Couple Threatened With $500-Per-Meeting Fines For Home Bible Study

[The Straight Story]

OC Couple Threatened With $500-Per-Meeting Fines For Home Bible Study

MISSION VIEJO (CBS) — An Orange County couple has been ordered to stop holding a Bible study in their home on the grounds that the meeting violates a city ordinance as a “church” and not as a private gathering.

Homeowners Chuck and Stephanie Fromm, of San Juan Capistrano, were fined $300 earlier this month for holding what city officials called “a regular gathering of more than three people”.

That type of meeting would require a conditional use permit as defined by the city, according to Pacific Justice Institute (PJI), the couple’s legal representation.

The Fromms also reportedly face subsequent fines of $500 per meeting for any further “religious gatherings” in their home, according to PJI.

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2011/09/20/oc-couple-threatened-with-500-per-meeting-fines-for-home-bible-study/

[CanonRay]

1. Isn't Freedom of Assembly

in the 1st Amendment? I'm no Bible Thumper, but it seems the city is a bit off base with this.

[trotsky]

14. As usual, there's a bit more to the story.

“The Fromm case further involves regular meetings on Sunday mornings and Thursday afternoons with up to 50 people, with impacts on the residential neighborhood on street access and parking,” City Attorney Omar Sandoval said.

None of us live in a vacuum. We have neighbors and ordinances and a lot of rules to make sure the neighborhood works for everyone - not just the people who want to have huge gatherings and tie up parking and perhaps even make the roads impassable to emergency equipment.

[KurtNYC]

31. perhaps the city should go after them on the parking issue

It should not be for the city to decide that spirituality MUST happen only in a church. There are faiths that require home meetings.

If someone parks illegally then tow the car (?) It seems obvious. Kind of troubling that the city is instead choosing to define how religion should be practiced.

[trotsky]

50. They probably used whatever ordinance was handy.

But we can all assume that the city council hates Christians who are just peaceably gathering to pray and study the bible. That's cool too.

[Bandit]

69. Do you believe in zoning ordinances?

The government issues permits for gatherings, parades, business', etc... Why should these people be immune? I meant to reply to the post below yours and not you, sorry...

[LiberalFighter]

83. That would imo be the best approach.

Fine and tow their damn vehicles.

[MrCoffee]

65. That's BS...if they're parking illegally, ticket/tow them. If not, the city can cram it.

[Javaman]

84. So you would be okay with that right next to your home?

I wouldn't.

[hedgehog]

2. What would the city do if a couple had a regular week-end

barbecue involving 50 people? I'm not talking a wild party, just a regular non-religious gathering of 50 people? What if they got together to work on a quilt?

[The Straight Story]

4. They are protecting people, if 3 or more meet, and one smokes, it could harm them

And since, just like bars, people have to go to such places the town is trying to save lives :evilgrin:

[Chan790]

You know, TSS,

I think that's a valid concern...I now support banning tobacco...all for you and the public welfare. Thank you.

[slackmaster]

6. I suspect that would violate the same ordinance.

The city wouldn't do anything about it unless someone filed a code compliance complaint.

[Ineeda]

11. Self delete

after reading more.

[TheMadMonk]

79. Hopefully the same thing? That much traffic is a pain in the arse...

...whyever it's there.

[SheilaT]

90. If it's happening twice a week,

as with the couple holding the Bible study, then it becomes a problem. Thirty or more cars parked in the neighborhood will take up a LOT of curb space.

[HelenWheels]

3. Sounds like Orange County

Now if the Real Housewives of OC want to hold any thing that's OK. Maybe they should hold the Bible studies.

[slackmaster]

5. Misleading headline is misleading

They were fined for a land-use violation, not for holding Bible study sessions.

Their Sunday morning home worship services have grown to as many as 50 attendees. That sounds like a church to me. Not really the issue, but they are in fact operating a FOR PROFIT business - Google Chuck Fromm and see what he does for a living. His business is NOT a non-profit organization. It's a business, selling religious materials and an online magazine. They're playing the Religious Persecution Card because that draws automatic sympathy from knee-jerk religion supporters, and the press is more than happy to promulgate that idea.

