Places of Public Worship Exemption and Classification

Places of Public Worship Exemption and Classification Last Document Review Date: September 29, 2014 Last Legal Review Date: August 26, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction... 2 In Scope... 2 Out of Scope... 2 Executive Summary... 2 Resources... 2 Compliance Checklist... 4 Places of Public Worship... 6 Exemption... 6 Mandatory Exemption Versus Permissive Exemption... 6 Key Questions... 6 Classification... 8 Appendix A: Review Process... 11 Places of Public Workship Exemptions... 11 Appendix B: Decisions Pertaining to Places of Public Worship... 16 Stated Cases Exemption... 16 Board Decisions Exemption... 18 Stated Cases Classification... 23 Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 1

INTRODUCTION In Scope This document applies to all property that is used, or set aside, for public worship, in municipalities or in rural areas. It addresses the exemptions applicable to these properties and their classification. Out of Scope This document does not deal with the application of the more general exemptions for properties used for charitable purposes, although churches may be charitable organizations. If a church-owned property is to be exempt due to its charitable nature (e.g., some Salvation Army owned properties might fall under this category), then the exemption will likely be pursuant to a provision different from the provisions applicable for places of public worship. This document also does not address the specific exemptions for Bible Colleges under specific pieces of legislation that relate to the particular college. This document does not address classification of properties owned or used by religious organizations for purposes other than public worship. Those properties will be classified according to their use, just as any other property is. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RESOURCES The goals of this document are to achieve consistency in: 1. Exemption of places of public worship. 2. Classification of places of public worship. Community Charter, section 220(1)(h), 224(2)(f) and 224(2)(g) Local Government Act, section 809(4)(b) Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 2

Prescribed Classes of Property Regulation, BC Regulation 438/81 Taxation (Rural Area) Act, section 15(1)(d) Vancouver Charter, section 396(1)(c)(iv) and section 397(1) Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 3

COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST The following is a list of items that must be completed in order to be considered compliant with this document: 1. Where properties/portions of properties that are used (or set aside for use) principally as places of public worship meet the requirements for exemption set out in the Vancouver Charter, Community Charter, or Taxation (Rural Area) Acts, a mandatory exemption must be applied using the guidelines set out in this document. 2. Confirm whether the property is within a municipality (including City of Vancouver) or in a rural area to determine which legislation to apply. 3. Confirm that worship occurs at the property (i.e., worship likely does not occur on the entirety of a religious recreational camp). 4. Confirm that the worship is public by applying the invitation test (i.e., that anyone is invited to attend to worship, not just a group within the congregation or specific persons attending at the property). 5. Confirm that public worship is the principal use of the property. 6. For properties within a municipality 1 (except City of Vancouver), confirm that the property is owned by one of the following: 2 o The religious organization using the building o Trustees for the use of that organization o A religious organization granting a lease of the building and land to be used solely for public worship If the property is owned by none of these, confirm whether the municipality has passed a permissive exemption for the property. 3 1 The Taxation (Rural Area) Act, section 15(1)(d) does not have an ownership criterion. 2 Pursuant to section 220(1)(h) of the Community Charter. Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 4

For properties within the City of Vancouver, confirm that the property is owned by a religious organization, either directly or through trustees (includes owner under agreement). 4 7. For properties within a municipality (except City of Vancouver) which conform to the ownership requirement, confirm whether the municipality has passed a permissive exemption for: o Land surrounding the worship building o A hall necessary to the worship building o Land surrounding the hall 8. Public places of worship must be classified based on their use as set out in BC Regulation 438/81, Prescribed Classes of Property, using the guidelines set out in this document. 3 A permissive exemption can be passed for a leased property owned by a non-religious owner, under section 224(2)(g) of the Community Charter, no matter who the owner is. 4 Pursuant to section 396(1)(c)(iv) of the Vancouver Charter. Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 5

