A quiet property dispute in Toms River has sparked a significant legal and constitutional debate involving religious freedom, homelessness, and local development.

According to Fox News, the town is seeking to use eminent domain to acquire Christ Episcopal Church’s 10-acre property for public recreation, while church leaders claim the effort is retaliation for a proposed homeless shelter on the same land.

Located in the suburban area of Toms River, New Jersey, Christ Episcopal Church encompasses a sizable property with several buildings, including a sanctuary, a school, a deacon’s residence, a parish house, and an auditorium. The church first applied in July 2023 to launch an outreach center aimed at helping those without stable housing. That application was granted.

Alongside the outreach initiative, the church proposed the addition of a 17-bed overnight shelter. This idea brought mixed reactions, with some members of the neighborhood voicing unease about the presence of a homeless facility in what is largely a residential area.

Then, on April 29, 2025, one day before a scheduled Toms River Township Council meeting, a concerned community member shared with church officials that the property was quietly being added to a list for potential seizure under eminent domain. The timing of this revelation alarmed church leaders and raised skepticism about the township’s intentions.

Timing and Intent Questioned by Church Leaders

By April 30, 2025, the matter became public when the township council officially included an ordinance on its legislative agenda to take over the property. Township officials stated that the land would be converted into a park featuring soccer fields, pickleball courts, and other recreational elements.

Harvey York, who represents the church in legal matters, said the township had never previously discussed using the church grounds for recreation. “Any governmental agency has the right to condemn property for governmental purposes. That’s clear,” he said, “however, the township has never thought of this as a recreational site.”

York further hinted that the sudden push for recreational redevelopment was linked to the church's homeless shelter plans. He argued that the timing and context “clearly” indicated a retaliatory motive on the part of the township leaders.

Federal Laws and Constitutional Rights Invoked

The legal team representing the church is putting forward constitutional grounds as well as federal protections under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. York emphasized that churches have a right to use their property in ways that reflect and carry out their missions, especially when it comes to community outreach.

“I don’t know that you’ll find a lawyer who will say, ‘Oh, yeah, they have every right to do this; they’re going to win,’” York stated, underscoring the uncertainty but also suggesting strong grounds for a legal battle favorable to the church.

York added that he believes the majority of people in the area are stunned by the township's move and that reactions have varied widely. While some citizens are apparently “thrilled” with the mayor's proposed condemnation of the church land, many others are alarmed.

Diocese to Decide Church’s Next Move

The plan for the church’s property is still unfolding, with numerous public hearings having already taken place. According to York, between five and six meetings have been held to discuss the matter in various forums.

The next pivotal moment was scheduled for May 22, 2025, when the zoning board intended to continue reviewing the situation. Meanwhile, the church’s legal representation suggests that full-on litigation is nearly certain.

Ultimately, the decision on whether to initiate a legal challenge or pursue alternative action rests with the Episcopal Diocese overseeing the church. “The plan will be decided by the diocese,” York confirmed, indicating that discussions within the church’s broader leadership structure are ongoing.

Broader Implications for Other Religious Institutions

If the situation becomes a court case, many legal watchers believe the outcome could be influential beyond Toms River. At the heart of the debate lies the question of how far local governments can go in redesignating property owned by religious entities for municipal use.

The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act was passed to protect places of worship from burdensome zoning laws. This case could test how that act interacts with a town’s use of eminent domain when public objections are tied to religious social programs.

The situation has even drawn attention outside the immediate community, with national supporters beginning to weigh in. York hopes that the legal protections in place for religious practice and property usage will be upheld if the matter reaches the courtroom.

Dispute Continues With Public Divided

The township's proposal, if acted on, could alter the future of one of Toms River’s long-standing religious institutions. For now, Christ Episcopal Church remains on its property, continuing its mission and waiting for a final decision from its diocese leadership.

Meanwhile, the community around the church is deeply divided, torn between the appeal of public recreational space and concern for religious freedom. York concluded, “The government should mind their own business and stay out of the religious affairs of the community.”

As of now, the property remains in legal limbo while the church weighs its response. More hearings and likely legal battles are expected in the months ahead.