Seattle Housing Authority Faces Controversy over Allowing Nativity Scene in Public Building

The latest public agency caught in the cross-fire between those who favor removing all displays of religion in public buildings and those who favor allowing alleged secular displays such as Christmas trees and menorahs is the Seattle Housing Authority (SHA). The agency allowed residents of one senior building to put up angels and a Nativity scene over the objection of one resident who pointed out that this display breached the wall of separation of church and state.

December 26, 2006 (FPRC) -- The latest public agency caught in the cross-fire between those who favor removing all displays of religion in public buildings and those who favor allowing alleged secular displays such as Christmas trees and menorahs is the Seattle Housing Authority (SHA). The controversy erupted after SHA allowed a nativity scene at one of their publicly owned and managed senior buildings.

The controversy in Seattle had been building for some time. It started with the Port of Seattle removing 14 Christmas trees after a rabbi asked them to allow him to put up a menorah and was turned down. After much controversy, the trees were returned but not after many anti-Jewish emails, letters, and phone calls were received by Jewish organizations.

If you are looking for something to report on why Christmas trees and menorahs don't belong in public buildings and public places and the consequences that befall those who oppose putting up Christian religious scenes in these buildings:

In a special reader point of view published in the Seattle Times (Saturday, 12/23/06, Page B7 [url]http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2003491164_satrdr23.html[/url], Keith Gormezano (206) 789-8328 who lives in one of the 23 [url=http://www.seattlehousing.org/housing/programs/sshp/sshp.html]Seattle Senior Housing Program[/url] buildings owned by the City of Seattle through money raised by a 1981 bond levy vote and managed by the [url=http://www.seattlehousing.org/]Seattle Housing Authority[/url] through a Housing Cooperation Agreement between the agency and the city said that:

"When you start putting up on public property religious symbols like a menorah (celebrating a (KG: Jewish) religious victory and therefore inappropriate) or a Christmas tree (celebrating the alleged birthday of the most famous Jew in the world), you start down the slippery slope of merging church and state.
For example, in the publicly owned senior building that I live in, management has said that it is OK, in the interest of "equal access," to allow menorahs and other cultures' (KG: alleged) celebrations in our community room.

Unfortunately, I am not aware of any other religion that would be celebrating a holiday this time of year, so I suspect this policy is for the sole purpose of allowing Christians to put up these kinds of "secular but not religious" decorations, since they would be the only ones affected.

Every identified Jew that I know wouldn't put up a menorah in this public space (KG: sorry but Rabbi Elazar Bogomilsky is in the distinct minority of our community on this issue). And every Muslim I know would be aghast [at displaying a symbol of Islam], as there is no [holiday] equivalent.

As a result of that decision, my fellow residents have now pushed forward with more obvious religious decorations, such as a Nativity scene or crèche on top of the coffee table (KG: which is underneath) a beckoning Christian angel similar to images of Christ I have seen in museums, and an angel with wings (neither angel of which is a Jewish or Muslim symbol, by the way) on top of the so-called "secular" Christmas tree (KG: whose holiday lights are either lit using public funds or my portion of my rent that goes for the public spaces in the building).

As a result, I cannot use the community room (KG: which I pay for through my rent), nor can I reserve it for a private Hanukkah party for my (KG: Jewish) friends, because I know we would be offended by such religious displays.

I wonder what is next. Forced wreathes or crucifixes on everyone's door? A demand that everyone put up a tree in their apartment? A requirement that we attend Christmas or Easter dinner in order to live in this taxpayer-supported building?

That is why we shouldn't allow Christmas trees (why are they called that if they are secular objects?), menorahs or any other religious object in public spaces.

Religion belongs in the home. Public buildings are for public business."

Gormezano, who completed two years at Seattle University Law School and has served as an arbitrator in securities, business, and real estate cases said today that residents who benefit from the housing authority's and city's tax exempt status have to abide by US Supreme Court decisions which have held that a Nativity scene in a public place is a government's endorsement of religion, even if it is in a publicly owned apartment building.