PLACES OF PUBLIC WORSHIP Exemption Exemptions for places of public worship can be complicated because they may be: o Mandatory only, or permissive only, or a combination of both mandatory and permissive. o Sometimes, but not always, based on ownership criteria. o Complete or partial, depending on the circumstances. o For a building or just a place of public worship. Mandatory Exemption Versus Permissive Exemption Key Questions A mandatory exemption is one that the assessor must apply if the criteria in the exemption are met. A permissive exemption is one that requires a bylaw to be passed by a municipality or regional district. The bylaw must be authorized by the Community Charter (for municipalities) or the Local Government Act (for regional districts). There are no permissive exemptions for places of public worship under the Vancouver Charter there is only a mandatory exemption. Where there is a permissive exemption, consider the legislative provision under which the permissive exemption bylaw was passed, and determine whether the property meets the criteria of the legislation and bylaw before applying the exemption to the property. Exemptions for places of public worship are generally based on the use of the property and may, in addition, be based on ownership of the property. Some of the questions to ask in determining whether a property is exempt as a place of public worship include: 1. Where is the property located? Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 6

o This question is important because it will determine which piece of legislation is applicable. For example, in the City of Vancouver, apply the Vancouver Charter, section 396(1)(c)(iv). In municipalities other than the City of Vancouver, apply the Community Charter, sections 220(1)(h), 224(2)(f) or 224(2)(g). For rural areas, apply either the Taxation (Rural Area) Act, section 15(1)(d), or the Local Government Act, section 809(4)(b) (depending on the circumstances). 2. Does worship occur at the property? o Establish what evidence there is that worship occurs, or will occur if the property has improvements under construction/renovation. 3. Is the worship public? o Establish what evidence there is of who participates, or will participate, in the worship. 4. How often does this activity occur? o This evidence will go toward a finding of what the principal use of the property is. 5 5. If the property is used for public worship, is that its principal use? o Determine whether there are any other uses of the property. There is no need for worship to be the only use of the property, provided that worship is its principal use. Areas that are used for more than one purpose should be looked at to see if there is a need to apportion the exemption to the portions of the property that have as a principal use public worship. o For areas that are used both for worship and daycare purposes (e.g., Sunday school spaces), allow the exemption in order that these sorts of properties will be treated consistently with exemption in the Vancouver Charter (which exempts daycares in worship spaces). 6. Is the whole of the property used for public worship, or only a portion of it? 5 Young Life v. Assessor of Area 08 North Shore/Squamish Valley (2005, Stated Case 487, BCSC Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 7

o If only a portion of the building is set apart and/or used for public worship (including areas that are necessarily incidental to the worship, such as hallways, foyers, washrooms), then that is the area that should be exempted under the exemption for places of public worship. NOTE If there are other areas of the building that could be exempt under a different exemption (e.g., such as a permissive exemption), then consider what else may apply. Classification o If the whole of the building is set apart and/or used for public worship then the whole of the building should be exempted under the exemption for places of public worship. 7. Who owns the property? o This is relevant for the exemption under the Vancouver Charter, and for some of the exemption provisions under the Community Charter. Classification of places of public worship is governed by BC Regulation 438/81, the Prescribed Classes of Property Regulation. Class 8 recreational property/non-profit organization is the classification that applies to most places of public worship. The regulation provides for specific use requirements to be met or Class 8 will be lost. If a property does not qualify for Class 8, it will likely be Class 6 business and other, or possibly Class 1 residential if there is a residential component to the property (e.g., a manse). Split classification may be necessary if part of a property meets the criteria for Class 8 and part does not. It is important to keep in mind that the tax status of a property and its classification are completely separate concepts, so depending on the facts of a particular situation a property used for public worship could be in Class 8 but not entitled to exemption or vice versa. For example, if a property is purchased after June and does not meet the 150-day test Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 8

in Class 8, but is used as a place of public worship as of December 31, then for the upcoming roll it cannot be in Class 8, but it will be exempt as a place of public worship (for the first year). Classification must be based on the type or use of the property, not on ownership. Since some exemptions are based (at least in part) on ownership, but classification is based on the type or use of the property, it may be possible to have a property that is classified as Class 8, but not exempt because of not meeting the ownership requirement for exemption. The following criteria must be met for a property used or set aside for use as a place of public worship to receive Class 8: 1. The use or setting aside of the land and improvements for the purpose of public worship must be for at least 150 days of year ending June 30. 2. The 150 days cannot include any days where: o The land and improvements so used or set aside are also used for i) any purpose by an organization that is neither a religious organization nor a non-profit fraternal organization, ii) the property is used for entertainment with an admission charge, or iii) there is the sale or consumption of alcohol on the property. Class 8 may apply not only to the part of the property used for public worship (i.e., the sanctuary in a church), but also to any facilities necessarily incidental to that use (i.e., such as the clergyperson s offices, a church hall, parking, etc.). If a property will be or has been under construction or renovation and there is a clear intention that for at least 150 days prior to June 30 the property has been set aside for public worship (e.g., through building permit), and if there are no other reasons (e.g., alternate usage) to place the property in a different property class, then the property Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 9

