“You are either Knights or caterers.”
They are likely both.
Councils with halls usually have a parallel organization that owns and runs the hall. Often, it's called the “home corporation,” as in, “Council #5555 Home Corporation.” The corporation is the actual entity that owns the hall and the catering business and services that go with it. The council controls, but does not own the corporation. The corporation must obey all federal and state statutes, including any “anti-discrimination” statutes on the books.
Thus, the council may have been under legal obligation to capitulate.
I forget the specific tax reasons for this; it has to do with taxable versus non-taxable council activities. Beyond the tax issues, Supreme strongly discourages that councils directly own real property.
For many councils, it's absolutely necessary to run a for-profit catering business out of the council home, otherwise, the council home is just unsupportable. The alternative is for the council to have no physical home, and to rely on the good graces of local pastors to allow councils to use parish facilities for their activities.
Which sometimes works out. And sometimes doesn't. It also means that the survival of a council can turn on the attitude and receptiveness of a new pastor when he rolls into a parish. I've actually seen councils without their own homes brought nearly to the point of destruction by new pastors. In one case, it required the intervention of the ordinary of the archdiocese to prevent that eventuality. In another case, it took extraordinary effort on the part of State and District officers to prevent another such destruction.
sitetest
This is correct. I’m a DD in Missouri. I received a lot of detailed information about this subject just this morning in fact based on a question posed to me last night at a Council meeting.