Unless I've misunderstood something here, the city exchanged permanent, rent-free use of the facility when the Boy Scouts paid to produce it and made it the property of the city (a legal mechanism created to avoid the existence of property taxes since it is a publicly owned building). If the city wants to reneg on its agreement for political(ly correct) reasons, then why should it not pay the costs of bailing out of its agreement by purchasing the facility rather than accepting it as a gift?