Clear 45°5 Day Forecast
News Search

Advanced search
go
NewsClassifiedsDirectoryShoppingReal EstateAutos
Saturday 21 November, 2009
Home > News > News > Top Stories
News
Top StoriesCommunity NewsBusinessPolitical NewsNorthwest Corner JournalLitchfield Area NewsKent Top StoriesKent Community NewsKent OpinionKent GalleriesEditorialObituariesWeather
LCT Monthly Magazine
Passport
Photo Galleries
Connecticut Careers
CT Publications
Classifieds
Place a classified ad
Advertising Info
Subscriptions
Entertainment
Fun and Games
Business Directory
Personal Finance
About Us
Contact Us
County Times Jobs
Home : News : News : Top Stories
Top Stories
Jewish Group Sues Litchfield Over A Denial
By: Douglas P. Clement
09/10/2009
email this storyEmail to a friendpost a commentPost a Commentprinter friendlyPrinter-friendly
LITCHFIELD-In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court Wednesday, Chabad Lubavitch of Litchfield County and Rabbi Joseph Eisenbach are suing the town of Litchfield, the Historic District Commission and 10 unnamed individual defendants in connection with Chabad's rejected attempt to expand and transform property at 85 West Street into a new headquarters that would include a temple.


The plaintiffs claim in the suit, prepared by attorney Kenneth R. Slater of Halloran & Sage LLP in Hartford, that the actions of the defendants in blocking Chabad's plans represent violations of the Jewish group's civil rights, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA) and Connecticut statutes.
In fact, Chabad and Rabbi Eisenbach allege on the part of the defendants "a pattern of religious discrimination directed at the Jewish people ... based in large part on anti-Hasidic animus ... ."
One part of the complaint reads, " ... Defendants have made statements disparaging Plaintiffs' religious uses. Defendants have repeatedly used administrative means to prevent Plaintiffs and the Jewish community from utilizing the Property. This targeting is the direct result of the Defendants' opposition to the Plaintiffs' religious sect."
"The Defendants' actions, all of which took place under color of state law, are and should be declared unlawful, and should be permanently enjoined," the lawsuit goes on to say. The suit asks the court to issue a declaratory judgment, permanent injunctive relief and damages-as well as the appointment of a federal monitor to ensure that the defendants comply with all orders of the court.
In terms of the 10 unnamed defendants, the lawsuit says, "Plaintiffs are ignorant of the true and complete names of some Defendants sued herein, including those officers listed as Does 1 through 10, and for that reason have sued them by their fictitious names. ... Plaintiffs allege that each of these ... Defendants is responsible for some or all of the acts alleged herein ... ."
Rabbi Eisenbach declined to comment on the lawsuit Wednesday. A message left for First Selectman Leo Paul after the town hall had closed for the day was not returned by deadline, and the Historic District Commission's attorney, James Stedronsky, could not be reached for comment Wednesday.
In late 2007, the Historic District Commission denied an application to relocate the Chabad's headquarters from Village Green Drive to the former home of the Wilderness Shop in Litchfield center.
The commission based its denial on the scale of the proposed expansion and restoration of the 135-year-old building. The commission said it would be willing to consider a revised plan, including a downsized version.
The commission's motion for denial stated that the proposal would overwhelm the town's central historic district. A written statement from Mr. Stedronsky said the plan would have "dwarfed the house, altered the streetscape and been incompatible with standards of the historic district."
Mr. Stedronsky said in 2007 that a downsized version could involve a doubling of the original square footage of the building, and that the commission would consider a plan totaling about 5,000 square feet.
Rabbi Eisenbach said at an informational meeting held earlier this year that Chabad's plans had not changed. They call for an expansion totaling 21,000 square feet, with a four-story addition off the back of the old house. It would include a synagogue, a community center, classrooms, several kosher kitchens, offices, a swimming pool and a ceremonial pool.
The lawsuit noted that there is no temple in town where Chabad is able to hold regular services and conduct meetings. The plan to use the West Street property as a place of worship is "religious exercise" protected by RLUIPA, according to the lawsuit, which says, "Prayer will be a fundamental element of the religious use of the Property. ... ."
"In our new place, the focus is to have a synagogue, to have a center outreach, to have places where people can come in and poke open a book from our library where people can learn another heritage, another faith," Rabbi Eisenbach said at the informational meeting earlier this year. "Chabad's mission is to do mitzvahs, to do good deeds. Chabad does not in any way shape or form look at labels; labels are for food packages not for brothers and sisters."
The facility would also have residential quarters for Rabbi Eisenbach and his family, as well as housing for visitors and staff. The historic building was purchased by the organization in 2006.
One section of the lawsuit discusses the use of other nearby properties in the historic district, citing among examples the Oliver Wolcott Library, which consists of a historic home embellished by an addition done by a master of Modern architecture. "The square footage of the rear addition to Wolcott's historic home is larger than the house itself, the addition extends way beyond the existing building at the south side of the structure," the lawsuit says. "It is not half the size of the historic home-it is larger than the Wolcott's historic home. The Defendants approved these changes to the Wolcott's historic home."
The lawsuit, which offers context and history that makes reference to the Nazis destruction of temples during World War II, claims that "The Defendants have engaged in a targeted and deliberate effort to prevent the Plaintiffs from developing the Property and use it as a place of worship, while permitting other development within the Town that is substantially similar to the modifications proposed for the Plaintiffs' property. Plaintiffs have attempted to use the Property for religious purpose affiliated with the Jewish faith, but the Defendants acted to prevent such use, constituting a pattern of religious discrimination directed at the Jewish people. This targeting has been based in large part on anti-Hasidic animus ... ."
Editor's note: The following is a release sent Wednesday by Chabad Lubavitch of Litchfield County. Chabad Reaches Out to the Federal Government to help with Building its Litchfield, CT Synagogue (Northwest CT) Chabad in its continuous effort in erecting its Synagogue in Litchfield, CT, has reached out today (9/9/2009) to the federal government for help. Chabad is celebrating its Bar-Mitzvah in Northwest CT, "Chabad Lubavitch exercises the universal motto 'people helping people,' no matter race, color or religion," said Rabbi Joseph I. Eisenbach, director of Chabad Lubavitch of Northwest CT. "We have seen the community respond in astonishing ways to our educational, social and arts programs." Chabad Lubavitch is the local branch of the largest Jewish organization in the world, with over 2,700 branches spanning the globe. Chabad embraces a philosophy of study, meditation, and social outreach that combines rigorous academics with active community involvement. Chabad's growing array of educational and social services programs has made it one of the most dynamic forces in modern life. "The Litchfield community - Jew and Gentile - and its clergy, have been most welcoming and supportive in all our programs", said Rabbi Eisenbach, "and it is a shame that some elected officials have made it their mission to try to block the Synagogue, with statements from a historic commission member claiming "there is no place for a Star of David on the Litchfield Green", and a Litchfield selectman hiring her own lawyer to fight the Synagogue, and having him announce at the town meeting "the Synagogue is like a Strip Joint". Rabbi Eisenbach added "We had gone through the due process, sadly we were forced to reach out to the Federal government as a last resort. We are sure that G-D willing the power of good will overcome the hurdles being put in front of the loving & tolerant community of Litchfield. Chabad hopes and prays to resolve the matter in the a most efficient matter, and is looking forward to having it home for prayer & good deeds on church row in Litchfield as soon as possible". For more information on the Litchfield Synagouge, please visit: chabadNW.org/85w


