Share this:

Plaintiffs, a religious order recognized by the Catholic Church, has owned a house in a residential area of the Township since 2002 where several church leaders reside.  In addition, the order holds regularly scheduled Bible study classes at the house during the week, and religious services also take place in a chapel in the home.  In 2003, neighbors began complaining to the Township about the use of the property and specifically the number the vehicles parked at the house. On the advice of the Township planner, the religious order wrote to the clerk, introducing themselves as a religious community and informing the clerk about their use of the property.  They described themselves as a “religious family, with strong and permanent bonds, which are the religious vows according to the rules of the Church.” They explained that the house is meant to be a residence, and that is contains an oratory where Mass and confession may be celebrated, but stated that while everyone is welcome to attend daily mass, the oratory only seats 10 people (although a later letter indicated it seats 18 people).  Although the Zoning Board had decided that they were in compliance with the zoning, neighbors continued to complain, leading the plaintiffs to allege that the Township started to take an interest in finding violations and allegedly began increased police surveillance of the property.  The Plaintiffs alleged that as a result of the increased police presence, they were forced to cancel one of their study groups and they limited visits by friends and supporters. 

After receiving a letter from the zoning enforcement officer indicating that surveillance revealed vehicles parked on the grassy area of the property in violation of the parking ordinance and requesting more information about the oratory, the Plaintiffs responded with a letter indicating the size of the oratory and explaining that faith-based groups regularly meet at the house and that volunteer opportunities took place regularly at the house during the week.  A meeting ensued with representatives of the Township, and the Plaintiffs were told that since the use of the property resembled a small church or place of worship under the zoning ordinance, and that they would need to go through the site plan approval process. The Plaintiffs were told they had 60 days to submit a site plan and/or apply for a variance. The Plaintiffs did neither. However, they did consult with an engineer who estimated costs of $5,000 to come into compliance with the zoning code, and more than $80,000 for renovations. The zoning enforcement officer issued a civil infraction ticket to the Plaintiffs for violating the zoning ordinance after they failed to submit the site plan or variance request.  Following a hearing the trial court held that the ordinance was “overly vague and subjective” and concluded that the Township had not shown that a change in use had occurred. On appeal, the circuit court reversed and remanded to the district court, finding that the ordinance was not vague and that the Township had met its burden of proving a change in use of the property. The state court action was stayed during the pendency of the current federal action initiated by the Plaintiffs alleging violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, a violation of the Religious Land Use and Institutional Persons Act, and similar provisions under the Michigan constitution.

Further, the Court said that the Plaintiffs had not suffered an immediate injury as a result of the Township’s actions, noting that they were not subjected to a cease and desist order and that any limiting the Plaintiffs did as a result of the enforcement action was a result of their own choosing. Therefore, the court concluded that the Plaintiff’s First Amendment rights (and rights under RLUIPA) have not been threatened or impaired by the Township’s actions that could have necessitated a different ripeness result.    

Miles Christi Religious Order v. Northville Township, 2009 U.S. Dis. LEXIS 36228    (E.D. MI 4/30/2009).