Freedom of Religion – Part 2

Church Law and Tax 1990-05-01 Recent Developments Freedom of Religion Richard R. Hammar, J.D., LL.M.,

Richard R. Hammar, Attorney, CPA

Bio

State: Colorado
Categories: Freedom of Religion, Schools

Church Law and Tax 1990-05-01 Recent Developments

Freedom of Religion

Richard R. Hammar, J.D., LL.M., CPA

• A federal court in Colorado ruled that a public school policy prohibiting the distribution of “material that proselytizes a particular religious or political belief” was unconstitutional. The court observed: “The mission of public education is preparation for citizenship. High school students … must develop the ability to understand and comment on the society in which they live and to develop their own sets of values and beliefs. A school policy completely preventing students from engaging other students in open discourse on issues they deem important cripples them as contributing citizens. Such restrictions do not advance any legitimate governmental interest.” The court rejected the school’s claim that the policy was required in order to avoid violating the first amendment’s nonestablishment of religion clause. It noted that a policy “permitting students to speak to the full extent of their consitutional rights” would have a secular purpose, and would not advance religion. Rivera v. East Otero School District, 721 F. Supp. 1189 (D. Colo. 1989).

© Copyright 1990, 1998 by Church Law & Tax Report. All rights reserved. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is provided with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional person should be sought. Church Law & Tax Report, PO Box 1098, Matthews, NC 28106. Reference Code: m47 c0390

Legal Developments

Freedom of Religion – Part 3

Church Law and Tax 1989-07-01 Recent Developments Freedom of Religion Richard R. Hammar, J.D., LL.M.,

Richard R. Hammar, Attorney, CPA

Bio

State: Colorado
Categories: Schools

Church Law and Tax 1989-07-01 Recent Developments

Freedom of Religion

Richard R. Hammar, J.D., LL.M., CPA

• Can a public elementary school legally ban the Bible from the school library and prohibit a teacher from reading a Bible silently during classroom hours? These were the issues before a federal district court in Colorado. The court concluded that the school had acted improperly in banning the Bible from the school library. Noting that a school library is “a place where students must always remain free to inquire, to study and to evaluate,” the court concluded that “it is inconceivable that the Bible should be excluded from a school library.” Aside from maintaining a Bible in a public school library, the court emphasized that public schools can use the Bible “as part of a secular course of study.” It observed: “A study of American history would be incomplete without reference to the Bible. The American revolution and the founding of our country cannot be taught without a discussion of religious freedom and occasional references to the Bible. Likewise, it would be impossible to understand the civil rights movement of the 1960’s without reference to religious groups and their beliefs in Christianity and the Bible. The study of literary works, such as Shakespeare, Milton, and Dante, is greatly enhanced by reference to the Bible. A study of the evolution of agricultural practices finds that Biblical law prescribed giving the land a rest every seventh year (Exodus 23), an accepted practice in today’s agricultural science. An inquiry into the roots of our modern day privilege against self-incrimination would be incomplete without reference to the Bible. The Bible’s Song of Solomon may be as fruitfully studied for its poetic qualities as its religious precepts.” The court did order the removal of two religious books (The Bible in Pictures and The Life of Jesus) from a fifth grade classroom library—noting that a teacher had placed them in the library solely to advance his own religious views and not as part of “a secular, historical course of study approved by the [school board] as part of the curriculum for fifth grade students. The court also prohibited the fifth grade teacher from reading his Bible during classroom hours in front of his students, citing the “vulnerability” of fifth graders to the “examples set by their teachers. “It is unrealistic,” concluded the court, “to think that bright, energetic students are oblivious to what their teacher reads.” Roberts v. Madigan, 702 F. Supp. 1505 (D. Colo. 1989).

© Copyright 1989, 1998 by Church Law & Tax Report. All rights reserved. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is provided with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional person should be sought. Church Law & Tax Report, PO Box 1098, Matthews, NC 28106. Reference Code: m47 c0489

Legal Developments

Taxation

Church Property

Richard R. Hammar, Attorney, CPA

Bio

State: Colorado
Categories: Church Property

Church Law and Tax 1989-03-01 Recent Developments

Taxation – Church Property

Richard R. Hammar, J.D., LL.M., CPA

• Does property used exclusively for religious worship automatically remain exempt from property taxation when it is sold from one church to another? No, concluded a Colorado state appeals court. In 1984, a Coptic Orthodox church (“St. Mark”) purchased property from a Nazarene church that was exempt from property taxation as of the date of sale. The Nazarene church notified local authorities of the sale, and the property was removed from the listing of exempt properties. When St. Mark received a tax bill for 1984, it immediately applied for an exemption. Local authorities denied the exemption on the basis of a Colorado law that specifies “in no event shall [an] exemption apply to any year prior to the year in which application is made.” Since St. Mark did not apply for an exemption during 1984, it was denied an exemption for that year. On appeal, the state appeals court upheld the denial of an exemption for 1984: “Contrary to St. Mark’s argument, the exemption is not perpetual; it is dependent upon the use to which the property is put. It does not run with the land. Thus, St. Mark had no automatic right to the exemption and was required to comply with statutory prerequisites to so qualify …. [Under state law], St. Mark was required to file an application for exemption when it purchased the property to enable the property tax administrator to determine whether the property was being used for religious worship. There is a presumption against exemption, and the burden is on the taxpayer who claims an exemption to establish the right to it by showing that it has met the necessary criteria.” And, since “St. Mark, as the property owner, did not apply for an exemption for the 1984 tax year,” the tax administrator correctly denied the exemption for that year. The court also ruled that the tax administrator’s failure to notify St. Mark’s of the need to file an exemption application upon the purchase of the property did not deny the church any legally protected right. St. Mark Coptic Orthodox Church v. Colorado State Board of Assessment Appeals, 762 P.2d 775 (Colo. App. 1988).

Legal Developments

Court Upheld the Property Tax Exemption of “Young Life” on the Ground That Its Property Is Owned and Used Solely for Religious Worship

A Colorado state appeals court upheld the property tax exemption of "Young Life" on the

Richard R. Hammar, Attorney, CPA

Bio

State: Colorado
Categories: Church Property, Tax Exemption

A Colorado state appeals court upheld the property tax exemption of "Young Life" on the ground that its property is owned and used solely for religious worship and not for private or corporate profit.

The court also ruled that the state property tax administrator was without standing, under Colorado law, to challenge the decision of the state board of assessment appeals recognizing the exempt status of the property in question. Maurer v. Young Life, 751 P.2d 653 (Colo. App. 1988)