Philadelphia woman faces $600-a-day fine for feeding needy neighborhood kids

cancerman1120

cancerman1120

CAGiversary!
Normally I do not make a habit of reading Fox news but I saw this someplace else and it really pissed me off. It is hard to defend government when rules/regulations somehow get in the way of common sense. Why not help this woman instead of putting a roadblock in her path? Why should there be any cost for this type of program?

"I don't think it's my responsibility to go to her to say, 'why don’t you come to talk to me to see if there’s something that we can do to help your program,'" William Pisarek, the Chester Township business manager, said.

That is exactly what you should be doing as a public servant Mr. Pisarek.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/08/1...eedy-neighborhood-kids/?cmpid=cmty_twitter_fn
 
A Pennsylvania woman who offers free lunch every day to low-income children in her neighborhood faces a $600-a-day fine next summer if she continues because she did not clear the food giveaway with township officials.
Angela Prattis donates her time to distribute the meals -- supplied by the Archdiocese of Philadelphia -- and adheres to strict paperwork, like filling out weekly reports and being visited bi-weekly from a state worker, MyFoxPhilly.com reports.

"Angela saw it as a way to contribute to the community in a positive way," Anne Ayella, a member of the archdiocese, said. "There was nothing in it for her."
Prattis laughed and said, "I don’t make a dime."
Prattis lived in the township for three years. She reportedly distributes the meals to the 60 or so children at a gazebo on her property during the summer months, when children are home from school.
The Delaware County Times reports that another resident alerted the council about the distribution a few weeks ago. The council investigated and ruled that the practice is not permitted without a variance, the paper reported.
"You have houses here, the roofs are falling in, and they could be focused on a lot of more serious issues than me feeding children," she said.
Chester Township, which has a per capita income of $19,000 a year, says Prattis lives in a residential zone, hence handing out food to children is not allowed. The township says she needs to go before a zoning board to ask for a variance, which would cost her up to $1,000 in administrative fees.
"I don't think it's my responsibility to go to her to say, 'why don’t you come to talk to me to see if there’s something that we can do to help your program,'" William Pisarek, the Chester Township business manager, said.
Prattis told The Delaware County Times that she is not going to stop feeding the children in the area.

Here is a link to the Delaware County Time article if you want more.

http://www.delcotimes.com/articles/2012/08/14/news/doc5029caaab5f38185662919.txt?viewmode=fullstory
 
[quote name='soulvengeance']This usually comes about because a neighbor has complained.[/QUOTE]
That's exactly what happened. I'm guessing the neighbor didn't want a bunch of feral poors hanging around the neighborhood. It's like feeding pigeons; there'll just be more of them tomorrow, so it's better off to just let those animals...I mean kids starve.:booty:
 
Yeah, I only kinda agree.

You dont want random people just giving out food....even if its for a good cause, because eventually someone will give food away for the wrong reasons, like to attract kids to them or to poison the food.

Its a stretch but it can happen......the rules are the rules. I love her heart but she has to do it within the system.

Now, if she still wants to help she should do it on the down low instead of out in the open.
 
I had the health concern too, butth second article above noted that it was subject to regular inspections and seems like OT was just a zoning issue wit where she was giving out the food. Mentioned she could do it in a parking lot and be within the law.

I don't have a strong opinion on that. Seems easy enough to move the location to comply with zoning laws. I man it doesn't seem like a big deal to begin with, but I get the concerns over making an exception in in case etc.

I can't really talk I guess. There's a couple homeless shelters a couple miles from my condo and people often park and give out food in a parking lot there etc which I think is great. But at the same time I wouldn't want them doing that in the lobby of my building or the park I go running in etc. I pay a premium to live in a nicer part of town and not have as much of that stuff around.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='dohdough']That's exactly what happened. I'm guessing the neighbor didn't want a bunch of feral poors hanging around the neighborhood. It's like feeding pigeons; there'll just be more of them tomorrow, so it's better off to just let those animals...I mean kids starve.:booty:[/QUOTE]

Meh - living next door to a soup kitchen is going to lower house values. When you pay a mortgage you're going to protect your investment, even if that means ratting out the good-intentioned lady next door who is dragging your neighborhood's image into the dumpster.

