In December, leaders of a Catholic parish in Burlington won a two-year court battle against activists who sought to stop their planned demolition of the downtown Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception.
But just as that conflict ended, another is brewing.
Earlier this month, the City of Burlington informed the parish that the cathedral no longer qualifies for the tax-exempt status generally afforded to religious organizations.
The parish, however, says the city’s tax analysis is faulty. Used or not, the parish says, a church is a church — and therefore can’t be taxed.
“Until the cathedral is demolished, nothing changes,” the parish’s attorney, John Franco, said.
The city is considering the parish’s argument, but for now, the parties are at a stalemate that may not be resolved for months.
Built in 1977, the cathedral shuttered six years ago after parishioners could no longer afford to maintain it. The congregation, which now worships at the nearby Cathedral of St. Joseph, listed the property for sale in 2019 for $8.5 million.
The following year, a chain-link fence was erected around the tree-lined grounds, barring access to city dwellers who once enjoyed lounging on the lawn. Now, the structure is on a city list of vacant buildings, and the parish is charged a fee for each year it remains empty.
In 2022, the parish sought a city permit to tear down the building as a means of deconsecrating it and preparing the property for redevelopment. But a group of preservationists sued.
Another activist, Devin Colman, began to question whether the former cathedral should still be tax-free. The religious organization operates as a nonprofit, meaning it doesn’t have to pay local property taxes. But Colman wondered how a cathedral that’s no longer offering services — and that’s walled off to the public — could still receive the benefit.
“If a property isn’t open to the public, it would be a stretch to meet the tax-exempt definition.” Rebecca Sameroff
In January 2023, Colman emailed the former city assessor, John Vickery, who said he’d look into the matter but never followed up. Nor did Vickery respond to an interview request from Seven Days last month.
Colman reprised his inquiry on January 5, when he asked Vickery’s successor, Joe Turner, whether the parish had filed a form used by nonprofits to explain why they deserve tax-exempt status. Called a PVR-317, the form isn’t required but can help assessors determine whether a property qualifies. Turner replied that there was no form on file and that the property would indeed be taxed, unless the parish could show why it shouldn’t.
Turner told Seven Days that he used a three-part test to make his decision. Established by case law, the “public, pious and charitable use test” says that to be exempt from taxes, a property must be “dedicated unconditionally” to the public and benefit the people who use it, without generating profit. Turner declined to elaborate further on his analysis.
Vermont deputy tax commissioner Rebecca Sameroff was unfamiliar with the cathedral property and has no say in the city’s decision. But, in general, she said, “if a property isn’t open to the public, it would be a stretch to meet the tax-exempt definition.”
Unless the parish can change Turner’s mind, he plans to include the property, which is assessed at $4.5 million, on next year’s grand list. Assuming a higher municipal tax rate than the current year’s, the parish would owe more than $100,000 in taxes in fiscal year 2026.
Had the cathedral been added to the tax rolls when it first closed in 2018, the parish would have paid more than $800,000 in taxes to date, according to a Seven Days analysis. State law prevents the city from collecting taxes retroactively.
There’s precedent for taxing unused religious properties. In Winooski, the city assessor added the former St. Stephen Church to the grand list after it closed in 2020. Valued at almost $500,000, the property has generated about $74,000 in taxes, mostly paid by the parish before it sold the church to members of the Handy family last summer. The Burlington parish has an agreement to sell its cathedral property to an undisclosed buyer, whose plans haven’t been publicly announced. City zoning for the lot encourages high-density buildings, including housing.
Franco, the parish attorney, says Winooski church leaders should have challenged the tax assessment, as he is in Burlington. He says the three-part test used by the city assessor isn’t applicable to the cathedral, pointing instead to another law that says a “church edifice,” or building, is exempt from taxes.
Further, Franco said, the December court ruling recognized that deconsecration through demolition is a religious act. By that logic, he said, as long as the building stands, it’s a religious structure that can’t be taxed. Because parishioners have to fundraise to pay for the demolition, it’s unclear when the tear-down will commence, Franco said.
Franco charged that Colman is repackaging the preservationists’ failed legal argument to now question the cathedral’s tax status. The crux of the lawsuit was whether the city properly granted the demolition permit under a state law that limits zoning review on houses of worship. Preservationists unsuccessfully argued that the cathedral was no longer a religious building once it closed.
Of Colman’s latest effort, “it’s literally just old wine in new bottles,” Franco said.
The cathedral’s parking operation raises other questions. Earlier this month, the U-shaped lot was dotted with signs advertising paid parking from a company called Unified Parking Partners; a yellow neon sign read “PAY HERE” above a machine that appeared to accept credit and debit cards.
As of late last week, all of that had been removed.
Franco said the parish had allowed Unified Parking Partners to run the lot in exchange for a $1,000 monthly donation. The operation was going to cease in a few months, but Franco said he advised the parish to shut it down immediately because it could jeopardize the cathedral’s tax status.
City officials weren’t aware of the paid parking lot and are investigating a possible zoning violation. Franco said the parish is now allowing workers from the nearby CityPlace Burlington construction site to park their personal vehicles there — for free.
On the tax question, he has asked city officials to reconsider their position. So far, they haven’t responded to his request.
Colman hopes the city’s initial decision stands. He thinks the parish should pay its fair share. The Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington, which oversees the parish, “owns property all over the state and should know the rules,” Colman said. “For the city, it seems like somewhere along the way, this should have been picked up and rectified much sooner.”
The state recommends assessors review tax-exempt parcels every year to see whether they still qualify. That would be a heavy lift in Burlington, where 40 percent of parcels are tax-exempt. They include properties owned by nonprofits such as the University of Vermont, UVM Medical Center and Burlington Housing Authority.
Turner acknowledged that the cathedral situation cemented the need for more regular audits but said he doesn’t think the issue is widespread. Meantime, the cathedral’s status remains an open question and could be for some time. The city has until April 1, the deadline for compiling the grand list, to officially decide whether it will tax the property. The parish could challenge the decision, first with Turner himself and with the Board of Tax Appeals, a panel appointed by the city council and mayor.
Meaning: The parish could end up back where it started — in court.
The original print version of this article was headlined “In God We Tax | Burlington officials, Catholic parish at odds over cathedral’s tax status”
Related Stories
This article appears in Feb 5-11, 2025.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
