Just curious. I know there has been a lot of debate regarding the mosque in NY, but this incident is in another State. Should she be forced to pay or not? sammieswife
-----
Owner could lose condominium: Legal fight on religious grounds cost city $40,000 -- for a $635 tax claim
August 17, 2010 By BOB SEIDENBERG [email protected]
A family's steadfast refusal to pay a $635.02 special assessment tax for an alley paving project because it violated their religious beliefs has run up an estimated $40,000 in outside legal bills for the city, with no apparent end in sight.
Padma Rao, of 2246 Sherman Ave., said she plans to keep fighting the judgment, even though the U.S. Supreme Court recently declined for a second time to take her petition for appeal on the case.
ยป Click to enlarge image Padma Rao (left, with her mother, B.K.) has been involved in a long-running lawsuit with the city of Evanston over an assessment for paving the alley behind their home, and because of a tree that was removed during the project.
(Brian O'Mahoney/Staff Photographer)
A city attorney, meanwhile, said the case is now in the hands of Cook County, which could put up the family's condominium unit in a tax sale unless they pay immediately.
Rao said a court order, entered earlier, vacated a warrant for the city to collect the tax.
Rao, with her 72-year-old mother, B.K., have defended themselves against the city's lawsuit to levy the tax on the 2007 paving of the alley.
Rao and her mother fought removal of a tree in the project, saying the action ran counter to the basic precepts of their Hindu religion. Hinduism forbids the needless killing of any living thing and also requires practitioners from not participating or acquiescing in such acts, Rao said.
The tree stood at the exit drive of the condo and served as a kind of a "sentry" to people as they drove away from the premises, Rao and her mother said.
The city argued in court that the tree was located partially on city property and fell partly on the common area that belonged to the 33-unit Corinthian Condominium Association where Rao resides.
Moreover, the condominium association gave the city permission to take it down, "so we did," said Tober-Purze. In addition, the tree was in poor health and likely to die anyway, she said.
Rao said the city arborist had told her that the tree, between 30 and 40 years old, had no infectious diseases and did not pose any public health risk. She said he never mentioned anything about it being in poor health.
She said well more than 90 percent of the tree's ground volume fell on the condo's land.
In addition, she said the city's own survey showed that the tree did not obstruct the alley where the paving was to take place, since a utility pole that stood outside where the tree formerly stood was left undisturbed in the project.
Rao said the makeup of the condominium board was in dispute at the time. She said the board was not in control of such decisions anyway -- with state law giving unit holders individual rights on such matters.
Another possible option
She argued that city officials should have filed for eminent domain in Cook County Circuit Court if they wanted to take down the tree. Officials would have had to prove it was necessary to cut down the tree, she said.
Records show the city has spent close to $40,000 in legal bills after turning to outside counsel in April 2008.
Tober-Purze said Pao's legal remedies are exhausted, with the Supreme Court declining to take up the case for a second time.
"What happens next, sadly, is she could lose her property in a scavenger sale if she doesn't pay the assessment immediately," said Tober-Purze. "They go after people for unpaid taxes, and this concerns a tax on the property."
Further, Tober-Purze said the city offered to pay her assessment before all legal costs were incurred, but she said Rao insisted on fighting the case on principle.
Rao said the offer came long after she had filed her appeal and incurred substantial costs.
Rather than paying her off and making her the "middle man" in the tree's ultimate demise, "the city could have simply paid the amount and disposed of the judgment," Rao said, "so I wouldn't have to be involved."