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

Skip to comments.

City Hikes Boy Scouts' Rent by $199,999 over Gay Ban (Philadelphia)
Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | 10/18/2007 | Joseph A. Slobodzian

Posted on 10/18/2007 9:41:25 AM PDT by Pyro7480

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 401-409 next last
To: trumandogz
How can you people get this far into a thread without having actually read the article or at least other posts in an effort to reasonably articulate cognoscente thoughts about the stated issue.

I thought only liberals and MSM made knee jerk judgments and reactions to two-bit headlines.

C’mon!

151 posted on 10/18/2007 10:37:37 AM PDT by Tenacious 1 (No to nitwit jesters with a predisposition of self importance and unqualified political opinions!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Mean Maryjean

Yes, that is true, although there have ben troops that have kicked out atheist and gay youths, that is up to the troop, not the national or council level.


152 posted on 10/18/2007 10:37:40 AM PDT by nuke rocketeer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
I’m just flagging your anti-Catholic bigotry for what it is.

Is it bigotry when someone refers to historical events? Just asking. I've got nothing against Catholics or any other people. Heck, my parents are Catholic.
153 posted on 10/18/2007 10:38:05 AM PDT by Hazwaste (Now with added lemony freshness!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz
"But why should the scouts get free land from the city?"

They are not getting free land. They are getting a nominal rental fee because THE SCOUTS BUILT THE BUILDING, per the full story that is linked in the excerpt shown here. What we don't know are the full terms of the original agreement between the Scouts and the city, and whether the agreemet had an expiration date or any other provisions that would allow the city to unilaterally terminate or amend it.
154 posted on 10/18/2007 10:38:29 AM PDT by Steve_Seattle ("Above all, shake your bum at Burton.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

You can’t even be honest in your own head! LOL

That’s alright the Lord love you anyway!:)


155 posted on 10/18/2007 10:38:36 AM PDT by restornu (No one is perfect but you can always strive to do the right thing! PRESS FOWARD MITT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz
Exactly. Why are the Boy Scouts on Welfare?

Most, if not all, scouting organizations participate as unpaid volunteers at community functions and special events. If they didn't, the city would have to staff those events at a significant cost.

156 posted on 10/18/2007 10:39:24 AM PDT by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

Your statement is a non-sequitor.

It’s now been established on the thread that the boy scouts built this building with their funds, and the City gets plenty of benefits from the Boy Scouts.

Yes, the Boy Scouts do deserve public help. Such as allowing the boy scout troops to use schools for meetings, etc. The benefits to the community in reducing juvenile delinquency and building up solid citizens more than pays for the minor costs involved, which is less than the maintenance of a park or two.


157 posted on 10/18/2007 10:39:51 AM PDT by WOSG (I just wish freepers would bash Democrats as much as they bash Republicans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: restornu

You’re bearing false witness against me while inhaling and praying for me while exhaling.

As I said, you make no sense.


158 posted on 10/18/2007 10:40:18 AM PDT by Petronski (Congratulations Tribe! AL Central Champs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

Must be bi polar?


159 posted on 10/18/2007 10:41:29 AM PDT by restornu (No one is perfect but you can always strive to do the right thing! PRESS FOWARD MITT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
The rights of the property owner supersede those of the tenant.

And if a tenant wishes to improve a property the improvements become property of the landlord.

160 posted on 10/18/2007 10:41:35 AM PDT by trumandogz (Hunter Thompson 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Hazwaste
Is it bigotry when someone refers to historical events?

Broad-brush generalities are typically false. It's a drive-by smear.

161 posted on 10/18/2007 10:41:49 AM PDT by Petronski (Congratulations Tribe! AL Central Champs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz
One dollar a year is Free Rent.

Your math skills are as poor as your legal skills.

$0.00/year is "free rent".

$1.00/year is a legally recognized amount.

Please keep playing, you have been the sole entertainment value in this thread thus far.

162 posted on 10/18/2007 10:42:02 AM PDT by been_lurking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

Holding the catholic church accountable for its action is not being a bigotry however if you read my comments it was anti-government not anti catholic as I was noting the government was trying to destroy one of the few great organizations left they have not already destroyed.

This comes from my 1st amendment belief in freedom of assembly in that we have a right to pick our friends and those we associate with.


163 posted on 10/18/2007 10:42:04 AM PDT by edcoil (Reality doesn't say much - doesn't need too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Hazwaste
Is it bigotry when someone refers to historical events?

Did you merely refer to a historical event? The events I think you are referring too involved a few priests. Your post attacks ALL Catholics.

