Oregon city to pay $400K after restricting church's homeless feeding ministry
An Oregon city will have to pay over $400,000 in legal fees and other costs after stopping a church's homeless ministry that provides free meals several days a week from serving the local needy population amid complaints from neighbors.
Last week, the City of Brookings agreed to a settlement with St. Timothy's Episcopal Church that includes repealing a local ordinance that restricted the congregation's homeless ministry.
As part of the settlement, the city will have to pay the legal group Stoel Rives LLP $375,000 and the Oregon Justice Resource Center $43,000, according to Oregon Public Broadcasting.
Get Our Latest News for FREE
"It certainly didn't have to come to this, but we had to stand up for our religious freedoms," said Father Bernie Lindley of St. Timothy's, according to OBP.
"We're really glad that the whole thing's over with and we can get back to … getting to the needs of the marginalized in our community without the distraction of this lawsuit."
Brookings City Council Member Clayton Malmberg said at a meeting last week that it was "unfortunate that things have gone this far."
"It all kind of stemmed from not being a good neighbor, in my opinion, and not working with your community to find a path forward and address the needs while minimizing the impacts," Malmberg continued, as quoted by OPB. He added that the issues neighbors in the residential community the church is located in have with the ministry's operation are still there.
In 2021, Brookings unanimously passed Ordinance 21-O-795, which required food providers to get a conditional use permit to operate in a residential zone. The new ordinance restricted permit holders to providing food twice a week, interfering with St. Timothy's ability to do their outreach in the community. The ministry was launched in 2009 and eventually expanded to several days a week.
Brookings City Manager Janelle Howard told OPB in 2021 that the ordinance came after residents said the food ministry had negatively impacted them.
"They were looking for some relief because it was becoming an impact to their particular neighborhood, whether they mentioned trespassing, littering, noise," Howard said. "They were asking for some kind of relief from the city."
Howard also argued that city officials had the authority to institute the restrictions on the ministry because the church is located in a residential zone instead of a commercial zone.
"If they were in commercial zones, there would be no limitations to the frequency, or the hours, or the number of days a week," Howard added at the time.
In 2022, the church filed a lawsuit, arguing that the ordinance violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, which bans land-use regulations that burden religious exercises.
"Plaintiffs now face the decision of whether to exercise their core religious beliefs or face enforcement action by the City," read the lawsuit. "Plaintiffs do not intend to restrict their religious exercise to two days or fewer per week because the community need is greater than serving meals only twice per week."
The church received the backing of the U.S. Department of Justice, which filed a statement of interest in the case last November, siding with the homeless ministry.
Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of the DOJ's Civil Rights Division said in a statement at the time that the department is "committed to enforcing federal civil rights laws to ensure that all religious groups can freely exercise their religious beliefs."
"Many churches and faith-based organizations across the country are on the front lines serving the critical needs of people experiencing hunger and homelessness," stated Clarke. "Discriminatory zoning restrictions that burden and limit religious organizations' use of their land violate federal antidiscrimination laws."
In March, Magistrate Judge Mark Clarke of the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon ruled against the ordinance, writing that "there can be no genuine question that St. Timothy's feeding ministry is a sincerely held religious belief."
He added that the ordinance violated RLUIPA because it "substantially burdens [Plaintiffs'] feeding ministry, which is an exercise of Plaintiffs' religion" and was "not the least restrictive means to achieve" a compelling state interest.