Like Dmaul said, move the sandwich operation to a nearby parking lot or other isolated spot, bit of a pain for the sandwich lady but that's what compromise is all about.

Also OP - if you don't like neighborhood regulations, vote with your feet and goto one of the neighborhoods in America where you can live out your trailer trash dreams and noone will say boo.
 
[quote name='camoor']Meh - living next door to a soup kitchen is going to lower house values. When you pay a mortgage you're going to protect your investment, even if that means ratting out the good-intentioned lady next door who is dragging your neighborhood's image into the dumpster.

Like Dmaul said, move the sandwich operation to a nearby parking lot or other isolated spot, bit of a pain for the sandwich lady but that's what compromise is all about.

Also OP - if you don't like neighborhood regulations, vote with your feet and goto one of the neighborhoods in America where you can live out your trailer trash dreams and noone will say boo.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for missing the fucking point. It has nothing to do with regulations but rather the local governments attitude towards this problem. Instead of trying to help her solve a problem they just say pay your $1000. On a personal note, fuck you.

Edit:Side note...this neighborhood is already in decay. This has nothing to do with "house value".
 
I agree with the general consensus of the comments here, that you can't just run a soup kitchen because you feel like it.

But "Trailer trash dreams"? WTF? She's in the wrong for not securing the proper paperwork but trying to help others isn't being trailer trash. Idiot.
 
The 2nd article said that the city told her she could move to a parking lot and be fine legally. That's trying to help her solve the problem, she just doesn't want to move.

Prattis, who also serves as president of the Toby Farms Civic Association, was not present when the response was read at last Thursday’s council business meeting, but arrived a few minutes later. After the meeting, she said, Polaha told her that the township could fine her $600 every day she distributed the food.

“He told me that I could take (the gazebo) off my street and stand in a parking lot, and that would be OK,” Prattis said.
Click to expand...
 
Yeah, and I don't really see how it's anyone's job to reach out to her, that isn't how it works. If you need a city building permit for something, you don't start building and wait for the city to contact you.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']The 2nd article said that the city told her she could move to a parking lot and be fine legally. That's trying to help her solve the problem, she just doesn't want to move.[/QUOTE]

I agree she could move but I also think the government could issue the variance without charging $1000 for her to stay at home (where I assume it is easier to prepare food for 60 kids). This was my issue. The way the guy I quoted in the OP just was like it is not my problem. I am as pro-government as it comes but not when they have people who cannot think beyond their narrow-minded job descriptions. In the end she is just trying to feed kids for Christ's sake.
 
Yeah, and I think that's what camoor was getting at with his trailer park comment.

In cities you can't just build things on your property (Gazebo in this case) with out getting the permit first. Much less build something and use it to distribute food without the right permits and licenses (and in some cases you just can't as the zoning laws in the area don't allow it).

If you want freedom to build whatever you want on your property you need to move out of a city/town and live in an unincorporated area. Even then there are usually county permits needed etc., but there's almost no enforcement of that. Especially if you're on a big plot of land with no neighbors to complain etc.

Zoning laws exist to keep areas residential rather than becoming commercial or mixed land use. Protect property values etc. There are always cases like this where it comes across as shitty because someone can't do something like give away meals to poor kids due to zoning laws. But the laws serve their purpose and they can't make exceptions in individual cases as that's a slippery slope that can lead to undermining the laws as others demand exceptions and so on.

