7 10 101 https://usmc.oxomeka.org/files/original/6ff10bec359b16f8ee5bb6fd86eb66f9.jpg 2ee54cbb75850e38d17e50c808765c2b Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource This collection documents 29 cases of public opposition towards American Muslim cemetery building projects from 2002 to 2023. Each case contains a narrative that describes its events, which was compiled through analyzing newspaper archives via NewsBank and NexisUni. The primary challenge American Muslim communities face when establishing cemeteries is obtaining administrative approval from an entity such as a city council or board of commissioners. Residents' concerns related to groundwater contamination, lowered property values, and aesthetics often pressure authorities to deny cemetery projects. These reasons for opposition differ from those involving mosques, which tend to focus on increased traffic, violations of noise ordinances, and the potential for terrorism. This collection is more comprehensive than other compilations of cemetery cases, which cover a limited timeframe, are no longer current, or need to be updated (e.g., Pew Research Center 2012, Younes 2017, ACLU 2017, New America 2018, HuffPost 2024). However, it does not fully represent all controversies surrounding American Muslim cemeteries, as it focuses on post-2000 cases and does not include cases of vandalism against established cemeteries. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ryan Wang Title A name given to the resource Cemeteries Language A language of the resource English Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Current and former Oxford College of Emory University students: Sofia Fonti, Ben Damon, Geneva Cunningham, Ameer Alnasser, Nadira Hassan, Chloe Peyrebrune, Lauren Yee, Ammarah Ahmed, Alexander Cleveland, Ehren Fernandez, Andres Lebed Wright, Bryce Bentinck, Rahim Khan Alidina, Ayman Badawy, George Drakos, Shahmeer Khan, and Snehitha Vardhineni. Project supervisor: Dr. Florian Pohl Case Use this Item Type to create the case Item Pages for the U.S. Mosque Controversies site. Case Number Enter the case number in this field using the format: Case No. XX_00 (e.g. Case No. Ga_01) Case No. De_01 Location The location of the interview New Castle County, DE Year Year the case began. 2020 Address Enter the full address, if it is available. 786 Port Penn Rd, Middletown, DE 19709 Plus Code Enter the plus code for the location, if it is available. G99P+3P Middletown, Delaware Proposed Project 942-plot cemetery with 1,000 square-foot building Proposed By List the entity (legal entity or community name) that proposed the project. <a href="https://www.facebook.com/p/A-Light-of-Hope-100069426126447/">A Light of Hope</a> Type of Opposition Public Campaign, Vandalism, Legal Action, Local Ordinance Public Campaign, Legislation Outcome Rejected, Approved, Approved with Modifications The cease-and-desist order was lifted after the cemetery worked with the Delaware Department of Transportation to pave a driveway and add parking spaces. Narrative Enter the narrative about the case here. A Light of Hope is an organization that provides religious and educational services to the local Muslim community in Delaware. In addition to establishing a mosque and funeral home where they perform washing and shrouding for free, A Light of Hope constructed a Muslim cemetery in New Castle County. Previously, families needed to drive more than an hour to the nearest Muslim cemetery in South Jersey or opt for a non-Muslim burial ground (Read, 2020, Mar 5). In February 2020, after only three burials had taken place, the property failed a code inspection and was subsequently issued a cease-and-desist order to halt all burials (Cherry, 2020, Feb 28). Though current zoning allows for new cemetery use, no land use plans have been approved by the county. State Representative Kevin Hensley, whose district covers the unauthorized cemetery, said in a Facebook post that he had received multiple calls from constituents about “suspicious” activity at the property (ibid.). County officials stated that the cease-and-desist order would be in effect until they approve all required land use plan submissions and any associated site improvements. Additionally, New Castle County would have discretion over how the proposed property would impact traffic, noise, and similar criteria (ibid.). The next month, leaders from A Light of Hope met with county officials to obtain approval for their cemetery (Bodies Buried Along, 2020, Mar 4). The property did not comply with local codes as it did not contain parking and walkways. During a press conference, New Castle County Executive Matt Meyer stated that the cemetery could continue burying people without special permission once safety concerns were met (Porter, 2020, Mar 4). On March 5, it was reported that A Light of Hope was working with the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) to pave a driveway and add parking spaces. The cease-and-desist order was temporarily lifted for humanitarian reasons to allow for the burial of 1-year-old Ja-Ziyah Gordon, who was taken off life support after being born with a heart defect and contracting a deadly lung disease (Cease and desist order lifted, 2020, Mar 4). In August 2020, about 70 people who live near the Muslim cemetery met to ask county officials questions about the approved project (Parrish, 2020, Sep 2). The meeting was initially scheduled for March 25 but was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Residents mainly voiced their concerns about the risk of groundwater contamination. In response, public health officials stated that they did not believe water contamination would occur based on the water flow and history of the land (ibid.). Questions about environmental regulations and how the county would monitor water quality were left unanswered because officials from the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) were invited to the meeting but did not attend. Naveed Baqir, a representative from A Light of Hope, briefly spoke to the crowd, stating that many of the residents’ questions could have been answered if they had contacted the organization. Additionally, Baqir accused Hensley, who organized the meeting, of exhibiting racist behavior by not including the Muslim community in the conversation. “I feel like I am crashing the party today because I was not invited. The Muslim community was not invited,” he said. “You are asking the right questions to the wrong people” (ibid.). In response, Port Penn residents claimed their concerns were not racially motivated and instead related to the quality of their water supply. Hensley stated that he did not invite anyone specifically to the meeting and only posted about the event on Facebook. Ultimately, the cease-and-desist order was lifted after a driveway and parking spaces were added. New Castle County authorized 942 burials and the construction of a 1,000-square-foot building (ibid.). The Muslim Cemetery of Delaware is now fully operational. References <ul> <li style="font-weight:400;">Bodies Buried Along Delaware Road Raises Red Flags. (2020, March 4). NBC10 Philadelphia. <a href="https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/bodies-buried-along-delaware-road-raises-red-flags/2314971/">Web</a>.</li> <li style="font-weight:400;">Cease and desist order lifted at Delaware’s only Muslim cemetery. (2020, March 4). ABC6 Philadelphia. <a href="https://6abc.com/muslim-cemetery-of-delaware-burial-gravem-new-cast-county/5986197/">Web</a>.</li> <li style="font-weight:400;">Cherry, A. (2020, February 28). New Castle County halts burials at unauthorized cemetery in Port Penn. WDEL 107.1FM. <a href="https://www.wdel.com/news/new-castle-county-halts-burials-at-unauthorized-cemetery-in-port-penn/article_715003b8-5a69-11ea-a58b-abb087f2267b.html">Web</a>.</li> <li style="font-weight:400;">Parrish, A. (2020, September 2). Concerns over Muslim cemetery in Port Penn continue. The News Journal. <a href="https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/local/2020/08/27/concerns-over-muslim-cemetery-port-penn-continue/5645167002/">Web</a>.</li> <li style="font-weight:400;">Porter, I. (2020, March 4). Burials will proceed at Muslim cemetery once safety conditions are addressed. The News Journal. <a href="https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/2020/03/04/burials-proceed-muslim-cemetery-port-penn/4954998002/">Web</a>.</li> <li style="font-weight:400;">Read, Z. (2020, March 5). Delaware’s only Muslim cemetery can resume burials after cease-and-desist order lifted. The Philadelphia Tribune. <a href="https://www.phillytrib.com/news/state_and_region/delaware-s-only-muslim-cemetery-can-resume-burials-after-cease-and-desist-order-lifted/article_e3ae30d0-5ed1-11ea-bd63-bb9e61e9b9bb.html">Web</a>.</li> </ul> Last Updated Date revised. July 10, 2024 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource In February 2020, the Muslim Cemetery of Delaware failed a code inspection and was subsequently issued a cease-and-desist order to halt all burials. Multiple residents had called State Representative Kevin Hensley regarding “suspicious” activity at the site. In March, the cease-and-desist order was temporarily lifted to allow for the burial of a one-year-old child. Residents met in August to voice their concerns about groundwater contamination. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ryan Wang Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University Title A name given to the resource New Castle County, DE Approved Built Cemetery Planning and Zoning Public Campaign https://usmc.oxomeka.org/files/original/86a017ab5d2a923242bf2961d530c308.jpg 15c456cccc8d7ed74886e99eb47eadac Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource This collection documents 29 cases of public opposition towards American Muslim cemetery building projects from 2002 to 2023. Each case contains a narrative that describes its events, which was compiled through analyzing newspaper archives via NewsBank and NexisUni. The primary challenge American Muslim communities face when establishing cemeteries is obtaining administrative approval from an entity such as a city council or board of commissioners. Residents' concerns related to groundwater contamination, lowered property values, and aesthetics often pressure authorities to deny cemetery projects. These reasons for opposition differ from those involving mosques, which tend to focus on increased traffic, violations of noise ordinances, and the potential for terrorism. This collection is more comprehensive than other compilations of cemetery cases, which cover a limited timeframe, are no longer current, or need to be updated (e.g., Pew Research Center 2012, Younes 2017, ACLU 2017, New America 2018, HuffPost 2024). However, it does not fully represent all controversies surrounding American Muslim cemeteries, as it focuses on post-2000 cases and does not include cases of vandalism against established cemeteries. