To read all postings regarding the – Happy Valley Tattoo Massacre’ click here
Yup, believe it or not, the American Fork Police – Lt. Falslev again, came in to the studio portion of the ministry today and delivered an illegal order which he claimed (but I doubt) was initiated by the local Zoning Enforcement Officer Jim Hardy 801-404-0112.
I say that I doubt Jim knew anything about the order because 1) It seems Lt. Falslev, Chief Call and City Atty Hansen are a gang of 3 (or more) trying to intimidate and harass us till we pack up and leave town and 2) Lt. Falslev told me that when I am in compliance, I likely will find it hard to contact Jim Hardy and so I shouldn’t even try, but rather should just call Lt. Falslev and he will come over to ensure our compliance.
The order called “American Fork City Fix-It” claims under the heading: Violation: Zoning Laws, residential living in commercial zone.
The “Fix-It” order gives us 14 days to comply – meaning to move out.
Of course he is referring to the parsonage in the rear of the Whole Life Ministries church and studio (Happy Valley Tattoo & Piercing) where Reverend Lowrey and his wife live.
This building was designed with a business section in front and an apartment in the rear with garage, back yard, etc. so it is not a commercial area that is being used as a residence.
It is a residence area being used as a residence.
I guess Lt. Falslev and his cronies failed to notice the residences across the street and around the corner that are also in the supposed commercial zone – but apparently are not a problem because…well…because they are not us, I guess.
This is just the next attempt on behalf of the American Fork City government to chase a religion they don’t personally approve of (er…….not Mormon) out of town.
Federally Mandated Rules (from Utah.gov website)
1. Religious Land Uses
In a world where we are getting used to the federal government’s involvement in many areas of our lives, we must accommodate an increasing interest from Washington, D.C., in local land use management. An example of this is the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA),1 a bill co-sponsored by Utah’s own U. S. Senator Orrin Hatch and fellow Senator Ted Kennedy.
RLUIPA basically provides that if the user of land is a church, then no land use regulation can be applied which imposes a“substantial burden” on the religious exercises unless the local government involved demonstrates two things:
1. the regulation furthers a “compelling”government interest;
and
2. the regulation is the “least restrictive” means of achieving
the end desired.
The property user must establish the regulation is a substantial burden. Once that is accomplished, the government entity
imposing the burden must establish the compelling need and that there is no less restrictive means of accomplishing the goal of the regulation.
The local regulator also bears a burden in showing its regulations treat a religious use no more harshly than non-religious uses; the rules do not discriminate against any particular religious uses; no rule acts to eliminate religious uses from a municipality or county; and no rule “unreasonably limits religious assemblies, institutions, or structures within a jurisdiction.”
The law also provides these rules are to be interpreted broadly to protect religious freedom.
The Utah State Legislature enacted a similar statute in 2005, guaranteeing the right to use land for religious purposes would be protected by state, as well as federal law.
These burdens are no small thing. As we discussed in Chapter 4, local regulations typically will be upheld if it is “reasonably
debatable” they advance some public good.
But under RLUIPA, religious uses only can be substantially burdened by regulation if the need for the regulation is “compelling,” which means the city or county must prove the issue involves a significant matter of public safety and health.
The U.S. Supreme Court said that the duty to show a “compelling state interest” to justify a local regulation is “the most demanding test known to constitutional law.”
A federal circuit court of appeals also held in 2003 that members of a local city council could be personally liable for their actions in denying an individual application for permission for religious assembly.
Attorneys’ fees are allowed as if any violation of RLUIPA were a civil rights act violation.
So, if the user of property in your community is a church, be prepared to suspend the normal rules. The real potency of the act is that it gives a religious institution that feels “put upon” by a local land use regulation an immediate appeal to federal court.
This is a very powerful tool, since normal land use claims must go through the state court system only, never receiving what some consider the more sophisticated and unbiased services of a federal judge.
The best advice to all involved in the review and approval of religious land uses is, of course, to engage in an earnest discussion of what can be accommodated without resorting to legal wrangling and court action. Once RLUIPA is understood by all, the issues should be much easier to resolve.