[quote name='cancerman1120']I agree she could move but I also think the government could issue the variance without charging $1000 for her to stay at home (where I assume it is easier to prepare food for 60 kids). This was my issue. The way the guy I quoted in the OP just was like it is not my problem. I am as pro-government as it comes but not when they have people who cannot think beyond their narrow-minded job descriptions. In the end she is just trying to feed kids for Christ's sake.[/QUOTE]

See above, just shouldn't make exceptions in individual cases like this IMO.

If I lived there, I wouldn't want to deal with a bunch of kids rushing to a neighbor's house everyday. That should be somewhere in a parking lot on a busier/noiser mixed use or commercial location IMO. And to be fair, maybe this street is like that--but it doesn't sound like it given the zoning issue.
 
[quote name='camoor']Meh - living next door to a soup kitchen is going to lower house values. When you pay a mortgage you're going to protect your investment, even if that means ratting out the good-intentioned lady next door who is dragging your neighborhood's image into the dumpster.

Like Dmaul said, move the sandwich operation to a nearby parking lot or other isolated spot, bit of a pain for the sandwich lady but that's what compromise is all about.

Also OP - if you don't like neighborhood regulations, vote with your feet and goto one of the neighborhoods in America where you can live out your trailer trash dreams and noone will say boo.[/QUOTE]
If this was a fulltime soup kitchen, I could understand, but according to the articles, she only does this during summer break because she's serving kids and not mentally ill homeless people(that's a topic for another debate).

I'm guessing that this was a bit of an open secret as long as no one complained. That way the town wouldn't be liable because of plausible deniability. Now that the word is out, the town has to do something and I'm guessing seasonal soup kitchens aren't covered by her home owners insurance, so this lady is pretty much screwed at this point. But like cancerman1120 and the Delaware County Times said, it already seems like a pretty poor neighborhood. As long as there aren't any behavioral problems, I don't see why she shouldn't be able to continue unmolested as the only real harm she's putting herself in is through her own liability for anything that goes wrong since it's her property.

edit: dmaul, I understand your point as well. I've lived next to schools(pre-k to 8 with several day care programs as well) for most of my life, so I guess I'm just used to it. Hell, there's even a center for high-risk youth across the street and an emergency room for a hospital with a heliport a block away.:D
 
[quote name='cancerman1120']I agree she could move but I also think the government could issue the variance without charging $1000 for her to stay at home (where I assume it is easier to prepare food for 60 kids). This was my issue. The way the guy I quoted in the OP just was like it is not my problem. I am as pro-government as it comes but not when they have people who cannot think beyond their narrow-minded job descriptions. In the end she is just trying to feed kids for Christ's sake.[/QUOTE]

Then the next guy will want to do it without the fine.

You gotta either keep the laws intact without exceptions or change the law.
 
[quote name='Clak']Yeah, and I don't really see how it's anyone's job to reach out to her, that isn't how it works. If you need a city building permit for something, you don't start building and wait for the city to contact you.[/QUOTE]

No but once you know of the issue should it not be your job to solve it instead of being punitive? Government should be in the business of providing solutions. This is what conservatives hate about government. It just so happens it is about feeding kids so they care less.
 
Well I'm pretty sure those fines are there to detour people from breaking the rules to begin with, that was their way of solving the problem that someone might do something like this in the first place. Make the punishment harsh enough that most people won't keep doing it. They're providing her a means of continuing anyway, just move it out of the residential zone. They're not going to rezone an area so a woman can hand out food. And I'm pretty sure that at least in this case, republicans would side with the city, no way would they want someone handing out food to poor people in their neighborhood.
 
[quote name='confoosious']Then the next guy will want to do it without the fine.

You gotta either keep the laws intact without exceptions or change the law.[/QUOTE]

I see your point. I am more upset about what I perceived as a "I could care less" attitude from the local government. Laws do need to be followed or changed.
 
What should the government do to solve it beyond telling her where she could move it to? It sounds like they did that, and I gathered that they wouldn't impose fines if she moved.

Seems reasonable to me.
 