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ryan Wang Title A name given to the resource Cemeteries Language A language of the resource English Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Current and former Oxford College of Emory University students: Sofia Fonti, Ben Damon, Geneva Cunningham, Ameer Alnasser, Nadira Hassan, Chloe Peyrebrune, Lauren Yee, Ammarah Ahmed, Alexander Cleveland, Ehren Fernandez, Andres Lebed Wright, Bryce Bentinck, Rahim Khan Alidina, Ayman Badawy, George Drakos, Shahmeer Khan, and Snehitha Vardhineni. Project supervisor: Dr. Florian Pohl Case Use this Item Type to create the case Item Pages for the U.S. Mosque Controversies site. Case Number Enter the case number in this field using the format: Case No. XX_00 (e.g. Case No. Ga_01) Case No. Tx_03 Location The location of the interview Farmersville, TX Date May 2015-July 2019 Address Enter the full address, if it is available. 333 County Rd 557, Farmersville, TX 75442 Plus Code Enter the plus code for the location, if it is available. 5H5R+RX Farmersville, Texas Proposed Project IACC applied to develop a cemetery on 34 acres of land. The project included restrooms, a pavilion, a maintenance building, internal roads, and approximately 11,000 burial sites. Proposed By List the entity (legal entity or community name) that proposed the project. <a href="https://planomasjid.org/">Islamic Association of Collin County</a> (IACC) Type of Opposition Public Campaign, Vandalism, Legal Action, Local Ordinance Public Campaign/Protest; Local Ordinance/Legislation Outcome Rejected, Approved, Approved with Modifications Denied in 2017 but approved with minor restrictions after DOJ investigation in December 2018. The cemetery opened in June 2021. Narrative Enter the narrative about the case here. Farmersville is a rural Texas city in Collin County with an estimated population of 3,500 people. In 2015, the Islamic Association of Collin County (IACC), which operates a mosque on the west side of Plano, TX, spearheaded efforts of five Muslim communities to develop a new cemetery. The cemetery would offer affordable burials for Collin County’s Muslim population, which grew from 6,000 in 2000 to more than 22,000. Up to that point, Collin County’s Muslim families had buried their deceased in cemeteries in Dallas and Denton. Most cities in Collin County such as McKinney, Allen, Blue Ridge, and Anna either did not have adequate space or had certain restrictions against building cemeteries (Veigel 2015). However, in early 2015, IACC identified a 34-acre plot in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City of Farmersville. The property was in a suitable location in relatively close proximity to the county’s five Muslim communities. The IACC developed plans for its cemetery project to include restrooms, a pavilion, a maintenance building, and approximately 11,000 burial sites (Light, 2018). As a first step, IACC submitted a concept plan to the city’s Planning Commission, which the commission discussed at a special session on May 28, 2015. The City’s engineering firm and city manager reviewed the plan, and the Planning Commission approved it unanimously. Based on the approval, IACC proceeded to purchase the property. The wider Farmersville community did not become aware of the cemetery project for several weeks. However, once news about IACC’s project broke, intense public opposition emerged. Social media posts, emails, and editorials in local papers expressed residents’ and non-residents’ opposition to the project frequently on the basis of religion. Although the project was not on the July and August agendas, meetings of the Planning Commission and the City Council drew large crowds of objectors. While some local community members such as David J. Meeks, the pastor of the Bethlehem Baptist Church, spoke about their concerns regarding this project, others such as Bart Barber, the pastor of the First Baptist Church in Farmersville, supported IACC saying, “The rights of conscience are inalienable, and religious conscience is among those inalienable rights – and that includes Muslims. If I can build a church, Muslims can build a mosque” (Holley, 2015, Jul 24). Reacting to the emerging controversy, the City organized an extraordinary town hall meeting to discuss the project. On August 4, an overflow crowd of 300 to 400 people gathered in the Farmersville High School auditorium. Numerous discriminatory comments about ICAA, Muslims, and Islam were made (Pots, 2015, Aug 5). Local elections in May 2016 brought to office a new mayor and several council members who had run on an anti-cemetery platform. The newly elected officials significantly delayed the project at a significant cost to ICAA for the next two years. Despite the opposition, IACC decided to move forward with its project plans. On June 19, 2017, the Planning Commission considered IACC’s preliminary plat application. It unanimously recommended approval to the City Council. Notwithstanding the recommendation, the Farmersville City Council voted to deny IACC’s application at its regularly scheduled meeting on July 11, 2017. Council members justified their decision by citing general flooding concerns for a small portion of the cemetery property along County Road 557. The result was a complete dismissal that did not give IACC an opportunity to address the issue the council had raised. In September 2017, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) announced it had opened an investigation to inspect the reasons behind the city’s decision to deny the proposal. Following a yearlong investigation, the DOJ concluded in August 2018 that the City of Farmersville had violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA). The DOJ declared it was prepared to file a lawsuit but gave the City of Farmersville a chance to negotiate with IACC. Within a month, the City and IACC came to an agreement to approve the proposal to build the cemetery. The agreement placed a temporary limit on the use of the small section of the cemetery for which flooding issues had been identified. In December 2018, The City of Farmersville formally approved IACC’s application to develop the land as a cemetery (Department of Justice, 2019). On April 16, 2019, the DOJ filed a legal complaint and entered into a settlement agreement resolving the case. The complaint alleged that “City decision makers made discriminatory comments against Islam and acted in response to the religious animus that many members of the public expressed against Muslims” (United States v. City of Farmersville, Texas, 2019). In July, the City approved IACC’s Final Plat. A groundbreaking ceremony was held in 2020. The cemetery has been operational since June 2021. References <ul> <li>Holley, J. (2015). Dispute over Islamic cemetery splits N. Texas community. Houston Chronicle. Available at https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/columnists/native-texan/article/Dispute-over-Islamic-cemetery-splits-N-Texas-6402572.php</li> <li>Department of Justice (2019). Justice Department settles claims against Farmersville, Texas, involving denial of Islamic cemetery. Available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-settles-claims-against-farmersvilletexas-involving-denial-islamic-cemetery.</li> <li>Pots, R. (2015, August 5). Why is Farmersville, Texas, so dead-set against a Muslim cemetery? The Daily Beast. Available at https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-is-farmersville-texas-so-dead-set-against-a-muslim-cemetery?ref=scroll. </li> <li>United States v. City of Farmersville (E.D. Tex., 2019). Available at https://www.justice.gov/crt/case-document/complaint-united-states-v-city-farmersville-texas-ed-tex. </li> <li>Veigel, W. (2015, July 9). Muslim cemetery: Residents want it dead. The Farmersville Times. Available at https://farmersvilletimes.com/2015/07/09/muslim-cemetery-residents-want-it-dead. </li> </ul> Last Updated Date revised. April 11, 2022 Year Year the case began. 2015 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Farmersville, TX Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University Description An account of the resource In 2015, the Islamic Association of Collin County (IACC) spearheads the development of a cemetery for American Muslims of Collin County. The project meets with opposition from the residents of Farmersville, TX. Despite a recommendation for approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council unanimously rejects IACC’s application in 2017. The Mayor and City Council Members publicly oppose the project. Following an investigation, the United States Department of Justice sues the City in August 2018 for violation of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. Subsequently, the city of Farmersville and IACC enter an agreement approving the cemetery construction with minor restrictions. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Snehitha Vardhineni Approved (initial denial) Built Cemetery DOJ Lawsuit (RLUIPA) Planning and Zoning Public Campaign Public Speech https://usmc.oxomeka.org/files/original/12507b83d6b717da1d46463b2c9cbc77.png b3ca0f9f663810f95d9abf00f5472214 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource This collection documents 29 cases of public opposition towards American Muslim cemetery building projects from 2002 to 2023. Each case contains a narrative that describes its events, which was compiled through analyzing newspaper archives via NewsBank and NexisUni. The primary challenge American Muslim communities face when establishing cemeteries is obtaining administrative approval from an entity such as a city council or board of commissioners. Residents' concerns related to groundwater contamination, lowered property values, and aesthetics often pressure authorities to deny cemetery projects. These reasons for opposition differ from those involving mosques, which tend to focus on increased traffic, violations of noise ordinances, and the potential for terrorism. This collection is more comprehensive than other compilations of cemetery cases, which cover a limited timeframe, are no longer current, or need to be updated (e.g., Pew Research Center 2012, Younes 2017, ACLU 2017, New America 2018, HuffPost 2024). However, it does not fully represent all controversies surrounding American Muslim cemeteries, as it focuses on post-2000 cases and does not include cases of vandalism against established cemeteries. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ryan Wang Title A name given to the resource Cemeteries Language A language of the resource English Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Current and former Oxford College of Emory University students: Sofia Fonti, Ben Damon, Geneva Cunningham, Ameer Alnasser, Nadira Hassan, Chloe Peyrebrune, Lauren Yee, Ammarah Ahmed, Alexander Cleveland, Ehren Fernandez, Andres Lebed Wright, Bryce Bentinck, Rahim Khan Alidina, Ayman Badawy, George Drakos, Shahmeer Khan, and Snehitha Vardhineni. Project supervisor: Dr. Florian Pohl Case Use this Item Type to create the case Item Pages for the U.S. Mosque Controversies site. Date 2015 Case Number Enter the case number in this field using the format: Case No. XX_00 (e.g. Case No. Ga_01) Case No. Sc_01 Location The location of the interview Rock Hill, SC Year Year the case began. 2015 Address Enter the full address, if it is available. Bird Street, Rock Hill, SC 29730 Proposed Project The Islamic Center of South Carolina originally proposed a project to construct a Muslim cemetery complex in Rock Hill, SC, in a residential area on Bird Street. However, the project's details are not specified, such as size and the number of plots. Proposed By List the entity (legal entity or community name) that proposed the project. <a href="https://icscrockhill.org/">Islamic Center of South Carolina</a> (Masjid Al Saalam) Type of Opposition Public Campaign, Vandalism, Legal Action, Local Ordinance Public Campaign, Zoning Outcome Rejected, Approved, Approved with Modifications In 2015 the project was rejected by the zoning board of appeals. However, in 2016 the Zoning Board worked with the Muslim community to find a new plot for the cemetery, approving the project in November of that year. In 2017 the project began construction and is currently operational. Narrative Enter the narrative about the case here. In September 2013, Masjid Al Saalam of the Islamic Center of South Carolina opened as the first mosque in Rock Hill, SC. Rock Hill is the fourth-largest city in the Charlotte metropolitan area. Two years later, the Islamic Center of South Carolina proposed building a cemetery to meet the needs of Rock Hill’s growing Muslim community. The project was spearheaded by Nazir Cheema, a decades-long Rock Hill resident. Cheema and other Rock Hill Muslims proposed the cemetery project on Bird Street near Anderson Road. However, the project required a zoning exception because the property was in an area zoned residential. The Muslim community petitioned the city for a variance utilizing the Complementary Use designation, which would allow for the property to be used as a religious site. Although city officials had supported the request, the Zoning Board of Appeals rejected the petition at its public meeting on July 21, 2015. The project was met with fierce public opposition at the July Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. Rock Hill residents cited concerns about traffic, property value, neighborhood character, and Muslim burial practices. A resident was reported asking “what would happen behind a Muslim cemetery fence” (Dys, 2015, Jul 29). Opponents also presented a petition with 28 signatures to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Aware of potential legal challenges under the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), the Zoning Board had conferred with legal counsel behind closed doors prior to the final vote. The application ultimately failed and was denied on a split vote (3-3). Questions about the board's decision remained because an exception for religious structures, schools, and playgrounds in residential zoning districts is frequently granted. For example, the city had previously approved a Catholic church’s columbarium in close proximity to the proposed site (ibid.). Following the denial, Nazir Cheema questioned the board’s decision saying, “What I heard here was that we are Americans and have rights, but we as Muslims do not have the right to bury our dead” (Dys, 2015, Jul 29). He added, “If this cemetery did not have the word Muslim, it would have been different. Are we not Americans? Do we not love America? Yes, we do” (ibid.). The Council on American-Islamic Relations followed the controversy and offered support in case the Muslim community decided to pursue a legal challenge. Despite their disappointment and unanswered questions about the board’s decision, the Muslim community decided not to appeal the board's decision to the Circuit Court. In 2016, city officials assisted the Muslim community in securing a different piece of property on Blackmon Street zoned for commercial use. The Islamic Society of South Carolina acquired the land and received approval for cemetery use without any public or administrative opposition (Dys, 2017, Jun 18). The new plot on Blackmon Street has woods on two sides and homes behind trees on two sides. Construction on the site began in 2017, and a fence was put between the homes and the cemetery as a courtesy to the neighbors. The Islamic Center of South Carolina currently maintains the cemetery. References <ul> <li>Dys, A. (2015, July 29). Rock Hill Muslims: Cemetery buried by city not dead yet. The Herald (Rock Hill, SC), p. 3A. Available from <a href="https://infoweb-newsbank-com.proxy.library.emory.edu/apps/news/document-view?p=WORLDNEWS&docref=news/156E641D8D773848">NewsBank</a>. </li> <li>Dys, A. (2017, June 18). Neighbors, zoning no longer roadblocks. Rock Hill's first Muslim cemetery to open. The Herald (Rock Hill, SC), p. 1A. Available from <a href="https://infoweb-newsbank-com.proxy.library.emory.edu/apps/news/document-view?%20p=WORLDNEWS&docref=news/1651CE763930A000">NewsBank</a><a href="https://infoweb-newsbank-com.proxy.library.emory.edu/apps/news/document-view?"></a>. </li> </ul> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Rock Hill, SC Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Sofia Fonti Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University Description An account of the resource In 2015, city officials in Rock Hill, SC deny an exception for cemetery usage to the Islamic Society of South Carolina. The public hearing before the Zoning Board draws a standing-room crowd in opposition to the project, including prejudicial statements against Muslims and Islam. The Muslim community does not appeal or take legal action against the decision. In 2017, ISC purchases a different property zoned for cemetery use. Built Cemetery Denied Planning and Zoning Public Campaign Relocated https://usmc.oxomeka.org/files/original/041826c06b3b79f5109c1febefc80c61.png 2b12da41c6e2aff8b36a3a07f9bbc717 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource This collection documents 29 cases of public opposition towards American Muslim cemetery building projects from 2002 to 2023. Each case contains a narrative that describes its events, which was compiled through analyzing newspaper archives via NewsBank and NexisUni. The primary challenge American Muslim communities face when establishing cemeteries is obtaining administrative approval from an entity such as a city council or board of commissioners. Residents' concerns related to groundwater contamination, lowered property values, and aesthetics often pressure authorities to deny cemetery projects. These reasons for opposition differ from those involving mosques, which tend to focus on increased traffic, violations of noise ordinances, and the potential for terrorism. This collection is more comprehensive than other compilations of cemetery cases, which cover a limited timeframe, are no longer current, or need to be updated (e.g., Pew Research Center 2012, Younes 2017, ACLU 2017, New America 2018, HuffPost 2024). However, it does not fully represent all controversies surrounding American Muslim cemeteries, as it focuses on post-2000 cases and does not include cases of vandalism against established cemeteries. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ryan Wang Title A name given to the resource Cemeteries Language A language of the resource English Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Current and former Oxford College of Emory University students: Sofia Fonti, Ben Damon, Geneva Cunningham, Ameer Alnasser, Nadira Hassan, Chloe Peyrebrune, Lauren Yee, Ammarah Ahmed, Alexander Cleveland, Ehren Fernandez, Andres Lebed Wright, Bryce Bentinck, Rahim Khan Alidina, Ayman Badawy, George Drakos, Shahmeer Khan, and Snehitha Vardhineni. Project supervisor: Dr. Florian Pohl Case Use this Item Type to create the case Item Pages for the U.S. Mosque Controversies site. Case Number Enter the case number in this field using the format: Case No. XX_00 (e.g. Case No. Ga_01) Case No. Id_01 Location The location of the interview Kuna, ID Year Year the case began. 2014 Proposed Project The ICBB applied to build a 10-acre cemetery for about 6,000 burial plots on 36 acres of land outside of Kuta, ID. An on-site mosque was considered as part of a separate future application. Address Enter the full address, if it is available. 