Scouts Honor: One famous Logan Square building won’t go condo—at least for now

[fgoodwin 23]

Scouts Honor: One famous Logan Square building wont go condoat least for now

 

http://www.philadelphiaweekly.com/articles/14825

 

by Gwen Shaffer

 

Should the local assembly of Boy Scouts be evicted from its headquarters in the Art Museum area, the grand Beaux Arts building will remain institutional in nature, Philadelphia City Councilman Darrell Clarke assured neighbors during a recent meeting. Logan Square residents called for the June 2 powwow amid fears the historic building could be transformed into upscale residential units or a restaurant.

 

Were concerned about many potential unintended consequences of this eviction, one of which is the property being developed in ways that arent compatible with the neighborhood, says Frances Dalton, who lives on adjacent Spring Street. A primary goal of nearby residents is preserving the historic building erected by the Cradle of Liberty Boy Scout Association nearly 80 years ago.

 

In 1928 City Council adopted a resolution allowing the Boy Scouts to use land at 22nd and Winter streets in perpetuity, as long as any building on the premises housed Boy Scouts-related programming. But City Council members voted May 31 to authorize termination of the lease on grounds that the city will not subsidize any organization that discriminates against gays.

 

The local Boy Scouts council provides programs for 40,000 children in Philadelphia, including after-school mentoring and job shadowing. Although this kind of support is clearly needed in Philadelphiawhere the School District was drowning in a $173 million deficit before the recent balanced budgetthe Boy Scouts ban on gay members and employees violates the citys Fair Practices Ordinance.

 

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June 2000 that as a private organization, the Boy Scouts of America may exclude whomever it wishes.

 

Rumors about the fate of the buildingprime real estate just off the Benjamin Franklin Parkwayare now flying. The former School District headquarters next doorat 21st and Winter streetsis currently being converted into luxury condos. A spokesperson for one of the developers on that project, Synterra Partners, says the company hasnt looked into buying the property now occupied by the Boy Scouts.

 

Clarke says the potential to pocket millions from the sale of the buildingwhich boasts an intricately tiled floor, a vaulted ceiling and detailed frescosplayed no role in the citys decision to move toward eviction.

 

I met with local residents and assured them the building would be used for another nonprofit or governmental entity, Clarke says. But I dont want to talk about alternative uses of the building yet. Im hopeful we can come up with compromise language.

 

City solicitor Romulo Diaz Jr. confirms the city isnt pursuing competitive uses of the property. Our move to evict the Cradle of Liberty Council is strictly a principled response to its lack of answers.

 

Nevertheless, the property is zoned R-14, a classification that could permit the building to be redeveloped into you name it, one concerned neighbor cautions. During the June 2 meeting Clarke promised to introduce legislation that would tighten the zoning designation. But with Council poised to recess for summer, that cant happen until fall.

 

The Fairmount Park Commission voted to evict the Boy Scouts last July. But the city Law Department couldnt take action without approval from the mayor and City Council, says Diaz.

 

I find it amazing that in this day and age, if you were to seek a job with the Boy Scouts, youd be asked to fill out an application that overtly states gays are not welcome, Diaz says. The Cradle of Liberty Council has to determine whats more valuableto allow members to contribute their skills without fear of discrimination, or to have the blessing of the national Boy Scouts.

 

According to property law, should the Boy Scouts ultimately be evicted, ownership of the land would revert back to the city of Philadelphia. But the Boy Scouts built the headquarters with its own funds, and the organization spends about $60,000 annually to maintain it, says Cradle of Liberty Council spokesperson Jeff Jubelirer. In 1994 the organization spent $2.6 million to refurbish the structure.

 

I dont know what the citys legal rights are regarding the building itself and the landthats likely one of the issues that could be dealt with in a legal proceeding, Jubelirer says.

 

Russell Meddin, vice president of the Logan Square Neighborhood Association, says a majority of the neighbors dont want to see the Boy Scouts booted. Theyve been excellent neighbors, in terms of taking care of their property and contributing to safety in Logan Square.

 

Dalton, the Spring Street resident, stresses that no one in the neighborhood association supports the Boy Scouts antigay policy. At the same time, this council has an important role to play in childrens lives, she says. I cant understand why its necessary to take action at this point.

 

Resolution of this 4-year-old drama may ride on the use of a single word: unlawful. Thats because the antidiscrimination policy adopted by the Cradle of Liberty Council in January 2004 states that the organization opposes any form of unlawful discrimination.

 

Ironically, the Philadelphia Law Department suggested this exact language before realizing that the Supreme Court decision makes discrimination against gays perfectly legal. City solicitor Diaz is scheduled to meet with the local Boy Scouts council at the end of June.