should be placed in Class 8. In cases of uncertainty, please contact Legal Services. If a property is owned by a religious organization but public worship is no longer a use of the property at all (e.g., a derelict building), then the exemption should be removed and the classification changed to Class 6 (see: Assessor of Area 25 Northwest v. Trustees of Prince Rupert Congregation of Church of Christ, 1993, AAB). If the property is within a municipality, check first with the municipality regarding whether it wishes to pass a permissive exemption for the property even though it is no longer used as a place of public worship (e.g., an exemption under the Community Charter, section 224(2)(a), depending on the circumstances). Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 10

APPENDIX A: REVIEW PROCESS Places of Public Workship Exemptions Legislation Type and extent of Exemption Mandatory Criteria Special considerations Vancouver Charter, section 396(1)(c)(iv) and section 397(1) Only within the City of Vancouver Can be full or partial Exemption for churches Real property, includes land and improvements thereon ; exemption applies to any public worship of God and to improvements on property even if improvements are not a building Apply to worship building of any religious organization Exemption not lost if bylaw of City of Vancouver approves use of part of building for/by: government, even if fee paid for use (e.g., polling place for election) Community Charter, sections 220(1)(h) and 224(2)(f); or section 224(2)(g) Mandatory or permissive, or a combination of both mandatory and permissive Must be both set apart and in use as place of public worship cannot apply if improvements not in use, so cannot apply to improvements that are under construction or that are being renovated use as place of public worship not required to be exclusive use, so other uses permitted provided public worship is the primary use (Young Life) Must be owned directly by the religious organization using it, or by trustees for that religious organization Ownership can be either registered ownership or ownership under agreement Section 220(1)(h) Mandatory exemption for building set apart for public worship and land on which the building stands Building building narrower than Care or instruction of children under school age by charitable or non-profit organization (e.g., pre-school or daycare) teaching of organ or choral music, even if fee paid for use organ recitals, even if recitalist receives fee for recital Section 397(1) limits the exemption to so much real property as is reasonably necessary for the religious organization, which is up to the Assessor to determine Land on which the building stands is the footprint of land under the exempt worship building. No requirement that the land and improvements be used exclusively for public Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 11

Legislation Type and extent of Exemption Criteria Special considerations Municipalities other than the City of Vancouver Can be full or partial improvements ; exemption applies only to buildings Set apart for public worship can apply to buildings under construction or being renovated 6 worship, so secondary uses of space permissible without exemption being lost. However, public worship should be the primary user intended use if the building is under construction/being renovated) (Young Life) Title to land (i.e., ownership) must be registered in one of the following: the religious organization using the building; the trustees for the use of that organization; or a religious organization granting a lease of the building and land to be used solely for public worship A company that enters into a legally binding trust agreement with a religious organization, that provides the property is held in trust for the exclusive use by the religious organization as a place of worship, should meet the ownership criterion under section 220(1)(h). Section 224(2)(f) Permissive exemption bylaw by municipality required to exempt: area of land surrounding the exempted building (i.e., the building exempt under section 220(1)(h) a hall that council considers is necessary to the exempt building, and the land on which the hall stands any area of land surrounding the exempt hall and the land on which it stands It is a prerequisite to the application of section 224(2)(f) that there be an exempt worship building under section 220(1)(h); if the building isn t exempt under section 220(1)(h), then the municipality has no authority under section 224(2)(f) to pass a permissive exemption If Council chooses not to pass a permissive exemption bylaw for 6 In Roman Catholic Archbishop v. Assessor of Area 23 Kamloops (1982, Stated Case 164, BCSC), the Court decided that an exemption for a building set apart and in use for the public worship of God could not apply to a building under construction. Subsequent to that decision, the words and in use for were removed from the exempting provision, so which now enables places of public worship to be exempted while under construction (as soon as construction of a building has commenced on site). Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 12