It's funny how "Love thy neighbor as thyself" is the first of Jesus' teachings to go out the window when there is money involved. They all need to get a room, and show their love for God and Jesus there.

[Fumesucker]

9. I kind of figured there was more to it than met the eye..

Love thy neighbor..

Until his wife gets home..

[Dogtown]

12. Good clarification, Slack.

Thanks for your research.

[slackmaster]

18. When I was a kid, there was a pseudo-Indian guru dude across the street who had sessions...

...about once a month, usually a weekday evening, at his home. My parents and I were amused by the number (about 12-15) and quality of automobiles that showed up. There were Jaguars, Mercedes, Porsches, even a couple of Bentleys there to take in the wisdom of "the Brahamadanda" (whose real name was Bernard Siegal if memory serves.)

My dad called the meetings "fleecings" of the guy's flock.

There was never enough traffic from those sessions to be much of a nuisance, but if it had been 50 people every Sunday morning I'm sure my parents would have been annoyed.

[The Straight Story]

15. I think you missed this part (or the point)

"city officials called “a regular gathering of more than three people”."

Does that mean, as the CITY is saying, that meeting with more than 3 people on a regular basis is wrong and you can be fined for it?

[slackmaster]

26. Yes, that is exactly what the ordinance says. Code compliance in SJC is reactive only...

...meaning that the city won't act unless someone files a written complaint.

As long as they aren't discriminatory as to what kind of group the gatherings consist of, and they enforce the code consistently, I don't see a problem with the city's action.

The Fromms are being inconsiderate of their neighbors IMO. With that many attendees, they can afford to rent a hall somewhere nearby.

[Chan790]

30. That is what it means...but it's generally-unenforced boilerplate.

Many jurisdictions have the same sort of laws, it's intentionally low to thwart those who would skirt the law by head-counting. As long as you're not being disruptive...and not a little disruptive, a lot disruptive, you'll never end up on the receiving end of the fine.

Why? How low do you think they should set the headcount?

[backscatter712]

66. Indeed. If we're talking about 50+ people groups, the couple does have options.

If they're on good terms with any of the churches around, they could get meeting space from them.

or they could do it at the public library or other town facilities that have meeting space they make available to the public.

Or they could rent space from somewhere.

[and-justice-for-all]

76. Makes sense, thanks for clearing that up..nt

[hobbit709]

7. If they want to have bible studies in the privacy of their own home

then the city should just STFU. As far as I can see the city has no case on 1st Amendment grounds. More than three people on a regular basis-what about someone's weekly poker game or similar. Hell, I remember having all night Scrabble games with 3 or more people at least a couple of times a week.
Some officious bureaucratic asshat got his nose out of joint-probably because he wasn't invited.

[slackmaster]

10. So, you'd be OK with 50 people showing up in cars in your neighborhood every Sunday morning

How about 100?

What if the group grew to 500?

[hobbit709]

13. I see that around here every weekend.

It ain't for "bible studies" but usually yard sales.

it doesn't bother me as long as I can get out of my driveway.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Union Scribe]

33. Posting people's addresses isn't cool, for one thing.

And why do I get the feeling that you're the guy who calls the cops on the garage sale because they don't have their permit displayed?

[slackmaster]

36. It's public record data. Anyone can look it up online for free, and I don't believe...

...that I have violated any of the forum rules.

[Union Scribe]

39. You looked up and posted a private party's address

That makes you skeezy, at the very least. If I had your name I could look up your address, does that mean you'd be cool with it being posted?

[slackmaster]

40. If you posted MY address you would be in violation of the forum rules

HTH

[Union Scribe]

43. How is this different? Only DU members should have privacy rights?

[slackmaster]

44. Read the forum rules.

HTH

BTW, not only is the Fromms' address in public record data, they're listed in published white page directories.

http://www.whitepages.com/name/Charles-E-Fromm/San-Juan-Capistrano-CA/3hrwkpb?site_id=15277

[Union Scribe]

49. Again, this isn't about rules. It's about you violating someone's privacy.

And of course you got it from a directory. So what?

