California churches have been warned that a state housing framework could expose their property to eminent domain. Brad Dacus of the Pacific Justice Institute says developers may use the rules to seek court action against churches, potentially putting church land at risk of a forced transfer for public housing.
The warning traces to a law Gov. Gavin Newsom signed in 2023. The measure lets religious institutions and nonprofit colleges move around local zoning rules to create affordable housing. Its stated purpose was to support growth and housing services for low-income and homeless populations. Dacus says the same framework can place church land inside a housing plan even when a congregation has not agreed to sell.
Lakewood illustrates the concern. Dacus said the city designated land belonging to at least 10 churches for public housing while still allowing the sites to be used as churches. The city did not itself announce an eminent-domain seizure. The concern is what could follow: a developer might argue that the city is failing to meet housing requirements and then bring an independent action seeking eminent domain.
That possibility is the heart of Dacus’s warning. Eminent domain is the power to take private property for a public purpose, usually through government action. Dacus said California’s rules could give developers a path to ask for that power against churches, turning a zoning decision into a fight over property control.
The issue has already reached Huntington Beach. Dacus said his organization is defending Calvary Chapel in Orange County, where a developer is trying to obtain part of the church’s property rights while arguing that more housing is needed. That makes the dispute more than a theoretical reading of the law. A real church property fight is now tied to the same housing rationale.
Tony Perkins pointed to another possible reason churches could be targeted: They do not pay property taxes, while other uses could generate tax revenue. Dacus also said lenders might become less willing to work with religious organizations on church projects when control of the property is uncertain. The pressure, therefore, may begin before any property changes hands.
Perkins also posted the warning on social media:
At least 10 churches could have land taken for public housing in California.
"The law allows [developers] to… seek eminent domain against churches," explains @PacificJustice President Brad Dacus. pic.twitter.com/FDychp5zJP
— Tony Perkins (@tperkins) October 5, 2026
Why It Matters
The stakes extend beyond whether one congregation keeps a particular parcel. The source describes a collision between a public goal, adding affordable housing, and a legal tool that can alter the bargaining power of property owners. Religious institutions could face pressure to surrender land or defend it at legal and financial risk, while cities and developers face pressure to meet housing demands. People with low incomes and homeless people are also part of the picture, because the policy was created to address those needs. The dispute asks whether moving faster on housing can come at the expense of voluntary control over church property.
The open questions are practical as well as legal. Does a zoning designation that permits public housing remain a planning choice, or can it become a launch point for a developer’s eminent-domain request? Will the possibility of a forced transfer make lenders wary of church projects even before a court decides who has the stronger claim? The Lakewood decision and the Calvary Chapel dispute give those questions immediate weight. They also show why the law’s meaning may be shaped not only by its text, but by how cities, developers, churches, and courts respond when housing goals collide with religious property rights.
Source: The Liberty Daily
