logo
A Church Wants a Homeless Shelter. The Mayor Wants Space for Pickleball.

A Church Wants a Homeless Shelter. The Mayor Wants Space for Pickleball.

New York Times21-05-2025

Leaders of Christ Episcopal Church in Toms River, N.J., were preparing for a Cinco de Mayo festival late one night when the news began to spread: The mayor planned to use eminent domain to seize their church and its 11 acres of land.
Under his plan, the church, which was founded in 1865, would be replaced by 10 pickleball courts, a soccer field and a playground with a nautical theme, according to an engineer's drawing. The first vote by the Township Council, Toms River's governing board, was the next afternoon.
The proposal represented a curious new twist in an ongoing battle in the large Jersey Shore community. An affordable housing nonprofit that rents space from the church had asked to create a small homeless shelter on the very land the mayor now wanted to turn into a park. The request was unpopular with neighbors, and the organization was awaiting approval from a zoning board.
The mayor, Daniel T. Rodrick, called the timing a 'coincidence.' But opponents have condemned the park plan as a thinly disguised way to block the shelter.
The effort to buy or take the land is all but certain to face legal challenges. But it has unleashed an emotional debate over property rights, religious liberty and the limits of a community's responsibility to care for poor people at a time when the Trump administration is making deep cuts to safety-net programs that provide emergency food and housing.
'I am outraged,' said Rabbi William Gershon of Congregation B'nai Israel, a conservative synagogue that has been in Toms River for 75 years. 'If you can do it to them, you can do it to any of us.'
Rabbi Gershon said members of the town's interfaith council were united in their opposition to the effort, which he considers an attempt to use 'political levers to cudgel a community, almost vindictively.'
With a population of nearly 100,000, Toms River is one of New Jersey's largest communities and is within 15 miles of some of the state's most desirable Atlantic Ocean beaches. As property values have soared, coastal motels that once offered inexpensive lodging and seasonal work have been replaced in many Jersey Shore towns by multimillion-dollar homes, straining an already limited supply of affordable housing.
According to one estimate, the number of homeless residents in the region has doubled since the pandemic. Tent encampments have sprung up as makeshift housing, forcing uncomfortable conversations about how to address homelessness in a largely affluent region of the state.
A Township Council meeting three weeks ago where the proposal to take Christ Episcopal's land was discussed publicly for the first time was long and contentious.
Speakers shared personal stories of homelessness, addiction and redemption. Councilmen opposed to the seizure invoked the Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels, suggesting he would have supported it, too.
'You hate God? You hate Christ? Obviously you hate humanity,' a councilman shouted at a councilwoman.
'Why don't you pipe down,' she shouted back.
The proposal authorizing the township to take the church property passed during the meeting, 4 to 3, in a preliminary vote. A final vote on the measure could take place as early as next Wednesday.
Mr. Rodrick, a Republican, said the church and its land figured prominently in his vision for opening up access to the river that the township is named for. He would prefer to buy the land (he estimates it's worth $4 million) but is prepared to seize it, if necessary. He also hopes to take several other waterfront parcels and build a tiki bar and jet ski rental hub.
The church property, he said, presents 'a great opportunity for parking, for recreation.'
Its owner, the Episcopal Diocese of New Jersey, has stated unequivocally that the property is not for sale, and its rector has made clear the church is 'prepared for a long court fight to protect our congregation and property from this egregious land grab.'
Christ Episcopal is one of the largest and most active of the diocese's roughly 135 churches, according to Bishop Sally J. French, who leads the diocese. Razing it would also endanger the more than 20 programs it offers as part of a commitment to what Bishop French calls 'gospel justice,' including 12-step addiction meetings and a weekly food pantry.
The Affordable Housing Alliance, a nonprofit that rents office space on the property, requested permission from township zoning officials to build a 17-bed shelter there months ago. The church supports the plan, but many residents of a neighborhood that would be nearest to the shelter do not.
Edward F. Bezdecki, a lawyer who lives near the church and is trying to block the shelter, said he was concerned about the housing alliance's screening processes and where shelter residents might go during the daytime hours.
