Buddhist Society Appeals

Town Order To Halt Gatherings

By Andrew Gorosko

The Cambodian Buddhist Society of Connecticut, Inc, is challenging a town cease-and-desist order issued against it in April over the society’s holding gatherings of its members at its 145 Boggs Hill Road property without having the special zoning permit that is required for such activities.

The society’s appeal of that order likely will be the subject of a public hearing conducted by the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA), possibly on July 16.

In documents filed May 15 at the town land use office, the society and its president, Pong Me, challenge the cease-and-desist order that was issued against them on April 16 by Zoning Enforcement Officer Gary Frenette.

Mr Frenette issued the order in response to several complaints from nearby residents charging that the society was illegally holding gatherings at its property in violation of applicable zoning regulations. In the cease-and-desist order, Mr Frenette states that the complaints he received describe the recent activities at the property as “religious services and/or festivals.”

In a letter of complaint to Mr Frenette about recent gatherings at the Buddhist property, 11 concerned residents stated that on March 22 approximately 23 vehicles were parked at the property, and on April 13 at least 60 vehicles were parked there.

In the cease-and-desist order, Mr Frenette stated, “If these activities should continue, a court injunction will be issued to stop these activities…I must emphasize that the [Buddhist] monks may continue to reside there as they have in the past,”

In 1999, the society purchased the ten-acre property, which includes a house that is used as a monastery by four monks, two acres of wetlands, and a three-acre pond. The property is located in a F/R-2 (Farming/Residential) zone, in which houses of religious worship are allowed by the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z), provided that the property owner holds a special zoning permit for such a use.

In January, after almost five years of court appeals, the Connecticut Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the P&Z was justified in February 2003, when it rejected the Buddhist society’s controversial request for a special zoning permit that would be required to build a proposed 7,600-square-foot Buddhist temple/meeting hall at the property. That Supreme Court decision upheld a November 2005 Danbury Superior Court decision in which a judge upheld the P&Z’s rejection of the temple/meeting hall proposal.

In their two court appeals, the Buddhist society claimed that the P&Z had violated its right to religious freedom, as protected by state and federal law. The courts, however, ruled that those religious freedom rights had not been violated by the P&Z.

Town Land Use Agency Director George Benson said this week, “I just think we just have to sit down and work something out” concerning what activities are permissible uses of the property by the Buddhist society.

The town prevailed in the court challenges that were mounted by the society over its failed proposal to build a temple/meeting hall, but now the issue concerns the society’s use of the existing facilities on the property, he said.

“It’s a gray area,” Mr Benson said of the distinction between Buddhist society members paying social visits to the monks at the property versus holding religious services there.

Mr Benson said he expects to discuss the matter with attorney Robert Fuller, who has represented the P&Z in the two legal appeals filed by the society.

Attorney Michael Zizka, who represents the Buddhist society, said on May 21 that the zoning enforcement officer’s cease-and-desist order is unconstitutional because it would prohibit society members from having religious activity in and near the monastery on the Buddhist property. The enforcement officer is exceeding his authority in issuing such an order, Mr Zizka said.

Pinith Mar, a spokesman for the Buddhist society, has said that the gatherings held recently at the Boggs Hill Road property were not religious services, but were simply instances of society members socially visiting the property to pay their regards to the monks, bringing them food and gifts.

In its appeal to the ZBA, the Buddhist society and Pong Me state that Mr Frenette’s cease-and-desist order is “vague and overbroad and violates the property owners’ legal and civil rights,” including the First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, the First Article of the Connecticut Constitution, and federal and state law pertaining to religious freedom.

The society’s appeal to the ZBA states that the cease-and-desist order is misdirected to Pong Me, who does not own or live at the Boggs Hill Road property.

The appeal urges that the ZBA nullify Mr Frenette’s cease-and-desist order.

In February 2003, the P&Z had decided that the temple/meeting hall construction proposal, which would require a 148-space parking lot to accommodate 450 society members at five major Buddhist festivals annually, is a land use that is too intensive for the site. The P&Z decided that the proposed use of the site was inconsistent with a quiet single-family residential neighborhood with a rural setting, and thus does not meet applicable zoning regulations, which require that a land use be in harmony with the general character of a neighborhood.

The society later filed the two court appeals in seeking to build a temple/meeting hall at the property, but lost both cases.

Nearby Boggs Hill Road area property owners had strongly opposed the temple/meeting hall proposal, charging that the use of the site would be far too intensive in the residential neighborhood, posing traffic hazards due to increased traffic volume. Some of those property owners became legal intervenors in the Superior Court case and later in the Supreme Court case, siding with P&Z in its rejection of the construction proposal.

Those Boggs Hill Road residents had lodged complaints with the town over the heavily-attended festivals that the Buddhists had held at the property before they applied for a special zoning permit in the summer of 2002 to build a temple/meeting hall.

P&Z members have maintained that the amount of usable land at the site was inadequate for the proposed temple/meeting hall use. Issues including septic waste disposal, water supply, vehicle parking, and driveway access all were aspects of the P&Z’s decision to reject the construction proposal.

The P&Z had decided that the temple/meeting hall proposal was inconsistent with a quiet single-family residential neighborhood with a rural setting, and thus did not meet applicable zoning regulations that require that a given land use shall be in harmony with the general character of a neighborhood.

In its January decision, the Connecticut Supreme Court found that “the record contained substantial evidence to support the [P&Z’s] denial of the society’s application on the grounds that the level of activity at the proposed temple would not be in harmony with the general character of the neighborhood, that the temple would substantially impair neighboring property values, and that the proposed septic wastewater and water supply systems would create a health or safety hazard.”