A federal lawsuit was filed today in U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against the Monmouth County Borough of Roosevelt, its Planning and Zoning Board, the Borough’s Mayor and Council, the Roosevelt Preservation Association and certain individual members of the Planning and Zoning Board and Council alleging violations of the “Free Exercise” and other civil rights of congregants and students affiliated with Congregation Yeshivas Me’on Hatorah and Congregation Anshei Roosevelt. The suit charges that action taken against the Yeshiva and the Synagogue by the defendants were designed to restrict the religious freedom of the Synagogue’s members and the Yeshiva’s students.

According to Bruce Shoulson of Lowenstein Sandler of Roseland NJ, attorney for the plaintiffs, the Yeshiva and the Synagogue have been the subjects of “a relentless campaign of harassment by the Borough in clear violation of state and federal statutes.” Mr. Shoulson noted that the Borough’s actions deprived citizens of their rights to the Free Exercise of their religion as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. He added: “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 Yeshivas 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.” Mr. Shoulson charged that the campaign against the Yeshiva began even before the first 12 students of the new Yeshiva ever spent a day at the Synagogue two years ago.

The lawsuit seeks to overturn a decision by the local Zoning and Planning Board on July 24, 2007 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 premises did not violate the Borough’s zoning ordinances.  Mr. Francis’ ruling was based upon a legal opinion to such effect given to him by the then Borough attorney,  Mr. Ira Karasick. The suit seeks injunctions against further interference with the activities of the Yeshiva as well as damages, including attorney’s fees and other costs associated with defending the Yeshiva and the Synagogue.   In particular, the suit charges the Borough, the Planning and Zoning Board and the various individuals named with violations of 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.

Roosevelt, New Jersey was founded as a Great Depression-era utopian cooperative for Jewish garment workers. It looks pretty much as it did when it was started by the United States Department of the Interior in the late 1930’s. Its streets meander around hills and stream beds, and most of its houses back up to green belts or woods, including the sprawling, 5,600 acre state-owned Assunpink Wildlife Management Area to the south.

The town is listed on both the National and State Registers of Historic Places in its entirety, Roosevelt was originally named Jersey Homesteads. It was one of 34 municipalities started by the federal Subsistence Homesteads Program, an experiment that gave workers cooperative ownership over local farms and factories. In 1945, after President Roosevelt’s death and long after the government had sold off the factory and farms, the borough renamed itself Roosevelt to honor F.D.R.

Congregation Anshei Roosevelt, founded in 1936 and at its current location since 1955, was at one time a thriving Orthodox synagogue that in recent years had struggled to function as a vibrant institution. Many attempts were made over the years to develop programming, including a nursery school, but the synagogue failed to have a regular “minyan” (necessary quorum for prayers). The Synagogue had reached the stage where it could no longer afford to retain the services of a rabbi.  Under its 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.

Joshua Pruzansky,  Executive Vice President of the Yeshiva, said: “It wasn’t by chance that we chose to open a yeshiva in Roosevelt. We considered the town a perfect model of stability, tranquility, and tolerance. We were, to say the least, shocked by the reception that we received.” Mr. Pruzansky said that he witnessed a vigil and demonstrations, including signs and epitaphs that border on anti-Semitism. “We refused to believe that this town would not be representative of Americana in its diversity and respect for religion,” he noted.

Mr. Pruzansky said that the behavior of Borough officials, and a small group of residents, that included many dismissals and even the recall of a sitting mayor, is “a flashback to a period in American history that we would all rather forget.” He added: “Some of the actions by the Borough officials and residents were manifestations of bigotry and hatred which has no place in the America of 2007.”

Mr. Neil Marko was the mayor of Roosevelt who was ousted in a recall vote because of his support for the Yeshiva. In addition to making the legal case for the Yeshiva, Mr. Marko saw the Yeshiva’s presence in the community as a positive development in the rebirth of Jewish life in the community that had existed in Roosevelt for many years. Mr. Marko’s vision was shared by Mrs. Elly Shapiro, president of Congregation Anshei Roosevelt that had invited the Yeshiva to Roosevelt as a means of injecting new life into the Synagogue.

Mr. Pruzansky stated that, in addition to creating zoning changes and placing other legal roadblocks, the opponents of the Yeshiva used disparaging language in describing the lifestyle of Orthodox Jews, argued that the Yeshiva  would take properties off the tax rolls, and claimed that the Yeshiva faculty and their families would harm the local public school. Mr. Pruzansky called these arguments “falsifications of the truth.” As examples, he cited the facts that not a single building has been taken off the tax rolls, the Yeshiva would have no bearing on the public school in the community, and the Yeshiva does not expect the Borough to provide it with any services that other residents do not receive.

Said Mr. Pruzansky, “The only taxpayer money that is being spent at the moment is as 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.” According to Mr. Pruzansky, “We met with representatives of the municipality and offered a variety of approaches but were 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.  It is unfortunate that the taxpayers of Roosevelt will now have to suffer the financial consequences of their municipal government’s unreasonable decisions.”