[MassHistPres] Churches in LHDs

[Heather Massler]

Sorry if I implied the building had already been demolished.  I didn't mean
to and perhaps wrote too quickly.  I'm glad to hear the local decision on
demolition has been appealed.

Heather Massler


On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:26 PM, <sanderheggen at cs.com> wrote:

>  Hi All:
>
>  Julia Miller, an attorney here in the National Trust's Legal Department,
> says this:
>
>  "Litigation surrounding Third Church of Christ Scientist is far from
> resolved. The Mayor’s Agent’s decision, which authorized demolition of the
> church on “economic hardship” grounds, has been appealed to the D.C. Court
> of Appeals. The federal district court has not ruled on the church’s first
> amendment and RLUIPA claims.
>
> Regulation of historic religious properties has been upheld under the First
> Amendment and RLUIPA. A list of cases is posted on our website at:
>
> http://www.preservationnation.org/resources/legal-resources/understanding-preservation-law/constitutional-issues/religious-protection.html
>
> Scroll down to the .pdf document at the bottom of the page."
>
>  To further clarify, the Third Church has not been demolished.  I trust
> this helps a bit.
>
>  Shanti
>
>  *Shantia Anderheggen | Easement Administrator | Law Department*
> National Trust for Historic Preservation | 1785 Massachusetts Avenue, NW,
> Washington DC 20036 **
> Phone: 202.588.6159 | Fax: 202.588.6272 | Email: *s*
> hantia_anderheggen at nthp.org <shantia_anderheggen at nthp.org> |
> www.preservationation.org
>
> -----Original Message-----
>  From: Heather Massler <hmassler at alumni.uchicago.edu>
> To: slater at alum.rpi.edu
> Cc: masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
> Sent: Thu, Oct 22, 2009 12:10 pm
> Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] Churches in LHDs
>
>  A similar argument was made with respect to the Third Church of Christ,
> Scientist, in Washington, DC.  The church filed suit in District Court
> against the DC government for the right to demolish the church.  The suit
> referenced the First Amendment, Religious Land Use and Institutionalized
> Persons Act (RLUIPA), and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).  As
> far as I know there was never a decision in court because the city's
> planning director eventually permitted the demolition.  Nevertheless, a
> local site noted this:
>
> "D.C. planning director Harriet Tregoning said that the building was an
> "experiment" that had "failed badly." No doubt, she had little say in the
> matter: U.S. District Court Judge James Robertson pressed the issue by
> threatening to overrule a decision that guides the ways in which a city can
> declare a church an historic building."
>
> Heather Massler
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 11:36 AM, <slater at alum.rpi.edu> wrote:
>
>>  Our city attorney is floating a theory that it is may not be legal to
>> include churches in local historic districts because this would be a
>> violation of the separation of church & state, in particular because any
>> encumbrance would be considered a "taking" under the 5th amendment,
>> particularly since the building would not be permitted to be demolished.
>>
>> Can anyone speak to that? That seems like a very dangerous path to go
>> down.
>>
>> Ralph Slate
>> Springfield, MA
>>
>> ******************************
>> For administrative questions regarding this list, please contact
>> Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us directly.  PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY" TO THE
>> WHOLE LIST.
>> MassHistPres mailing list
>> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
>> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
>> ********************************
>>
>>
>
>
>
>  ******************************
>
> For administrative questions regarding this list, please contact
> Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us directly.  PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY" TO THE WHOLE
>
> LIST.
>
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
>
> ********************************
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/private/masshistpres/attachments/20091022/18c362c2/attachment.htm>