Those working to resolve problems in good will can save time, hassle, and money, including the limited resources of a church.
Well, that is the law regarding Churches and it should easily be apparent that regardless of their pretended friendly manner, the police are inwardly ravening wolves who have no good will in their dealings with Whole Life Ministries.
Of course, anyone who knows Dr. Lowrey knows that his moniker of Doc Loco is not unearned as he does have a permanent disability which also means that the next section regarding the Fair Housing Act also comes in to play.
2.Fair Housing Act
As with religious uses, the U.S. Congress has entered the arena of local land use regulation when housing for those with disabilities is involved.
The federal Fair Housing Act provides that it is unlawful to discriminate in the sale or rental, or to otherwise make unavailable or deny a dwelling to any buyer or renter because of a handicap or impairment.
A local regulation may be found in violation of the act if it is shown to have a “disparate impact” on a particular group of people that the act was enacted to protect.
Another standard in the act is that local rules are in violation if they fail to make “reasonable accommodations,” in allowing people with disabilities an equal opportunity to live in a dwelling.
When these rules are applied, the local government must balance the interests of the person with a disability against the demands of public health, safety, and welfare.
What is forbidden is for local policies or practices to have a discriminatory effect.
The act also has been interpreted to impose the burden of making accommodations on the local government, not on the applicant.
In a Utah case, the court held “the responsibility rested with the city to initiate and make the accommodation.”
Like the federal act related to religious uses, the Fair Housing Act has teeth, allows for immediate access to federal courts, and for legal fees for successful plaintiffs.
I have initiated complaints with the Assistant Attorney General of the United States of America and Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah and Senator Ted Kennedy, co-sponsors of the bill cited.
This action by the City of American Fork does impose a substantial burden on our exercise of religion and is additionally intended to “rattle the cages” of disabled persons.
These “member mafia” are no more than anti-American bullies and creeps who use their civil authority to terrorize law abiding citizens engaged in legal and Constitutionally protected activities, which activities they seek to disrupt with no respect to law or freedom or principles of truth, honesty or justice.
I expect tomorrow to advise Jim Hardy and the City Council of the liability the Chief and Lt. are burdening him with in this matter and my intention to prosecute everyone from the Mayor down to the lunch-lady for their shirking their responsibility to protect citizens from these anti-American and immoral violations of the United States and Utah Constitutions.
If you want to help, you can help yourself to my list of complicit parties and call or email or drop in to visit, though if you drop in on the Police Department, be prepared for arrest, as Lt. Falslev has bragged on several occasions that he can and will lock up anyone for anything, any time he feels like it and I’m sure the Chief feels the same.
Here is where you can access their contact information.
When Jesus said: “Don’t be a Dick.” They apparently were not listening.
One might think that Police Chief Call during his tenure as a Mormon Bishop would have paid some attention to the Jesus he claimed to officially represent!
If they are treating me the way they want to be treated – well, I’m paying close attention.
So here is the view out the front window of the church of residences in the “commercial” zone.
I guess you can decide if the “The local regulator … treat[s] a religious use no more harshly than non-religious uses.”
And of course the city wants to claim that since our some of our patrons donate money when receiving spiritual services that means we are a business and not a church, but I would counter that the Mormon church requires a person to be a “full tithe payer” which means that you must give a full 10% of your annual income in order to qualify to receive a temple recommend which gives you access to the spiritual services and blessings of the Mormon Temples. No “full” tithing – no spiritual temple services – end of story!
In the temple a patron is clothed with a temple garment (underware) that is marked with spiritual marks (to Mormons) and which they are instructed never to remove.
I don’t see much difference in tattoos and piercings compared to temple garments, except that our spiritual markings more intimately represent the individual who wears them and their personal expressions of self and of course ours do not require an instruction to never remove them.
Yes, I hate to break the news, you can’t roll up a tattoo (in order to hide your beliefs to be socially acceptable).
And, to the American Fork Police and City Attorney and those who pull their strings…
I know you are facinated by the fact you have a penis…
But,
Just because you have a dick…
Does not mean you are obligated to be one.
And Best Wishes.
Oh, Jesus says Best Wishes, too.
