Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Non-Sequitur
The land wasn't their's to begin with, it always was owned by the city.

Why then was the following statement included in the article?

The land on which the building sits had been turned over to the city by the Scouts with the understanding that the Scouts would be able to stay in the Beaux Arts style building "in perpetuity."

26 posted on 06/17/2010 8:37:20 AM PDT by cuz_it_aint_their_money (I'll show their president the exact same respect and loyalty that they have shown my president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]


To: cuz_it_aint_their_money
Why then was the following statement included in the article?

Because it's a sloppily researched article. The land belonged to the city. They leased it to the BSA for $1 a year. The Scouts built the building on it and later turned that over to the city. The land itself, though, always belonged to the city, and is part of the same large parcel that includes parks and public museums. As far as the "in perpetuity" thing, the original agreement includes a clause that allows the city to terminate the agreement with one year's notice.

32 posted on 06/17/2010 10:08:10 AM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

To: cuz_it_aint_their_money
Why then was the following statement included in the article?

Because it's LifeSite News...not exactly the most accurate source.

40 posted on 06/17/2010 11:10:05 AM PDT by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson