Written by John Galt, NEPA Media Group
The former Daniels Top of the Poconos resort at 180 Glenmere Road has operated under a 2017 Payment In Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) agreement that caps its total annual payment to Barrett Township, Monroe County, the Pocono Mo — regardless of assessed value increases or inflation.
The agreement states it:
shall remain in full force and effect as long as the Properties are being used as at present for tax exempt purposes as permitted under the Consolidated County Assessment Law, Institutions of Purely Public Charity Act and/or other applicable law.
That language is central to understanding whether the agreement remains valid today.
Without exemption or a PILOT agreement, the 2024 property tax obligation on the primary parcel alone was listed at $73,580.70.
Background: Exemption Was Initially Denied
The property was sold in 2014 for approximately $1.15 million.
In 2016, when the new owner applied for tax-exempt status, the Monroe County Commissioners denied the exemption. Under Pennsylvania Law, nonprofit status under IRS §501(c)(3) does not automatically guarantee local property tax exemption. The organization must satisfy Pennsylvania’s constitutional and statutory requirements for classification as a “purely public charity.”
Those requirements are defined through both the Pennsylvania Constitution and judicial interpretation, most notably the five-part Hospital Utilization Project (HUP) Test. To qualify as a purely public charity, an organization must:
- Advance a charitable purpose;
- Donate or render gratuitously a substantial portion of its services;
- Benefit a substantial and indefinite class of persons who are legitimate subjects of charity;
- Relieve the government of some burden; and
- Operate entirely free from private profit motive.
Failure to satisfy any one of these prongs may disqualify an exemption claim.
Further Reading:
The 2017 Settlement Agreement and PILOT
Following the County’s denial, the property owner appealed. On June 28, 2017, Barrett Township Supervisors’ meeting minutes reflect discussion of a “Settlement Agreement for Tax Appeal.” The minutes show a motion to approve the settlement, seconded and passed unanimously.
The recorded excerpt states:
Discussion was held on the Settlement Agreement for Tax Appeal for the Congregation OHR Menachem. Ralph Megliola made a motion to approve the Settlement Agreement. The motion was seconded by John Seese and carried. All Supervisors voted aye. It was noted that the Pocono Mountain School District and Monroe County approved the Settlement Agreement.
The minutes do not detail the $25,000 cap or quote the “as at present” condition. The fully executed PILOT agreement, including the use-restriction language, did not appear in township files until later County correspondence.
Under the settlement, the property retained tax-exempt status subject to the annual $25,000 -capped PILOT payment.
What “As at Present” Meant in 2017
The PILOT’s enforceability hinges on what the property’s use was “as at present” in 2017.
Township records and meeting minutes from that period describe the property as operating as a religious camp and school. There is no indication in the 2017 public record of a public restaurant.
The agreement expressly conditions its continuation on the property being used “as at present” for tax-exempt purposes under the Consolidated County Assessment Law and the Institutions of Purely Public Charity Act (IPPCA).
Under Pennsylvania Law, exemption status is determined by the actual and regular use of the property, not merely ownership by a nonprofit entity.
Current Operations: Public Food Facility Inspections
Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture records show the property registered and inspected as a food facility. Unlike private institutional kitchens limited strictly to internal program use, facilities classified as food establishments are inspected under standards applicable to public restaurants.
An August 13, 2024 inspection report documented 14 violations, including:
- Inadequate food safety oversight by the person in charge;
- Improper storage of refrigerated products at room temperature;
- Uncovered prepared foods in cold storage;
- Food residue on equipment and utensils;
- Fruit fly presence near food preparation areas;
- Plumbing and sanitation deficiencies.
These are violations cited under the same regulatory framework governing public food service establishments. These publicly available materials raise factual questions regarding the scope and nature of present operations compared to the 2017 baseline.
Legal Implications Under the IPPCA
The Institutions of Purely Public Charity Act prohibits tax-exempt organizations from using their exemption in a manner that results in unfair competition with private enterprise.
Pennsylvania courts consistently apply a “primary use” analysis. If substantial portions of the property are devoted to commercial or revenue-generating activity not incidental to the charitable mission, exemption may be subject to review.
Courts have also held that properties may be partially exempt and partially taxable depending on building-by-building or use-by-use analysis.
If public restaurant operations, commercial event rentals, or market-based lodging constitute a material portion of current use, taxing authorities may have grounds to reassess whether the property continues to meet the HUP criteria and IPPCA standards.
Because the PILOT agreement is explicitly conditioned on continued tax-exempt use “as at present,” a material change in use could affect the validity of the agreement itself.
The 2027 Renewal Window
The agreement appears structured for five-year review cycles, with the next renewal period anticipated in 2027.
However, under Pennsylvania assessment law, exemption status is not permanently insulated until a renewal date. If property use materially changes, taxing authorities may initiate reassessment or appeal proceedings prior to the renewal cycle.
Exemption determinations focus on actual use patterns at the time of review.
Questions for Officials
Given the documented facts, concerned residents may wish to ask:
- Has the property’s primary use materially changed since 2017?
- Is the food facility classification consistent with internal charitable use only?
- Does the current use align with the HUP test requirements?
- Are any portions of the property subject to partial taxation?
- Will the 2027 review include a full reassessment of use classification?
Relevant public records include:
- The 2017 Settlement Agreement and PILOT document;
- Township Ordinance 197 (if applicable);
- Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture inspection reports;
- County assessment records;
- Public marketing materials and listings.
Conclusion
The central issue is not whether religious or charitable organizations deserve tax consideration — Pennsylvania law clearly provides for that when the legal standards are met. The question is whether the property at 180 Glenmere Road continues to operate “as at present” under the same tax-exempt use that justified the 2017 settlement. The difference between a capped $25,000 annual PILOT payment and a fully assessed 2024 tax obligation of $73,580.70 is substantial, particularly for Barrett Township, Monroe County, the Pocono Mountain School District, and the Barrett Paradise Friendly Library. Clear documentation, transparent review, and consistent application of the Institutions of Purely Public Charity Act and HUP standards are essential to maintaining public trust. As the 2027 review approaches, a careful examination of current property use — based on facts, not assumptions — will determine whether the agreement remains legally and equitably justified.