Legislation Type and extent of Exemption Criteria Special considerations the land surrounding the exempt building, the hall and the land under the hall, or the land surrounding the exempt hall, neither the PARP nor the PAAB can change that. 7 If Council does not pass a permissive exemption, or passes a permissive exemption for only part of the the land surrounding the exempt building, the hall and the land under the hall, or the land surrounding the exempt hall, the property will be partially exempt and partially taxable. Section 224(2)(g) Permissive exemption bylaw required to exempt religious organization that, under lease or license, uses/occupies land or improvements for public worship or for purposes of a hall council considers necessary to land and improvements used for public worship If Council chooses not to pass a permissive exemption bylaw for land or improvements leased by a religious organization, neither the PARP nor the PAAB can change that (see footnote #2). If the Council chooses to pass a permissive exemption for only a portion of the property, the property will be partially exempt and partially taxable. 7 See Assessor of Area 14 Surrey/White Rock v. Iglesia Ni Cristo Church of Christ and Roman Catholic Archbishop of Vancouver (2003, PAAB refer to as 2003 PAABBC 20030824); Assessor of Area 14 Surrey/White Rock v. Roman Catholic Archbishop of Vancouver (2003, PAAB refer to as 2004 PAABBC 20031755) Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 13

Legislation Type and extent of Exemption Permissive Criteria Special considerations Local Government Act, section 809(4)(b) Regional Districts (may be urban or rural, though because of exemptions under Community Charter and Vancouver Charter, most likely to apply to rural properties) May be full or partial Permissive exemption bylaw to exempt property that a church does not own but which it rents or occupies for public worship or for purposes of a church hall council considers necessary to land and improvements used for public worship Apply to worship building of any religious organization This provision specifically refers to the religious organization being the tenant or licensee of the property, therefore the property can be owned by anyone (i.e., including a private, taxable owner) and still be eligible for the permissive exemption, provided it is used or occupied by a religious organization as tenant or licensee. If the regional district board chooses not to pass a permissive exemption bylaw for land or improvements leased by a religious organization, neither the PARP nor the PAAB can change that (see footnote #2). However, if the property is in the rural area, check to see if it qualifies for exemption under the Taxation (Rural Area) Act. Taxation (Rural Area) Act, section 15(1)(d) Mandatory Full Property must be a place of public worship (see definitions section) primary use of the property must be for public worship worship must be public If the regional district board chooses to pass a permissive exemption for only a portion of the property, the property will be partially exempt and partially taxable. Place can be land only if the land meets the definition of a place of public worship (see BC Assessment (BCA) Glossary for definition). No ownership criteria for place of public worship, so place of public worship need not be owned by the religious organization using it. Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 14

Legislation Type and extent of Exemption Criteria Special considerations No limitation to the extent (i.e., size in area) of the exemption. However, if only a portion of a property meets the definition of a place of public worship, then the exemption should be applied only to that extent. Any area that is reasonably ancillary to the public worship use of the property should be exempted which, depending on the size of the parcel, may be all of it or only some of it. Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 15

APPENDIX B: DECISIONS PERTAINING TO PLACES OF PUBLIC WORSHIP Stated Cases Exemption 1. Young Life v. Assessor of Area 08 North Shore/Squamish Valley (2005, Stated Case 487, BCSC) Public Worship Places of Public Worship Of Demonstrable Benefit to All Members of The Community Non-Profit Organization Young Life is a non-profit organization whose purpose is the presentation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ to youth. The subject properties are located on Princess Louisa Inlet on the coast of British Columbia, approximately 100 miles north of Vancouver. They are divided into three distinct locations and used for the operation of a Christian youth camp known as the Malibu Club, a youth wilderness hiking and kayaking program known as Beyond Malibu, and an administration headquarters known as the Headquarters and Landing. At issue was whether Young Life's use of the properties for an evangelist-christian summer camp, and their many outdoor sports and related activities, may properly be characterized as public worship occurring in places of public worship, or are of demonstrable benefit to all members of the community where the land is located. HELD: 1. The properties are not places of public worship so as to entitle them to exemption under section 15(1)(d) of the Taxation (Rural Area) Act (the Act). Not all the activities of the staff and campers constitute worship. What worship that does occur is not public worship. The principal use of the properties is not as a place of worship, but rather as a recreational summer camp. The dictionary definitions all define worship in terms such as: reverence or adoration of a deity through acts, rites or ceremony. BCA concludes that for worship to be public it must involve the coming together of people in a corporate event to which members of the public are given notice that they are Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 16