Whatever. I have an actual life going on, so I'll leave it to you to keep your binoculars on everyone in the neighborhood and make sure they're obeying all the ordinances.

[slackmaster]

56. Please quit whining and hit the Alert button if you think I've done anything wrong

TIA

I have an actual life going on, so I'll leave it to you to keep your binoculars on everyone in the neighborhood and make sure they're obeying all the ordinances.

It's unfortunate that you are unable to discuss this without making it into some kind of personal attack on me.

[Union Scribe]

51. Oh, and apparently the mods disagree with you. nt

[slackmaster]

57. So be it.

:hi:

[trotsky]

24. "it doesn't bother me as long as I can get out of my driveway"

That's rather key, don't you think? What about cars clogging both sides of the street and making them impassable to emergency equipment like fire trucks?

Maybe it would be good to get all the information here before decrying the persecution of Christians.

[hobbit709]

32. Personally, most self-described "Christians" should be persecuted.

The real Christians I've met didn't go around telling everyone how good of a Christian they were. Never had a problem with them. It's the "hypocrites who loudly proclaim their faith" I have problems with.

[Union Scribe]

35. ...and we arrive at the root of the issue.

Thanks for having the balls to just say it. If this was anything but a Bible study, this thread would have four posts and all of them would be on the couple's side.

[slackmaster]

38. The Fromms are getting all kinds of support from two quite different classes of people...

"Religious expression is a Constitutional right" Christians and "They should be allowed to do whatever they want on their own property" Libertarians.

I was taught that Christians are obligated to obey the law of the land, as long as it doesn't conflict with scripture. Libertarians who I regard as reasonable place some value on not interfering with other peoples' lives.

And there's that whole "Love they neighbor..." thing that Jesus taught.

[Union Scribe]

41. Their opposition is only coming from one, though.

And, you don't have to be a Christian to know the text of the first amendment. I wonder how this would play out if a zoning issue affected the second, instead? If your "all codes must be obeyed" bit would be the same?

[slackmaster]

42. If they were holding weekly gun sales every Sunday morning and 50 people showed up every week...

...I'm sure that would be a violation of the same ordinance.

[Union Scribe]

46. Just remember that from now on.

When they talk about local laws infringing on people's rights in the gungeon, I expect you to be there supporting the codes as written. Wouldn't want you being a 'libertarian' now.

[slackmaster]

52. I do now and have always supported complying with laws

You would know that, if you have ever read anything I've written about it.

[Chan790]

61. Nah, I'd still support fining them.

I'm the guy who brought a motion in my highrise's HOA to buy-out one of the first-floor vacant condos nearest the main door and convert it to a rentable gatherings room at $50/hour...and in the same motion, increase the penalties for "gatherings" violations...now the fine's $100/hour and repeated violators can be forced to sell/vacate. The HOA agreement says "no parties or gatherings in units" of more than 10 people and no regular-weekly gatherings at-all. We enforce. :)

[MicaelS]

70. People like you are why I would never own property

Where an HOA was involved. The term "jackbooted little fascists" is what I think of all HOAs. :puke:

And I'd never live in a highrise either, because undoubtedly I would have neighbors like you and yours.

[Chan790]

71. and you're the sort of neighbor we don't want. n/t

[MicaelS]

73. Great then we both win..

Because I would never darken your door in the first place.

[blueamy66]

67. We have renters a few houses down that run a gym out of their garage.

They put cones in the street to mark distance for sprints. They bring their kids and let them run wild. I have no problem with the kids playing, but when they purposefully block your way in the street....that becomes an issue.

Most of my neighbors think that they are running a pitbull puppy mill outta their backyard. Nothing like a dirt backyard and dogs in kennels in 115 degree heat.

The HOA is involved, as is the city. The # of cars parked up and down the street has decreased significantly, thanks to people getting involved.

There are reasons for laws in this country.

