My Very Sincere Apologies. Addendum to 4/1/14 Commission Meeting Post.

I made a mistake last night.  The Boy Scouts requested a concession from us.  They wanted to use Village public space without having to pay us for it, as everyone else does.  The issue for us was that whether or not we might be willing to forego the income, we openly objected to the BSA's official position regarding sexual preference.  Specifically, they previously banned gays from any involvement with the organization, including as Scouts, but they have now softened their position.  They will allow gay boys to be Scouts, but not gay men to be Scout leaders.

So we were poised to punish them for the policy and their adherence to it.  We asked them if they 1) were willing to make an open protest to the national organization, and 2) willing to ignore the policy, and accept gay men as Scout leaders.  They were willing to make the statement, but unable to ignore the dictate from national.

I asked those of us who spoke most openly about how distasteful this policy was, and how indisposed they felt to waive a fee, if they were only opposed to waiving the fee, or if they would go further and recommend we not allow the Boy Scouts to function on Village property.  Before there could be much discussion about it, the Village Attorney informed me/us that we would not be allowed to ban an organization like the Boy Scouts, or any other organization, from using Village space, if they paid for it like anyone else.  I suppose the issue was essentially a First Amendment issue.

I tend to be more of a carrot and stick person, so I suggested we waive the fee for one year, and let the BSA know that if they change their policy about gays, we could waive it thereafter, too.  But if they don't change it, the fee-less party would be over.  This suggestion of mine was taken by some to be grossly insensitive, and outrageously accommodating of a cruel position on the part of the BSA.  One of the BSA speakers had even used the term "flag-waving" to describe the kind of visibility the BSA are not able to tolerate.  I confess I did not clearly hear this term, only vaguely, but more important, it did not engage my attention as it should have.  It did not raise hackles in me as it clearly did in some others of us.

So it has been brought to my attention that my proposed partial concession to the BSA, one of whose representatives at the meeting last night is also one of our BP neighbors, was experienced as all but anti-gay itself.  That was never my intention, and I am deeply apologetic for the impression I left.  My attempt at finesse, which may have been faulty anyway, was never meant to carry that kind of connotation.  I'm sorry.