Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Minot council approves $65,200 forgivable facade loan for Church of Saint Leo over two dissenting votes
Loading...
Summary
The council approved up to $65,200 in forgivable loan funds for exterior improvements to the Church of Saint Leo at 208 1st St. SE after debate about tax-exempt status and legal risks; the motion passed 5–2 with Aldermen Pittner and Samuelson opposed.
The Minot City Council voted 5–2 on April 6 to approve a forgivable loan of up to $65,200 for facade improvements at 208 1st Street Southeast for the Church of Saint Leo (Trustee Incorporated).
The request was on the agenda as item 7.4. City staff and the clerk clarified a printed address error on the agenda; the correct address shown on meeting monitors is 208 1st Street Southeast. The recommended action in the packet did not repeat the address, the clerk said.
Opponents raised legal and policy concerns about awarding public funds to a tax-exempt religious institution. Alderman Samuelson said the program "is not the funding law" and that the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) governs land-use discrimination rather than funding; he said he would not support the facade program in general and would not support this application.
The city attorney advised council members to apply neutral, objective criteria from the facade program guidelines — such as eligibility district, design standards, and completeness of application — rather than use tax-exempt status as a deciding factor. He noted other federal constitutional protections (free exercise and equal protection) could be relevant and cautioned that treating religious applicants differently could invite legal risk.
Alderman Blessum and Alderman Fuller both said they would support the award, citing private funds coming into the project and the church's investments in downtown buildings, including a $2.1 million project on a historical building list. Alderman Pittner said he would vote no, noting concerns that some applicants provide little return to taxpayers.
The final roll call on the motion produced five yes votes and two no votes; the clerk recorded dissent from Aldermen Pittner and Samuelson. The council authorized the mayor to sign the agreement.
Next steps: The item was approved as presented and the mayor was authorized to sign; council discussion noted federal legal standards should guide future decisions and that the program's guidelines should be applied uniformly.