[The Straight Story]

17. Happens with yard sales here most weekends in the summer (nt)

[slackmaster]

28. If it doesn't violate zoning and it doesn't bother you, then it's not a problem for anyone

Unlike the situation in San Juan Capistrano.

[Gormy Cuss]

48. In a city near me, more than four yard sales at the same address in a year constitutes a business

and a business permit is required.

[slackmaster]

54. It's that way in a lot of places. However, enforcement of that kind of code is often spotty,

especially in larger cities.

SJC's code compliance policy seems reasonable to me. They don't go around looking for violations like the one described here.

[Gormy Cuss]

63. Compliance is usually based on complaints, like many quality of life ordinances.

If the neighbors don't care, neither does the city or county. It seems that's true here in the SJC instance too.

[slackmaster]

64. Yes. I suspect neighbors have tolerated the Fromms' activities for many years.

Their following just grew large enough that it became an annoyance for someone.

[HappyMe]

25. There is a church 1 block away from our apartment.

So, every Sunday morning, there are about 60-75 cars parked during the service. It doesn't bother me or anybody else in the neighborhood.

On Saturday there were about 100 cars parked all around. They were attending a backyard wedding reception.

:shrug:

[slackmaster]

29. I presume you knew about the church when you rented the apartment

The Fromms' neighbors bought their homes with an expectation (a legal one) that nobody in the neighborhood would run recurring meetings of dozens of people every Sunday morning.

If the Fromms want to run a church, they can buy or lease land in an area that is zoned (and physically designed to handle) that kind of activity.

[HappyMe]

45. The Fromm's neighbors just sound

like they have an ax to grind. What you do in the privacy of your home is nobody's business.

As far as them running a business out of their home, so what? Mary Kay, Avon, Tupperware, Pampered Chef, there are candle and home accessories and on & on.

[slackmaster]

47. If someone on my street started having 50 people show up every Sunday morning in cars...

...I think I'd have an axe to grind too.

What you do in the privacy of your home is nobody's business.

Yes, until your activity starts to affect other peoples' business. If you build a second story, you may block someone else's view.

Can you imagine having your house on the market, and trying to show it to a prospective buyer when there are 25 cars parked in the immediate area on a Sunday morning?

[_ed_]

62. "What you do in the privacy of your home is nobody's business."

Really?

Can I run a weapons-grade plutonium plant in my house?

Can I murder hundreds of people in my house?

Hell, can you start any business in your house without a license?

Can I erect a hundred foot tower in my lawn?

Have you ever heard of zoning?

[pennylane100]

82. The activities inside the home are not the issue.

It is also not about running a business out of their home. There were approximately 50 people showing up to their house TWICE A WEEK.
What about the rights of the neighbors. That is nothing like someone holding a Tupperware party or a garage sale a few times a year.

The neighbors have every right to complain. Their neighborhood has been turned into parking lot twice a week and you think they have an axe to grind. Well I think they have a legitimate complaint. Religious freedom does not mean you are allowed to do what you want, when you want, without consideration of the people that live near you.

[_ed_]

53. This is zoning

Would you want your neighbor to erect a tent every weekend and have a circus next door? The fact that they get together for some religion is irrelevant.

[slackmaster]

60. The religion argument would hold that an unpermitted 12-unit apartment would be OK

As long as you call it a monastery.

[rfranklin]

68. If you had poker games with 50 people there would probably be complaints...

and if you read the previous posts, the city only acts when there are complaints.

[Boojatta]

8. The authorities favor idolizing an unread book. Actually studying it is discouraged.

[Lance_Boyle]

16. Oh! Those poor, oppressed christains!

Everyone knows that established zoning and land use statutes should *never* be applied to people doing gawds' work!

[The Straight Story]

19. Again - city officials talk about "regular meeting with more than *3* people"

This is not about the bible study folks (could be worse, could be those jews! See how that sounds?) it is about that statement.

But hey, if you are ok with no more than 3 just let us know.

