I live in the Philly suburbs and have no problem with the city demanding fair rent regardless of whether or not it has to do with the Scouts excluding gays. There are plenty of places in the city that would allow them to hold meetings at low cost.
What is “fair” when the contract that turns the property over to the city specifically stipulate $1 for the scouts?
Why does the city own the land?
The problem is not the rent it's the property.
The Scouts originally owned the property but gave it to the city with the stipulation that annual rent would be $1.00. Many, if not all of us here, believe that if the city, and the homosexual councilman who is driving this idea, wants the Scouts to pay fair rent, then the Scouts should consider the agreement abrogated and sue to take their property back.