Philly raises scouts rent $199,999/year

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

 

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/front_page/20071018_City_hikes_Boy_Scouts_rent_by__199_999_over_gay_ban.html

 

...

Cradle of Liberty officials have said they could not renounce the

scouts' long-established policy of not opening membership to atheists

or openly gay people without running afoul of their charter with the

scouts' National Council.

 

City officials have said they could not legally rent taxpayer-owned

property for a dollar a year to a private organization that

discriminates.

...

At one point in 2005, the city and scouts seemed poised to agree on a

policy statement adopted by New York scouts. That statement, while not

renouncing the bars against atheist or gay members, affirmed that

"prejudice, intolerance and unlawful discrimination in any form are

unacceptable."

 

But last year, Diaz wrote Cradle of Liberty Council officials to say

the suggested policy statement could not be reconciled with the city's

own anti-discriminatory fair-practices ordinance.

...

 

Like I said back then, the BSA's proposed "nondiscrimination"

statement was completely dishonest and fraudulent.

[scoutldr]

What a beautiful building that the Scouts built and paid for! That must mean that the land lease alone is $200K per year. I wonder how that stacks up to standard rates in the Phila area?

 

Looks to me that the building is worth at least $10 million. I think the city should buy the building and the scouts can build elsewhere. Problem solved.

 

800 inner city kids denied Scouting. I'm sure Jesse and Al will be there shortly demonstrating in the streets.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

The scouts built it, but from what I've read, they transferred ownership to the city as part of the deal to build on public land in the first place. The city owns the building, the council just leases it.

 

And as usual, point to the straight, theist kids being "denied scouting", while ignoring the ones being denied scouting now, all across the country. That's the whole reason the BSA is losing $1/year rent, after all.

[evmori]

Maybe the Scouts should send the city a bill for all the years of upkeep & maintenance they did for nothing while they were the tenants.

 

Does Philly lease to any other groups at a reduced rate?

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10(This message has been edited by evmori)

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Fine, if the city can send them a bill for $22.5 million for past rent, Ed. But neither case would have a leg to stand on.

[Aquila]

>>> And as usual, point to the straight, theist kids being "denied scouting", while ignoring the ones being denied scouting now, all across the country. That's the whole reason the BSA is losing $1/year rent, after all.

[skeptic]

Okay, so the Council pays the ransom of their building. Does that not mean then that the basic maintenance of the grounds and structure are now the responsibility of the city? What might that cost the city; or will they be like too many landlords and simply ignore their responsibilities? Can see it now; "City of Brotherly Love" taken to court as slum lord due to refusal to care for property leased to the BSA.

 

 

[OldGreyEagle]

Wouldnt that depend on the conditions of the lease?

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Well then Aquila, scoutldr is wrong for saying 800 inner city kids would be denied scouting too, right? They can just use a different program. And if you're aware of any organization that leases Philadelphia property at less than market rates (notice that the BSA can continue to lease the building at market rates) and which does not meet the city's nondiscrimination policy for getting a subsidised rate, I'm sure they'll do the same for that hypothetical organization. But there really aren't that many organizations that practice such invidious discrimination apart from the Boy Scouts, Freemasons, or KKK.

[skeptic]

OGE; most likely that is part of the current $1 a year lease. The scouts take care of everything, including improvements that the city is now taking back. Point of course is that the people who look at this only see part of it. In most cases, the city is saving money by not having to maintain it, and it is probalby better maintained. Certainly the property in Balboa Park in San Diego would be like much of the rest of the park, overgrown and a hidaway for transients, if the scouts did not care for it. There would be no youth center most likely on Mission Bay if the city had had to build and maintain it; but a group of youth agencies specifically turned to BSA to build, maintain, and run the center which is open to "all" of the city groups.

 

But, it often appears that the PC screamers simply do not care to recognize that benefits to many outweigh the perceived slight to a few (many who have not even actually tried to use the facilities).

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Any halfway-reasonable lease amount would figure in maintenance costs, whether it's the lessor's or lessee's responsibility. And once again, treating the scouts the SAME as every other private organization results in whining from some BSA supporters.

[evmori]

Fine, if the city can send them a bill for $22.5 million for past rent, Ed. But neither case would have a leg to stand on.

 

Maybe not, but it would be fun to watch!

[scoutldr]

For the record, I do not agree with the BSA policy on discrimination. I have not met many gay Cub Scouts (or adults for that matter) that I would call a threat to my, or anyone else's safety. Also for the record, I believe that sexual orientation and pedophilia are two separate issues. Like OGE, I would hope that all scouting functions are asexual, but also being realistic and the father of two young men (and I used to be a teenager myself with raging testosterone), I recognize that human beings are sexual in nature and things will happen in the natural course of growing up. Our challenge is to teach young people the ethics and morals necessary to control those urges, regardless of their orientation. I like the "local option" approach that others have advocated here.

 

I think it is a shame that the BSA is willing to throw an entire Council under the bus lest their religious mega-sponsors get pissed off and withdraw support.

 

Sorry for the non-PC verbage, but do I have it about right, Irving?

[evmori]

How is sticking to what you believe throwing the whole organization under the bus? Should the BSA cave or should they stick to what they believe in? I say stick! Doing anything else weakens the organization.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[OldGreyEagle]

I will try to be gentle, but it might be, not that it is, but just maybe not all scouters suscribe to the National Policy against gays and Atheists.

 

I don't know whether or not that is true, I know I have never been asked my opinion on the matter nor do I know anyone who has been asked.