164 posted on 10/18/2007 10:42:15 AM PDT by CharacterCounts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
Philadelphia used to be friendly to all that is good and honorable. Hence the $1 rent for a positive and universally (at least in the past) acclaimed service group like the Boy Scounts.

Now, Philadelphia is run by corrupt, perverse scoundrels. Is it any surprise that they're willing to yank their previous patronage of the Scouts to try to force them to admit pillow-biters?

By their fruits and all that...
165 posted on 10/18/2007 10:42:24 AM PDT by Antoninus (Republicans who support Rudy owe Bill Clinton an apology.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

the city engaging on thug tactics. asking the boy scouts to lower moral standards or pay the price?


166 posted on 10/18/2007 10:42:32 AM PDT by Ancient Drive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: been_lurking
He/She ironically claims to be a landlord/developer that knows something about these deals as well. I’m in the business myself and while the author’s writing and/or investigative skill are lacking, it seems easy enough to get the gist of the BS power move by the city.

I think he/she must be allergic to reading beyond headlines and message boards.

167 posted on 10/18/2007 10:42:43 AM PDT by Tenacious 1 (No to nitwit jesters with a predisposition of self importance and unqualified political opinions!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

I’ve never heard anything about the Boy Scouts refusing to admit gay scouts—I’ve just heard they didn’t want gay scout leaders. But then it’s hard for me to wrap my mind around a scout being sexually active, much less homosexually active. I would think any kind of sexual activity outside marriage would violate the oath of a Scout.


168 posted on 10/18/2007 10:42:45 AM PDT by Burkean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

Where did you get your legal degree? How long did you spend reviewing the relevant documents between the parties in this case? How long did you spend in the law library researching all the issues involved?

Welfare? Get over yourself.


169 posted on 10/18/2007 10:43:10 AM PDT by Petronski (Congratulations Tribe! AL Central Champs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: freekitty
Very good freekitty. It is hard to remember there was a time when this country was “decent and moral” from coast to coast. My G-D save us all from this sin.
170 posted on 10/18/2007 10:43:21 AM PDT by 2001convSVT ("People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: CharacterCounts

Whoops, you have me mixed up with someone else. I’m not the guy who posted the comment that the guy called bigoted.


171 posted on 10/18/2007 10:43:35 AM PDT by Hazwaste (Now with added lemony freshness!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Bob

If folks want the BSA “off of welfare” then they need to put up or shut up. The BSA is not on welfare, it was started as a volunteer organization and has basically been one ever since. With growth comes organization and the need for paid professionals to ensure continuity. There is also the cost in buildings, land, maintenance and salaries to name a few.

Years ago, it was noticed that the BSA is the best “one stop shopping” for values based programs that develop the future crop of our country’s leaders. If that isn’t worth 1 stinkin’ dollar per year, I don’t know what the hell is.

SZ


172 posted on 10/18/2007 10:44:08 AM PDT by SZonian (Tagline under repair until further notice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: restornu
I didn’t say you’re bipolar, I’m not qualified to diagnose you at all.
173 posted on 10/18/2007 10:44:18 AM PDT by Petronski (Congratulations Tribe! AL Central Champs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: WOSG

I have never discounted the merit of the Boy Scouts to a community.

However, should all organizations that some people feel are a benefit to the community receive rent of $1.00 per year?


174 posted on 10/18/2007 10:44:53 AM PDT by trumandogz (Hunter Thompson 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: SZonian
"The BSA was/is providing a service to the city. I call it bartering, yet others are calling it “free land”. I guess that’s the distinction."

Sometimes the government will invoke the principle of "mutual offsetting benefits" ("MOB") to justify "giving" land to a private entity for some purpose which is deemed to have a public benefit of greater or equal value. So a city might give land to a developer who wants to build an art museum or low-income housing or a free health clinic for the poor..
175 posted on 10/18/2007 10:45:04 AM PDT by Steve_Seattle ("Above all, shake your bum at Burton.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: CharacterCounts; edcoil

The bigot here is edcoil, not that guy. Your point is well made.


176 posted on 10/18/2007 10:45:21 AM PDT by Petronski (Congratulations Tribe! AL Central Champs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

Did you read my post with the other source? The BSA built the building, and they pay $60,000/year to maintain it. They’ve invested millions to refurbish it.

So, the situation is different from what the article suggests. If they can, they should demolish the building as they’re leaving. Or the city should at least pay top dollar for it.


177 posted on 10/18/2007 10:46:28 AM PDT by Tired of Taxes (Dad, I will always think of you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

Please explain to me why a private organization should only pay $1.00 a year rent for a piece of land?