'What do they do?' he asked. 'They're wandering around the neighborhood. Are they burglars? Were they in jail for burglary? Are they pedophiles?'
The bishop said that providing shelter was 'actually a way to diminish the community concerns.'
'You've provided them with opportunities and the capacity to do what they need to do to get employment, to begin to contribute to the community in ways they haven't been able to do because of their difficult, painful circumstances,' she said.
Mr. Rodrick, who became mayor last year, initiated the eminent domain effort three weeks before the zoning board was set to vote on whether to allow the shelter to operate in a residential area. A decision is expected on Thursday.
He described his intention to create a park on the church land as a matter of priorities.
'When you balance the hardships — you have a whole community without a park, and 65 or 70 people who could probably drive to a different location on a Sunday' to attend church, Mr. Rodrick said in an interview. (Bishop French said weekly attendance at Sunday services, which are offered in English and in Spanish, was more than twice that figure.)
'As the guy who is supposed to look out for the welfare of all of the residents of Toms River, when you balance out those two things,' the mayor said, 'it's pretty clear which side I should be on.'
The controversy appears to have little to do with traditional party politics. In a state controlled by Democrats, Toms River and the surrounding county are conservative strongholds. Republicans hold most local offices and dominate elected boards.
Still, three Republican councilmen spoke out strenuously against the mayor's eminent domain resolution before voting against it, calling it hardhearted and plainly intended to circumvent the shelter.
The mayor, a former schoolteacher, said that he was used to being challenged by his political rivals after spirited battles in the last year over control of an animal shelter, declining police staffing levels and a redevelopment plan he scuttled.
'They fill the room and make a jerk out of me in the meeting and, like President Trump, my numbers just keep going up,' he said. 'The people are with me.'
Even Republicans who agree the church property might not be the ideal location for a shelter have warned that the eminent domain battle is likely to expose the township to a protracted and costly legal fight.
'It doesn't make a lot of sense to me, and I think it sets a bad precedent,' said Maurice Hill, Toms River's previous mayor, who lost to Mr. Rodrick in a Republican primary.
While seizing a church might sound unusual, David Schleicher, a professor of property and urban law at Yale Law School, said that religious institutions had no broad federal protections from eminent domain.
Showing that a government entity acted vindictively could provide a defense, he said, but that can be hard to prove.
'The history of eminent domain is the history of government doing things for questionable purposes,' Professor Schleicher said.
Other legal scholars have noted that constitutional arguments centered on religious liberty are often more effective than those that hinge on land-use law. Quirks of the New Jersey Constitution might also provide Christ Episcopal with an added layer of protection.
'New Jersey courts tend to dig a little deeper than the federal courts,' said Ronald K. Chen, a former dean of Rutgers Law School who also served as the state's public advocate. 'But there's no guarantee they will reach a different result.'
Opponents of the seizure appear aware that the church's best strategy might be winning in the court of public opinion before any legal wrangling begins.
Affordable housing advocates and a formerly homeless man who founded the online interview series Portraits of the Jersey Shore held a rally on Saturday that drew scores of protesters.
Christ Episcopal's choir director, Polly Moore, said parishioners were buying church T-shirts to wear in solidarity to the Township Council's meeting next Wednesday, when the eminent domain ordinance could win final approval.
Ms. Moore, 75, first joined the choir in 1959 with her siblings and parents, whose cremated remains are interred in a memorial garden on the church's property.
'I'm horrified that he would have the audacity to try to do something like this with such a thriving, vibrant church,' Ms. Moore said of the mayor.
Mr. Rodrick said he was confident that most other residents supported his plan. He claimed a poll of about 400 residents taken after the first vote authorizing the use of eminent domain showed him with 66 percent support.
Asked which company had conducted the poll, he said he had done it himself.
'I didn't get here by accident,' he said. 'It's a combination of wanting to do the right thing and knowing what you're doing.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Unsubstantiated 'chemtrail' conspiracy theories lead to legislation proposed in US statehouses
Unsubstantiated 'chemtrail' conspiracy theories lead to legislation proposed in US statehouses