15000 Cloverdale Rd, Kuna, ID Proposed By List the entity (legal entity or community name) that proposed the project. <a href="https://www.facebook.com/icbboise/?ref=page_internal">Islamic Community of Bosniaks in Boise</a> Outcome Rejected, Approved, Approved with Modifications County Commissioners vote to deny opponents’ appeal at a public hearing on September 10, 2014, but impose minor conditions for the project to move forward. Narrative Enter the narrative about the case here. In 2014, the Islamic Community of Bosniaks in Boise (ICBB) submitted a proposal to use 10 acres of land for a cemetery outside of Kuta, ID. At the time, the ICBB served approximately 380-400 families from across the valley. The project was spearheaded by Imam Midhat Smajic, who pointed to the need of his growing community to bury loved ones according to Muslim burial practices. For several years, the community had buried their deceased in a separate section of the Morris Hill Cemetery, a government-funded cemetery complex in Boise. The ICBB’s proposal affirmed that their Islamic burial practices would comply with Idaho’s regulations governing cemeteries (Muslim cemetery proposed, 2014, Sep 1). Smajic and other members of the ICBB worked with the Ada County Planning and Zoning Commission to approve their cemetery plans. The proposed cemetery site was zoned for conditional use as a cemetery and did not require any special exceptions or variances. Thus, the county’s Planning and Zoning Commission approved it. Following this, a resident appealed the decision to the County Commission, expressing concerns about potential ground contamination and the spread of disease. The resident also stated that the cemetery’s visual or aesthetic impact would negatively affect property values. A public hearing was scheduled to discuss the appeal. “Any time you're dealing with religious items, there's a lot of passion that goes with that too," said Dave Case, Chairman of the Ada County Commission. "That tends to bring out a lot of people who want to provide their testimony and want to be heard, and that's what the whole process is about" (Zepelin, 2014, Sep 10). During their public meeting on September 10, the Ada County Commissioners voted to deny the appeal but imposed minor conditions on the cemetery project. Despite the approval amid public opposition, no information is currently available regarding the completion or operational status of the cemetery project. References <ul> <li style="font-weight:400;">Muslim cemetery proposed for Kuna creates stir. (2014, September 1). Idaho Press-Tribune (Nampa, ID), p. 4. Available from <a href="https://infoweb-newsbank-com.proxy.library.emory.edu/apps/news/document-view?p=WORLDNEWS&docref=news/1501109D0E8C9C00">NewsBank</a>.</li> <li style="font-weight:400;">Zepelin, S. (2014, September 10). Plans move forward for Muslim cemetery near Kuna. NBC - 7 KTVB (Boise, ID). Available from <a href="https://infoweb-newsbank-com.proxy.library.emory.edu/apps/news/document-view?p=WORLDNEWS&docref=news/15045A8A06098840">NewsBank</a>.</li> </ul> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University Title A name given to the resource Kuna, ID Description An account of the resource In 2014, the Ada County Planning and Zoning Commission issues a conditional use permit (CUP) for an Islamic cemetery near Kuna. The Islamic Community of Bosniaks in Boise wants to use parts of a 36-acre lot as a burial ground. The property is already zoned for conditional use as a cemetery. Kuna residents appeal the decision to the County Commission, stating health concerns. County Commissioners deny the appeal at a public hearing but impose minor conditions for the project to proceed. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Sofia Fonti Approved Cemetery Public Campaign https://usmc.oxomeka.org/files/original/52c1346a599bfdfc34e902d20af01731.png 22e5c0f5dff0a6be8baf90696ec92907 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived https://www.isgl.org/funeral-services/ Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource This collection documents 29 cases of public opposition towards American Muslim cemetery building projects from 2002 to 2023. Each case contains a narrative that describes its events, which was compiled through analyzing newspaper archives via NewsBank and NexisUni. The primary challenge American Muslim communities face when establishing cemeteries is obtaining administrative approval from an entity such as a city council or board of commissioners. Residents' concerns related to groundwater contamination, lowered property values, and aesthetics often pressure authorities to deny cemetery projects. These reasons for opposition differ from those involving mosques, which tend to focus on increased traffic, violations of noise ordinances, and the potential for terrorism. This collection is more comprehensive than other compilations of cemetery cases, which cover a limited timeframe, are no longer current, or need to be updated (e.g., Pew Research Center 2012, Younes 2017, ACLU 2017, New America 2018, HuffPost 2024). However, it does not fully represent all controversies surrounding American Muslim cemeteries, as it focuses on post-2000 cases and does not include cases of vandalism against established cemeteries. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ryan Wang Title A name given to the resource Cemeteries Language A language of the resource English Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Current and former Oxford College of Emory University students: Sofia Fonti, Ben Damon, Geneva Cunningham, Ameer Alnasser, Nadira Hassan, Chloe Peyrebrune, Lauren Yee, Ammarah Ahmed, Alexander Cleveland, Ehren Fernandez, Andres Lebed Wright, Bryce Bentinck, Rahim Khan Alidina, Ayman Badawy, George Drakos, Shahmeer Khan, and Snehitha Vardhineni. Project supervisor: Dr. Florian Pohl Case Use this Item Type to create the case Item Pages for the U.S. Mosque Controversies site. Case Number Enter the case number in this field using the format: Case No. XX_00 (e.g. Case No. Ga_01) Case No. Ma_03 Location The location of the interview Walpole, MA Year Year the case began. 2014 Narrative Enter the narrative about the case here. In the summer of 2014, Al-Marhama Islamic Burial Services proposed the construction of a cemetery with 3,700 burial plots on three acres of open land in Walpole, MA. The Muslim group is part of the Islamic Society of Greater Lowell, which operates a mosque in Chelmsford, Massachusetts. In response to the Walpole Conservation Commission’s concerns about the use of wetlands located at the property, Al-Marhama reduced the size of its project to 3,400 grave sites (Seltz, 2014, Sep 3). After receiving clearance from the Conservation Commission, the project went before the Planning Board, which determined that Al-Marhama needed permission from the State Department of Environmental Protection and the local Board of Health (ibid.). Public opposition to the cemetery project was organized in an online group, Walpole for Clean Water, which circulated a petition with more than 350 signatures against the project. Adjacent property owners commissioned independent reviews of Al-Marhama’s site plan and hired legal counsel. In response, representatives of the Muslim community stressed that three professional studies had been conducted showing that groundwater contamination was unlikely, assured the residents that they would have protocols in place to avoid burials involving contagious diseases or radiation, and offered to use concrete encasements for all burials (Stuhlman, 2015, May 14). In a series of public meetings in early 2015, the Walpole Board of Health discussed the cemetery project. On May 12, the board had its final public hearing on the project at the local high school, where officers were present to keep the peace (Ferguson, 2015, May 14). Although the analysis from the Department of Environmental Protection found the cemetery did not pose a significant threat to the water supply and that contamination was very unlikely, the local Board of Health voted 4-0, with one abstention, to reject the project because it could contaminate the aquifer. Health Board member Carol Johnson summarized the Board’s decision by stating, "I am not totally convinced that this green cemetery would be responsible for any contamination, however, in good conscience, if there's the slightest, slightest possibility that this cemetery could result in the closing of this well, I need to vote accordingly" (ibid.). However, abstaining Health Board member Mona Bissany explained that chemicals from projects other than cemeteries were more likely to endanger the water supply and noted other burial grounds on aquifers that had been approved in the past (ibid.). Al-Marhama did not choose to appeal the Board of Health’s decision. The community continues to use a section of The Gardens at Gethsemane Cemetery in West Roxbury, MA, to bury deceased members. References <ul> <li style="font-weight:400;">Ferguson, K. (2015, May 14). Aquifer risk kills cemetery plan. Wicked Local. <a href="https://www.wickedlocal.com/story/times-advocate/2015/05/14/aquifer-risk-kills-cemetery-plan/34556488007/">Web</a>. </li> <li style="font-weight:400;">Seltz, J. (2014, September 3). Walpole aquifer complicates bid for Muslim cemetery. The Boston Globe. <a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/regionals/south/2014/09/03/islamic-burial-service-proposes-build-muslim-cemetery-walpole/HMJeC51bEIc4fvYwRhfAPM/story.html">Web</a>.</li> <li style="font-weight:400;">Stuhlman, A. (2015, May 14). New concrete liner plan would come with size concerns. Walpole Times. Available through <a href="https://infoweb-newsbank-com.proxy.library.emory.edu/apps/news/document-view?p=WORLDNEWS&docref=news/15554614B2179BC0">NewsBank</a>.</li> </ul> Address Enter the full address, if it is available. At the corner of Rte. 1 and Foxhill Drive between the Hilltop Drive apartment complex and old driving range. Plus Code Enter the plus code for the location, if it is available. 4Q42+F8 Walpole, Massachusetts, USA Proposed Project The project plan included converting three acres of forest area into a Muslim cemetery with 3,400 burial plots. The property was in a zoning district where cemeteries were allowed by right. Proposed By List the entity (legal entity or community name) that proposed the project. <a href="https://www.isgl.org/funeral-services">Al Marhama Islamic Burial Services</a> Outcome Rejected, Approved, Approved with Modifications In May 2015, after acknowledging the property assessment by the Department of Environmental Protection, the Walpole Board of Health rejected the cemetery proposal in a 4-0 decision, citing fears that green burial practices would pollute the water supply since the site was on the town aquifer. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource In May 2015, the Walpole Board of Health denied Al-Marhama Islamic Burial Services a special permit to construct a cemetery on three acres of land. The board justified its decision by citing potential groundwater contamination because the property sits atop the town’s aquifer. Al-Marhama conducted several environmental studies and offered interment in concrete caskets but did not appeal the board’s decision. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Sofia Fonti Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University Title A name given to the resource Walpole, MA Cemetery Denied Planning and Zoning Public Campaign https://usmc.oxomeka.org/files/original/a0e8e678290bf2926c27d2342dea0e5e.png 7262f628bba1f355c93a70515844ac90 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource This collection documents 29 cases of public opposition towards American Muslim cemetery building projects from 2002 to 2023. Each case contains a narrative that describes its events, which was compiled through analyzing newspaper archives via NewsBank and NexisUni. The primary challenge American Muslim communities face when establishing cemeteries is obtaining administrative approval from an entity such as a city council or board of commissioners. Residents' concerns related to groundwater contamination, lowered property values, and aesthetics often pressure authorities to deny cemetery projects. These reasons for opposition differ from those involving mosques, which tend to focus on increased traffic, violations of noise ordinances, and the potential for terrorism. This collection is more comprehensive than other compilations of cemetery cases, which cover a limited timeframe, are no longer current, or need to be updated (e.g., Pew Research Center 2012, Younes 2017, ACLU 2017, New America 2018, HuffPost 2024). However, it does not fully represent all controversies surrounding American Muslim cemeteries, as it focuses on post-2000 cases and does not include cases of vandalism against established cemeteries. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ryan Wang Title A name given to the resource Cemeteries Language A language of the resource English Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Current and former Oxford College of Emory University students: Sofia Fonti, Ben Damon, Geneva Cunningham, Ameer Alnasser, Nadira Hassan, Chloe Peyrebrune, Lauren Yee, Ammarah Ahmed, Alexander Cleveland, Ehren Fernandez, Andres Lebed Wright, Bryce Bentinck, Rahim Khan Alidina, Ayman Badawy, George Drakos, Shahmeer Khan, and Snehitha Vardhineni. Project supervisor: Dr. Florian Pohl Case Use this Item Type to create the case Item Pages for the U.S. Mosque Controversies site. Case Number Enter the case number in this field using the format: Case No. XX_00 (e.g. Case No. Ga_01) Case No. Ma_04 Location The location of the interview Dudley, MA Year Year the case began. 2016 Address Enter the full address, if it is available. off Corbin Road [across from 176 Corbin Rd] Proposed Project The Islamic Society of Greater Worcester hopes to build a Muslim cemetery with 16,000 burial plots on 55 acres of vacant farmland off Corbin Road. Proposed By List the entity (legal entity or community name) that proposed the project. <a href="https://isgw.us/">The Islamic Society of Greater Worcester</a> Plus Code Enter the plus code for the location, if it is available. 33F7+4QX Dudley, Massachusetts Type of Opposition Public Campaign, Vandalism, Legal Action, Local Ordinance Public Campaign, Planning and Zoning Outcome Rejected, Approved, Approved with Modifications After the Islamic Society of Greater Worcester sued the town of Dudley, MA, and the Department of Justice launched its investigation, an agreement was reached allowing a permit for a 6-acre Muslim cemetery with a 10-year moratorium on expansion. Narrative Enter the narrative about the case here. In January 2016, the Islamic Society of Greater Worcester applied to the Dudley Zoning Board of Appeals for a special use permit to build a cemetery with up to 16,000 burial plots on 55 acres of vacant farmland. The town’s zoning regulations allowed for cemetery use with a special permit in the agricultural zone. In the weeks leading up to the first public hearing, Dudley residents launched an opposition campaign. Opponents cited concerns about groundwater contamination due to Muslim burial practices. At the February 4 hearing, several hundred residents attended to present a public petition opposing the cemetery permit (Boeri, 2016, Feb 5). Over the next months, the Zoning Board of Appeals continued public hearings on the project before finally denying the request during its meeting on June 9, 2016. The board based its unanimous decision on the claim that the property was under special-tax status and that the Islamic Society lacked legal standing to purchase it. According to the board, the property owner had not complied with the requirement to notify the town prior to the sale, thereby failing to give the town the right of first refusal (Laplaca, 2016, Jun 9). The Muslim community appealed the Board’s decision to the Massachusetts Land Court (MacQuarrie, 2016, Jul 5). In August, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced it had opened an investigation into the town’s denial of the cemetery project as a potential violation of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) (Serhan, 2016, Aug 18). In December 2016, the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Islamic Society of Greater Worcester settled the case. The town granted the special permit for a six-acre cemetery with several conditions: a ten-year moratorium on any expansion beyond the six acres, the installation of buffer zones, and a maintenance agreement (LaPlaca, 2017, Mar 2). In April 2017, the Islamic Society released a statement that it would not pursue the cemetery project further out of financial considerations. The group announced it was seeking to reserve about 1,500 burial sites at Hope Cemetery, the municipal cemetery of Worcester (Murtishi, 2017, Apr 14). References <ul> <li style="font-weight:400;">Boeri, D. (2016, February 5). Proposal For Muslim Cemetery In Dudley Meets Opposition From Residents. WBUR. <a href="https://www.wbur.org/all-things-considered/2016/02/05/muslim-cemetery-proposal">Web.</a></li> <li style="font-weight:400;">Laplaca, D. (2016, June 9). Zoning board nixes Muslim cemetery. Telegram. <a href="https://www.telegram.com/story/news/local/south-west/2016/06/10/dudley-zoning-board-rejects-muslim-cemetery-application/27954817007/">Web.</a></li> <li style="font-weight:400;">Laplaca, D. (2017, March 2). Dudley board approves Muslim cemetery. Telegram. <a href="https://www.telegram.com/story/news/local/south-west/2017/03/03/dudley-board-approves-muslim-cemetery/22006573007/">Web.</a></li> <li style="font-weight:400;">MacQuarrie, B. (2016, July 5). Islamic group accuses Dudley of blocking Muslim cemetery. The Boston Globe. <a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/07/05/islamic-group-files-suit-accusing-dudley-illegally-blocking-muslim-cemetery-plans/9TpLhOUWs8S3z2QoGmHPbM/story.html">Web.</a></li> <li style="font-weight:400;">Murtishi, A. (2017, April 14). Dead deal: Islamic Society abandons plan for Dudley cemetery. MassLive Media. <a href="https://www.masslive.com/news/worcester/2017/04/dead_deal_islamic_society_aban.html">Web.</a></li> <li style="font-weight:400;">Serhan, Y. (2016, August 18). One Massachusetts Town's Rejection of a Muslim Cemetery. The Atlantic. <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2016/08/muslim-cemetery-rejection-investigation/496520/">Web.</a></li> </ul> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource In June 2016, the Dudley, MA Zoning Board denied the Islamic Society of Greater Worcester's request for a cemetery permit on 55 acres of farmland, citing special-tax status and legal standing issues. According to the Board, the property owner had not notified the town before the sale, violating the right of first refusal. The Islamic Society sued Dudley, alleging "prejudicial treatment," prompting a Department of Justice investigation. The case drew national attention. In December 2016, an agreement allowed a 6-acre cemetery with a 10-year expansion moratorium. In April 2017, the Islamic Society withdrew the project due to financial issues and sought burial sites at Worcester’s Hope Cemetery. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Sofia Fonti Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University Title A name given to the resource Dudley, MA Approved (initial denial) Built Cemetery DOJ Relocated Withdrawn https://usmc.oxomeka.org/files/original/c01946305b7c6b26a2d7cf7255a3bec0.jpg eb438edeb6f6620aa4adedeee24a37bc Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Lopez and Associates (2013). Rendering of the proposed Islamic center in Lomita. [Online image]. Retrieved June 18, 2020 from https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2013/02/islamic-center-lawsuit-lomita-settled.html. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource California Case Use this Item Type to create the case Item Pages for the U.S. Mosque Controversies site. Case Number Enter the case number in this field using the format: Case No. XX_00 (e.g. Case No. Ga_01) Case No. Ca_05 Location The location of the interview Lomita, CA Date 2010-2013 Summary Enter a brief description of the case (no more than 600 characters). This should be one or two sentences. The city of Lomita, California rejects a proposal by the Islamic Center of South Bay (ICSB) for an expansion of a new center on its property. The city states that the rejection is based on residents’ concerns over increased traffic and noise as well as the project’s size and fit with the neighborhood. Members of the ICSB allege anti-Islamic sentiment, and CAIR-LA files a federal lawsuit on behalf of ICSB against the city. The denial prompts a DOJ investigation and, eventually, a DOJ lawsuit under RLUIPA. Lomita and the DOJ settle the suit in 2013 along with a settlement in ICSB’s lawsuit, clearing the way for ICSB to bring a new, successful application to the city council. Address Enter the full address, if it is available. 