Late one evening while preparing for a Cinco de Mayo celebration, leaders of Christ Episcopal Church in Toms River, New Jersey, learned that the mayor intended to invoke eminent domain to seize their historic church and its surrounding 11-acre property.
The mayor’s plan, supported by an engineer’s rendering, would replace the church with ten pickleball courts, a soccer field, and a nautical-themed playground. The Township Council was scheduled to hold its first vote on the proposal the following afternoon.
This development adds a complex layer to an ongoing dispute in the Jersey Shore community. An affordable housing nonprofit leasing space from the church had sought approval to establish a 17-bed homeless shelter on the same site the mayor now seeks to convert into a park. The proposal faced opposition from local residents and was pending zoning board approval.
Mayor Daniel T. Rodrick described the timing as coincidental; however, critics argue the park initiative is a veiled attempt to block the shelter’s creation.
The move to acquire or seize the land is expected to encounter legal resistance. Meanwhile, it has ignited a passionate debate on property rights, religious freedoms, and the community’s obligations toward its most vulnerable members, especially amid significant reductions in federal safety-net programs.
Rabbi William Gershon of Congregation B’nai Israel, a longstanding synagogue in Toms River, expressed outrage over the proposed seizure, emphasizing the potential precedent it sets for religious institutions and the broader community.
He noted that members of the town’s interfaith council stand united in opposing what they view as a politically motivated effort to target the church community.
Toms River, home to nearly 100,000 residents, is among New Jersey’s largest municipalities and is situated close to some of the state’s most sought-after Atlantic coast beaches. Rising property values have transformed many coastal motels—once affordable seasonal housing—into multimillion-dollar residences, exacerbating the shortage of affordable housing in the region.
Since the pandemic, homelessness in the area has reportedly doubled, leading to the emergence of tent encampments and prompting difficult discussions on how best to address the issue in a relatively affluent community.
A recent Township Council meeting to discuss the eminent domain proposal was marked by heated and emotional exchanges. Several speakers shared personal experiences with homelessness, addiction, and recovery.
Opponents of the proposal employed strong rhetoric, even referencing Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels to criticize the plan, underscoring the deep divisions among council members.
Tensions escalated as council members exchanged sharp verbal confrontations during the debate.
The initial vote to authorize the township to pursue acquisition of the church property passed narrowly, 4 to 3. A final decision is anticipated imminently.
Mayor Rodrick, a Republican, envisions the church land as a strategic location to increase public access to the river, after which the township is named. He prefers purchasing the property—estimated at $4 million—but is prepared to proceed with eminent domain if necessary. He also plans to acquire other waterfront parcels to develop recreational amenities like a tiki bar and jet ski rentals.
Describing the property, the mayor highlighted its potential for parking and recreational use.
The Episcopal Diocese of New Jersey, which owns the property, has firmly declared that the land is not for sale. The church’s rector has expressed readiness for a prolonged legal battle to defend the congregation and its assets against what they characterize as an unjust land grab.
Bishop Sally J. French, leader of the diocese, emphasized that Christ Episcopal is one of the most active churches in the diocese’s network of around 135 churches. Demolishing the church would jeopardize more than 20 vital community programs, including 12-step addiction recovery meetings and a weekly food pantry, all part of the church’s commitment to social justice.
The Affordable Housing Alliance, which leases office space on the church grounds, applied months ago for zoning approval to establish the 17-bed shelter. While the church supports this initiative, many neighbors in the closest residential area oppose it.
Edward F. Bezdecki, a local attorney and resident near the church, has voiced concerns regarding the shelter’s resident screening procedures and questions about where residents might be during daytime hours.
He questioned whether shelter residents might pose risks, asking pointedly about the nature of their backgrounds.
Bishop French countered that offering shelter is a means of alleviating community worries by providing opportunities for residents to gain employment and contribute positively despite their challenging circumstances.
Mayor Rodrick initiated the eminent domain process just weeks before the zoning board’s scheduled vote on the shelter proposal, with a decision expected soon.
He framed the plan to create a park on the church land as a matter of community priorities, contrasting the needs of many residents who lack park access with the church’s congregation size.
Rodrick noted that while about 65 to 70 people might attend Sunday services at the church, the broader community lacks recreational spaces.
He expressed that, as the mayor responsible for the welfare of all residents, his stance was clear on which interests to prioritize.
This controversy transcends typical party lines. Though New Jersey is predominantly Democratic, Toms River and Ocean County are conservative strongholds, with Republicans holding most local offices.
Nonetheless, three Republican council members voiced strong opposition to the mayor’s eminent domain resolution, criticizing it as callous and deliberately designed to circumvent the homeless shelter.
Rodrick, a former schoolteacher, acknowledged frequent political challenges from rivals over various local issues but remains confident in his leadership and public support.
Even some Republicans who question the suitability of the church property for a shelter warn that the eminent domain effort could drag the township into a protracted and expensive legal battle.
Former Mayor Maurice Hill, who lost to Rodrick in a primary, criticized the move as illogical and cautioned about the precedent it could set.
Legal experts note that religious institutions do not enjoy broad federal protections from eminent domain. While proving government vindictiveness could provide a defense, such cases are difficult to win.
Some scholars suggest that constitutional claims focusing on religious liberty may offer stronger legal grounds than land-use challenges, and New Jersey’s courts might provide additional protections, though outcomes remain uncertain.
Opponents appear to recognize that public opinion could be the church’s most effective battleground ahead of any courtroom proceedings.
Recently, advocates for affordable housing and a formerly homeless individual who hosts a Jersey Shore interview series organized a rally that attracted dozens of protesters.
Polly Moore, the church’s choir director, shared that parishioners are preparing to attend the upcoming Township Council meeting wearing church T-shirts in a show of solidarity.
Ms. Moore, a lifelong member, expressed dismay at the mayor’s attempt to seize such a vibrant and active church.
Mayor Rodrick remains confident that his plan enjoys majority community support, citing an informal poll he conducted showing 66 percent approval.
When questioned about the poll’s methodology, he admitted to conducting it personally, emphasizing his conviction that his success stems from doing what he believes is right and understanding the community’s needs.
0 Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!