SF vs. the Catholic Church, round 3
By Ryan Thomas Riddle
A decision is expected next month in the high-stakes battle
between the Archdiocese of San Francisco and Assessor-Record Phil Ting, which will determine whether the church will pay out millions in transfer taxes.
On Thursday, Oct. 8, Ting once again went before the Transfer Tax Review Board to counter the Archdiocese’s
assertions that its extensive 2008 property transfers aren’t taxable. The board then called for final legal documentation in the case, including closing briefs, to be delivered by both sides on Nov. 9. The board will render its final ruling two weeks later, according to Ting.
“It is in the capable hands of the tax review board,” he told the Guardian.
Ting said he expects that the verdict will be in his office’s favor, which could force the Catholic Church to pay somewhere between $3 million and $15 million in transfer taxes to the city. Church officials, who have yet to respond to our calls, contend that the properties the archdiocese moved from one interdenominational entity to another are considered a “gift” under canon law, and thus do not qualify for transfer taxation since the properties still belong to the greater Catholic Church.
The Assessor’s Office reviewed a January 2009 California Supreme Court ruling that reaffirmed the national Episcopal Church’s ownership of local church buildings and properties, a case the archdiocese has cited. “Basically, it’s an interdenominational conflict that has no barring on this case,” Ting said.
As for accusations from the more militant church supporters that this is the city’s retaliation for the passing of Proposition 8
, Ting said that his office made overtures on the transfer taxes long before the same-sex marriage issue went to the election ballot. Craig Dziedzic, manager of the recording division within the Assessor’s Office who testified in Thursday’s hearing, sent emails out to the legal counsel for the diocese regarding the transfer taxes back in April 2008, months before Prop 8 was passed.
digg •
del.icio.us •
sphere •
google
•
Comments (5)
ROFLMAO. "A gift under canon law" - Hey Bishop! we live in the United States, and your canon law doesn't apply. Join the rest of us, that actually pay taxes so we can have roads, schools, police and fire protection. If you want to live under canon law, move to Vatican City, pronto!
Posted by Philip | October 9, 2009 07:05 PM
Why shouldn't the church only abide by cannon law while ignoring the laws of the USA? The bay Guardian doesn't think SF has to adhere to federal law. What's the big deal? We should all be able to only pay attention to laws we agree with.
The Catholics should be able to do whatever they want with their property, Muslims should be able to have honour killings, and SF should be able to pick through federal law while begging endlessly for federal tax dollars.
Jeez, we should all follow our bliss and pick and choose our way through reality. Isn't that what being progressive is all about?
Posted by glen matlock | October 9, 2009 07:15 PM
The City risks getting shot down by the state or feds as far as sanctuary goes. The Catholic Church also took risks making the canon law play. Unlike the feds, SF is shooting down the Church's efforts.
I know so many think that taxation is a violent crime, but honor killings, please!
San Francisco generates many more federal tax dollars than it gets back.
-marc
Posted by marcos | October 10, 2009 09:24 PM
Marc the real story is that true believers get to pick and choose what laws they have to follow based only on how they see the world. Catholics can own property in the real world then laughingly claim cannon law? No different than the picking and choosing over federal law that SF progressives want to do here in SF.
It's always amazes me how much the extremes rant about us serfs being brainwashed, and how stupid we all are. Maybe its a challenge, "don't be stupid believe what we believe rote." The trouble for me is am I being brainwashed by Rush Limbaugh and the ridiculous republicans or am I being brainwashed by Michael Moore and the democrats?
Why should the Catholic Church, or anyone else that can get a couple of people together to believe the same thing follow any law? Why shouldn't we allow for anything as long as you can get enough people to believe it?
Posted by glen matlock | October 11, 2009 01:39 PM
@the troll: I love the term "cannon law," but when referring to the Catholic Church, it's commonly known in English as "canon law."
Posted by sfmike | October 11, 2009 07:55 PM