Archives > Breaking News
Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
RSS
Share
Vietnamese congregation sues city for denying occupancy
By Stephanie Flemmons, Staff Writer
A 50-member Vietnamese Baptist Church filed a lawsuit against the City of Plano for denying them occupancy in their recently-purchased church.
The city passed an ordinance in the 1980s that states all churches located in a residential area must sit on two acres of land.
“No city should have a rule that specifically bans churches and synagogues,” said Kelly Shackelford, Chief Counsel for Liberty Legal Institute, the religious freedoms organization representing Plano Vietnamese Baptist Church. “What’s happening to this Vietnamese Church is wrong, it’s unconstitutional and it has got to stop.”
“For them to be locked out of their own church is ridiculous,” he said. “There is no rational reason. They meet all the safety and parking regulations. The Board of Adjustments refused them occupancy and gave no reason that makes any sense. They never should have excluded these folks from this church.”
Phyllis Jarrell, Plano’s director of planning, said the ordinance was implemented to ensure that all institutions such as churches, schools, hospitals and retirement housing facilities have sufficient space to accommodate their specific use.
“The ordinance could be repealed [by the city council],” Jarrell said.
Plano Mayor Pat Evans said she can’t comment on lawsuits, but the two-acre ordinance is the primary requirement for all churches.
Shackelford said the members of PVBC fled religious persecution under a Communist regime in Vietnam in the 1980s and 1990s.
Pastor Thomas Le started the PVBC in 2003 and when the church grew to 50 members, he began looking for a building of their own. The congregation purchased a foreclosed building located on the southeast corner of 17th Street and Avenue G.
“We came to America because it is the land of freedom,” Le said. “I don’t understand why they don’t want our church to be here. All we want is to worship God and serve this community.”
Shackelford said many members spent their life savings, cashing out 401K’s and taking out bank loans to make the $400,000 investment.
“Using zoning laws to arbitrarily discriminate against this Vietnamese church is the essential abuse of governmental authority that the Constitution prohibits,” said Jeff Mateer, Chief Counsel for PVBC. “Members of this church fled religious persecution in another country only to encounter it again in Plano.”
Shackelford said their legal organization fought a similar case in McKinney. He said the city repealed the two acre ordinance, which now allows home churches.
“They replaced it with limitations on parking and availability, which makes since for safety,” Shackelford said. “We are hoping the city of Plano reacts quickly.”
Liberty Legal Institute filed the lawsuit in the Collin County District Court. Pastor Le and church members now await the city’s response.
The lawsuit specifically seeks relief from deprivation of the church’s freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, due process and equal protection of the laws by the city and its Board of Adjustment.
Plano City Attorney Diane Wetherbee was unavailable for comment.
Contact Stephanie Flemmons at aflemmons@acnpapers.com
The following are comments from the readers.
In no way do they represent the view of Starlocalnews.com
In no way do they represent the view of Starlocalnews.com
willy wrote on Jun 18, 2008 9:57 AM:
" City ordinances should be reviewed comprehensively to avoid situation like this in the future to ensure that ordinances passed are not in violation of the supreme law of the land (U.S. Constitution). "
Pam Hatcher wrote on Jun 18, 2008 10:29 AM:
" Your story about the Plano Vietnamese Baptist Church could easily have been elevated from a one-sided sensationalized piece into a piece of good hard news reporting by investigating just a few more facts and including the following key points.
The church originally occupying the property (Second Baptist) did so back when Avenue G was pretty much at the edge of town, surrounded by vacant lots, large open spaces, minimally utilized PISD properties and a four lane, low-traffic street. Since that time, activity and development around the property has intensified, with school district space now in full usage and infill including large office buildings for medical and social service providers, private homes and, now in progress across the street, approximately 100 townhomes. Additionally, the four-lane street has been narrowed to just two to accommodate growing street parking needs.
This foreclosed propertys bargain-basement asking price (based on the fact that it no longer meets minimum city standards for church usage)not the First Amendmentis driving the fight for this property. The church has unwisely, willingly and knowingly put itself in this position. The churchs original contract was contingent on a favorable Board of Adjustment ruling, and was to expire two days following that ruling should their request have been denied. Despite the Boards denial, and the sellers failure to fully disclose Heritage zoning overlay requirements affecting their ability to improve or expand the property, they chose to buy the property anyway, as opposed to getting an extension on their contract contingent on results of this lawsuit.
