Eagle Cove Camp & Conference C v. Town of Woodboro, Wisconsin
734 F.3d 673
7th Cir.2013Background
- Eagle Cove sought to build a year‑round Bible camp on a 34‑acre Squash Lake parcel in the Town of Woodboro, which is zoned Single Family Residential under the Oneida County Zoning and Shoreland Protection Ordinance (OCZSPO).
- Woodboro adopted local land‑use plans favoring low‑density, single‑family lakeshore development; in 2001 Woodboro subordinated zoning authority to Oneida County (OCZSPO), retaining only an advisory role.
- OCZSPO permits year‑round recreational camps on ~36% of Oneida County and allows churches/religious schools on much of the county; it prohibits year‑round camps in Single Family Residential districts like the subject parcel.
- Eagle Cove applied for rezoning (to Recreational) and later for a conditional use permit (CUP) to build a large lodge and camp; both applications were denied by the County (with Woodboro recommending denial). Appeals to the County Board of Adjusters failed.
- Eagle Cove sued under RLUIPA, the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and the Wisconsin Constitution (and sought certiorari); the district court granted summary judgment for Woodboro and Oneida County, and the Seventh Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| RLUIPA total‑exclusion (§ 2000cc(b)(3)(A)) | Woodboro’s ordinances effectively exclude year‑round Bible camps from town limits, so religious assemblies are totally excluded. | Woodboro lacks zoning jurisdiction (County controls zoning); year‑round camps are permitted elsewhere in the County, so there is no total exclusion. | No total exclusion — County (not Woodboro) controls zoning and year‑round camps are allowed in substantial parts of the County. |
| RLUIPA substantial‑burden (§ 2000cc(a)) / Free Exercise | Denial of rezoning/CUP, delay, and expense substantially burden Eagle Cove’s religious exercise because the camp must be on the subject property year‑round. | Zoning is neutral and generally applicable; many county sites permit year‑round camps; Eagle Cove refused alternatives; burden is not substantial. | No substantial burden — zoning is neutral, alternative locations exist, and Eagle Cove’s insistence on that parcel (and specific scope) is decisive. |
| RLUIPA unreasonable‑limitation (§ 2000cc(b)(3)(B)) | County’s scheme unreasonably limits opportunities to locate the camp within the jurisdiction. | OCZSPO permits religious assemblies throughout the County and offers reasonable alternatives; land‑use aims are neutral and legitimate. | No unreasonable limitation — county zoning provides reasonable opportunities and alternatives. |
| RLUIPA equal‑terms (§ 2000cc(b)(1)) | Year‑round religious camps are treated worse than comparable secular uses. | The ordinance treats religious and secular uses alike under the Single Family Residential criteria; recreational camps (religious or secular) are uniformly prohibited to preserve character. | No equal‑terms violation — religious uses are not treated worse than comparable secular uses. |
| Wisconsin Constitution (Art. I, § 18) | State constitutional protection exceeds federal and the zoning burdens conscience rights. | Zoning is neutral, normally acceptable, and serves compelling state interests by least restrictive means. | No state‑law relief — neutral zoning meets Wisconsin’s compelling interest/least restrictive test. |
Key Cases Cited
- Vision Church v. Village of Long Grove, 468 F.3d 975 (7th Cir.) (total‑exclusion standard under RLUIPA requires complete and total exclusion)
- Civil Liberties for Urban Believers v. City of Chicago, 342 F.3d 752 (7th Cir.) (definition of "substantial burden" in RLUIPA context)
- Petra Presbyterian Church v. Village of Northbrook, 489 F.3d 846 (7th Cir.) (availability of alternative sites undermines substantial‑burden claim)
- Sts. Constantine & Helen Greek Orthodox Church, Inc. v. City of New Berlin, 396 F.3d 895 (7th Cir.) (delay, uncertainty, and evidence of bad faith can support a substantial‑burden inference)
- River of Life Kingdom Ministries v. Village of Hazel Crest, 611 F.3d 367 (7th Cir.) (equal‑terms inquiry focuses on zoning criteria and comparable uses)
- Digrugilliers v. Consolidated City of Indianapolis, 506 F.3d 616 (7th Cir.) (equal‑terms provision applies when religious uses are treated worse than comparable nonreligious ones)