Associated Press

time35 minutes ago

  • Associated Press

Unsubstantiated 'chemtrail' conspiracy theories lead to legislation proposed in US statehouses

BATON ROUGE, La. (AP) — As Louisiana Rep. Kimberly Landry Coates stood before her colleagues in the state's Legislature she warned that the bill she was presenting might 'seem strange' or even crazy. Some lawmakers laughed with disbelief and others listened intently, as Coates described situations that are often noted in discussions of 'chemtrails' — a decades-old conspiracy theory that posits the white lines left behind by aircraft in the sky are releasing chemicals for any number of reasons, some of them nefarious. As she urged lawmakers to ban the unsubstantiated practice, she told skeptics to 'start looking up' at the sky. 'I'm really worried about what is going on above us and what is happening, and we as Louisiana citizens did not give anyone the right to do this above us,' the Republican said. Louisiana is the latest state taking inspiration from a wide-ranging conspiratorial narrative, mixing it with facts, to create legislation. Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signed a similar measure into law last year and one in Florida has passed both the House and the Senate. More than a dozen other states, from New York to Arizona, have introduced their own legislation. Such bills being crafted is indicative of how misinformation is moving beyond the online world and into public policy. Elevating unsubstantiated theories or outright falsehoods into the legislative arena not only erodes democratic processes, according to experts, it provides credibility where there is none and takes away resources from actual issues that need to be addressed. 'Every bill like this is kind of symbolic, or is introduced to appease a very vocal group, but it can still cause real harm by signaling that these conspiracies deserve this level of legal attention,' said Donnell Probst, interim executive director of the National Association for Media Literacy Education. Louisiana's bill, which is awaiting Republican Gov. Jeff Landry's signature, prohibits anyone from 'intentionally' injecting, releasing, applying or dispersing chemicals into the atmosphere with the purpose of affecting the 'temperature, weather, climate, or intensity of sunlight.' It also requires the Department of Environmental Quality to collect reports from anyone who believes they have observed such activities. While some lawmakers have targeted real weather modification techniques that are not widespread or still in their infancy, others have pointed to dubious evidence to support legislation. Discussion about weather control and banning 'chemtrails' has been hoisted into the spotlight by high-profile political officials, including Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Recently, Marla Maples, the ex-wife of President Donald Trump, spoke in support of Florida's legislation. She said she was motivated to 'start digging' after seeing a rise in Alzheimer's. Asked jokingly by a Democratic state senator if she knew anyone in the federal government who could help on the issue, Maples smiled and said, 'I sure do.' Chemtrails vs. contrails Chemtrail conspiracy theories, which have been widely debunked and include a myriad of claims, are not new. The publication of a 1996 Air Force report on the possible future benefits of weather modification is often cited as an early driver of the narrative. Some say that evidence of the claims is happening right before the publics' eyes, alleging that the white streaks stretching behind aircrafts reveal chemicals being spread in the air, for everything from climate manipulation to mind control. Ken Leppert, an associate professor of atmospheric science at the University of Louisiana Monroe, said the streaks are actually primarily composed of water and that there is 'no malicious intent behind' the thin clouds. He says the streaks are formed as exhaust is emitted from aircrafts, when the humidity is high and air temperature is low, and that ship engines produce the same phenomenon. A fact sheet about contrails, published by multiple government agencies including NASA and the Environmental Protection Agency, explains that the streaks left behind by planes do not pose health risks to humans. However, the trails, which have been produced since the earliest days of jet aviation, do impact the cloudiness of Earth's atmosphere and can therefore affect atmospheric temperature and climate. Scientists have overwhelmingly agreed that data or evidence cited as proof of chemtrails 'could be explained through other factors, including well-understood physics and chemistry associated with aircraft contrails and atmospheric aerosols,' according to a 2016 survey published in the journal Environmental Research Letters. In the survey of 77 chemists and geochemists, 76 said they were not aware of evidence proving the existence of a secret large-scale atmospheric program. 'It's pure myth and conspiracy,' Leppert said. Cloud seeding While many of the arguments lawmakers have used to support the chemtrails narrative are not based in fact, others misrepresent actual scientific endeavors, such as cloud seeding; a process by which an artificial material — usually silver iodide — is used to induce precipitation or to clear fog. 'It's maybe really weak control of the weather, but it's not like we're going to move this cloud here, move this hurricane here, or anything like that,' Leppert said. Parker Cardwell, an employee of a California-based cloud seeding company called Rainmaker, testified before lawmakers in Louisiana and asked that an amendment be made to the legislation to avoid impacts to the industry. The practice is an imprecise undertaking with mixed results that isn't widely used, especially in Louisiana, which has significant natural rainfall. According to Louisiana's Department of Agriculture and Forestry, a cloud seeding permit or license has never been issued in the state. Geoengineering While presenting Louisiana's bill last week, Coates said her research found charts and graphics from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on spraying the air with heavy metals to reflect sunlight back into space to cool the Earth. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2022 directed the Office of Science and Technology Policy, with support from NOAA, to develop an initial governance framework and research plan related to solar radiation modification, or SRM. A resulting report, which Coates holds up in the House session, focuses on possible future actions and does not reflect decisions that had already been made. SRM 'refers to deliberate, large-scale actions intended to decrease global average surface temperatures by increasing the reflection of sunlight away from the Earth,' according to NOAA. It is a type of geoengineering. Research into the viability of many methods and potential unintended consequences is ongoing, but none have actually been deployed. Taking focus In recent years, misinformation and conspiratorial narratives have become more common during the debates and committee testimonies that are a part of Louisiana's lawmaking process. And while legislators say Louisiana's new bill doesn't really have teeth, opponents say it still takes away time and focus from important work and more pressing topics. State Rep. Denise Marcelle, a Democrat who opposed Louisiana's bill, pointed to other issues ailing the state, which has some of the highest incarceration, poverty, crime, and maternal mortality rates. 'I just feel like we owe the people of Louisiana much more than to be talking about things that I don't see and that aren't real,' she said. ___ Associated Press writers Kate Payne in Tallahassee, Florida, and Jack Dura in Bismarck, North Dakota, contributed to this story.

Three Days of Protest in L.A.
Three Days of Protest in L.A.

New York Times

time35 minutes ago

  • New York Times

Three Days of Protest in L.A.