25816 Walnut St, Lomita, CA 90717 Plus Code Enter the plus code for the location, if it is available. QMQQ+G8 Lomita, California Proposed Project Islamic center; mosque expansion Proposed By List the entity (legal entity or community name) that proposed the project. <a href="http://masjidalnoor.org/about/">Islamic Center of South Bay</a> Type of Opposition Public Campaign, Vandalism, Legal Action, Local Ordinance administrative denial; public campaign; bias-related incident Outcome Rejected, Approved, Approved with Modifications approved (with restrictions; following lawsuit and settlement) Narrative Enter the narrative about the case here. On June 8, 2009 an initial hearing was held before the City of Lomita Planning Commission for the proposed redevelopment of the Islamic Center of South Bay (ICSB). Initial specifications for the redevelopment included a proposed sanctuary consisting of 2,370 square feet, a proposed building area of 16,851 square feet, and a proposed 74 additional parking spaces. During the meeting, the architect for the project, Shakil Patel, addressed residents’ concerns about the project, including “the location and height of the mosque windows, the traffic and noise issues” and “the distance between the buildings” (Planning Commission Notes 6/8). After commissioners asked Mr. Patel questions about the project, Commissioner Dever suggested that the project be continued and that residents have an opportunity to voice their opinions about the project. Initial public reactions were not positive. Residents were primarily concerned over the additional noise and traffic that the project would create. On July 1 and August 12 of 2009, two community meetings were held so that the Islamic Center of South Bay could revise their initial project. These revisions were brought before the Planning Commission in a meeting on September 14, 2009. In this meeting, the Planning Commission voted 4-3 in favor of recommending the project for approval. Residents continued to express their concerns about the project leading up to the city council meeting. On March 2, 2010, after a five-hour hearing, the Lomita City Council unanimously voted to reject the proposed redevelopment. Some of the project’s supporters alleged that religion played an important role in the decision. City Councilman Tim King contended that the decision was based on the structure’s location and the coding changes that would have been required (KPCC, 2010). Importantly, the rejection of the redevelopment allowed for the Islamic Center of South Bay to come back with another plan (”Lomita Stops Mosque Expansion,” KPCC, 2010). On November 18, 2011, the United States Department of Justice announced that it had begun a formal civil rights investigation over the rejection of the proposed redevelopment. Officials stated that the investigation was triggered after DOJ officials had read reports of the mosque’s denial (Green, 2011). While the DOJ investigation was still ongoing, the Islamic Center of South Bay on March 21, 2012 filed a lawsuit against the City of Lomita, seeking “damages and reimbursement for costs incurred during a planning process that has lasted more than three years” (Flaccus, 2012). To date, we have been unable to find the original lawsuit filed. On January 11, 2013, it was announced that the City of Lomita had reached a conditional settlement with the Islamic Center of South Bay. “The agreement [allowed] the Islamic Center of South Bay to reapply to complete the expansions. It also [called] for the city to process the new application promptly and to waive application fees, with a caveat that if the new application is denied again, the lawsuit may resume” (“Islamic Center Reaches Settlement,” KPCC, 2013). On March 8, 2013, the DOJ filed a complaint and agreed order against Lomita, alleging that Lomita violated RLUIPA by creating a substantial burden for ICSB community members to practice their religion in their denial of the redevelopment. The agreed order affirmed the city’s settlement with the ICSB and mandated certain record-keeping and training requirements for city officials. On September 9, 2013, the Planning Commission discussed the ICSB’s new application. After a long public hearing, the Planning Commission voted 4-0 in favor of the redevelopment. On October 7, 2013, the City Council reviewed the new application, which contained changes such as a 7,000 square-foot increase in the site’s size after the purchase of a new lot and 20 more parking spaces (Green, 2013). The project was approved in the meeting by a unanimous vote. Construction was underway by 2014 and today the Islamic Center of South Bay’s redevelopment plans appear to have been completed and the site is operational. References Enter list of sources cited using the proper format. <ul><li>Green, Nick. (2012, March 22). Discrimination is alleged. Religion: Islamic Center says the City Council violated federal law in rejecting its renovation plans. Daily Breeze, p. 1A. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Green, Nick. (2011, November 9). Planning officials capture 2 seats. Daily Breeze, p. 4A. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Green Staff Writer, N. (2011, November 18). Mosque rejection spurs inquiry. Lomita: Feds ask city officials why expansion of Islamic Center was blocked. Daily Breeze, p. 3A. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Green, Nick. (2011, October 12). 3 running for 2 council seats. Lomita: A previous challenger faces pair from planning board. Daily Breeze, p. 3A. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Justice Department reaches agreement with Lomita, Calif., to protect religious exercise. (2013, February 1). Office of Public Affairs, Department of Justice. Retrieved from<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-reaches-agreement-lomita-calif-protect-religious-exercise"> https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-reaches-agreement-lomita-calif-protect-religious-exercise</a>. </li> </ul> Year Year the case began. 2010 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Lomita, CA Description An account of the resource A documented account of Case No. CA_05, occurring in Lomita, CA, 90717 from 2010 to 2013 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Stewart Zelnick Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University DOJ Lawsuit (RLUIPA) https://usmc.oxomeka.org/files/original/7b7adce9fe578de7f200966c60dfb481.jpg a9de4e7d346141f522cc38b9e7ddbf46 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Minnesota Case Use this Item Type to create the case Item Pages for the U.S. Mosque Controversies site. Case Number Enter the case number in this field using the format: Case No. XX_00 (e.g. Case No. Ga_01) Case No. Mn_04 Location The location of the interview St. Anthony, MN Date 2012-2014 Summary Enter a brief description of the case (no more than 600 characters). This should be one or two sentences. After the denial of a conditional use permit for an Islamic center in St. Anthony, Minnesota, Muslim community leaders request a DOJ probe to investigate bias. City officials claim denial is based on a zoning conflict because the property is located in an area zoned for light-industrial use. The Muslim community alleges unequal treatment and files a federal RLUIPA lawsuit. Two years later, the DOJ also sues St. Anthony for RLUIPA violation. The city eventually settles both lawsuits, allowing the Islamic Center to occupy parts of the property it purchased and reserving other parts for commercial use. Address Enter the full address, if it is available. 3055 Old Hwy 8, St. Anthony, 55418 MN Plus Code Enter the plus code for the location, if it is available. 2QFR+J5 St Anthony, Minnesota Proposed Project Islamic center Proposed By List the entity (legal entity or community name) that proposed the project. Abu-Huraira Islamic Center Type of Opposition Public Campaign, Vandalism, Legal Action, Local Ordinance Administrative denial; legislation Outcome Rejected, Approved, Approved with Modifications approved (with restrictions, after lawsuit and settlement) Narrative Enter the narrative about the case here. At a planning commission meeting on Tuesday, March 20, 2012, supporters of the proposed Abu-Huraira Islamic Center (AHIC) voiced their frustrations over the city’s decision to delay their plans by removing discussion of their application for a Conditional Use Permit from the meeting agenda. The proposed Islamic Center would be about 15-000 square feet and would occupy a former Medtronic building (French, 2012). At this meeting, supporters said they had worked with city officials throughout every phase of the project, but were frustrated when the city delayed the project to consider zoning issues at the site of the project. The zoning issues city officials were concerned over involved the question of whether a religious facility could operate in an area zoned for light-industrial use. A week prior, on March 13th, the St. Anthony City Council unanimously approved Resolution 12-037 that placed “a moratorium on Conditional Use Permits for assemblies, meeting lodges, or convention halls in the Light Industrial Zoning District to study whether to impose additional amendments to the Code” (City Council Minutes, 2012, March 13). This moratorium allowed city officials to suspend conditional use zoning permits. Chair Heinis of the Planning Commission clarified that the AHIC’s application would be taken up at a future meeting within the city’s 120-day statutory time frame for action on applications, after the City’s study had been completed. In a special meeting on June 4th, 2012, the St. Anthony City Planning Commission approved the project. Following this, a vote was set for June 12th for the city council to approve the project. At this June 12th meeting, residents made “disparaging remarks” about the project during the public comments section prior to the vote (Mohr, 2012). One speaker, John Murlowski, is quoted as saying: “Islam is evil. There’s no other religion in the world that endorses violence” before he was cut off by Mayor Jerry Faust (French, 2012). The Islamic Center was rejected on a 4-1 to vote. The next day, on June 13th, the Council for American Islamic Relations-Minnesota asked the DOJ to conduct a probe into the city council’s vote as a potential violation of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). On October 29th, 2012 the United States Department of Justice announced that it had begun an official civil rights investigation over the rejection of the Islamic Center. Supporters of the mosque applauded the decision. After almost two years of investigation by the U.S. attorney’s office in Minneapolis, the U.S. Department of Justice US announced on August 27, 2014 that it had filed an RLUIPA lawsuit against the city. The lawsuit alleged that the city had violated RLUIPA’s Equal Terms provision by allowing general assemblies but not religious ones and, as a result, that the city had imposed a substantial burden on the Abu-Huraira Islamic Center by denying their application. At a news conference in Minneapolis, the attorney general for the District of Minnesota, Andrew Luger, reiterated the DOJ’s reasoning that the city had violated the Islamic Center’s civil rights saying,“Under the same zoning language, the city had allowed other assemblies in the same neighborhood, including a union hall and a church” (Rathbun, 2014). This was the first time the DOJ had brought an RLUIPA case against a Minnesota city. It followed several other cases in the state where counties and municipalities had denied Muslim communities permits for houses of worship or schools (e.g., in Blaine, Plymouth, Wilmar, and Bloomington). On December 9th, 2014, the city and the government reached a settlement, allowing a Planned Use Development at the property that the Islamic Center purchased. The Planned Use Development agreement allows Abu-Huraira to occupy the St. Anthony Business Center for religious services. The settlement also stipulates that the city will not discriminate against Abu-Huraira or any other religious groups based on zoning laws and that city officials must receive training about RLUIPA. Year Year the case began. 