In the third appellate decision in ten years of litigation, a commercial fitness center failed in a claim that the operation of a fitness center by a YMCA violated the prohibition against subsidizing a commercial business unrelated to the YMCA's charitable purpose. Selfspot, Inc. v. Butler County Family YMCA, No. 1308 D.C. 2008 (Pa. Cmwlth. Jan. 5, 2010) (en banc). The appellate court agreed with the conclusion of the trial court after five days of hearings that the YMCA's fitness center was not operated as a commercial business and was indeed related to the YMCA's charitable purpose to promote the health and welfare of the community. In a thorough opinion, the Commonwealth Court reviewed the extensive evidence and testimony that the YMCA's fitness center was not operated as a separate facility but was one of a number of facilities available to any member of the YMCA. The YMCA subsidized some memberships for persons of limited means and made the facilities available, essentially for free, to a substantial number of community groups. Therefore, the commercial fitness center failed to prove that the YMCA's fitness center served only dues-paying members, in violation of the statutory provision in 10 P.S. § 378. The court summarized applicable case law by stating that no Pennsylvania case has ever held that a charitable purpose can only be advanced by giving something away. Rather, a charitable purpose can be fulfilled by making a gift to the general public which extends to the rich as well as the poor and is not vitiated if the charity receives some payment for its services. If the public generally is benefited, the charitable purpose is fulfilled.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
