[MassHistPres] grants for a historical church

[roberta cameron]

This is a very sticky issue, which gets more complicated the more deeply
you get into it. Medford's City Solicitor prepared an opinion a few years
ago, post Acton decision, weighing the concern about the Anti-Aid amendment
and spending public funds on religious purposes, versus case law which
establishes that public funding cannot be denied to a religious
organization solely because of its religious beliefs for a project which
would be funded if the exact same request was made by any non-religious
organization. The context for the memo was a grant to restore a historic
door on a church building, and he argued that a door is a fundamental part
of any building, not specifically serving a religious purpose.

In the two communities I work in, Medford and Somerville, we have given CPA
grants to churches, to nonreligious nonprofit organizations that own
buildings which were formerly churches, and a building that was
historically secular but is now owned by a religious organization. Any of
these buildings at any time could be sold to another organization which
uses them for a different purpose, so the investment to preserve
the building in exchange for a permanent preservation restriction is
independent of who is using the building. However, if the PR restricts the
owner from making any exterior changes to the building, then the owner is
bound to preserve any religious iconography that happens to be part of the
exterior ornamentation, regardless of whether it is an expression of their
own beliefs (whether the organization is religious or not). This compels
nonreligious organizations to have to raise funds from private sources to
restore that one panel  that has a religious symbol on it, to get funding
to restore all of their otherwise plain windows. In fact, there are some
churches who would be happy to get rid of their stained glass windows
because it would be cheaper to replace them with plain windows, but that
wouldn't be historic preservation.

I have also heard interpretations that suggest that cities acquiring PRs on
church-owned property is mingling church and state resources, and on the
other hand, that stained glass windows in buildings owned by nonreligious
organizations can be treated as secular art, eligible for public funding no
matter what is depicted in them. It is very easy to fall into a situation
where one is discriminating on the basis of religion (by not funding a
project that would otherwise be eligible), or compelling a property owner
to preserve some religious expression whether or not the City actually pays
for it, or running into other church/state problems. There is no clear
right answer (although I would love to know more if anyone has found one.)
Because of the situations I have encountered, I would love to see a
foundation that provides privately-funded grants to preserve stained glass
windows or other religious iconography on the exterior of buildings,
because there is so much valuable community space that is locked up inside
these historic buildings that aren't eligible for public funds because of
the aesthetic choice of designers from 100 years ago. (If there are funding
sources I would love to know about them!) The buildings themselves are
valuable public assets both for historic reasons but also for community
purposes which we have no other spaces to accommodate.

*Roberta Cameron, AICP*

*Community Preservation Act Manager*

Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development

City of Somerville

rcameron at somervillema.gov <lmorton at somervillema.gov>

On Wed, Jan 8, 2025 at 2:49 PM SAMUEL R BLAIR via MassHistPres <
masshistpres at cs.umb.edu> wrote:

> But doesn't that disadvantage religious groups who use and always have
> used religious iconography? Wouldn't that violate the 14th Amendment?
>
> Samuel R. Blair
> AIA emeritus
> Fitchburg
>
> On 01/07/2025 3:47 PM EST Judy Markland via MassHistPres <
> masshistpres at cs.umb.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
> Olivia,
>
> Many communities have funded CPA projects for restoration work on
> churches.  The work must be for restoration of the building itself, rather
> than for any religious components of the building.  Thus plain glass
> windows may typically be restored with CPA funds, but not stained glass
> windows.  The Community Preservation Coalition has an informative piece
> on the state court decision
> <https://www.communitypreservation.org/home/news/ma-supreme-judicial-court-issues-decision-acton-lawsuit>
> on this matter and its interpretation.  They advise that any CPA
> application for work on religious structures be reviewed by municipal
> counsel before approval.
>
> Judy
> On 1/6/2025 12:27 PM, Olivia Davis Mausel via MassHistPres wrote:
>
> Any suggestions for a restoration grant for an historic church here in
> Holyoke.
> Many doors are closed to this 'Iglesia' because of its religious
> affiliation....denied by local CPA, and state mandates. Sacred Places is
> not an option- either.
> Thank you for any information/suggestions that you can provide.
> Olivia Mausel
> Holyoke, MA
>
> _______________________________________________
> MassHistPres mailing listMassHistPres at cs.umb.eduhttps://mailman.cs.umb.edu/listinfo/masshistpres
>
>
>
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
> Virus-free.www.avg.com
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
> _______________________________________________
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
> https://mailman.cs.umb.edu/listinfo/masshistpres
>
> _______________________________________________
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
> https://mailman.cs.umb.edu/listinfo/masshistpres
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/pipermail/masshistpres/attachments/20250108/5dd430d5/attachment-0001.html>