RLUIPA Questions Delay RMCC Expansion Decision

By LuAnn Piccard

At the Jan. 17 follow up hearing on the Rocky Mountain Christian Church (RMCC) expansionapplication, Boulder CountyCommissioners deferred a decision in order to better understand the implications of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA). The matter was tabled until Feb. 2at 9 a.m. at the Boulder County Courthouse. Commissioner Ben Pearlman explained that this session would be reserved for commissioners’ discussion and communication of a decision; no further testimony from the applicant or community will be taken.

The hearing’s purpose was to review RMCC’s response to space utilization questions posed by commissioners in November. Commissioner Tom Mayer led off by questioning the proposed Sunday school space. “Crowded hallways don’t translate to a need to triple the existing space and add 15,000 square feet,” Mayer said.

Pearlman asked, “You’ve stated there are 700 kids in Sunday school. How many kids are in each room by age?” His question prompted a mad scramble by RMCC to provide this breakdown. He asked for clarification of space needed for the existing congregation versus new growth.

Tom Ragonetti, RMCC’s attorney answered, “It is sized to generously accommodate today’s needs plus small additional capacity.”

Commissioner Will Toor asked if additional services could accommodate growth and also asked about RMCC’s planned church in the Frederick, Firestone and Dacono “tri-town” area, saying, “Why can’t that church handle the growth and what prevents people in that area from choosing to come here?”

Rick Thielen, RMCC’s Minister of Operations, said there was a limit to how far people will drive and suggested that I-25 was a psychological barrier.

Regarding more services, Thielen answered that RMCC added a service on Saturday evening and one at 10:45 a.m. on Sunday in addition to the 9 a.m. service. He stated that RMCC’s target audience is young families and “church seekers” who prefer 9 a.m. services. He elaborated on the challenges to recruit volunteers from RMCC’s 2200-plus congregation members to support additional services and Sunday school programs.

Toor then asked, “Is this a commitment that all additional growth would be handled elsewhere?” Thielen answered, “Yes.”

Thielen also committed that no future requests for building expansion would be made. “This is the full build-out plan for the next 20 years that was requested by the commissioners,” he said. “We’ll address the most pressing needs first and continue to build based on our ability to finance.”

Toor also asked Thielen, “(In the expansion proposal)…there is no further application to increase enrollment of the school. Is that a commitment that no request will be made in the future?” Thielen answered, “Yes.”

RMCC played an “MTV-like” video illustrating its Sunday school format to justify the need for a “gathering space,” as described in the application. This space, along with a 1000 person fellowship area for potlucks and a gymnasium to accommodate faith-based basketball and cheerleading programs fills out the requested 112,000 square foot expansion proposal.

After viewing the video, Mayer laughed and said, “Is that Sunday School? My father would be rolling in his grave.”

During the public testimony, Neal Anderson, speaking on behalf of the opposition, said, “An invocation before a dinner at the Niwot Grange does not make the gathering or the act of eating a religious function. It does not make the Grange a church.” He also suggested that the traffic impact was similar to a FasTracks station.

In a letter sent to commissioners prior to the meeting Anderson stated, “If the Niwot community established a tax district and raised funds to build a community center it would not be allowed on this or a similar site. If Habitat for Humanity wanted to build administrative offices or if Community Food Share wanted to expand their distribution center, neither would be allowed on this or a similar site. If a secular private school wanted to build a facility, it would not be allowed. Preferentially allowing the RMCC to massively expand for nonreligious activities unconstitutionally violates this nation’s long standing separation of church and state. All organizations have a right to gather, serve and evangelize their mission but not in ways that violate laws or long accepted guidelines that have well served Boulder County.”

Alan Ahlgrim, RMCC Lead Pastor, concluded, “It’s impossible to separate connecting with the community and serving God. It’s like asking which wing of an aircraft is most important.” He also said that today’s pot-lucks are not new, noting, “People have been breaking bread together since the beginning of Christianity.”

Each commissioner agreed that the size and location of the expansion was not consistent with the Boulder County Comprehensive Plan in support of the Land Use Planning Department’s third sequential recommendation to deny the proposal. Each also commented that had the application been made by a nonreligious organization, it would have likely been denied.

The commissioners delayed the decision in order to confer with legal counsel regarding the implications of RLUIPA on their decision. This federal legislation, which took effect in September 2000, stipulates that government land use regulations cannot place an undue or “substantial burden” on the free exercise of religion.

Case law has been divided given the difficulty of measuring “substantial burden” and the unique requirements of different religious practices. Pearlman stated, “There is nothing in the Land Use Code that specifically addresses religious organizations.” He added, “RLUIPA is a relatively new law and few courts have provided much direction. There is a different set of issues for different churches.”