©Litchfield County Times 2009

Reader Comments
 Submit your own comment!
Added: Thursday September 24, 2009 at 11:49 PM EST
Sigh.
Every once in a blue moon, I actually agree with an authentic Republican.

I don't know who was motivated by what, but those comments are completely backwards and ignorant. This is supposed to be Connecticut, not Oklahoma.
Joseph
Added: Saturday September 12, 2009 at 09:36 AM EST
The Historical Commission will cost Litchfield a fortune!
" A Methodist Church sits two doors away from the proposed site of the synagogue; with stained glass windows originally from a Synagogue in New Haven no-less!

Thus; despite Historic District Chair Wendy Kuhne's concern; "....the Star of David may not comply with the district." There's already one or two next door in the windows at the Methodist Church.

I attended one of the Historic District hearings in 2007 and was appalled by the attitude and remarks of commission members as well as a few members of the public.

Not only did a member of the commission request that the Rabbi remove his hat; outside others indicated the real problem wasn't that it was to be a Synagogue but that the Rabbi and his flock were
"...you know, "those" kind of Jews, not like regular Jews or anything......"

The raw bigotry was overwhelming; as was the irony in that we were standing in a parking lot not 10 miles from the birthplace of John Brown himself!

Surely our forebearers didn't flee Europe in wooden boats and suffer though countless hardships so as to practice their own religion in peace in the hopes that their descendants would treat others in the fashion that had motivated them flee their homeland and settle here in the first place.

The behavior of the Historic Commission has been not only horrifically anti Semitic; but totally un-American as well.

Other, similar RLUIPA lawsuits have garnered financial awards well into the millions forcing municipalities to float bond issues to pay them off.

It's a shame the commission members can't be held personally liable for their actions - in this case they would surely deserve it. "
Authentic Connecticut Republican, Marion, CT
View All 4 Comments »

email this storyEmail to a friendpost a commentPost a Commentprinter friendlyPrinter-friendlyTop
Place your classified ad online!
Business Card Bulletin Board
Home Services Guide
Advertisement
Interested in a career with Journal Register Company? Click here.
Copyright © 1995 - 2009 Townnews.com All Rights Reserved.
NewsClassifiedsDirectoryShoppingReal EstateAutos