2012 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource St. Anthony, MN Description An account of the resource A documented account of Case No. MN_04, occurring in St. Anthony, MN 55418 from 2012 to 2014 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Stewart Zelnick Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University DOJ Lawsuit (RLUIPA) https://usmc.oxomeka.org/files/original/90cc03a8095012f61b6c24ba91f6581b.png 0b42bcb5dbc527a401169a618229919c Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource New Jersey Case Use this Item Type to create the case Item Pages for the U.S. Mosque Controversies site. Case Number Enter the case number in this field using the format: Case No. XX_00 (e.g. Case No. Ga_01) Case No. Nj_01 Location The location of the interview Wayne, NJ Date 2003-2008 Summary Enter a brief description of the case (no more than 600 characters). This should be one or two sentences. The Township of Wayne in New Jersey delayed a mosque’s building application for three years and eventually sought to seize the purchased property under eminent domain. The mosque sued under RLUIPA and the DOJ filed an amicus brief against the Township of Wayne. A court went on to agree with the DOJ that the use of eminent domain in this specific case violated RLUIPA. The case was settled in 2008. As a result of the settlement, the Muslim community sold the property to the Township in 2009 and subsequently found a new property in nearby Riverdale. Address Enter the full address, if it is available. 1840 Hamburg Turnpike, Wayne, NJ 07470 Proposed Project mosque Proposed By List the entity (legal entity or community name) that proposed the project. <a href="http://aaccriverdale.org/">Albanian Associated Fund</a> Type of Opposition Public Campaign, Vandalism, Legal Action, Local Ordinance administrative denial; public campaign Outcome Rejected, Approved, Approved with Modifications AFF sold land to Twp after settlement; subsequently moved to different location outside of Twp Narrative Enter the narrative about the case here. On October 5, 2001, the Albanian Associated Fund (AAF) finalized the purchase of a property along the Hamburg Turnpike in the Township of Wayne (“Wayne”) in northern New Jersey. A year later, the AAF submitted a Land Development Application and a Site Plan for a religious facility. The AAF met with the Township of Wayne Planning Board for the first time on March 24, 2003. The original plans for the development included a 39,392-square-foot recreation center and school as well as a 4,864-square-foot mosque (Ratish, 2004). After the first Planning Board meeting, the Township of Wayne’s planner found that the application met all permitting requirements in October of 2003. Over the next four years, the Planning Board continued to deliberate AAF’s application in more than twenty hearings. After deliberation, the Planning Board would eventually attempt to seize the AAF’s property through the use of eminent domain. This extended span of meetings is very much not the norm and eventually led the AAF to accuse Wayne of possessing a bias against Muslims. Shortly after the initial hearing, in November 2003, the Township of Wayne held a public vote to approve an Open Space Referendum. In January of 2004, the township created the Open Space Committee, which was chaired by the mayor. The goal of this referendum and subsequent committee was to set aside parcels of land for preservation. One such parcel was the land that the AAF had spent years trying to develop. While the AAF’s application was still under discussion by the Planning Board, the Township began eminent domain proceedings to condemn the group’s property for open space preservation. In Planning Board meetings from 2003 to 2006, city officials raised concerns over many different aspects, ranging from traffic and noise to concerns about the water level of the area and the rocky terrain. In an effort to assuage these concerns, civil engineer Arthur Hanson explained stormwater plans at a special Planning Board meeting on February 3, 2005. Residents, however, continued to oppose the project. In a coordinated effort to oppose the mosque project, residents of Wayne formed the “Property Protection Group” (PPG). According to the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which served as legal counsel for the AAF, the PPG “[had]...attempted to prevent the Muslims from locating in Wayne, complaining about minarets, calls to prayer, and describing the Mosque as ‘a public nuisance’” (Becket). On March 14, 2005, the Planning Board adopted the aforementioned Open Space and Recreation Plan. This plan listed the undeveloped land in Wayne, but “did not prioritize properties for acquisition as required by the Open Space Ordinance” (AAF v. Wayne Complaint). In February of 2006, the township offered the mosque $510,000 in compensation for the property and suggested alternative locations for the project. The AAF refused to sell the property. This led to the township ending the AAF’s application process on March 8th and beginning the condemnation process shortly after. In July, the AAF sued the township for trying to seize the land under eminent domain. As mentioned previously, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty served as legal counsel to the AAF. In response to the suit and the condemnation process, a federal judge temporarily blocked Wayne from seizing the property. In late January of 2007, the Planning Board officially vetoed the mosque project with a 7-0 vote. On February 23, 2007, it was reported that the AAF would go before a federal court judge with the complaint against the township in April. The township filed a request for summary judgement and claimed that the eminent domain proceedings did not fall under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA). On July 24, the DOJ backed the AAF lawsuit and alleged that the property was taken in order to stop the AAF’s project. The DOJ also recommended that the court deny the township’s request for summary judgement. Part of the DOJ’s reasoning included the fact that the property, which was intended to be used for religious purposes, was seized by eminent domain. Thus, the DOJ stated that the AAF’s case did indeed have standing because of the intended religious use of the property. On October 1, 2007, a district court reflected the DOJ’s view when it ruled that RLUIPA can apply to the case and that the case could go to trial. There is no public record of the settlement between the AAF and Wayne, but in December of 2008, the Township approved the sale agreement for the land to be sold. On June 16, 2009, the AAF sold the property for just over $1,000,000. The AAF has since moved to a site located at 90 Riverdale Road in Riverdale, New Jersey. Last Updated Date revised. July 1, 2020 Year Year the case began. 2003 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Wayne, NJ Description An account of the resource A documented account of Case No. NJ_01, occurring in Wayne, NJ 07470 from 2003 to 2008 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Stewart Zelnick Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University DOJ Lawsuit (RLUIPA) https://usmc.oxomeka.org/files/original/81716a2f121477b733e7a3773296774e.jpg ac3af9148496773b79d4847086a88046 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Illinois Case Use this Item Type to create the case Item Pages for the U.S. Mosque Controversies site. Case Number Enter the case number in this field using the format: Case No. XX_00 (e.g. Case No. Ga_01) Case No. Il_02 Location The location of the interview Morton Grove, IL Date 2002 Summary Enter a brief description of the case (no more than 600 characters). This should be one or two sentences. The Village of Morton Grove denies a Muslim school a special use permit to add a mosque and increased classroom space on its 4.5-acre property. The denial follows intense opposition from community members voicing concerns over traffic, parking, and noise. However, expressions of anti-Muslim sentiment and an incident of vandalism also occur. A legal case following the denial involves complaints against the city and the school by a neighborhood opposition group as well as an RLUIPA lawsuit brought by the school against the village. The Department of Justice’s Community Relations Services mediates a settlement in the RLUIPA case. Address Enter the full address, if it is available. 8601 Menard Ave, Morton Grove, IL 60053 Plus Code Enter the plus code for the location, if it is available. 