Skip to main content

First The Verdict, Then The Trial


Suffering from a troublesome case of anti-Semitic indigestion, “pete” from West Hartford belched in the Hartford Courant commentary section attached to a story called “A Tangle Of Tensions, “go back to isreal (sic) and steal some more land, dirtbag (sic) troublemakers.”

The comment is a dramatic overstatement of some of the tensions underlying a decision of Litchfield’s Historic Commission to deny a Jewish orthodox religious group, Chabad Lubavich, permission to convert a “home” into a Jewish temple. 

The historic “home” on Litchfield’s pristine town green was gutted 40 years earlier and turned into a business, seriously compromising the “home’s” historical character. Like the poor, anti-Semitism will always be with us. But in this particular case, a just decision between the competing claims of Chabad Lubavich and Litchfield’s Historic Commission very likely will be settled in court. 

The dispute, in any case, appears to be tending in that direction since the Historic Commission refused Chabad Lubavich’s petition on December 20th. The court, one may be sure, will render its decision based on the facts of the case, which have very little to do with the anti-Semitic hostilities of “pete” from West Hartford. 

The Historic Commission objected to the clock tower that Chabad Lubavich wishes to add to the former “home” but would allow a finial bearing a Jewish star. Previously the commission objected to the addition of a Jewish star, but some observant commentators pointed out to the commission that there were no fewer than two Jewish stars blighting a nearby Methodist church on what is referred to in the town as “Church Row.” 

The commission in a seven page declaration argued that the additions proposed were too large. While denying the application, the commission said it would welcome a new application only if Chabad Lubavich’s plans did not exceed 6,000 square feet. 

There are, however, a number of buildings in the historic district that do not comply with the standard imposed by the commission on Chabad Lubavich. The proposed renovation of Town Hall, presently 7,884 square feet, would be expanded to 20,000-square-feet under current plans. The Town Hall is located directly across the street from the proposed Jewish temple. 

The Jewish temple would share a neighborhood with Episcopalian, Methodist and Roman Catholic congregations, each of which occupy structures much larger than the space Chabad-Lubavitch needs to services its needs. 

"We deliberately picked this site two years ago,” said Rabbi Joseph Eisenbach told the commission, “because we wanted to be at the center of religious worship in Litchfield and contribute to the life of the town."

All the Chabad wants is to be treated like other religions, to be on church row and have a structure of equal size to those churches," Merriam said. "But the commission has denied us that right tonight, and there are many remedies under the law with which to proceed."

Chabad Lubavich’s lawyer, Peter Herbst, asked the Historic Commission, “ "I have to ask why, when the Historic District Commission is dealing with a constitutionally protected use such as the Chabad, rather than a nursing home … or town hall, which is not afforded similar protection under the Constitution, why would a different and more-difficult-to-meet standard be applied?"

That is a question the Historic Commission will not be able to dodge in a court proceeding. Lawyers for Chabad Lubavich may be expected to argue in future court proceedings that the restrictions imposed by the Historic Commission place an undue burden on the religious organization’s First Amendment Rights. The protections afforded religious organizations under the U.S. Constitution are not all that ambiguous. The court cannot allow zoning regulations, rules promulgated by government agencies and dubious Historic Commission decisions to trump constitutional safeguards that courts themselves are sworn to protect and uphold.

Comments

Don Pesci said…
The petition was approved in 2013 -- https://www.nhregister.com/connecticut/article/Borough-of-Litchfield-Historic-District-11419126.php

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Taking The Fifth, After Esty

Whether or not U.S. Representative Elizabeth Esty will serve the remainder of her term or resign immediately is very much an open question. But, in any case, the battle for Connecticut’s 5 th U.S. Congressional District has begun with a show of unexpected fireworks. For many years, the 5 th District was a toss-up proposition; both Republicans and Democrats have held and surrendered the seat. Geographically the 5 th District touches the border of New York from Connecticut’s northern-most point to Danbury in the southern quadrant and includes much of Litchfield county and parts of Fairfield, Hartford and New Haven counties. Party affiliation is competitive, in round figures, 30 percent Democrat, 25 percent Republican and 45 percent unaffiliated. Over the years, the Democrat Party in Connecticut has moved from the center to the left, but the 5 th District has been a moderate preserve. During the Obama presidential election, Republican moderates within Connecticut's U.S. ...

PCBs, GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH

By Gerald and Natalie Sirkin c2007 A front-page story on PCBs in the March 9 News-Times is just wrong. The first thing to know about PCBs is that they never killed a single person nor did they ever cause cancer. The second is that although they are invariably called “cancer-causing,” that designation comes chiefly from a single rat study. The third thing is that the subject rats were exposed daily for 21 months to 100 parts per million (ppm) of PCBs containing 60% chlorine. (The 100 ppm was about 5,000 times the tolerable daily intake of PCBs set by FDA in 1973.) When rats were exposed to PCBs containing less chlorine, they developed no cancers. The fourth, that when the exposed rats were allowed to live out their lives, they had fewer cancers and lived longer than the unexposed rats. PCBs is a family of chemicals known as polychlorinated biphenyls. PCBs contain chlorine ranging from 12% to 70%. They were used in two General Electric plants that manufactured electrical equipmen...