Yeah I really don't see what the big problem is. It sucks, sure. I know the woman is only doing it out of the goodness of her heart and I hope she finds a way to continue in some capacity. If it's that big an issue in this area, maybe over the fall and winter the city could help her put together some sort of temporary setup somewhere in the summer months.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']What should the government do to solve it beyond telling her where she could move it to? It sounds like they did that, and I gathered that they wouldn't impose fines if she moved.

Seems reasonable to me.[/QUOTE]

Yeah I guess that is all they can do. Funny thing about it is that she can stay for the rest of the summer at the house, so it must not be that huge of a liability.
 
[quote name='Soodmeg']
You dont want random people just giving out food....even if its for a good cause, because eventually someone will give food away for the wrong reasons, like to attract kids to them or to poison the food.

Its a stretch but it can happen......the rules are the rules. I love her heart but she has to do it within the system.
[/QUOTE]
I guess Halloween is banned in Philadelphia?
 
[quote name='confoosious']I agree with the general consensus of the comments here, that you can't just run a soup kitchen because you feel like it.

But "Trailer trash dreams"? WTF? She's in the wrong for not securing the proper paperwork but trying to help others isn't being trailer trash. Idiot.[/QUOTE]

OP said "It is hard to defend government when rules/regulations somehow get in the way of common sense." That is the idiotic statement I was refuting. You idiot.
 
[quote name='Clak']Yeah I really don't see what the big problem is. It sucks, sure. I know the woman is only doing it out of the goodness of her heart and I hope she finds a way to continue in some capacity. If it's that big an issue in this area, maybe over the fall and winter the city could help her put together some sort of temporary setup somewhere in the summer months.[/QUOTE]

You guys know that local govt has been cut to the bone right? This story is the end-result of the 'tea party thinking' and 'low tax revenue in a recession' double wammy.

If ppl want govt services that help food shelters relocate then ppl have to realize that those services cost money. If folks want to keep bitching about regulations then by all means bitch away but it won't do any good. If you don't want regulations then go live the aforementioned trailer trash heaven.

Like they say at BK, have it your way.
 
That's true actually, I get the feeling the people who complained about this probably wouldn't want to help pay for something more permanent in a better location.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I had the health concern too, butth second article above noted that it was subject to regular inspections and seems like OT was just a zoning issue wit where she was giving out the food. Mentioned she could do it in a parking lot and be within the law.

I don't have a strong opinion on that. Seems easy enough to move the location to comply with zoning laws. I man it doesn't seem like a big deal to begin with, but I get the concerns over making an exception in in case etc.

I can't really talk I guess. There's a couple homeless shelters a couple miles from my condo and people often park and give out food in a parking lot there etc which I think is great. But at the same time I wouldn't want them doing that in the lobby of my building or the park I go running in etc. I pay a premium to live in a nicer part of town and not have as much of that stuff around.[/QUOTE]

Note this last sentence, especially "that stuff". Translation: "Please don't let me see homeless or poor people around. They make me feel uncomfortable. I just don't want to look at them.". Also can be translated as: "I pay for this community to be gated, to keep the riff-raff out!".

Why don't you teach those kids dmaul? You're a college professor. Tell them how Christianity really came to be and about the "wonderful" rulers of Constantine who really helped it spread.
 
I'm not a teacher and just begrudgingly teach paying college students at a research university so I can have freedom to pursue my research agenda that you can't get at research institutes. I really don't give a crap about helping people learn, beyond mentoring graduate students with shared research interests. And as an atheist I certainly wouldn't be teaching that even if I was motivated to teach. :D

And yes, I don't want to live around the riff raff. I got a lot of education and work hard so I don't have to live in poor white trash areas like where I grew up or their urban equivalents.

Doesn't mean I don't care. I donate to local charities that help the homeless every year, support higher taxes (including middle income brackets like mine) to have better services and support for the needy.

