I have to agree with the city. What if there was a fire and people were housed in a place where there wasn't sufficient exits, the Church would be held responsible and the situation would be a lot worse. Whether they are housing the homeless or housing for profit, they still need to follow regulations and God would have us obey these common city laws.What the Baptist church should be doing is finding a building where it can be zoned for such practices and facility that can facilitate the homeless in a safe environment in case a fire does occur.This has nothing to do with religious freedom.Back in the day when this was zoned for a Church, documents from the city would have been drawn up as to what they would be allowed to have. Now if those papers said that they could house the homeless than they have a fighting chance, but to fight something that is zoned for a Church and not a residential facility is a foolish venture.
QUOTE: "What if there was a fire and people were housed in a place where there wasn't sufficient exits."==APPROVEDInitially i agreed with you BUT what do you think the safety is of Sunday morning worshippers then? There are probably at least a hundred people gathered there on a Sunday morning for worship and the fire code for them is the same: they must have exits in case of fire. So if it is ok for them to have 50 to 100 worshippers or however many they have, then why is not ok for them to have just up to 5 families or 5 people overnight? The exits don't change in the middle of the night.