The Wisconsin Court of Appeals for District IV recently overturned a dismissal of an action by the County of Jackson against Joni L. Borntreger for failure to obtain a zoning permit before building a sawmill on his property. In County of Jackson v. Joni L. Borntreger, the court ruled that the defendant, an Amish man, had not properly claimed a sincerely held religious belief that that would be burdened by the requirement to obtain a zoning permit before building a sawmill on his property.
In 2010, Borntreger was cited by Jackson County, Wisconsin for building a sawmill on his property without having first obtained the required zoning permit. The sawmill met all the required zoning criteria except the requirement to actually obtain the permit. At a bench trial on the issue, Borntreger said that his forefathers had never had to obtain such permits, and thus he did not believe he should be required to obtain the permit either. Another person present for the proceeding stated that it was “related to their religion” for Amish to not follow new changes in society. Still another speaker at the trial read a passage from the Bible telling believers to not conform to the world. The judge concluded that Borntreger had presented a valid religious objection to the zoning requirement, and thus the case was dismissed.
On appeal, the court noted that it is improper for a court to question the legitimacy or sincerity of religious beliefs. However, the court concluded that Borntreger “failed to provide the circuit court with sufficient evidence to support a finding that the zoning ordinance burdened any sincerely held religious belief.” More specifically, the court said that Borntreger had never given the court any specific religious tenant or law that prohibited him from complying with Jackson County’s zoning permit process. The court gave the example of the Islamic prohibition against eating pork as a clear example of a valid, specific religious tenant that contrasted with Borntreger’s inability to articulate why his religion prevented him from obtaining the zoning permit. The court concluded that the dismissal should be overturned and the case remanded for further proceedings.
The takeaway from this case is that while courts typically will not (and should not) question the logic or sincerity of religious beliefs, such beliefs do need to be clearly articulated and tied to the particular zoning restriction being questioned in a religious land use case. A broad and ambiguous statement of religious belief usually will not be adequate. The attorneys at Dalton & Tomich, PLC have extensive experience in religious land use cases across the nation. If you feel your rights in this regard are being violated, please do not hesitate to contact us.