But that doesn't mean I want to live in lower class areas, deal with aggressive panhandlers in my neighborhood etc. I have a Ph D and work very hard and want the upper middle class lifestyle that can provide and have no shame in that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Sarang01']Note this last sentence, especially "that stuff". Translation: "Please don't let me see homeless or poor people around. They make me feel uncomfortable. I just don't want to look at them.". Also can be translated as: "I pay for this community to be gated, to keep the riff-raff out!".

Why don't you teach those kids dmaul? You're a college professor. Tell them how Christianity really came to be and about the "wonderful" rulers of Constantine who really helped it spread.[/QUOTE]

We seem to keep dancing around the fact that having a soup kitchen nearby detracts from quality of living.

Face it, homeless people smell and some even have mental issues. It's great when you setup an area of town to help them out and I've donated my time to these efforts. But I don't want that going on next door. And I'd feel ten times more strongly if I had kids.

Plus it will bring down property values - that is a fact. I live right near a nice restaurant and that brings down my values - I can only imagine how much a soup kitchen would put a dent in my home's valuation. Communities should balance good intentions with respect for the investment that folks put into their neighborhood.
 
[quote name='Clak']That's true actually, I get the feeling the people who complained about this probably wouldn't want to help pay for something more permanent in a better location.[/QUOTE]

That's the problem I have with modern American conservatives - they have such a hard-on for blaming govt that they don't give a shit about real solutions.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']Note this last sentence, especially "that stuff". Translation: "Please don't let me see homeless or poor people around. They make me feel uncomfortable. I just don't want to look at them.". Also can be translated as: "I pay for this community to be gated, to keep the riff-raff out!".

Why don't you teach those kids dmaul? You're a college professor. Tell them how Christianity really came to be and about the "wonderful" rulers of Constantine who really helped it spread.[/QUOTE]
I agree with your sentiment, but dmaul isn't an activist and even if he were, this is a systemic issue and not an individual one. The "left" and those that lean that way aren't immune from classism.
 
All true. Though I don't think it's classism to want to live in a nice area, keep up property value etc., while supporting more services and investment in poor areas.

I'm not an activist as you note, so I'm not going to move to a gentrifying area like I lived in grad school and deal with crime and grime. But I'm more than happy to donate to charities, support tax increases and other efforts to get state and local governments to re-invest in these areas etc. Also a lot of good restaurants and bars in gentrifying areas, and I'm happy to frequent those despite not wanting to live in the area.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='dmaul1114']All true. Though I don't think it's classism to want to live in a nice area, keep up property value etc., while supporting more services and investment in poor areas.[/QUOTE]

If it is, then sign me up for classism.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']All true. Though I don't think it's classism to want to live in a nice area, keep up property value etc., while supporting more services and investment in poor areas.

I'm not an activist as you note, so I'm not going to move to a gentrifying area like I lived in grad school and deal with crime and grime. But I'm more than happy to donate to charities, support tax increases and other efforts to get state and local governments to re-invest in these areas etc.[/QUOTE]
The classism part was more of a general comment about my fellow libs and not really directed at you personally. My point it is that it's more complicated and not a straight line from not wanting to live around mentally ill people to "I hate the poors because their dirty and icky." Both exaggerations of course.

I understand camoor's and your sentiments as well. Even beyond the economic aspect of it, I know you guys support a system to help those people not be in the dire straights they're in.
 
All fair. Though it's hard to see how anyone could call themselves a liberal without support a system to help the poor as that's pretty much the foundation of liberalism. :D

But maybe that's your point, that lots of people who claim to be liberally really aren't outside of things like being pro-choice etc.
 
[quote name='dohdough']The classism part was more of a general comment about my fellow libs and not really directed at you personally. My point it is that it's more complicated and not a straight line from not wanting to live around mentally ill people to "I hate the poors because their dirty and icky." Both exaggerations of course.

I understand camoor's and your sentiments as well. Even beyond the economic aspect of it, I know you guys support a system to help those people not be in the dire straights they're in.[/QUOTE]

I still think it's crazy that this country labels me a liberal. I love regulated capitalism, social democracy, and my personal and political philosophies are probably a little too individualistic.