This is in no way a religious or ethnic issue for our neighborhood--I along with many of my neighbors am active in local churches, and we enjoy the diversity here. But our small neighborhood faces many ongoing challenges, and constantly struggles to maintain our hard-fought gains. Especially for such a small and vulnerable neighborhood as ours, the minimum city standards for church usage offer needed and welcome protection.
Please honor your readers trust by including the above points in your coverage of this story.
Pam Hatcher
City Liaison, Haggard Park Homeowners Association "
The church originally occupying the property (Second Baptist) did so back when Avenue G was pretty much at the edge of town, surrounded by vacant lots, large open spaces, minimally utilized PISD properties and a four lane, low-traffic street. Since that time, activity and development around the property has intensified, with school district space now in full usage and infill including large office buildings for medical and social service providers, private homes and, now in progress across the street, approximately 100 townhomes. Additionally, the four-lane street has been narrowed to just two to accommodate growing street parking needs.
This foreclosed propertys bargain-basement asking price (based on the fact that it no longer meets minimum city standards for church usage)not the First Amendmentis driving the fight for this property. The church has unwisely, willingly and knowingly put itself in this position. The churchs original contract was contingent on a favorable Board of Adjustment ruling, and was to expire two days following that ruling should their request have been denied. Despite the Boards denial, and the sellers failure to fully disclose Heritage zoning overlay requirements affecting their ability to improve or expand the property, they chose to buy the property anyway, as opposed to getting an extension on their contract contingent on results of this lawsuit.
This is in no way a religious or ethnic issue for our neighborhood--I along with many of my neighbors am active in local churches, and we enjoy the diversity here. But our small neighborhood faces many ongoing challenges, and constantly struggles to maintain our hard-fought gains. Especially for such a small and vulnerable neighborhood as ours, the minimum city standards for church usage offer needed and welcome protection.
Please honor your readers trust by including the above points in your coverage of this story.
Pam Hatcher
City Liaison, Haggard Park Homeowners Association "
Loc Tram wrote on Jun 18, 2008 10:48 AM:
" Laws are meant to protect people from government abuse and ensure the rights of the people. Its hard to believe that such laws exist to deprive people of faith the right to assemble and freely worship. As a country we are strangely focused on such different values now. We put God on our money but kick Him from our communities. We turn to Him in times of need and flock churches during troubles but declare Him and inconvenience when weathers are fare. Let the Plano Vietnamese Baptist Church worship. Somebody needs to pray for the city of Plano and its citizen. "
Akso Taxpayer wrote on Jun 18, 2008 1:22 PM:
" Pam should take a good look at the Haggard district she is speaking of, it is full of viiolations, just look across the street from where this church wants to make itself home. Weeds, broken lights,
blight all over. Look at 17th st, cars &
trash everywhere. 16th st, junk cars that are covered & parked for a dozen years. Those new townhomes were supposed to be such good residents, yet
look what is happening, broken beer bottles & trash all over.
Look at all the cases in the past year for the Board of Adjustment, they gave many a variance to other churches. So,
you just might wonder if we do in fact have politics at pllay here.
Plano is the loser for not better welcoming this Church, God forgive us all for not helping & just working it out like they do for others. Bless them, & I only hope they will forgive many in Plano. "
blight all over. Look at 17th st, cars &
trash everywhere. 16th st, junk cars that are covered & parked for a dozen years. Those new townhomes were supposed to be such good residents, yet
look what is happening, broken beer bottles & trash all over.
Look at all the cases in the past year for the Board of Adjustment, they gave many a variance to other churches. So,
you just might wonder if we do in fact have politics at pllay here.
Plano is the loser for not better welcoming this Church, God forgive us all for not helping & just working it out like they do for others. Bless them, & I only hope they will forgive many in Plano. "
TAXPAYER wrote on Jun 18, 2008 1:43 PM:
" JUST READ THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, & i AM SHOCKED AT HOW THIS NEIGHBORHOOD GANGED UP ON THE CHURCH MEMBERS AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. ANYONE INTERESTED, I ADVISE YOU TO READ THOSE MINUTES TO UNDERSTAND.
