Posted on 10/18/2007 9:41:25 AM PDT by Pyro7480
The Boy Scouts of America's refusal to bend its rules to permit gay scouts will cost the organization's local chapter $200,000 a year if it wishes to keep its headquarters in a city-owned building on Logan Square.
Representatives of the Boy Scouts of America's Cradle of Liberty Council were notified that to remain in their 79-year-old landmark headquarters, they needed to pay the city a "fair market" rent, Fairmount Park Commission president Robert N.C. Nix said yesterday. Currently, the rent is $1 a year....
(Excerpt) Read more at philly.com ...
Answer my questions first.
The poster made a classic FR mistake of spouting off before reading the article. Now, the poster is too full of him/her self to admit the mistake and back down. So they keep spouting more and more uninformed garbage as they spin themselves deeper and deeper into a hole of their own making.
I enjoy watching the show. It's entertaining.
Well they do, and for a variety of reasons as others have pointed out to you.
They provide a benefit for the cities residents, whether it be recreation, or some other service the public enjoys for little or no cost.
what you propose is that the citizens "the city" build and maintain all these places and charge the appropriate fee for the publics use of them, which of course will negate the need for many of them completely.
Rather than try defend your hopeless position, you should admit that you never put much thought into it.
Imagen a city that ran according to your way of thinking. It would have NOTHING to offer it's citizens, no recreation, no community clubs, skating rinks, soccer fields, sports clubs, yacht clubs, womens centers, and charities run facilities of ANY sort.
Kids would have even LESS to do than they do now, they wouldn't even have scate board parks to contain their vandalizm, because they would have to pay to get into them.
Those kids, teens and young adults with nothing to do, and no money to pay for anything to do WILL find something to do, usually to YOUR property.
Plus it would be a real crappy city to live in.
Tenant improvements to a piece of property become the property of the land owner.
Read post 65 with the CAPS and get back to me.
I wouldn't put it beyond a city like Philadelphia to try to use eminent domain to just kick the scouts out regardless of who owns the building. Both sides may have to go to court to try to figure out all of the ownership and financial issues...which would be unfortunate.
Keep in mind I'm on the scouts' side here. Ideally, they should just be able to purchase the land and remain there as long as they want without ever paying a cent of property taxes. That should be true, BTW, for all homeowners and private organizations as well. I only wish I could be more politically active.
See the 2nd paragraph of post 172.
SZ
My apologies. That one is a bigot too.
Are you saying that your city offers private organizations rent of $1.00 per year to yacht clubs, soccer fields and skating rings?
Have a merry day contrarian...
LOL
Paragraphs give me hives!
Is this a ground lease? If not, then it is not comparable. The Boy Scouts would be within their rights to demolish the building when they left; your tenants are not.
And commercial vs public-non-profit is apples v oranges.
The City is getting a great deal with the $1 ground lease of the building, benefits to the community way beyond the minor subsidy on this ground lease.
Farewell, liar.
Of course! Everyone’s a bigot except for you and “Character Counts”.
Love the ad hominems. Seems like you love them too, based upon reading your past posts.
You raise the point I’ve been trying to make - without knowing the details of the original agreement between the scouts and the city, we can’t know whether the city’s action is justified.
“So therefore, every non-profit organization in Philadelphia should get free land from the city.”
Did or did not the city of Philidelphia, in 1928, sign a written contract agreeing to the arrangement?
It matters not a wit how ill-advised the “bargain” may have been, or with some now appears to be. Contract law is binding on all parties — even the PC variety.
For 79 years the arrangement worked well for the city’s image, and thus to its advantage — including that of attracting morally-upright families, thus increasing the cities tax base. Otherwise, the contract would not have been agreed upon in the first instance.
The arrangement was never questioned until the sodomites took control of Philidelphia, in similar fashion where they have acquired control of every other city and organization — through the silence and inaction of “good” men.
Ironically, the purpose of the Boy Scouts is the formation of character, so to bring about a citizenry of good men, whom may rise in their adulthood to sound leadership — precisely the reason why sodomites desire the destructioon of the BSA. Good leaders must needs be moral men, not weak, easily manipulated, gutter trolls.
Liberals have no use for men of reason and moral character. Let’s not help their cause by advocating tax envy. The contract ought stand a court challenge.
RTO
Did the article state that the $1.00 a year rent was in perpetuity?
That seems to be the one major point that ALL of us seem to be missing. We aren’t privy to the original agreement, yet we’re tossing all kinds of arguments around. Thanks for the stabilizing post.
Cheers,
SZ
Yes, but should any organization only have to pay $1/year for rent? (Sarcasm on) I agree with your sentiments. Let's see how long this goes. I give up.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.