I seriously wonder how OP and friends would act if they lived next door to this woman and came home to find that a window had been broken or grafitti had been spraypainted on their door. My guess is that all this high-minded pro-individual, anti-govt rhetoric would go right out the window and in would come the usual bigotry and close-mindedness we see spewed in every other VS thread (for example the Treyvon thread)

All kids/teenagers do stupid shit and when you get a concentration of them in one area without adequate adult supervision it's going to cause problems. If you don't believe me then visit a junior high or spend a summer as a local pool lifeguard.
 
Yep. It's just an age thing as it happens in good areas too.

One of my favorite things about where I live now is that my high rise has no units larger than 2 bedroom (other than the $2 million or so penthouses at the top) so there are almost no kids in the complex as it's just not big enough for families for the most part. So we don't have much problems with vandalism, don't have many crying babies/toddlers making racket and running around etc. It's pretty much just young professionals and older retired folks (many more of the first group) in the building for the most part.
 
[quote name='camoor']I
I seriously wonder how OP and friends would act if they lived next door to this woman and came home to find that a window had been broken or grafitti had been spraypainted on their door. My guess is that all this high-minded pro-individual, anti-govt rhetoric would go right out the window and in would come the usual bigotry and close-mindedness we see spewed in every other VS thread (for example the Treyvon thread)[/QUOTE]

Wait you think I am pro-individual and anti government? Where the fuck do you even read that in my OP? You don't know me one bit. Insinuating that I am a bigot also? You infer this all because I was mad the government was not doing ENOUGH? The common sense part of my statement refers to the fact the government's insistence on use of fines and threats over solving problems. This woman does not need to move her operation if the government grants her a variance. It could be done without an issue except they want to charge up to $1000 for it. That is the type of crap I do not like. Your assertion that hungry kids equals rift raft is more insulting than anything I have said.
 
[quote name='cancerman1120']Wait you think I am pro-individual and anti government? Where the fuck do you even read that in my OP? You don't know me one bit. Insinuating that I am a bigot also? You infer this all because I was mad the government was not doing ENOUGH? The common sense part of my statement refers to the fact the government's insistence on use of fines and threats over solving problems. This woman does not need to move her operation if the government grants her a variance. It could be done without an issue except they want to charge up to $1000 for it. That is the type of crap I do not like. Your assertion that hungry kids equals rift raft is more insulting than anything I have said.[/QUOTE]

First off, it's riff raff.

Now you tell me - are you willing to pay more in taxes so that the county can hire someone whose job it is to advise charities how they can operate within the parameters of the law? Assuming you are, do you think that's going to go down well with the folks that live in the Chester township?

Tell the folks: good news everyone, we're going to help the lunch lady get her slapdash free lunch charity up to spec, and we'll force you to pay for it. That should go over well.
 
[quote name='camoor']First off, it's riff raff.

Now you tell me - are you willing to pay more in taxes so that the county can hire someone whose job it is to advise charities how they can operate within the parameters of the law? Assuming you are, do you think that's going to go down well with the folks that live in the Chester township?

Tell the folks: good news everyone, we're going to help the lunch lady get her slapdash free lunch charity up to spec, and we'll force you to pay for it. That should go over well.[/QUOTE]

I cannot seem to figure you out. Maybe that is what you want. In this particular case there is no need to hire someone. No money needs to be used to allow her to continue. She has already secured funding for the charity. All that is needed is a variance on her property. Now we can disagree on exactly what should and should not be allowed in a residential community but it seems if she pays the $1,000 the city will gladly give her the variance. I am questioning the cost of the change and the way government sometimes prefers to threaten rather than solve problems.

