Warning on Church Aid to Destitute Stirs Furor

Arguing that city officials are trifling with the separation of church and state, elders at South Coast Christian Church in Costa Mesa have vowed to fight the city’s claim of authority over how the church uses its facilities.

The city’s insistence that the church needs a permit to house a soup kitchen is threatening to spark a constitutional battle over whether the city is overstepping its authority, and church leaders say they will not back down.

“Since the church was founded, it has always taken care of the needy, including the hungry,” said South Coast pastor Bob Ewing. “Most people, whether they are Christian or not seem to indicate they see feeding people as part of its mission.”

The tiny Some Cares soup kitchen, beset with complaints from neighbors while at its former home in the Rea Community Center, moved to the church at 792 Victoria St. in April.

For proprietor Merle Hatleberg, the move to a church located on a street corner opposite gas stations, carwashes, and food stores seemed to promise an end to the divisiveness that her kitchen--and its clientele--had aroused in its previous home in a largely residential neighborhood.

Letter Started Dispute

The dispute was precipitated by a letter sent to the church in July from a city planning official, who indicated that its new neighbors had expressed concern about the kitchen.

“Although this type of use may fit within the spirit of community service that characterizes churches, it goes beyond the accessory uses that are normally associated with churches, such as Sunday schools or religious classes,” the planning official wrote.

Ewing said he was taken aback by that argument.

“The city is trying to narrow the scope of what constitutes church operations,” Ewing said. “We have biblical history and precedent that the church’s mission is much broader than the city makes out.”

While not conceding the church’s arguments, the city has relaxed its position somewhat since its original demand, saying now that it will not insist that the church seek a permit unless there is further evidence that the kitchen is causing a problem in the neighborhood.

Still, Ewing said, the city’s position raises broader constitutional questions.

“When a branch of American government decides that it will tell a church how to use or not use its own property, it has crossed over into territory that does not belong to it,” he replied in an August letter to city officials.

Separation of Church, State

Jim Brower, a professor and former dean at Western State University College of Law in Fullerton and also an elder at the church, said he had never heard of a city trying to stop a church from serving food.

“They are messing with the whole separation of church and state,” Brower said.

Perry Valantine, Costa Mesa’s assistant director of development services, said that no constitutional questions are involved and that the city has ample authority to regulate how the church uses its facility.

“A city’s right to regulate land-uses has been upheld by courts many times,” Valantine said. “We are trying to ensure that the operation is not causing problems for others in the neighborhood and would hope we would not have to get into a technical battle over rights.”

Valantine said some residents near the church have complained that large numbers of people “who are not otherwise there” are now streaming into the neighborhood to get free meals, producing litter and harassing kids on their way to and from school.

Some residents also complain that the west side neighborhood including the church already has more than its share of charitable groups and social service agencies.

Many of those complaints came to a head in July when the City Council voted to cancel the lease of Share Our Selves, a nonprofit, volunteer agency that for years has provided food, clothing, shelter and medical care to the needy from its base at the Rea center.

Observers say a string of recent city policies--cancellation of the SOS lease, a now-suspended policy barring city funds to groups that aid illegal aliens, an ordinance aimed at Latino dayworkers bannings curbside soliciting of work, the city’s position on the church--are linked to a backlash among residents who object to their close proximity to such social programs.

“The burden on the west side is staggering,” Janice Davidson said at a recent City Council meeting. “If we must carry the burden for all of Orange County, we ought to do it right and ask the state for use of the fairgrounds to shelter these people.”

Davidson said about 45 neighbors have signed a petition demanding that the soup kitchen go. She said residents would mount a larger effort if the city does not take action.

Precedent Favors Church

Lucie White, a UCLA law professor who teaches a course on advocacy for the homeless, said legal precedent appears to favor the church.

White said that in two similar cases in New York and New Jersey, where churches provided shelter for the homeless, the courts ruled that the activity was protected under the First Amendment and that the city could not impose its zoning powers unless there was a direct threat to the health or safety of the community.

“These two cases are similar to the Costa Mesa issue, and unless the city can find similar cases that address the same factual area, then these precedents should carry a lot of weight,” she said.

The brewing controversy is both surprising and saddening for Merle Hatleberg, who weathered a similar storm just months ago.

When neighbors voiced similar complaints about needy and homeless people who flocked to the Rea Community Center, Hatleberg agreed to relocate the soup kitchen to help defuse tension there.

Dwarfed by Share Our Selves

She said it was the charitable thing to do, even though her small operation was dwarfed by the much larger Share Our Selves, which provides clothing, medical and other aid to the needy at the community center.

Hatleberg said the same people who opposed the kitchen at the community center now want it out of the church.

“It’s a chosen few who have got their nose up and think they are so much better,” she said. “It’s a shame that people can’t have a little more compassion for their fellow man and not make a mountain out of a molehill.”

Hatleberg said that the kitchen has not attracted outsiders or increased crime and litter and that most of those who come for a free meal also live in the neighborhood.

She said no one has complained to her about her operation, and she questions whether the city is “picking” on South Coast because other city churches also serve food but have not been asked to get permission.

No Complaints Elsewhere

Valantine said the city has not asked other churches to amend their permits because neighbors have not complained about their activities.

Ewing said he is pleased with the city’s decision not to require a permit immediately, but he insisted that the church will remain vigilant in its position.

“We are going to support the soup kitchen, no matter what,” Ewing said. “We give up a lot of comfort here. It’s not as nice or as clean as we’d like, but we feel it’s more important to feed people.”