[slackmaster]

34. Dr. Boyle's opinion isn't the issue here

Someone living near the Fromms presumably became annoyed with the recurring traffic, and invoked their right to file a code compliance complaint with the city.

[Union Scribe]

20. Lol.

Funny how posters here get all authoritarian when people they don't like are affected. Be sure to remember this law-and-order routine for the next "pot must be legalized" thread okay?

[LanternWaste]

88. Precisely. Owners of the Cherry Pit in Dallas felt pretty oppressed too

Precisely. Owners of the Cherry Pit in Dallas felt pretty oppressed too over zoning and commercial laws some years back.

[HereSince1628]

21. Cars parked along suburban streets!

People may have a constitutional right to free-assembly. Their cars not so much.

[Thor_MN]

22. Sounds like a simple case of one neighbor not happy with streets clogged every week

The reason they are getting together isn't relevent, other than it makes for a attention grabbing headline,

If my neighbor had 50 people over every week, I would not be happy, either. I don't know that I'd complain to the LEOs, but I would definately be frustrated with all the cars parked in front of my house. On a weekly basis, if you can't fit your guest's cars in the space in your driveway and in front of your own house, you have too many people over. Special occaisions, graduation parties, weddings, funerals, etc. no big deal. Every week is something else.

Just from a firecode basis 50 people in one house probably doesn't fly.

[Union Scribe]

27. Does the story say how many cars there are?

I'm thinking there aren't fifty of them. And could you post or link to the fire code you're talking about, I'd like to read it.

[Thor_MN]

91. One couldn't fit 50 cars on my block.

At an average of 2 people a car that's still 25 cars which would pretty much take up both sides of my street for the entire block. Do that every week and I'm sure that someone on my block would complain.

As for firecode, I qualified it as "Probably" as I have no idea what the square footage of the residence is. The article did not say, but most residental dwellings are not designed for regular gatherings of 50 people. In any case, the people in the OP were violaing local regulations, and it has nothing to do with why they were gathering. Most communitie have regulations that sre only enforced when blatently violated, this looks to be the case here.

[HereSince1628]

59. Suburbanites have a territorial sensitivity to the curb parking in front of their home

Dealing with that is undeniably part of American suburban living not included anywhere in Biblical scripture.

[petronius]

81. Isn't that the truth. LOL!

I have suburban family who will explicitly ask me to park as broadly as possible when I visit, so the neighbors can't ooze into their turf. On the other hand, my city-dwelling family members will curl a lip at the sight of even a foot of curb-parking left to waste... :)

[Gormy Cuss]

37. Apparently they have quite a few people attending these "bible studies" and that's why

the city invoked the conditional use permit requirement.

City spokeswoman Cathy Salcedo declined to be interviewed by The Times. But in a brief email, she was emphatic the city does not prohibit home Bible studies.
Instead, the Fromms' case, she wrote, is about when a residential area has been transformed into a place where people regularly assemble.

"The Fromm case further involves regular meetings on Sunday mornings and Thursday afternoons with up to 50 persons, with impacts on the residential neighborhood on street access and parking," she wrote.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/09/san-juan-capistrano-family-fined-for-holding-bible-study-in-home.html


There's a movement towards "home churching" where people gather in a residence to discuss and interpret the Bible without a trained theologian. I suspect that a house near me is one such home church because of the number of cars parked around it on Sunday mornings -- and only Sunday mornings. I've noticed that in the past year they've been more scrupulous about shoehorning the cars onto their property or the adjacent side street, probably because there were too many complaints about the parking on the main road with its narrow shoulders and blind curve. The county with jurisdiction for the house is pretty laid back and probably doesn't have a similar ordinance but the roads are under CHP authority and cars parking on the main road were a traffic hazard.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

55. as a rabid fundy christian type

i agree with the finding of the city officials. a few people getting together every week or couple of weeks a bible study makes. you get 50 people hanging around and clogging up the roads and parking all over creation (and other peoples' yards) you have something different. if they want this many people on a frequent basis they need to hire out a hall or hold it in a church with facilities to deal with this kind of crowd.

sP

[NeedleCast]

58. So, what's the issue? They're violating a City Ordinance and Someone Complained About It

I don't see any issues with them being fined. Has nothing to do with the nature of what they're doing. If my next door neighbor had a yard sale once or twice a year, no biggie for me. If my next door neighbor ran a weekly yard sale re-selling other people's stuff and creating unsafe traffic situations on my street, I'd complain about it.

