Well sort of. Recently Jack Kelly introduced (and then tabled when he got no support from anyone else on Council) a proposal in City Council to make sure the Boy Scouts of America get paid money from out of the City of Philadelphia's treasury when their free-of-cost "lease" on Fairmount Park land runs out next year.

As you may know its it national BSA policy to discriminate against gays and lesbians not just as scouts and parental scout leaders but also as administrative employees. Actually if you were to ask for an application of employment with the Scouts, say as an administrative assistant or a janitor, the application clearly states that no homosexuals need apply. The Supreme Court thinks thats OK - they are private organization with a loosely defined "religious" mission to promote Christian values and they also have a policy of discriminating against declared hetero atheists as well. Their are other folks dedicated to the idea of scouting (you know camping, learning to be good citizen, etc.) that disagree with this policy and they have their own organization Scouting For All.
http://www.scoutingforall.org/data/home.html

I suggest you take quick gander at their FAQ page if you are unfamiliar with the BSA's policies towards gay scouts, gay scout parents and gay BSA employees. Its quite informative.

The problem is of course that their local branch has operated its offices for over 75 years on Fairmount Park land free of charge in violation of city laws about employment non-discrimination and "fair access" laws on the books for about 25 years. Recently City Council passed a bill stating that the BSA either has to either pay a full fair market rate for the continued use of its Fairmount Park headquarters or drop its discriminatory practices. In essence that the city would no longer subsidize an organization that discriminates in a way that would make it subject to fines if it were practiced by a private business doing business with the city. That bill was supported at the time by every member of council except district Republican Brian O'Neil - including of course both Republican at-large seats, Frank Rizzo Jr. and Jack Kelly.

Concerned by his tight race with David Oh, it appears Kelly recently rethought that vote and cooked up a proposal to have the city reimburse the Scouts for the cost of the building itself and more recent repairs and improvements to the building. This despite the fact that the original 1928 agreement providing the land to the Scouts clearly states that the city would remain the owner of the building and the land. As in any commercial lease (though this one was never formalized beyond the initial 1928 agreement), improvements the tenant makes on the property are at their own expense unless clearly stated in the lease - which never happened.

In essence, Kelly's proposal wanted to take money out of the City of Philadelphia treasury and give it to the Scouts as a consolation prize, despite their continuing to discriminate.

I think this underlines yet one more reason why a strategic vote for Oh, a moderate and independent-minded Republican proudly endorsed by the Log Cabin Republicans, to replace Kelly for one of the two guaranteed "minority party" at-large seats is a must to at least consider for any tactical progressive voter on Nov. 6.

Is Oh an "actual" Republican? Yes, a moderate one who has made a lot of his endorsement by Sam Katz. He's more importantly a Republican that does not endorse, apologize for or seek to reward discrimination in any form and his opposition Jack Kelly, as the quotes from Frank Keel above demonstrate, is supported and endorsed by the same Dems who backed Santorum in the last Senate race, Johnny Doc's IBEW. Oh's also a former ADA who will bring for the first time in recent years a real-world, hands-on law enforcement experience to City Council.

I urge progressives to at least consider a strategic cross-party vote in the truly competitive City Council race this November.

We get two Republicans in council no matter what, so we may as well make it count.

Though I don't agree with some of his positions and proposed policies (nor should any liberal), I do think David belongs on City Council right now. Kelly is a nice man who is always visable at events in Bella Vista and other parts of Center City (for which I am very grateful). Every vote is a weighing game. For me, Kelly's foie gras initiative is a very serious problem and David's a fighter who the Republican City Committee is nervous about....so that's good enough for me.

The shenanigans have started. I have it on good authority that some Republican ward leaders have crossed out David Oh on their ballots. When the going gets tough, it appears that some people resort to questionable tactics. Hmmm... are we surprised?

--Mike
Weeds in the Sidewalk

http://www.epgn.com/110207/1Kellyscouts110207.htm

Dear Fellow Democrat,

I write today to urge you to vote for David Oh on November 6th. He's one of the Republican candidates for City Council at-Large. In a city overwhelmingly Democratic, you can easily vote for your four favorite Democratic at-Large candidates and David, #223, and be assured that all the Democratic candidates will win. The crucial contested seats this time around are the two Republican at-Large seats, and David needs your vote to win.

David Oh thinks about Philadelphia in exciting, fresh ways. He's not bound by the way things have always been done, and that's good news for our future. He recognizes that Philadelphia has great untapped economic potential. He supports the expansion of the Port, a new commitment to the burgeoning local film industry, and a reconnection to the world through greater global trade opportunities that would make Philadelphia a truly international city. His plans would lead to thousands of family-sustaining jobs, many of them union jobs. All of his innovative ideas are geared toward increasing revenues for the city, and not just for big business, but for small business owners as well. He supports the re-siting of the proposed casinos so that we can reap the benefits from them, while keeping them out of thriving neighborhoods.

David was born and raised in Philadelphia and has a solid record of service both to our country as an Army officer, and to our community. As a former Assistant District Attorney he has first hand knowledge of our justice system and strong ideas to confront crime. Currently, David serves city residents as an attorney in private practice, and on many boards throughout the city, including the Welcoming Center for New Pennsylvanians, which helps immigrants find jobs and business opportunities, two area hospitals, and the Tribune Charities.

I support David Oh in his bid for a Republican at-Large City Council seat, and so should you. He's exactly the kind of public servant Philadelphia needs: dedicated, smart, and independent, with a history of service. He'll put your interests, and the interests of the city, first. You have five at-Large votes on November 6th, cast one of them for David Oh, #223.

Sincerely,

Caryn Hunt
Community Activist, former Democratic candidate, City Council at-Large

With David Oh up by 44 - 48 depending on which media source, its proof once again that every vote counts, particularly in a difficult to explain strategic race between two Republicans that is inevitably determined by us non-Republicans. Of course machine breakdowns and absentee ballots make any lead this narrow extremely tentative. So this particular election is still ongoing.

I saw Anne Dicker make a quick appearance at the David Oh victory, or it could be a victory party, so it would seem should Oh win in the end, it was us "good government" progressives were the tipping point in this election.

No, they're not the supremely-hackable Diebold models, but they're like them in that PA's electronic machines provide no paper trail, making recounts difficult or impossible.

-Z