invited to attend and to which members of the public feel invited. 2. The properties are not of demonstrable benefit to all members of the community where the land is located under section 15(1)(q) of the Taxation (Rural Area) Act because the activities and the advancement of religion through evangelism do not have a sufficient and direct benefit to the community. 2. Roman Catholic Bishop of Kamloops v. Kamloops Assessor (1982, Stated Case 164, BCSC) Exemption Municipal Act, section 398 (h) [now, Community Charter, sections 220(1)(h) and 224(2)(f)] Building set apart and in use for public worship of God A church building was under construction, but as of December 31, 1980, was incomplete and not in use for the public worship of God. HELD: Since the building was not complete nor used for the public worship of God, the exemption for a building set apart and in use for public worship did not apply. NOTE Since this decision, the exemption was changed from a building set apart and in use for public worship to a building set apart for public worship. This was done to allow for buildings that are under construction or in the process of being renovated to get/continue to get the exemption for a place of public worship. 3. Franck Patterson et al v. Assessor of Area 08 (1956, Stated Case 006, BCSC) Tax Exemptions Places of Worship Eligibility On Sundays, Sunday school is conducted in the hall as well as in the church proper. The hall contains a chapel that is open to the public six days a week for individual meditation. To this extent, the hall is used for the public worship of God. Other activities are carried on in the hall, these being of a social and recreational nature designed to promote the moral and physical welfare of young church members. The use of the hall is confined to church members. The church does not Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 17

charge rent for the use of the hall. Groups using the hall pay no rent, but some of them make a yearly donation to the church on a purely voluntary basis. Thus, the hall cannot be considered in any sense a commercial undertaking. HELD: The exemption does not require that the place of public worship to be exclusively or solely used for public worship. The property is eligible for the exemption as a place of public worship despite other activities occurring there. NOTE The Board, in Young Life, supra, held that the public worship needed to be the principal activity at the property. That finding was upheld by the BC Supreme Court. 4. Bishop of Vancouver Island v. City of Victoria, [1920] 3 W.W.R. 493 (BCCA) Every building set apart and in use for public worship of God Now the expression place of public worship... is as wide as it is indefinite, and would, without more, include a building with the adjoining land necessary for due enjoyment, and it might mean either a building or piece of land, open or enclosed, without any building or even an altar where people congregated according to their religious inclinations for public worship, with seats or benches, or without, just as they did, for example, in the early days in Victoria under a fine oak tree called the Gospel Oak, which until a few months ago was still standing on Fort Street, between Douglas and Blanshard streets, within a few yards of the cathedral now in question... Board Decisions Exemption 1. Oceanside Christian Ministries Inc v. Assessor of Area 04 Central Vancouver Island (2005, PAAB refer to as 2006 PAABBC 20060074, decision dated January 24, 2006) Place of public worship/exemption/classification The appellant provided evidence of a weekly schedule of events that occur on the property, which include bible study, ladies group, youth group and a coffee house. Sunday worship services occur at a different location. The appellant Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 18

submitted that the public is welcome to the activities held at the subject property. HELD: The activities occurring at the subject property do not constitute public worship. Young Life, supra was followed regarding the use of the meaning of public worship. 2. Assessor of Area 14 Surrey/White Rock v. Roman Catholic Archbishop of Vancouver (2003, PAAB refer to as 2004 PAABBC 20031755, decision dated March 4, 2004) Place of public worship/exemption/what constitutes building set apart The subject property is a 14.29-acre site improved with walkways, benches and various plaques depicting the stations of the cross. At issue was whether the property was exempt under section 339(1)(g) (mandatory exemption) or section 341(2)(c) (permissive exemption) of the (then) Local Government Act. The assessor argued that the property did not qualify for a mandatory exemption because there was not a building set apart for public worship. The municipality had declined to exercise its discretion to grant a permissive exemption for the property. HELD: Under section 339(1)(g) of the Local Government Act (now section 220(1)(h) of the Community Charter) an exemption must be granted in relation to a building set apart for public worship and the land on which the building stands. In order to qualify for an exemption under this section, there must be a building on the property. The evidence is that the property is improved with walkways, plaques and benches. These are improvements but they do not fall within the ordinary meaning of building. Accordingly, the property does not qualify for a mandatory exemption for a building set apart for public worship. The municipality s power to pass a permissive exemption for land surrounding the exempted building is contingent on there being an exempt building. Since there is no exempt building, then the municipality has no authority to pass a permissive exemption for land surrounding. The municipality had an additional power to grant a permissive exemption for property used for charitable or philanthropic purposes, but exercised its discretion not to pass that permissive exemption. Neither the PARP nor the Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 19

