Earlier this month, city leaders agreed to postpone action on a controversial proposed city ordinance that would limit the establishment of storefront religious institutions in order to meet with members of the religious community who seek to reform the proposal.
If the ordinance passes unaltered, religious institutions would have to obtain a special use permit if they expand, rebuild or if they are opening for the first time. The intention of the ordinance is to protect the businesses surrounding these storefront churches; though many religious leaders claim to support this rationale, most are upset that they were not consulted before the ordinance was introduced.
The Daily understands the concerns of the ordinance’s supporters, but we believe that inhibiting the establishment and growth of storefront religious institutions is an unnecessary, unhelpful response to growing alarm over the ever-decreasing number of storefronts in the city occupied by successful businesses. The proposed ordinance is also detrimental to attempts to build community in this city.
Ald. Ann Rainey (8th), a main proponent of the ordinance, has claimed that because most of these houses of worship are open only on certain days-when services are held-foot traffic in the area is reduced during the rest of the week, hurting neighboring businesses. Rainey has focused on Howard Street-part of her ward-where many churches have set up shop, snapping up vacant storefronts.
But it is not always true (and certainly does not have to be true) that churches are closed for most of the week. Many churches hold smaller-scale religious programming throughout the week, and also house community programs like childcare services, addiction recovery programs and support groups.
Limiting the ability of religious establishments to open and expand not only prevents them from breathing new life into a real estate market on the rocks, but also hurts the community by depriving it of a wide variety of productive social services that foster a sense of community.
We urge the City Council to consider these drawbacks going forward and hope that religious leaders-especially those affiliated with these storefront churches-to consider the numerous community needs that they can serve, especially in economically suffering parts of the city.
“While news businesses might find moving in next to a church less than ideal than moving in next to an already thriving business, it is certainly better than opening next to a boarded-up window.”
– Daily Northwestern Editorial Board
These churches did not force successful businesses out of the spaces they now occupy; in most cases, they likely moved in because the space was available and affordable. The alternative to a storefront house of worship is usually a vacant storefront, which is the ultimate physical sign of a depressed commercial area. And while new businesses might find moving in next to a church less ideal than moving in next to an already thriving business, it is certainly better than opening next to a boarded-up window.
According to a Chicago Tribune article last week, Rainey said it is not unprecedented to require a particular type of establishment to apply for a special use permit in order to ensure steady economic development of Howard Street. Until it is clear that the storefronts currently occupied by churches could be filled with businesses, however, we urge the city to reconsider this ordinance and instead work with these religious institutions to improve the community.
A vibrant community with a strong sense of unity, in turn, could revitalize the commercial districts of Evanston.
