c. 1999 Religion News Service

BELMONT, Mass _ Driving out of Boston on Rt. 2 West, it’s hard to miss the scaffolding and dirt piles rising out of the suburban town of Belmont. By the spring of 2000, this landscape will be different, but it will rise just as high _ a Mormon temple is being constructed on the site.

But even as construction is proceeding, neighbors whose property abuts the site are taking actions to stop it, with two separate lawsuits going to trial this month.

Far from being limited to the details of architecture and construction, the Belmont Temple suits will determine the future of zoning freedoms for religious institutions in the state of Massachusetts. At issue is the constitutionality of the so-called Dover Amendment, a state law that largely exempts religious institutions from zoning restrictions.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints _ the formal name of the Mormon church _ has owned the 15-acre plot of land in Belmont Hill for 20 years. The only structure on the land was a”meeting house,”or a regular congregation where Sunday worship is held.

In the fall of 1995, however, Gordon B. Hinkley, president of the church, visited the site and decided the quiet residential area was a prime location for a temple, the religion’s most holy building, where ceremonies such as marriage, baptism, and”endowment,”or accepting the church’s doctrines, take place.

The Belmont Temple, which will serve 40,000 Mormons in New England and southern Canada, soon became part of a plan by the church to have a Temple within a four-hour drive of every church member. Currently, the closest temple for New England Mormons is just outside of Washington, D.C.

But the temple’s size _ 69,000 square feet with a 139-foot steeple _ concerns many Belmont Hill residents, who allege the local zoning board misused its power when it granted a special permit to the temple. The board based its ruling on Massachusetts state zoning exemptions for religious institutions.

Hearings were held over the course of a year before the zoning board made its decision. After voting 4-1 in favor of granting the special permit, Hinkley offered, as a gesture of goodwill, a revised architectural plan reducing the 156-foot steeple to 139 feet and reducing the six-steeple design to one central steeple. “In the communication of his decision, (Hinkley) indicated that he felt the building of the Temple should engender a greater feeling of harmony,”said Grant Bennett, bishop of the Belmont ward of the church.

But neighbors were not convinced, and more volatile hearings followed. Some anti-Mormon literature was passed out and at least one anti-Mormon speech was delivered.

Bennett said that despite these incidents, religious bigotry has not played a large part in the dispute. He even expressed empathy for those residents whose property directly abuts the construction site.”They’ve had woodlands for their backyard,”he said,”Now they’ll have a 69,000 square foot building.” When the zoning board voted again in May of 1997 _ this time unanimously _ to grant the special permit, the neighbors filed the lawsuits.

The first suit, scheduled to go to trial Feb. 10 in Middlesex Superior Court, concerns the temple’s spire, which the neighbors want to reduce to 70 feet, the Belmont limit. The second suit, which will begin Feb. 16, is a federal case challenging the constitutionality of the Dover Amendment, which exempts religious buildings from certain zoning restrictions.

The Dover Amendment was adopted in 1950 primarily to protect parochial schools from being barred from building in certain areas. The Belmont residents contend that the Dover Amendment violates the First Amendment of the Constitution by giving religious institutions an unfair advantage in where they can build.”The Dover Amendment is an aid to the establishment of religion in violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution,”said Mark A. White, a lawyer for the residents.”It constitutes a state endorsement of religion, it promotes religion, and that’s unconstitutional.” Ken Harvey, who is the legal spokesman for the church in the two cases, however, argued that the Dover Amendment does not promote religion but rather bars bias against religious institutions.”The bottom line is that the Dover Amendment does not promote anything, so it’s not promoting religion. It’s not promoting religious institutions, it’s not promoting anything, and that’s really what the Establishment Clause of the Constitution is all about,”Harvey said. “All it does is simply say you cannot discriminate against religion,”he added.

The church argues that even if the Dover Amendment is struck down, a local ordinance still protects it from zoning restrictions.”In 1925 the town of Belmont stated on its own, through the town meeting process, that churches and schools could build in any zone,”said Bennett.

But attorneys for the plaintiffs _ three Belmont residents _ say the bylaw does not change anything.”If the Dover Amendment is unconstitutional as an aid to religion, then that bylaw is unconstitutional as an aid to religion,”said White.

The Dover Amendment also affects the Feb. 10 lawsuit, which concerns the spire height on the temple. The zoning board granted the special permit partially because of the exemptions provided for in the amendment.

Six neighbors are plaintiffs in this case, one of whom is also a plaintiff for the Dover Amendment case. They contend that the temple should comply with zoning laws regulating every other type of building in Belmont.”Our view is that it applies to them _ period,”said Art Kreiger, who is lead counsel for the case.

Kreiger’s case is only about the temple’s spire. The church building itself is within zoning specifications, he said, arguing the residents’ landscape will be dominated by the lofty spire.”We’re talking about something that would be dominating, something that would be visible all over the place, which I think is exactly what they want, which is to proselytize,”he said.

Bennett, the church’s Belmont bishop, says that while the temple’s purpose is not specifically to proselytize, the height of the spire does have religious symbolism.”The objective is to build something that has tremendous religious meaning,”he said,”It’s meant to symbolize the serenity and the peace that comes from living a virtuous life.” The church has got some support from local religious leaders who have been vocal about protecting the Dover Amendment.”There has been general support for the Dover Amendment, which protects various faiths, particularly minority faiths,”said Sheila Decter, executive director for the New England region of the American Jewish Congress (AJC). “The ability to prohibit and to limit a church from building is the same as the ability to deny a community religious expression,”she said, adding that the AJC submitted a letter of support to the Belmont zoning board during the hearings.”We want to be good neighbors,”said the church’s Harvey. He added, however, that the church intends to stand its legal ground and resist pressure to abandon the temple project.

Referring to the tumultuous early history of the Mormon faith, Harvey said,”If it’s a matter of, `You’ve got to pick up and leave the country and go out to the desert of Utah,’ like we did 150 years ago, well, we’re not going to do that anymore.” (BEGIN OPTIONAL TRIM)

The first Mormon temple was built in Kirtland, Ohio in the late 1830s, under the leadership of Joseph Smith, the church founder who is believed to have received direct revelations from God. The temple still stands and Mormons believe Smith received additional truths in it. They also believe any subsequent temple, such as that being constructed in Belmont, could potentially be a site for further revelation.

After suffering persecution, the growing Mormon community moved to the banks of the Mississippi River in Illinois, where they founded a city called Nauvoo and built a second temple. At one point, this city was larger than Chicago, but the anti-Mormon persecution continued and Smith was eventually arrested and killed in 1844.

After Smith’s death, Brigham Young assumed leadership of the beleaguered group, and in 1847 led them to Salt Lake City. Mormons believe that Young received a revelation dictating precisely what the temple in that city should look like. Forty years later, construction was completed.

In Belmont, church officials hope the legal issues will find a peaceful resolution.”When the lawsuits are settled, I think the neighbors are going to find that this is actually a wonderful neighbor,”said Bennett.

DEA END LEBOWITZ