Board has authority to interfere with the municipality s decision not to grant a permissive exemption. 3. Assessor of Area 14 Surrey/White Rock v. Iglesia Ni Cristo Church of Christ Inc et al (2003, PAAB refer to as 2003 PAABBC 20030824, decision dated October 16, 2003) Land surrounding exempt building not included in municipal permissive exemption bylaw The assessor exempted the building set apart for public worship and the land under it, but took the position that for the land surrounding the exempt building to be exempt, a permissive exemption from the municipality was required. The municipality did not pass any permissive exemption for the land surrounding the exempt building, on which were paving (for parking) and grass. The PARP exempted the entirety of the property. HELD: The City of Surrey municipal council did specifically consider, but did not renew the discretionary tax exempt status of the surrounding land. In effect, the PARP exercised the discretion given to the City of Surrey municipal council when it created an exemption for the surrounding land for the 2003 Assessment Roll. The PARP had no legislative authority to exercise that discretion, so the exemption is ineffective. Neither does the Board have the jurisdiction to impose an obligation on the City of Surrey municipal council to send applications for discretionary tax exemptions to the owners of all exempt buildings or to determine what the City of Surrey municipal council may have done had an application been made in relation to the surrounding land. Neither the PARP nor the Board has the authority to exercise the discretionary power of a municipal council to grant an exemption from taxation in relation to the surrounding land for the 2003 Assessment Roll. NOTE Since the Board s decision in Iglesia Ni Cristo Church of Christ, the Board had handed down its decision relating to the Interior Health Authority v. Assessors of Area 20 and 23 (2005, PAAB refer to as 2006 PABBC 20060082, decision dated February 1, 2006), in which the Board held that the assessor s interpretation of the exemption for a hospital and the land under it was too Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 20

narrow, and that the exemption applies to more than just the building and its footprint. Instead, the Board found that the mandatory exemption for a hospital building and the land on which it stands applies to those lands that make up the property, which are used for the purposes for which the buildings themselves are used. Included in the lands that make up the property are all ancillary uses including storage, mechanical systems, ingress and egress avenues, green space set aside for patient use, parking for doctors, staff, and visitors, and administrative functions. Without land for these functions, the healthcare facility would not be able to operate [paragraph 36]. The Board s decision in Interior Health Authority is under appeal, but in the meantime, that decision has called into question the position that assessors typically take for exemptions that apply to the building and the land on which the building stands, and then require a permissive exemption for the land surrounding the exempted building. 4. Assessor of Area 25 Northwest v. Trustees of the Prince Rupert Congregation of the Church of Christ (1993, AAB) No buildings on the land Land that was previously owned by the Crown provincial, and was exempt, was sold to the Trustees of the Congregation of the Church of Christ. There was no building on the lands. HELD: There is no mandatory exemption for the land because there is no building on it. 5. Evangelical Free Church of Canada v. Assessor of Area 17 Penticton (1992, AAB) Portion of exempt building used previously as residence, then in various worship-related capacities A portion of the subject building contained a section of the finished basement area that was subdivided and equipped to be used as a residential suite. The suite had previously been used as a residence for the incumbent minister. Since June 1990, it had been used in various capacities related to the pursuit of religious service and instruction. Other portions of the basement were used for Sunday school, a preschool play area, meeting areas and incidental storage. The permissive exemption bylaw of the municipality initially exempted the Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 21