26QH+3H Morton Grove, Illinois Proposed Project mosque (new mosque construction; and expansion of existing facilities for school) Proposed By List the entity (legal entity or community name) that proposed the project. <a href="https://mccchicago.org/">Muslim Community Center</a> (Muslim Education Center) Type of Opposition Public Campaign, Vandalism, Legal Action, Local Ordinance administrative denial; public campaign; legal campaign; bias-related incident Outcome Rejected, Approved, Approved with Modifications approved (with restrictions; after private lawsuit and DOJ mediation) Narrative Enter the narrative about the case here. With two schools and two mosques, the Muslim Community Center (MCC) is one of the largest and oldest Muslim organizations in the Chicago metro area. In December 2019 it celebrated its 50th anniversary. The controversy over the expansion project for its Muslim Education Center (MEC), K-8 school, dates to November 2002 when MCC submitted a site plan to add a mosque and increased classroom space on its 4.5-acre property in the Village of Morton Grove. The proposal met with vocal resistance from neighbors who raised concerns over traffic, parking, and noise. However, expressions of anti-Muslim sentiment and an incident of vandalism also occurred. The village denied MCC’s petition after six months and hours of testimony before various commissions and boards. The legal dispute that followed involved complaints against the city and MCC by a neighborhood opposition group as well as MCC’s RLUIPA case against the village. The RLUIPA case was resolved in June 2003 when a settlement mediated by the Department of Justice’s Community Relations Services allowed MCC to receive a special use permit subject. Although the SUP was subject to more than 30 restrictions and despite ongoing public and legal campaigns, MCC held its first communal prayer in the new mosque in late August 2008. MCC’ submission of expansion plans in Morton Grove came after multiple months of debate on traffic and parking. Neighbors had complained before the villages Traffic and Safety Commission (TSC) about street parking during MCC events, particularly during communal Friday prayers and Ramadan gatherings. While initially MCC had used its gym to hold prayer services for students and staff, it later began opening its doors to members of the local Muslim community for congregational Friday prayers. Discussions before TSC were attended by about 150 residents who urged the village to curb street parking by visitors during MEC events. An agreement reached with neighbors included restrictions on street parking. MCC further promised to address off-street parking in an expansion plan it was in the process of submitting (“Muslim Center Parking Pact Nears Finish,” 2002, October 10). The site plan MCC submitted with its special use application in November 2002 included classroom additions to the existing school building as well as a mosque for around 600 worshippers. Initial design plans for the mosque also showed a 45-ft dome and a 60-ft minaret. Parking issues were addressed by raising the number of off-street parking spaces from 70 to 144. During discussions before the village’s Appearance Commission and the Traffic and Safety Commission opponents rehashed concerns about parking from previous months (“Panel Reviews Mosque Traffic,” 2002, December 12). A revised plan that raised off-street parking to 210 spaces was discussed first before the Plan Commission on February 19, 2003. Over the next three months the Plan Commission and the Village Board heard more than 13 hours of testimony. Ultimately, the Village Board voted in late April to follow the Plan Commission’s unanimous recommendation for denial (“Morton Grove Rejects Plan for Mosque,” May 1, 2003). Concerns over traffic, parking, and noise remained central in the public debate over MCC’s expansion project, but opponents’ campaigns were also colored by expressions of anti-Muslim sentiment and an incident of vandalism. “There’s a lot of underlying agendas and hidden agendas here,” Village Administrator Larry Arft had commented during the earlier parking controversy (“Village Denies Charge of MCC Area Parking,” 2002, November 14). One Patrick Kansoer emerged as a central figure in the neighborhood opposition. After the Village Board had denied MCC’s application in April 2003, Kansoer requested the village stop all general worship at the school alleging that MCC was violating village ordinances by operating a house of worship without a special use permit. Later the same year Kansoer and other residents formed the Morton Grove Organization (MGO) that filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court against the village for failing to enforce its zoning ordinance. The group later amended their lawsuit to include a charge of “conspiracy” against the village (“Resident Group Files Revised Suit,” 2004, February 19). In what could count as outright displays of anti-Muslim bigotry or, at best, grave insensitivity, MGO members staged several public events as their lawsuit made its way through the court system. In one such case, the group protested the discussion over a settlement agreement between the village and MCC by displaying pigs on MGO members’ lawns (Katz, 2004, June 17; also see Routliffe, 2003, September 25). In late September 2003, MCC filed a federal lawsuit in which it asked for $5 million in damages from the village. Among others, the lawsuit alleged that the village had violated RLUIPA’s equal terms and unreasonable limitations provisions (Falsani, 2003, October 1). The Department of Justice responded to the lawsuit by opening a formal investigation. At the same time, mediators from the DOJ’s Community Relations Service began facilitating face-to-face meetings between the village, MCC and neighbors (”Village, MCC Begin Talks,” 2004, January 1). Although MGO had left the mediation proceedings by April, the village and MCC announced in early June that they had reached a settlement. As a result of the settlement MCC brought a revised SUP application before the village. It included a reduced maximum occupancy of 525 worshipers and off-street parking for 244 vehicles. Over the next six months, the application made it through the village’s regular hearing process until, on November 22, 2004, the Village Board finally approved the Special Use Permit. The approval, however, came with more than 30 restrictions including a reduction in the height of both the dome and the minaret, a 10 p.m. curfew on non-religious use, and no high-school classes (Katz, 2004, December 30). A dispute over a right-of-way MCC sought for additional off-street parking was only temporarily resolved and resulted in further court proceedings later on (Katz, 2008, January 24). Part of the agreement over the special use permit required MCC to suspend all non-school related events at its site during construction. After renting space in public buildings for Friday services and Ramadan events for more than two years, MCC held the first congregational prayer service in its new mosque on August 31, 2008. References Enter list of sources cited using the proper format. <ul><li>Commission discusses Muslim center parking. (2002, September 12). Morton Grove Champion, p. 6. Available from NewsBank</li> <li>Editorial: A fair shake for MCC plan. (2002, November 21). Skokie Review, p. 16. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Falsani, Cathleen. (2003, October 1). Muslim group seeking mosque sues Morton Grove. Chicago Sun-Times, p. 30. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Katz, Nick. (2008, January 24). Judge rules for MCC in land lawsuit. Morton Grove Champion. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Katz, Nick. (2005, November 17). MCC breaks ground for mosque addition. Morton Grove Champion, p. 5. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Katz, Nick. (2005, March 17). Muslim Community Center drops lawsuit against village. Morton Grove Champion, p. 003. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Katz, Nick. (2004, December 30). MCC Mosque plan finally approved. Morton Grove Champion (IL), p. 005. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Katz, Nick. (2004, June 17). Trustees OK MCC pact. Morton Grove Champion, p. 3. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com. </li> <li>Katz, Nick. (2004, June 10). Neighborhood group to pursue lawsuit. Morton Grove Champion, p. 003. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>MCC neighbors plan lawsuit against village. (2003, June 26). Morton Grove Champion. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com. </li> <li>MCC submits plan for mosque addition. (2002, December 5). Morton Grove Champion, p. 8. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Mendieta, Ana. (2004, June 9). Village reaches deal on mosque - Muslim site in Morton Grove to host 500 worshippers. Chicago Sun-Times, p. 18. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Morton Grove rejects plan for mosque. (2003, May 1). Skokie Review (IL), p. 9. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Muslim center parking pact nears finish. (2002, October 10). Morton Grove Champion, p. 8. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Muslim center submits revised mosque plan. (2003, February 13). Skokie Review, p. 8. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Panel rejects mosque plan. (2003, April 10). Morton Grove Champion, p. 12. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Panel reviews mosque traffic. (2002, December 12). Skokie Review (IL), p. 9. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Resident group files revised suit. (2004, February 19). Morton Grove Champion, p. 3. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Routliffe, Kathy. (2003, September 25). Police, FBI investigate threat letter. Morton Grove Champion, p. 3. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Sweeney, Annie. (2002, December 24). Vandal shatters glass at suburban Muslim center. Chicago Sun-Times, p. 14. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Suit seeks to block prayers at center. (2003, September 11). Morton Grove Champion, p. 3. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Village, MCC begin talks. (2004, January 1). Morton Grove Champion, p. 3. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> <li>Village denies charge on MCC area parking. (2002, November 14). Morton Grove Champion, p. 6. Retrieved from https://infoweb-newsbank-com.</li> </ul> Last Updated Date revised. June 29, 2020 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Morton Grove, IL Description An account of the resource The Village of Morton Grove denies a Muslim school a special use permit to add a mosque and increased classroom space on its 4.5-acre property. The denial follows intense opposition from community members voicing concerns over traffic, parking, and noise. However, expressions of anti-Muslim sentiment and an incident of vandalism also occur. A legal case following the denial involves complaints against the city and the school by a neighborhood opposition group as well as an RLUIPA lawsuit brought by the school against the village. The Department of Justice’s Community Relations Services mediates a settlement in the RLUIPA case. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Stewart Zelnick Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Oxford College of Emory University Approved Built DOJ Public Campaign