Sounds like another charlatan selling snake oil. His neighbor(s) appear to be tired of it, and called on the city to enforce the ordinance.

[eShirl]

72. "“a regular gathering of more than three people”" CRAP, there goes D&D Night.

[slackmaster]

74. It won't be a problem if people park a couple of blocks away and sneak in

Or become invisible.

[BiggJawn]

75. If I had to deal with 50 people and their cars in my neighbourhood...

...every week, I'd be more than a little miffed, I don't care if they're having "church", selling AMWAY, playing naked Twister, spouse swapping, trading guns, whatever.

Bet there's plenty of vacant storefronts in strip malls in OC that the Fromms could rent.

But they probably get their rocks off over "suffering" for their faith so much, oh poor them, being persecuted by the gawdless forces of Caesar...

[Coyote_Bandit]

77. As long as

(1) what these people are doing in their home is legal and as long as (2) their home can safely accomodate their guests and as long as (3) those cars a legally parked - and parked for only a couple of hours not for a full day or overnight I've got no problem with this.

I do think an ordinance that limits one's house guests to 3 is just stupid. That effectively prohibits hosting both maternal and paternal grandparents at the same holiday dinner.

I have a next door neighbor that hosts regular bridge parties in her home. There are never less than 20 people there - and usually there are about 40 people. They set up tables in the kitchen, the dining room, the den, the living room - and sometimes the outdoor covered patio, and even the garage. They are a bunch of litle old ladies and they usually don't play longer than two or three hours. While they are not legally rquired to do so they usually all park neatly along the same side of the street. You don't hear them come and go and they stay off of the neighbor's lawns. Noise isn't an issue. Nothing they do is disruptive.

This really shouldn't be an issue. The fact that it is sggests that either the neighbors are intruding into something that really should be of no concern to them or that the house guests are being disrespectful to the neighbors. Maybe there is loud music. Maybe the estivities are not time limited. Maybe the guests are taking all the street parking and leaving none for the neighbors. Maybe they are parking badly or going into or through neighbor's lawns - or littering. Or being loud and disruptive on the street.

[Skidmore]

78. A regular meeting of more than 3 people?

What does that do to regular play groups or other informal meetings. What about those Tupperware type sales parties? What if they are swinging couples? That's more than 3 people. I don't care what they are doing in that house as long as it isn't illegal. Stay out of the home. No government has the right to tell me how many guests I have in my home nor the purpose for gathering.

[jwirr]

80. This is ridiculous. A bridge club could be fined under those conditions. nt

[newspeak]

85. yeah, a bridge group could be fined

I played duplicate bridge each week, meeting at each members' house. We had a least 12-16 people.

Also, this reminds me of my grandmother's church. They just called themselves christians (almost like amish with the starched caps). Each sunday they met at one of the member's houses--no passing of the plate for donations, no music singing hymns. I think that there were over twenty at each meeting. So, it appears they would have been fined for congregating.

[slackmaster]

93. ...but only if someone complained about it and got the city involved.

;-)

[Taverner]

86. There is more to this story:

“The Fromm case further involves regular meetings on Sunday mornings and Thursday afternoons with up to 50 people, with impacts on the residential neighborhood on street access and parking,” City Attorney Omar Sandoval said.

[jwirr]

87. I had assumed that this is a parking space issue. Our community

has trouble with rummage sales and parking. Maybe they will have to learn to carpool.

[mn9driver]

89. The entire San Juan Capistrano elected city government is Republican

The Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem and the three City Council members are all, 100 percent GOP. Just sayin'.

[Generic Other]

92. I lived across the street from The Theosophist's Society

They had seances all the time.