Boy Scouts vs. Philadelphia

[evmori 11]

The City of the Cheese Steak agreed to lease the building to the BSA for $1 providing the BSA maintained it. The BSA's membership requirements were the same then as they are now. The BSA lived up to their end. The City of the Cheese Steak decided they didn't want to live up to their end.

[Narraticong 15]

Merlyn, can you give me some examples of churches who have lost tax exempt status due to becoming too involved politically? We always hear about this but I honestly can't recall any instances. The good Reverend Wright in Chicago does not seem to be in any danger of losing his status. Numerous other urban churches openly endorsed Mr. Obama with little apparent consequence.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Ed, I've pointed out a large number of times that the agreement ALSO allowed either the city or the BSA to end the agreement unilaterally by giving one year's notice. The city gave them one year's notice. The city followed the agreement. You can't just follow SOME of the rules, right? If the agreement allows the city to end the agreement by giving one year's notice, they can DO that, right?

 

narraticong, it's more threatened than used, but the Church at Pierce Creek was the first such instance when it lost its tax exempt status in 1995 for one example.

[evmori 11]

Did the City of Cheese Steak have this Fair Practices Ordinance in place when they originally agreed to the lease with the BSA?

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

No Ed, but that doesn't matter. The city has always had the ability to end the lease by giving notice a year in advance, and that's how they ended the lease; by following the terms of the original agreement.

[evmori 11]

Well yeah it does matter Merlyn. When did the City of Cheese Steak institute this Fair Practices Ordinance?

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

It doesn't matter, Ed. The city (and the BSA) have always had the ability to end this agreement as soon as either side wanted to end it; all either side had to do was give a year's notice. It doesn't matter if the city gives notice because a law requires them to break off the relationship, or the BSA becomes such a social pariah that the general public no longer wants to give them a free ride, or if the city council decided by flipping a coin.

[evmori 11]

Sounds like typical political pandering Merlyn! If this Fair Practices Ordinance the City of Cheese Steak instituted was in place for years then they decided to boot the BSA based on that ordinance, then the ordinance is just an "excuse" not the reason. The ones that will suffer is the City of Cheese Steak!

 

Now it would be a hoot if someone rented/bought the building then rented it back to the BSA for $1!

[RememberSchiff 3671]

Maybe the City of Philadelphia will lease the building to a non-discriminatory youth group, like the Philadelphia Boy & Girls Club, for $1/yr.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Ed, those of us who paid attention knew this became an issue when the BSA won the Dale case and was, officially, a private organization that could discriminate. If Dale had gone the other way, the BSA would be a public accommodation that could not discriminate. At first, the C of L council tried to defy the national BSA and have a real nondiscrimination policy, but the BSA made them rescind it. If either the Dale case had gone the other way, or the BSA had allowed the C of L council to have a real, enforced nondiscrimination policy, the lease almost certainly wouldn't have been ended. But the national BSA won't allow the C of L council NOT to discriminate against gays and atheists, so the city cut off their subsidized rent. You are free to rent the building at $200,000 per year and sublet it to the BSA for $1/year if you like. You keep saying that would be "a hoot," but it sounds more like sour grapes on your part.

[evmori 11]

I know all that Merlyn! My point is the City of Cheese Steak didn't really give a hoot about the lease until someone made a big deal about it! Political pandering! And no sour grapes here! Plus, this ain't over yet so don't count your winnings just yet! If I was able to afford the building I would buy it then sell it to the BSA for $1 then all this crap would be over!

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

No Ed, the city waited until it was definitely established that the C of L council would continue to discriminate. THAT is the issue.

 

Before Dale, it wasn't known if the BSA could discriminate or not. So the city council didn't do anything.

After Dale, the C of L council write a real nondiscrimination policy, so the city didn't end the lease then, either.

The national BSA told the C of L council to rescind their real nondiscrimination policy, but they came up with a "fake" one that promised no "unlawful discrimination" -- the city solicitor asked the council for clarification on what they meant by that.

After about a year and a half of NO REPLY from the C of L council what they meant by their "fake" nondiscrimination policy that promised no "unlawful discrimination," the city council voted to end the lease and gave them one year's notice to either vacate or pay market rates after the year was up.

 

And stopping government support of discrimination isn't what I would call 'pandering', but I suppose to panhandlers like yourself, having to pay your own way and pull your own weight must seem unfair somehow. As RememberSchiff says, maybe a nondiscriminatory youth group will get the building for $1/year and serve ALL kids instead of rejecting some because they aren't 'morally straight' or 'clean' or 'the best kinds of citizens.'

[evmori 11]

The BSA doesn't unlawfully discriminate, Merlyn! And you are still missing the point! The BSA has had the same membership guidelines in place for a long time! Using the argument "we didn't know" don't cut the mustard! Ignorance of that fact is an excuse not a reason! The City of Cheese Steak just never read the BSA membership policy & gave them a $1 lease! The BSA did nothing wrong or illegal!

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Ed, the city did nothing wrong or illegal, either. Ending the lease doesn't REQUIRE that the BSA did something wrong, illegal, or recently, or anything. You keep bringing up points that are totally irrelevant.

[Narraticong 15]

So, let's say the City of Philadelphia is lawfully terminating the lease. In essence they are saying the Boy Scouts are undesireable persons within their city. I suppose they have a right to do that.

 

On the other hand, nobody should be surprised if BSA pulls up stakes and no longer allows a chartered unit within the city limits. How much money does the council pour into serving urban youth? How much effort is expended by professionals and volunteers to bring the best youth program available to those urban youth?

 

There are many old units chartered to churches, schools, and civic organizations within our core cities. How will the pastors, principals, and civic leaders respond when their neighborhood boys no longer have the only positive organization available to them?

 

I'll suggest that there is no organization around that will be able to take up the slack. Not Boys and Girls Clubs, not PAL, not anybody. And can we count on those who so eagerly await the downfall of BSA to step up. They have not yet done so.

 

If so many people are against the BSA's discrimination policy, where is our replacement? Hello....is anybody out there? How many years ago was the Dale decision? How many new organizations are out there replacing us? None.

 

So, kick us out if you wish. But be careful what you wish for...