An extraordinary weekend of protest ignited in Los Angeles after federal immigration authorities conducted a series of immigration raids across the region Friday. Over the next two days, the protests were limited in size and occurred only in a few pockets of the area. But in some of the clashes with demonstrators, law enforcement officers responded with crowd-control munitions, tear gas and flash-bang grenades. President Trump activated the California National Guard without the assent of Gov. Gavin Newsom on Saturday, an unusual move the governor described as 'intentionally designed to inflame the situation.' By Sunday, several hundred troops had been dispatched to the city as protesters gathered outside a detention center in downtown Los Angeles, though most troops appeared not to engage with protesters. City and state leaders condemned the deployment, including Mayor Karen Bass, who called it 'a chaotic escalation.' But Ms. Bass also urged protesters to follow the law and said not all demonstrators had been entirely peaceful. Some defaced self-driving Waymo cars and a group ventured onto the 101 freeway, bringing traffic to a halt. Outside of downtown, life went on as normal in most parts of the city. But Mr. Trump painted a darker picture, saying the city had been 'invaded and occupied' and any efforts to impede federal immigration officials would be seen as a 'form of rebellion.' Sunday, June 8 Waymo self driving cars were vandalized and set on fire as protests intensified. Officers from the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the city police department all worked to contain the unrest. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

'60 Minutes' correspondent Scott Pelley warns a CBS settlement with Trump would be 'very damaging'
'60 Minutes' correspondent Scott Pelley warns a CBS settlement with Trump would be 'very damaging'

Yahoo

time40 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

'60 Minutes' correspondent Scott Pelley warns a CBS settlement with Trump would be 'very damaging'

"60 Minutes" correspondent Scott Pelley spoke out about President Donald Trump's lawsuit against CBS and its parent company on Saturday, arguing that a settlement would be "very damaging." "Well, it'd be very damaging to CBS, to Paramount, to the reputation of those companies," Pelley said during a conversation with CNN's Anderson Cooper on Saturday, who asked how harmful a settlement and potential apology would be to the network. Trump filed a lawsuit against Paramount Global, CBS News' parent company, over a "60 Minutes" interview with former Vice President Kamala Harris in October 2024. Fox News Digital confirmed that Trump rejected a $15 million offer to settle his lawsuit, according to a source familiar with the matter, as the president's legal team is also demanding at least $25 million and an apology from CBS News. Cooper, who is also a correspondent on "60 Minutes," also asked Pelley about former show producer Bill Owens resigning from the program in April. Cbs News Ceo Wendy Mcmahon Abruptly Resigns, Cites Disagreement With Company Amid 'Challenging' Period "Bill's decision to resign may not have been much of a decision for him because he was always the first person to defend the independence of '60 minutes.' Bill didn't work for Paramount. Bill worked for our viewers, and he felt very keenly about that. And so I'm not sure Bill had any choice, once the corporation began to meddle in Bill's decisions about the editorial content, or just place pressure in that area, Bill felt that he didn't have the independence that honest journalism requires," Pelley said. Read On The Fox News App Pelley also said he wished he had the public backing of CBS News, but added that his work was still making it onto the program. "You really wish the company was behind you 100%, right? You really wish the top echelons of the company would come out publicly and say '60 Minutes', for example, is a crown jewel of American journalism, and we stand behind it 100%. I haven't heard that. On the other hand, my work is getting on the air, and I have not had anyone outside '60 Minutes' put their thumb on the scale and say, 'you can't say that. You should say this. You have to edit the story in this way. You should interview this person.' None of that has happened. So while I would like to have that public backing, maybe the more important thing is the work is still getting on the air," Pelley said. The "60 Minutes" correspondent recently went viral for calling out Trump during a commencement address. '60 Minutes' Producer Defiant As Cbs Parent Company Mulls Settling Trump Lawsuit: 'I Will Not Apologize' "In this moment, this moment, this morning, our sacred rule of law is under attack. Journalism is under attack. Universities are under attack. Freedom of speech is under attack," Pelley said during his commencement speech at Wake Forest University. "And insidious fear is reaching through our schools, our businesses, our homes and into our private thoughts, the fear to speak in America. If our government is, in Lincoln's phrase, 'Of the people, by the people, for the people,' then why are we afraid to speak?" Pelley addressed the remarks during the CNN interview and told Cooper that he felt "strongly" it needed to be said. Click Here For More Coverage Of Media And Culture "I don't refer to him or the president or the White House or the administration. But I was talking about actions that have been taken by the government over these last many months. But, there was a little bit of hysteria among some about this speech, and I simply ask you, what does it say about our country when there's hysteria about a speech that's about freedom of speech?" the CBS correspondent added. Fox News' Joseph Wulfsohn contributed to this article source: '60 Minutes' correspondent Scott Pelley warns a CBS settlement with Trump would be 'very damaging'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store