'Do You Hate God?' Divided Toms River Council Takes 1st Step In Eminent Domain Vs. Church

TOMS RIVER, NJ — Toms River took the first step in a proposal to take over the Christ Episcopal Church property on Wednesday, with a divided council approving the introduction of an ordinance to take the site by eminent domain.

The proposal drew a large crowd to the council meeting room at Town Hall, with the church's supporters standing initially silently as acting township clerk Stephen Hensel read the ordinance title for the introduction vote.

The silence didn't last but a minute, however, as Councilman Tom Nivison moved to table the ordinance, setting off a raucous argument.

"Do you hate God? Do you hate Christians?" Nivison said to the other members of the council as Councilmen Jim Quinlisk and David Ciccozzi joined him in seeking to table the ordinance.

They were rebuffed, as Councilman William Byrne, Councilwoman Lynn O'Toole, Council Vice President Craig Coleman and Council President Justin Lamb voted against tabling it, then those four voted to approve the introduction of the ordinance. Nivison, Quinlisk and Ciccozzi voted against the introduction.

The ordinance is anticipated to be up for a second reading and final vote at the May 28 council meeting.

Christ Episcopal Church has an application before the Toms River Board of Adjustment seeking permission to operate a homeless shelter on the church's property; that use is not permitted in the zone where the church sits. The application has seen significant pushback from residents in the area near the church, who have expressed safety concerns. A final hearing with public comment and the zoning board's vote on the application is anticipated on May 22.

Mayor Daniel Rodrick on Tuesday evening said he wants to see the church property turned into a recreation area with a large-scale playground and facilities for adults, such as a pickleball court. He did not address the shelter application because that matter is ongoing.

Officials with the church and with the Episcopal Diocese of New Jersey said they will fight any attempts by the town to take the property.

Michael York, the attorney representing Christ Church, called the eminent domain action "clear and obvious bad faith" and said the church will be taking legal action.

"The Mayor of Toms River and the Ocean County Commissioners have been in the public spotlight discussing this application, at length," York wrote in a letter Wednesday to assistant township attorney Peter Pascarella, which was shared with Patch.

"They have also offered various commentary regarding their opinions as to the situation involving Ocean County’s ongoing homeless situation. "

"... it is clear and obvious that the Mayor is not in favor of the application and continues to voice his opinion. It would appear that he is now taking the position that he can either purchase the property (although same is not for sale) from the Diocese or use Eminent Domain to prevent the application," York wrote. "... This attempt to use eminent domain as an excuse to obtain property is not disguised in this instance. Adding a property as a last minute Council agenda item is clear and obvious bad faith."

"Local parishes such as Christ Church Toms River typically hold title to the land on which their church buildings and rectories are located," said Paul Ambos, who is the chancellor — the chief legal officer — of the Episcopal Diocese of New Jersey, which oversees the Episcopal churches in the southern two-thirds of New Jersey, including Toms River.

"Under the laws governing The Episcopal Church, however, all such real and personal property is held in trust for the benefit of the Diocese and for The Episcopal Church itself," Ambos said. "Accordingly, it is the intention of the Diocese to support Christ Church in maintaining control of its property."

Quinlisk, in voting against the introduction, said the eminent domain attempt also might put the town at risk of a lawsuit under the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. That statute prohibits local governments from enacting zoning and land use regulations that unreasonably limit religious exercise, treat religious assemblies or institutions on less than equal terms with nonreligious assemblies or institutions, and substantially burden religious exercise.

Toms River has been under investigation in the past by the federal Justice Department under RLUIPA for its 10-acre zoning for houses of worship in certain zones, and paid a settlement of $122,500 to the Chabad Jewish Center of Toms River in 2020 as a result of one probe. In a separate case, the township agreed to return the zoning to the 2-acre parcels that had been in place for more than 40 years in 2021 in a settlement with the Justice Department — a settlement Rodrick vocally opposed.

While Rodrick tried to dismiss the crowd in the audience as being from outside the township, those who spoke during public comment were current residents of Toms River with the exception of one woman who only recently moved to Manchester said she is a member of Christ Church.

Those who addressed the church issue were critical of the eminent domain attempt.

Scott Susich of Buermann Avenue echoed Quinlisk's concerns about a potential RLUIPA violation, calling the eminent domain measure "political retribution."

"New Jersey is already the poster child for the Religious Land Use Act," Susich said. "Those laws don't exist simply to serve the Jewish community. You're taking on the Christian community and there's going to be a problem when you start spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend yourselves from this utter ridiculous nonsense."

"We are talking about taking an active church, not a defunct church, not a dilapidated church, not something that is in in dire need of improvement but an active, thriving, serving church that is serving the constituents of this town," he said. "When you decide to take political retribution that's really not going to go well for you. ... When you decide that you're going to take political retribution against a house of worship that's just absolutely a new low."

"We've already made enough national headlines in the past two weeks but let's take it a step further," said Kenneth Gaughran of Fellowship Court, a lifelong Toms River resident. He noted that U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi has set up a task force to prosecute anti-Christian bias. "I don't know about you but this (the eminent domain attempt) sounds a lot like anti-Christian bias to me."

Miko Huggins, who lives on Teakwood Road, said the church has been a lifeline for her as she battled her way out of addiction with the help of 12-step program meetings at the church.

"Twelve of my meetings would be displaced if 415 Washington Street (the church's property) was taken," said Huggins, who is the public relations director of Wilson Investment Group in Pine Beach. "People that are in recovery are thriving today because of these fellowships because of that church and it can't be taken from us all just because there's something that you don't want there that doesn't fit into your township."

"You want to tear down the only church that helps us get resources, food, social services, so we can try and get housing," said Mark, who said he has been homeless for two years because he was forced to leave a shared home in Toms River. "I don't see you out there saying, Hey you guys okay do you need a bottle of water do you need some help? No, I just see these people who do the laundry for us, those are the people helping us."

Mark said he has battled addiction but has stayed clean for two years, but said it is stressful as he searches for solutions for himself and for a 78-year-old woman who also is homeless.

"You cannot demonize a church when they're doing the work of the Lord," Angie Felton of Woodbine Lane said. "That is what we are supposed to do is help people, not put a label on them just because they're in bad times. ... I don't know whether you believe in Christ or you believe in God but when you start messing with His children you are asking for trouble."