178 posted on 10/18/2007 10:46:48 AM PDT by trumandogz (Hunter Thompson 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Burkean
I’ve never heard anything about the Boy Scouts refusing to admit gay scouts...

To the best of my knowledge they do not. Your memory is correct concerning gay Scout leaders. There was a controversy awhile back about admitting Scouts who were avowed atheists due to the "Brave, Clean, Reverent" credo - possibly people are conflating the two issues.

179 posted on 10/18/2007 10:47:50 AM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle

Thanks, not a lawyer, yet I figured I was on some kind of “right” track.

Cheers,
SZ


180 posted on 10/18/2007 10:47:56 AM PDT by SZonian (Tagline under repair until further notice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

Answer my questions first.


181 posted on 10/18/2007 10:48:06 AM PDT by Petronski (Congratulations Tribe! AL Central Champs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Tenacious 1
I think he/she must be allergic to reading beyond headlines and message boards.

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.

182 posted on 10/18/2007 10:48:12 AM PDT by been_lurking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz
"None should be getting free rent from the tax payer."

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.

183 posted on 10/18/2007 10:48:13 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Tired of Taxes

Tenant improvements to a piece of property become the property of the land owner.


184 posted on 10/18/2007 10:48:13 AM PDT by trumandogz (Hunter Thompson 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz
"The rights of the property owner supersede those of the tenant."

Not if they have signed a legal agreement in which the tenant is granted certain rights, such as a specified rent amount, in perpetuity.
185 posted on 10/18/2007 10:48:26 AM PDT by Steve_Seattle ("Above all, shake your bum at Burton.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

Read post 65 with the CAPS and get back to me.


186 posted on 10/18/2007 10:48:45 AM PDT by CharacterCounts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: SZonian
I would need more information to answer your questions. I don't know what the original understanding was between the city and the Boy Scouts in 1928. Does the city own the building as well as the land, and if so, how did that come to be? Was there any transfer of funds along the way other than the $1 rent?

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.

187 posted on 10/18/2007 10:48:52 AM PDT by Freedom_no_exceptions (No actual, intended, or imminent victim = no crime. No exceptions.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

See the 2nd paragraph of post 172.

SZ


188 posted on 10/18/2007 10:49:17 AM PDT by SZonian (Tagline under repair until further notice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: CharacterCounts

My apologies. That one is a bigot too.


189 posted on 10/18/2007 10:50:19 AM PDT by Petronski (Congratulations Tribe! AL Central Champs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
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.

Are you saying that your city offers private organizations rent of $1.00 per year to yacht clubs, soccer fields and skating rings?

190 posted on 10/18/2007 10:51:03 AM PDT by trumandogz (Hunter Thompson 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

Have a merry day contrarian...


191 posted on 10/18/2007 10:51:37 AM PDT by restornu (No one is perfect but you can always strive to do the right thing! PRESS FOWARD MITT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: Tenacious 1
I think he/she must be allergic to reading beyond headlines and message boards.

LOL

Paragraphs give me hives!

192 posted on 10/18/2007 10:51:52 AM PDT by Petronski (Congratulations Tribe! AL Central Champs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

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.


193 posted on 10/18/2007 10:52:26 AM PDT by WOSG (I just wish freepers would bash Democrats as much as they bash Republicans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: restornu

Farewell, liar.


194 posted on 10/18/2007 10:52:35 AM PDT by Petronski (Congratulations Tribe! AL Central Champs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: Petronski; CharacterCounts

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.


195 posted on 10/18/2007 10:52:48 AM PDT by Hazwaste (Now with added lemony freshness!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: Freedom_no_exceptions

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.


196 posted on 10/18/2007 10:53:01 AM PDT by Steve_Seattle ("Above all, shake your bum at Burton.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

“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


197 posted on 10/18/2007 10:53:14 AM PDT by RTO (What will you do without freedom?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
Not if they have signed a legal agreement in which the tenant is granted certain rights, such as a specified rent amount, in perpetuity.

Did the article state that the $1.00 a year rent was in perpetuity?

198 posted on 10/18/2007 10:53:17 AM PDT by trumandogz (Hunter Thompson 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Freedom_no_exceptions

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


199 posted on 10/18/2007 10:53:31 AM PDT by SZonian (Tagline under repair until further notice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: been_lurking
I enjoy watching the show. It's entertaining.

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.

200 posted on 10/18/2007 10:53:42 AM PDT by Tenacious 1 (No to nitwit jesters with a predisposition of self importance and unqualified political opinions!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 401-409 next last

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.

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