The recent lawsuit filed by The Rock Church against the town of Castle Rock, Colorado, has sparked considerable legal debate and public interest. At the heart of the dispute is the church’s use of recreational vehicles (RVs) on its property to shelter people experiencing homelessness—a practice that the town claims violates local zoning regulations. This case raises critical questions about the intersection of religious freedom and municipal zoning authority, making it a significant legal matter in Colorado and across the United States.
Background of the Case
Since 2018, The Rock Church, a non-denominational evangelical congregation located in Castle Rock, has been using two RVs to temporarily shelter individuals without housing. The program was part of the church’s broader mission to assist the homeless, which began in 2016 as a Winter Shelter Network in collaboration with other local faith organizations. This effort initially included housing individuals in the church’s auditorium during the colder months. However, in 2021, the town of Castle Rock notified the church that using RVs as temporary shelters violated local zoning rules. The church’s property is not zoned for residential use, and town regulations prohibit using RVs for housing purposes.
In September 2023, after attempts to negotiate a resolution failed, Castle Rock formally charged The Rock Church with a zoning violation. In response, the church filed a lawsuit in federal court, arguing that the town’s actions infringed upon its First Amendment rights to religious expression. The church contends that providing shelter to those in need is a fundamental aspect of its religious mission and is protected under both the U.S. Constitution and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA).
Legal Arguments and Implications
The Rock Church’s lawsuit hinges on two primary legal arguments:
- First Amendment Rights: The church argues that its practice of sheltering homeless individuals in RVs is an exercise of religious expression protected by the First Amendment. The lawsuit asserts that the town’s zoning enforcement unlawfully restricts the church’s ability to perform what it views as a religiously mandated act of charity. Pastor Mike Polhemus of The Rock Church emphasized that helping the homeless is a “mandate from God” that supersedes local regulations
- RLUIPA Protections: Enacted in 2000, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) protects religious institutions from undue burdens imposed by zoning laws. The law requires the government to demonstrate a compelling interest if it imposes land use regulations that substantially burden religious exercise. The church argues that Castle Rock’s enforcement of its zoning laws does not meet this standard and constitutes discrimination against its religious activities.
The Town’s Position
Castle Rock officials argue that the church’s use of RVs as temporary shelters violates local zoning regulations that were agreed upon when the church property was annexed into the town in 2003.
The town has stated that its zoning rules are designed to maintain community standards and land use planning. It has offered alternative suggestions for how the church could continue to help the homeless without violating zoning laws. For example, the town suggested that the church could purchase property zoned for residential use or encourage its members to open their homes to those in need
Court Proceedings and Preliminary Rulings
In a preliminary ruling, a federal judge granted a temporary injunction in favor of The Rock Church, allowing it to continue using the RVs to shelter homeless individuals while the case proceeds. The judge noted that the town had not demonstrated a compelling interest in enforcing its zoning regulations in this specific context, suggesting that the church’s legal arguments based on the First Amendment and RLUIPA could be successful.
The judge also referenced the biblical exhortations cited by the church to support its mission, noting that the town’s actions appeared to restrict the church’s religious exercise “regardless of whether it might be possible to provide for the needy in some other way.” This preliminary ruling underscores the complexity of balancing religious freedom with municipal governance and community standards
Broader Implications for Religious Land Use and Zoning
The case of The Rock Church against Castle Rock is not an isolated incident. Similar lawsuits have emerged across the country, where churches and other religious organizations challenge local zoning laws that restrict their efforts to provide services to the homeless. For instance, recent cases in Ohio, Oregon, and California have invoked RLUIPA to challenge local ordinances that limit religious organizations’ ability to serve the needy. The outcomes of these cases could significantly impact future legal standards for how religious freedoms are weighed against local zoning regulations.
What’s Next for The Rock Church?
As the legal battle continues, The Rock Church seeks a permanent injunction allowing it to use its property as it sees fit to fulfill its religious mission. The case could set a precedent for how similar disputes are handled in the future, especially in municipalities with strict zoning regulations. For now, the church can continue its work while awaiting a final court decision, and the town of Castle Rock remains firm in its stance to uphold its zoning authority.
For legal professionals and community members alike, this case offers an important opportunity to examine the tension between local governance and constitutional rights. It will be closely watched by other religious organizations, municipalities, and advocacy groups nationwide, as its outcome may influence future interpretations of the First Amendment and RLUIPA protections.
If you or your organization are facing similar legal challenges related to zoning and religious freedom, contact the experienced attorneys at Baker Law Group, PLLC today. Our team is dedicated to defending your constitutional rights and ensuring that your mission can continue without unlawful interference.
