Religious freedom allegedly restricted in Roosevelt
Yeshiva Me'on Hatorah files federal lawsuit against borough
BY JENNIFER KOHLHEPP Staff Writer
The borough of Roosevelt is being sued for allegedly violating the free exercise and other civil rights of congregants and students affiliated with congregations Anshei Roosevelt and Yeshiva Me'on Hatorah.

A federal lawsuit was filed on Aug. 27 in U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against the borough, its Planning and Zoning Board, the mayor and council, the Roosevelt Preservation Association and certain individual members of the Planning and Zoning Board and Borough Council. The lawsuit charges that the defendants took action against the Homestead Lane synagogue and the yeshiva, which is housed in the synagogue, that were designed to restrict the religious freedom of the synagogue's and yeshiva's members, according to Joshua Pruzansky, executive vice president of the yeshiva.

According to Bruce Shoulson, of Lowenstein Sandler in Roseland, attorney for the plaintiffs, the yeshiva and the synagogue have been the subjects of a "relentless campaign of harassment by the borough in a clear violation of state and federal statutes."

Shoulson alleged that the borough's actions deprived citizens of their right to the free exercise of their religion as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

"Officials of the borough have been involved in a systematic and deliberate campaign to keep the local synagogue from allowing its premises to be used by Yeshiva Me'on Hatorah despite the best efforts of both institutions to forge normal and neighborly relations with the approximately 900 residents who live in the borough," Shoulson said.

He charged that the campaign against the yeshiva began even before the school's first 12 students spent a day in the school when it first opened in the borough two years ago.

The lawsuit also seeks to overturn a July 24 decision by the borough's Planning and Zoning Board that the operation of the yeshiva on the premises of the synagogue is not in compliance with the borough's zoning ordinances. The borough's former zoning officer, Robert Francis, had ruled in 2005 that the yeshiva's use of the synagogue's premises was not in violation of the town's ordinances after an inspection of the property and based on consultation with Ira Karasick, who was the borough's attorney at that time. The board later voted to overturn Francis' decision.

The suit alleges that the borough and its Planning and Zoning Board and the other various individuals named, violated the United States Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 and Section 1983 of the United States Civil Rights Act, as well as the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination.

The suit seeks injunctions against further interference with the activities of the yeshiva as well as damages, including attorneys' fees and other costs associated with defending the yeshiva and the synagogue.

Roosevelt Mayor Elsbeth Battel said that the borough is aware that the lawsuit has been filed. She said she could not further discuss the details of the matter.

"I can't say anything about the legal matters," she said.

When asked about the possibility of an appeal or for a timeline as to how the issue will unfold, Battel said that those decisions will be left up to the borough's lawyers.

Roosevelt was originally named Jersey Homesteads and was founded as a Great Depression-era utopian cooperative to help Jewish garment workers move out of tenements in the city. The town is listed on both the national and state registers of historic places as one of the 34 municipalities started by the federal Subsistence Homesteads Programs, an experiment that gave workers cooperative ownership over local farming and a factory. The cooperative ultimately failed, and the town renamed itself Roosevelt in honor of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1945 after the president's death.

Founded in 1936 as an Orthodox synagogue and now in the same location since 1955, Congregation Anshei Roosevelt was once a thriving synagogue that in recent years had struggled to function as a vibrant institution. The congregation made many attempts over the years to change and develop new programming, including transitioning away from Orthodox practices and opening a nursery school, but failed to have a regular minyan, which is the necessary quorum for the synagogue to hold services. The synagogue reached a stage where it could no longer afford to retain the services of a rabbi.

Under the congregation's arrangement with the yeshiva, the rabbis on the faculty of the yeshiva now lead services and provide the required rabbinical and pastoral services to the membership of the synagogue, according to Pruzansky.

Pruzansky said that the yeshiva did not choose to open in Roosevelt by chance.

"We considered the town a perfect model of stability, tranquility and tolerance," he said. "We were, to say the least, shocked by the reception that we received."

When the synagogue's plans to house the yeshiva started coming to fruition in 2005, some townspeople held a vigil and demonstration outside the building during a synagogue board meeting. Recalling the protest, Pruzansky said, "We refused to believe that this town would not be representative of Americana in its diversity and respect for religion."

Pruzansky called the behavior of borough officials and a small group of the town's residents "a flashback to a period in American history that we would all rather forget."

"Some of the actions of the borough officials and residents were manifestations of bigotry and hatred, which has no place in the America of 2007," he said.

Pruzansky said that the issue has caused many dismissals, referring to the resignations of Francis and Karasick and the recall of Mayor Neil Marko, who was mayor of Roosevelt when the yeshiva first moved into town.

Pruzansky alleged that Marko was ousted in a recall vote because of his support for the yeshiva. Those who formed a recall group that petitioned for Marko's removal from office alleged that Marko had at least the appearance of a conflict of interest

in his representation of the

borough in yeshiva-related matters as mayor, synagogue

board member, and

the member of a local

swim club that had decided

to sell its borough

property. The yeshiva

had expressed interest in

building a dormitory in town and spoke with the swim club about purchasing its pool property.

The swim club ultimately decided not to sell its property to the yeshiva, and although yeshiva representatives expressed interest in developing a dormitory for its students within the town, they have yet to appear before borough officials with any specific plans for doing so.

This year, the state Department of Community Affairs issued the yeshiva violations and fines for using four singlefamily homes in the borough as illegal dormitories. The yeshiva agreed to remove some of the inhabitants from the homes and to make the necessary repairs for compliance with state code. The state said that the organization would have to appear before borough zoning officials for approvals to have more than five unrelated persons living in the homes at one time, or converting the homes into dormitories.

Pruzansky said that the yeshiva did meet with representatives of the municipality and offered a variety of approaches, and alleged that the yeshiva was rejected at every turn.

"After the vote of the Planning and Zoning Board, we were left with no choice other than to seek vindication of our rights in the courts," he said.

Pruzansky said that it is unfortunate that the taxpayers in Roosevelt will now have to suffer the financial consequences of their municipal government's unreasonable decisions.

"The only taxpayer money that is being spent at the moment is a direct result of the decisions of the borough governing body and its Zoning and Planning Board to create an atmosphere of intolerance within the community," he said.

Pruzansky alleged that in addition to creating zoning changes and placing other legal roadblocks, opponents of the yeshiva have also used disparaging language in describing the lifestyle of Orthodox Jews, argued that the yeshiva would take properties off the tax roll, and claimed that the yeshiva faculty and families would harm the local public school.

Pruzansky called these arguments "falsifications of the truth" and said that the yeshiva has not taken a single building associated with it off the tax rolls, has had no bearing on Roosevelt Public School, and does not expect the borough to provide it with any services that its residents do not receive.