"Our rents are a minimum of $100 a month less," he said, "because the building does not pay any property taxes and the money that was raised to build the building carries a lower interest rate than money raised to build private sector buildings around the same time.

Unlike most public housing which requires and rewards you for being poor or "low-income" (maximum of $16,350 a year for one person), residents of senior buildings can earn up to 80% of the medium income of about $43,000 a year for one person as long as you are over 62 or have some kind of handicapped or disability, pay a maximum rent of $672 a month, and still live here.

So you don't get to double dip when it comes to the benefits of living here. You have to take the bitter with the sweet. If it was a privately owned apartment building, you might have a case."

Gormezano stated that he had filed a request with the managers of his building at the end of November long before the crèche went up asking them not to permit the Nativity scene again this year citing US Supreme Court decisions as well as the agency's own internal rules regarding cultural sensistivity and emails which regulated such a display in community rooms. "It was my birthday present to myself," he commented but "it fell on deaf Roman ears".

Fortunately, he said, "this year the display was a bit more restrained (see pictures) but it did contain an obviously Christian angel. Last year it was this huge display on top of the TV (see picture)."

Last year the Anti Defamation League (ADL) got involved after the fact and reached an agreement with staff members of Mayor Nickels office (since the city owns the buildings and this would be the appropriate office to get involved) that this wouldn't occur again. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case.

After filing his request this year with the agency's managers and hearing nothing, Gormezano then asked Rob Jacobs of the Anti Defamation League (ADL) [(206) 448-5349, 1] to intervene again. Jacobs was unable to reach or persuade the Mayor's Nickel's Office this year to take action.

"Consequently," he said, "Because the Mayor's Office was not willing to enforce the law or live up to their word in terms of what they had agreed to last year, I feel that I have no choice but to go public with this complaint. And to keep it from happening next year."

Gormezano said that he has contacted the Seattle Office of Civil Rights about filing a discrimination for violating the housing cooperation agreement which prohibits discrimination in programs by contractors such as SHA with the city and with HUD which enforces fair housing laws. "SHA," he stated, "is well known to them."

"Excluding me from being able to use the community room is a clear cut violation of the Seattle ordinance against discrimination and the federal fair housing act. Putting up a Nativity scene is no different than burning a cross on a African-American person's lawn or painting a swastika on my door, excluding Asians from applying or putting a cap on them for certain Ivy League colleges, demanding that Hispanics speak English in order to obtain public services, or refusing to recognize domestic partnerships or same sex marriages. It makes me think twice about living here."

"I sometimes wonder if my fellow residents are really doing this to make the building "Juden Rein" (Jew free in German). I have had people tell me that I have no right to complain, another Jewish resident had her "Happy Passover" signs torn down, I've been told that I should "get over it" and "we're in the majority", move to another building, scream at me and shower me with profanity, come close to physically assaulting me, vandalize a cartoon that I put on my apartment door, refuse to acknowledge my presence in the halls, or receive invitations to non-Christian events going on in the building. I also have received hate email, unsolicited Merry Christmas cards, and notes telling me that they will pray for me."

"This is why we can't tolerate these kinds of overt religious displays," he noted. "They are not appropriate for the Holiday season. They drive us apart and create hostile living conditions. If this was a workplace, these kinds of displays or behavior would not be permitted or tolerated."

-30-

People you might want to talk to about this story and have received a copy of this news release:

Rob Jacobs, ADL (206) 448-5349 rjacobs@adl.org
Virginia Felton, SHA spokesperson, (206) 615-3506 vfelton@seattlehousing.org
Marianne Bishsel, Mayor Nickels spokesperson, (206) 684-8878 marianne.bichsel@seattle.gov


For more information contact Keith Gormezano of Seattle Housing Authority  (http://)
206-789-8328

Keywords: Separation church state, Nativity scene creche, public buildings

You can read this press release online at: http://www.free-press-release-center.info/pr00000000000000002959.html