## Facts

- Messiah Baptist Church bought approximately eighty acres of vacant land in Jefferson County, Colorado in 1974.
- The property was zoned Agricultural Two (A-2); at the time, church use was not permitted in A-2.
- In 1976, the County amended its zoning resolution to allow churches in A-2 only by special-use permit, while permitting churches as of right or as special uses in most residential districts.
- In 1978, the Church applied for a special-use permit to build a large religious complex, including a main worship/education/administrative building and a drive-in amphitheater, with supporting parking and improvements.
- County staff raised planning and public-safety concerns, including traffic/access limitations and inadequate fire protection.
- The County denied the special-use permit.
- The Church sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking damages and declaratory relief and alleging violations of substantive due process and the Free Exercise Clause, and alleging unconstitutional discretion in the special-use process.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the County; the Church appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether limiting churches in an agricultural district to special-use approval, and denying the Church’s application, was arbitrary or unreasonable in violation of substantive due process.
2. Whether the zoning scheme and permit denial substantially burdened religious exercise in violation of the Free Exercise Clause.
3. Whether the special-use permitting procedure vested standardless discretion amounting to an unconstitutional delegation of power (or due process violation).

## Decision

- The court of appeals affirmed summary judgment for the County.
- The zoning classification and the permit denial did not violate substantive due process because they were reasonably related to legitimate governmental objectives (including preserving agricultural uses and addressing intensity, traffic, and safety impacts).
- The scheme did not violate the Free Exercise Clause because it was neutral and generally applicable and did not substantially interfere with religious belief or practice; it regulated location and site impacts rather than worship itself.
- The special-use process was not an unconstitutional delegation because the County applied identifiable standards and concrete planning criteria (including access and fire protection), and discretionary evaluation is permissible in special-use permitting when guided by reasonable standards.

## Legal Principles

- Substantive due process challenges to land-use regulation are reviewed deferentially; a zoning decision is upheld unless clearly arbitrary and unreasonable with no substantial relation to public health, safety, morals, or general welfare.
- Neutral, generally applicable zoning regulations that incidentally increase costs, delay development, or limit preferred sites do not violate the Free Exercise Clause absent substantial interference with religious practice itself.
- A jurisdiction may require special-use approval for particular uses in certain districts when the distinction is rationally related to legitimate planning goals and does not operate as a de facto prohibition of religious exercise.
- Special-use permit schemes may confer case-by-case discretion if guided by reasonable standards and applied through articulated, reviewable planning considerations rather than subjective or standardless judgments.

## Conclusion

The court held that Jefferson County could condition church development in an agricultural district on a special-use permit and deny a proposed complex based on traffic and safety concerns, without violating substantive due process, the Free Exercise Clause, or constitutional limits on delegated permitting discretion.


Messiah Baptist Church v. County of Jefferson, 859 F.2d 820 (10th Cir. 1988)