The Second Ring: Intimidating Zoning Officials Even before litigation is filed, such organizations are making grandiose claims about their "win record" and their proven ability to drain city resources through RLUIPA's attorneys' fees provisions.
"Rluipa was not intended to trump local zoning...." ======================================== Examples: 1) RLUIPA: Pitting Neighbor Against Neighbor With lawsuits and claims of anti-Semitism and defamation, the race for the Rockland Legislature's District 12 seat has been one of the nastiest in the county. The two name many of the same issues as priorities, including the fight against the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, known as RLUIPA, Both men said they'd like to see RLUIPA repealed. "I think it's a law that's pitting neighbor against neighbor," Withers said. Click here: Nasty primary race in Ramapo pits Withers vs. Meyers <http://www.nyjournalnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070916/NEWS03\ /709160353> 2) Ninth Circuit Throws Out City's Settlement With Congregation: Religious Freedom Claim Did Not Justify Ignoring Neighbors' Rights Under Zoning Process, Panel Say Click here: Ninth Circuit Throws Out City's Settlement With Congregation <http://www.metnews.com/articles/2007/leag082207.htm> 3) Trustee Joseph Meyers reiterated his commitment to working against high-density development and said his first priority as a legislator would be to get a resolution passed demanding the federal government repeal the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, known as RLUIPA. Housing development needs to be kept in balance with a municipality's infrastructure, he said. "There is a time when a community is filled up," he said. Click here: Rockland Legislature candidates discuss taxes, affordability at forum <http://www.nyjournalnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070911/NEWS03\ /709110376> 4) Critics say Rluipa has become not a shield but a hammer, used by religious groups around the country to force communities to approve projects at odds with local land-use regulation. Proponents say that the law appropriately protects religion and that local communities can't enact zoning codes that deny religious groups the ability to pursue their faith. Click here: OUR TOWNS; Where Religion Meets Real Estate, a Developer and a Town Face Off - New York Times <http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=FB0A13FE34540C7\ 28EDDA80894DF404482> 5) Local residents say, in fact, that health and safety are issues. But local officials and legal experts around the country say Rluipa has created something new in American life: federal intrusion into the most local of all issues, community zoning and land-use decisions. So, for now, the law goes to society's real priests, the lawyers. Some say the law, like an even more far-reaching predecessor, will be overturned. Kevin J. Plunkett, who was hired to represent Airmont and has handled Rluipa cases in Mamaroneck and Mount Pleasant, argues that as case law develops it will become clear that Rluipa was not intended to trump local zoning and can't do it. But for now, local communities are running scared, particularly because the law makes them pay both sides' legal fees if they lose Rluipa cases. Click here: Our Towns; In the Character of a Village, It's Property vs. Religion - New York Times <http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=FA0C1EFF3C5E0C7\ 58EDDAF0894DD404482> ========================================= "Running scared"? Asbury Park, don't fall for the sideshow.