 

If the Cradle of Liberty Council provides clarification about whether it intends to discriminate at all, he says, we can end this impasse. The ball is in their court. This has dragged on long enough.

 

--

Gwen Shaffer (gshaffer@philadelphiaweekly.com) last wrote about casino-related legislation being debated in City Council.

[Trevorum 24]

I believe Mr. Diaz, city solicitor is mistaken when he says, "... if you were to seek a job with the Boy Scouts, youd be asked to fill out an application that overtly states gays are not welcome."

 

To my knowledge, BSA employees are not considered "leaders" and thus are not subject to the gay litmus test. Is this incorrect?

[Hunt 11]

"The Cradle of Liberty Council has to determine whats more valuableto allow members to contribute their skills without fear of discrimination, or to have the blessing of the national Boy Scouts."

 

This statement is nonsensical, as is the idea that the Cradle of Liberty Council needs to "clarify" its position. The Council doesn't have the choice of choosing a membership policy different from the national BSA, and everybody knows it. I think the problem here is that the city has the right to evict the Boy Scouts, but reasonable people can see that it's cheesy to just kick them out and take over the building they built, refurbished, and maintained, without some kind of compensation. The difficulty will be to find a way to modify the relationship in a way that is both fair and legal.

[DanKroh 11]

Trev asks: "To my knowledge, BSA employees are not considered "leaders" and thus are not subject to the gay litmus test. Is this incorrect?"

 

From the BSA National Website under "Qualifications for Employment":

 

"Believe in the BSA and subscribe to its principles and standards"

 

Also, I notice nowhere on their website under employement do they give notification that they are an "Equal Opportunity Employer". So, I believe that means that yes, they are subject to all the same restrictions as leaders.

 

Hunt, I agree that while it seems to be the legal right of the city to terminate the lease, that it also seems right for the Cradle of Liberty Council to seek compensation for what they have put into the building over the years.

[SSScout 1616]

Baltimore has a real estate policy called "Land Rent". The original owner of the land can essentially ask for rent from subsequent owners seemingly forever (if the arrangement was set up that way). The land and the structures are considered SEPERATE, as absurd as that might seem. This land rent thing can also be bought and sold, and often the land purchaser can lose track of who his land rent owner is, and without knowing it become 'in arrears' in the land rent, and end up in court, losing his property. (he is always free to move his building, eh, eh, eh).

Not that Philly has that arrangement here. Perhaps the city will end up with the LAND but not the BUILDING. The city might end up buying or renting the BUILDING from the CoLC.

 

Baltimore is presently considering legally rescinding all land rent contracts and ending this bizentine artifact from the past.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Of course, the BSA still doesn't explicitly say anywhere in its membership forms that gays can't join; they only mention it in press releases and legal documents.

 

From what I've read, the BSA built the building but gave it to the city as part of the original deal to build on public property. Permanent improvements to a rented property generally belong to the owner when a lease ends unless an agreement says otherwise, if I remember correctly.

[TheScout 10]

Merlyn, by the use of the word "explicitly" you acknowledge that the BSA does say on its membership forms that gays can not join.

[TheScout 10]

Merlyn, by the use of the word "explicitly" you acknowledge that the BSA does say on its membership forms that gays can not join.

[TheScout 10]

Merlyn, by the use of the word "explicitly" you acknowledge that the BSA does say on its membership forms that gays can not join.

[nldscout 18]

I would contribute to the fund to rent the crane and wrecking ball.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

TheScout, the BSA does not explicitly say gays can't join on their membership forms. Mr. Diaz is wrong to say that the BSA forms "overtly" state it; it's implicit, which means the BSA could decide at some point in the future that Jews or Hindus or Democrats don't meet their admission requirements.

[TheScout 10]

Again, by using the word "explicitly" you acknowledge that the BSA does in fact say on their membership forms that gays are not allowed.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

No, I don't. The BSA does not explicitly state on their membership for that gays can't join, right?

 

Now, you can interpret that to mean the BSA implicitly says so, but I still haven't said that. In fact, all I've said is that the BSA does not explicitly state that gays can't join. They also don't explicitly state that Jews can't join -- yet Jews CAN join.

[Hunt 11]

Didn't BSA fire the head of SeaBase for being gay? I think it's pretty clear that at least some employees are subject to the same restriction as members.

 

As far as the building in Philadelphia, while it might usually be the case that a building reverts to the owner when the lease expires, here the original intention was that the property be used by the Scouts in perpetuity as long as they used it for Scouting purposes. They are only being evicted because of a change in policy by the city, and that's what makes the situation clearly unfair to any reasonable person.

[TheScout 10]

Merlyn, then why when you say that don't you leave out the term 'explicit.'

 

Oh yeah, because we all no the policy says no gays.