hall, but excluded from that exemption the suite used residentially. The municipality later purported to amend that bylaw by passing a resolution. HELD: A municipality cannot amend a bylaw by resolution or order, but only by passage of another bylaw. There was no authority for the municipality to partition a portion of a building that is owned by a church, and devoted to public worship, as distinct from the land. Further, if the land is to be partitioned for the purposes of obtaining an exemption under this section, it must be done by bylaw including the metes and bounds description and such bylaw must have annexed a plan of the parcel of land showing the portions exempt and the portion taxable. That was not done in this case. Because no part of the property was used residentially, the entirety of the building exempted permissively was exempt. 6. New Life Christian Fellowship v. Assessor of Area 24 Cariboo- Quesnel (1988, AAB) Church renting premises from federal government The property is not automatically exempt as a place of public worship because the religious organization is a tenant, not an owner of the land and improvements. Consequently, the only way the property may be exempt is if the municipality passes a permissive exemption for it under (now section 224(2)(g) of the Community Charter). 7. Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada v. Assessor of Area 20 Vernon (1986, AAB) Parsonage used partly as a Sunday school section 13(1)(d) (now 15(1)(d)) of Taxation Rural Area Act A small portion of a basement in a residential building (a parsonage) was used for Sunday school purposes. The appellant asked for the entirety of the building to be exempt as a place of public worship, notwithstanding that the principal use of the building was as a residence. HELD: The residence was not eligible for exemption as a place of public worship because it was not used exclusively for that purpose. Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 22

NOTE Exclusivity of use is not required for a place to be exempt as a place of public worship; however, the principal use of the property should be for that purpose. See Franck Patterson et al, Trustees of the Congregation of St. Andrew s United Church v. Assessor of Area 08 (1956, Stated Case 006, BCSC) and Young Life v. Assessor of Area 08 (2005, Stated Case 487, BCSC). 8. West Coast Christian Fellowship v. Assessor of Area 15 Langley-Abbotsford-Matsqui (1982, AAB) Exemption for place of public worship not limited to one building or part of a single building The exemption is not limited to only one building per property should other buildings set apart meet the criteria in the exemption. Many conventional church structures situated in each community contain amenities such as kitchens, lounges, studies, libraries, and meeting rooms in addition to the formal place of worship, which have been considered to meet the criteria. As well, a portion of a building can be deemed to be a church. In the result, the Board ordered that 50 percent of a dining hall/kitchen building should be exempt because of being used for worship services, in addition to the ark building that was principally used for public worship. NOTE Considering the requirement articulated by the Court in Young Life that worship must be the principal use of the place for it to be exempt as a place of public worship, it may be that this case would be decided differently today in regard to the dining hall/kitchen building, if its principal use were not for worship purposes. Stated Cases Classification 1. SCI Canada Ltd. v. Assessor of Area 09 Vancouver (1996, Stated Case 366, BCCA) Funeral chapel at funeral home whether place of public worship Persons making funeral arrangements on behalf of a deceased person essentially hire the facility for a fee and Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 23

invite persons who were acquainted with the deceased to attend a ceremony specifically for the purpose of paying respects to the deceased. HELD: There is a distinction between public worship and private worship. Public worship must be viewed in its ordinary sense and not according to the subjective interpretation of those worshipping or offering the facility for use. Public worship requires openness without discrimination to the general public: the invitation test. Factors such as the structure of the building, public notices, the number of persons attending and advertisements may be taken into account. Persons may come from different places and be entirely unknown to one another but so long as they are properly disposed in the sense that they are reasonably suitable and prepared to behave with reasonable conformity and are then admitted, the worship may be considered public. 2. Dance Foundation v. Assessor of Area 09 Vancouver (2002, PAAB refer to as 2003 PAABBC 20039049, decision dated May 29, 2003) Used or set aside for 150 days ending June 30 whether building under construction can qualify The property was under construction during the 150 days ending June 30. The occupancy permit was not been granted until after June 30, 2001. It was granted in August 2001. There was insufficient evidence to support a finding that the property could be used or set aside for use as a meeting hall until the permit was granted. NOTE Although the Dance Foundation decision relates to a non-profit fraternal organization s use of a property for 150 days ending June 30, the same time frame is applicable for the classification of a facility as a place of public worship. Assessment Practices and Procedures Places of Public Worship 24