I am sure this issue comes up a lot since many residences are used as child care facilities. I am sure they have to pay some type of license to do so and I am sure there are plenty of neighbors that hate it. Maybe my reasoning is off on this one because I do believe she should follow the law but I am not a fan of government when it seems to provide artificial roadblocks. The more I looked into zoning issues like these I find it really is dependent on the municipality. Some places will easily grant variances while others it takes a ton of effort or they are not allowed at all.
 
You can't just wave a fee for one person though. It's the law, and she has to either abide by it, or stop while trying to get the city to change the law.

And the variance from place to place is just what you get when you have a fragmented government system. We like having things accountable at the local level, but that means laws will be different from municipality to municipality.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']You can't just wave a fee for one person though. It's the law, and she has to either abide by it, or stop while trying to get the city to change the law.

And the variance from place to place is just what you get when you have a fragmented government system. We like having things accountable at the local level, but that means laws will be different from municipality to municipality.[/QUOTE]

Yeah the more I listened to people the more I realized it was a gut reaction on my part.
 
[quote name='cancerman1120']Edit:Side note...this neighborhood is already in decay. This has nothing to do with "house value".[/QUOTE]

Delaware County is a very odd place - it's like Philly's hillbilly outskirts, though the city of Chester itself (where the article is placed) is a small ghetto right in the center. It's so spatially separated from the city that I see little to no hope for it to rebound economically if/when parts of the city itself bounce back.

Such regulations as are placed on the woman seem absurd, but the willingness to waive the fines if she moves demonstrates compromise. The woman wants to not move, not change, and not pay the fine. She's being the unreasonable one by showing zero interest or incentive in changing what she does.

The location is key here, not so much the action itself. So it's kind of inaccurate to say her fine is due to "feeding...neighborhood kids." Because she can continue to do that - over there in the parking lot - and avoid fines. So geography, not activity, is what is causing the problem.

An unwillingness to compromise, to budge, to move, to find reasonable middle ground - that's not something to be proud of in this day and age. We act as if that is what we would truly support, but few of us do.
 
I think the action is key here. Because the action, if continued, could lead to other problems as well, which would result in consequences for a lot of people. But would you blame the woman more or the parents more if something bad happened?
 
It seems like both sides are dancing around the solution here. The program seems wholly supplied by the Archdiocese of Philly and this lady basically just runs it from her property. Her intentions are no doubt good, but running anything of public use like that from your own residential property is not a great idea. Like King Broly just hinted at, it can leave this lady open for all kinds of legal liability like property damage and even the well being of the children. Let's say part of that tent falls and strikes a child on the head. The lady owns the property, the tent, and probably even set up the tent so if the parent sue anyone for say negligence & medical care costs, it's going to be her. I honestly only skimmed the article real quick but did it mention if she was properly insured for things like this?

Now admitted the township could be a little more understanding/helpful here, but I do see the issue of if they let her continue as is then what's to stop the next organization from setting up shop at a member's residence? Then the next? It all sets a precedence. I'm not gonna say it's perfect at all but there are reasons for zoning laws.

So I don't see why the simply don't move the program to the nearest Archdiocese church or school, seeing as how they seem to supply all the goods. She can still run it from there as a volunteer. They could even move the pop-up tent that report called a gazebo there. Then No fines, no fees, no township sticking their nose in, problem solved.
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']So I don't see why the simply don't move the program to the nearest Archdiocese church or school, seeing as how they seem to supply all the goods. She can still run it from there as a volunteer. They could even move the pop-up tent that report called a gazebo there. Then No fines, no fees, no township sticking their nose in, problem solved.[/QUOTE]

Because it's alot easier to post a shitty opinionated piece on a few libertarian blogs and watch the outrage and donations roll in.

Why should she change? She's a god warrior fighting against the oppressive state or something.
 
Oh ffs. There's maybe two weeks left before kids go back to school, right? So more or less this summer lunch program will be done in that long. Why make such a capital case over something that's doing so much good? This is just a case of this city and its council being a buncha greedy obstinate fucks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top