THE SAME GROUP THAT GANGS UP ON ANY PROJECT THEY DONT LIKE. THEY SHOULD CLEAN UP THEIR OWN STREETS BEFORE THEY TEAR DOWN CHURCHES.
MISS MANNERS THEY ARE NOT!!!! "
THE SAME GROUP THAT GANGS UP ON ANY PROJECT THEY DONT LIKE. THEY SHOULD CLEAN UP THEIR OWN STREETS BEFORE THEY TEAR DOWN CHURCHES.
MISS MANNERS THEY ARE NOT!!!! "
Law abider wrote on Jun 18, 2008 5:17 PM:
" This has nothing to do with religion as a few in the article would have everyone believe. It has to do with the church being in violation of the ordinance, period. And it is being turned into a religious issue concocted out of the blue.
"They meet all the safety and parking regulations. The Board of Adjustments refused them occupancy and gave no reason that makes any sense."
Other than being in violation of the ordinance cited from the 80's. Since when do we pick and choose laws to follow based on whether or not we like them? Maybe the oridnance should be repealed. I don't know. But until it is, it is a city ordinance and should be adhered to, period.
We came to America because it is the land of freedom,
That doesn't mean you can come here and ignore laws and ordinances because they don't suit you. We are the land of the free, free from alot of things, but NOT free from the requirement to follow our laws. That is one detail you really DO have to stick to.
"Members of this church fled religious persecution in another country only to encounter it again in Plano"
They did not encounter religious persecution in Plano. They encountered the fact they are in an ordinance violation. There is a HUGE difference. What a slant they are creating. And why are they creating it? because their position cannot stand on its own merit because they are in violation of the ordinance and there is no way to get around that little fact other than spin. "
"They meet all the safety and parking regulations. The Board of Adjustments refused them occupancy and gave no reason that makes any sense."
Other than being in violation of the ordinance cited from the 80's. Since when do we pick and choose laws to follow based on whether or not we like them? Maybe the oridnance should be repealed. I don't know. But until it is, it is a city ordinance and should be adhered to, period.
We came to America because it is the land of freedom,
That doesn't mean you can come here and ignore laws and ordinances because they don't suit you. We are the land of the free, free from alot of things, but NOT free from the requirement to follow our laws. That is one detail you really DO have to stick to.
"Members of this church fled religious persecution in another country only to encounter it again in Plano"
They did not encounter religious persecution in Plano. They encountered the fact they are in an ordinance violation. There is a HUGE difference. What a slant they are creating. And why are they creating it? because their position cannot stand on its own merit because they are in violation of the ordinance and there is no way to get around that little fact other than spin. "
theresa wrote on Jun 20, 2008 12:16 AM:
" THIS IS NOT THE NEIGHBORHOOD! I live a block away and I welcome these people. Once again, Plano enforces rules for some while letting others slide. It is a ridiculous issue and should not be in the court system. Plano protects illegal practices in our neighborhood such as prostitution, drugs, trash, and more. Most people dont hear about this because Plano keeps it under wraps in keeping with image control. A CHURCH IS NOT GOING TO AFFECT OUR AREA. THEY SHOULD NOT BE FACING STUPID RULES! "
Woof Woof wrote on Jun 20, 2008 11:37 AM:
" The "BARKING DOGS OF
HAGGARD PARK" are out again!
Just like lower Greenville... "
HAGGARD PARK" are out again!
Just like lower Greenville... "
INVITED TO MEETING wrote on Jun 20, 2008 4:58 PM:
" I HOPE THE MEMBERS OF THIS CHURCH COME TO THE PLANO CITY COUNCIL RETREAT JUNE 25, (SEE POSTING), (there is an item on their agenda for the Multicultural community!!!)
AND TO THE NEXT MEETING OF THE
"PLANO MULTICULTURAL ROUNDTABLE", if you cannot find it call city hall for time & directions.
There has got to be a better way, lets work together.... "
AND TO THE NEXT MEETING OF THE
"PLANO MULTICULTURAL ROUNDTABLE", if you cannot find it call city hall for time & directions.
