, filed last month in U.S. District Court, places the archdiocese in the middle of a national debate over whether governments can restrict how religious institutions use their property. * * *

If the lawsuit goes to trial, it "will be a good test" of a 2000 federal law that requires governments to show a compelling reason why a church's rights should be limited, Haynes said.

The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act is the latest effort by Congress to protect religious freedom against excessive land use restrictions, he said.

Although many cases involved in the law are winding through the courts, Haynes said Louisville's is unusual because buildings that the government is trying to protect aren't a physical part of the church. A more typical case would involve a church fighting a historic status designation that affects the main church building, such as precluding an old altar from being moved, Haynes said.

The original ILB has several entries on the RLUIPA (use your browser back key to return): "Zoning laws and religious groups" (4/26/03); "Zoning Laws and Religious Groups II" (7/4/03); and "Zoning and Religious Groups - 7th Circuit ruling on application of RLUIPA" (8/20/03).

Posted by Marcia Oddi on February 23, 2005 07:16 AM
Posted to General Law Related