There has got to be a better way, lets work together.... "
Big Whitey wrote on Jun 21, 2008 8:58 AM:
" Hey Pam, did it ever occur to you that this would make your crackhead neighborhood better ... not worse? Plano is still very, very racist. As long as these people don't get on the news Plano's government will roll over them.
Following stupid laws because they are merely the law is for idiots. It's as stupid as an officer in the military following an illegal order. If you disagree then check these stupid other laws out ... http://www.skrause.org/humor/stupidlaws.shtml
In Texas it's legal for a chicken to have sex with you, but it's illegal to reciprocate. I'd rather have the chuch next to me then a bunch of perverted chickens even if they have the legal right to have sex with humans. "
Following stupid laws because they are merely the law is for idiots. It's as stupid as an officer in the military following an illegal order. If you disagree then check these stupid other laws out ... http://www.skrause.org/humor/stupidlaws.shtml
In Texas it's legal for a chicken to have sex with you, but it's illegal to reciprocate. I'd rather have the chuch next to me then a bunch of perverted chickens even if they have the legal right to have sex with humans. "
to law abider wrote on Jun 21, 2008 10:50 AM:
" You need to look at the history of the board of adjustment & their members
to see the records of how Plano conducts their business. Fair?
I think not!!!
Just look at the facts!!! "
to see the records of how Plano conducts their business. Fair?
I think not!!!
Just look at the facts!!! "
Law Abider wrote on Jun 23, 2008 6:29 AM:
" I am hearing alot of things that are irrelevant. The history of the board of adjustment makes no difference here. I don't care what they have done or haven't done in the past in regards to this issue. They are apples and oranges and people would wise to keep them seperate. If the board's actions in the past are questionable then they should be looked at outside of this. This issue is not a vehicle to "balance things out". It would just add to someone elses complaint 2 years from now that the board allowed this or that in the past (like is happening here). Come on people. the whole "well they did this or that in the past" is junior high arguments. "
Jason wrote on Jun 24, 2008 12:26 PM:
" Big Whitey sounds like the type of person who'll opt to speed through a residential neighborhood because he doesn't agree with the speed limit. "
UberMann wrote on Jun 26, 2008 7:29 AM:
" As a civil society, we must abide our laws, and law abiding citizens must demand that laws are enforced uniformly, and as Americans, without prejudice. To me, this just sounds like a failure on the part of the Church's leadership to do due diligence in researching the viability of a piece of property for their intended purpose. This issue should have been known BEFORE they signed the purchase contract. duh. "
Sad wrote on Jun 26, 2008 9:12 AM:
" I don't understand the problem. They need to sit on two acres, and they DO sit on two acres. What's the big deal? Can someone not measure. It sounds to me like another Collin County Teen Court coordinator case. I've only lived here for 6 mos. and I'm already REALLY sorry I moved to Plano. "
theTon wrote on Jun 27, 2008 8:16 AM:
" Pam,
It comes down to this:
You cannot have a building that can be used as a daycare, school, teen center, etc. with no problems on lot size and then say "If it's a Church, it must sit on two acres".
This is clearly unconstitutional. These cases have been tried over and over and ALWAYS result in these ordinances being turned over.
In other words, if me and my friends want to meet at my house to worship, it is a protected right. Resonable restrictions apply, for instance, I cannot have 200 peaple meeting in a 1900 square foot house. This ordinance is unreasonable as 2 acre rule is arbitrary and COULD apply to certain churches that have congregations of several hundred, but not to a 50 member congragation. "
It comes down to this:
You cannot have a building that can be used as a daycare, school, teen center, etc. with no problems on lot size and then say "If it's a Church, it must sit on two acres".
This is clearly unconstitutional. These cases have been tried over and over and ALWAYS result in these ordinances being turned over.
In other words, if me and my friends want to meet at my house to worship, it is a protected right. Resonable restrictions apply, for instance, I cannot have 200 peaple meeting in a 1900 square foot house. This ordinance is unreasonable as 2 acre rule is arbitrary and COULD apply to certain churches that have congregations of several hundred, but not to a 50 member congragation. "
You must register with a valid email to post comments.
Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here:
Become a Registered User
- Return to: Breaking News «
- Home «
- Top of Page ^
