eisely

FScouter's suggestions are well taken. Personally I don't think of active scoutmasters, cubmasters, den leaders, assistant scoutmasters, and other supportive volunteers who may not technically be part of the committee as mere "hangers on."

There is another technicality that your cubmaster may have been alluding to. I don't know about cub scout packs, but I do know that in boy scout units the scoutmaster and assistant scoutmasters are technically not part of the committee. If someone wanted to be a stickler, people currently filling positions may be precluded from voting in committee. This was aired in another thread in this forum recently. I don't know of a single unit that enforces this idea. In our committee, if the scoutmaster and assistant scoutmasters stayed home, there wouldn't be much of a committee. In every unit that I was involved in at either the cub or scout level, anybody who wanted to show up for a committee meeting did so, and when votes were called for, everybody present participated. But then, we were just ignorant. Few formal votes are necessary since most committees operate by consensus. The issue of who gets to vote can become important in real controversies such as removal of a volunteer. If I were in your shoes, I would go to any meeting I wanted to and participate as fully as I wanted to.

Chippewa29, your story about nine year olds in boy scouts is downright scary. Somebody would have to lie, and the scoutmaster acquiesce, about the age of the youth. I would think that the scoutmaster, and every other adult involved, would have a serious personal legal liability if such a kid were ever hurt. One would expect the council and BSA national to be able to walk away from such a liability if the truth came out.

I would be surprised if any council would go along with this. If I were a scoutmaster asked to sign off on a youth application to join, I would not do so. One of the adverse consequences of BSA pushing the joining age for scouts ever younger is that it increases the spread in physical and emotional maturity ever wider between the youngest scouts and the oldest scouts. It is difficult to run a coherent program as it is. Granted that this boy may be an unusual fourth grader, I still think it is a bad idea.

A follow up story from the Los Angeles Times. I had forgotten that the ACLU had gotten itself involved in this controversy. Also, the council member named in the previous article apparently is an out of the close lesbian pushing this issue. The scouts do have a lot of support in San Diego. On the whole San Diego is pretty conservative by California standards. ________________- Scouts' Use of San Diego Park at Issue Government: The council will consider whether to renew the group's lease. Opponents say its ban on gays and atheists violates city law. By KEN ELLINGWOOD, TIMES STAFF WRITER The San Diego City Council today will consider whether to renew the long-standing lease of a section of Balboa Park to the Boy Scouts--a controversial arrangement that has been the target of a federal lawsuit by the ACLU. Under the proposed 50-year lease, the Boy Scouts would retain use of a 16-acre chunk of the city's signature park occupied by the group since 1946. The council debate comes even as the ACLU challenges the legality of leasing public property to a group that bars gays and atheists. The lease issue has attracted keen public interest, and officials were preparing for a big turnout at today's council session. But opponents of the renewal conceded they are likely to lose. "I am ever hopeful, but it doesn't look good. That's the reality," said Councilwoman Toni Atkins, the council's only openly gay member. Atkins said leasing to the Boy Scouts violates city policies barring bias on the basis of religion or sexual orientation. "The city is violating its own policies. I don't know how we can do that," she said. Mayor Dick Murphy, who supports renewal of the lease, favored moving ahead with the vote in spite of the ACLU lawsuit, filed in August 2000. "There's no end in sight on when the lawsuit will be resolved," said Murphy's press secretary, Elena Cristiano. "If he timed things according to lawsuits, nothing would get done." The current $1-a-year lease expires in 2007, but the Boy Scouts want early renewal to ensure tenancy before raising funds for a series of fix-ups on the eucalyptus-shaded parcel near the San Diego Zoo. Under the proposed lease, the Boy Scouts would make at least $1.7 million in improvements during the next seven years. The group also would pay a $2,500 administrative fee yearly, in addition to the $1 rent. "In order to continue serving 25,000 kids, it's imperative that we have the lease renewed. To penalize the kids would be wrongheaded. It just wouldn't make good sense," said Dan McAllister, president of the Desert Pacific Council of the Boy Scouts, which covers San Diego and Imperial counties. Councilman Byron Wear, who rose to Eagle Scout and has two sons in the Boy Scouts, said the group gives youths an alternative to gangs and drug abuse. "The benefits that the Boy Scouts provide to our community far outweigh any negatives that have been brought forth," Wear said in a statement. "The issue of sexual orientation and the Boy Scouts is one for the Supreme Court to decide, and not the City Council." The ACLU lawsuit came after the U.S. Supreme Court, in a case filed by a gay Boy Scout leader in New Jersey, upheld the right of the group to exclude gays. The court said the Scouts are a private group that is seeking to instill its moral values in boys and therefore free to bar those whose behavior or lifestyle clashes with its message. The ACLU says the Boy Scouts cannot assert the right to discriminate while seeking support from city governments with laws that prohibit discriminatory groups from using public property. The lease "makes the city a partner in the Boy Scouts' discrimination against gays and religious nonbelievers," said Dale Kelly Bankhead, spokeswoman for the ACLU's chapter in San Diego and Imperial counties. "While the Boy Scouts may not be for everybody, city parks are." The City Council also will consider extending a separate 50-year lease governing the Girl Scouts' use of 15 acres in Balboa Park. The ACLU says it does not oppose the $1-a-year lease because the Girl Scouts do not discriminate.

The only requirements to be a committee member are age 21 (I think) and registered as an adult volunteer. The adult registration form has a position code that must be supplied for each volunteer. In most units, "committee member" is the default registration if the volunteer does not want to fill a specific position. If my memory serves me correctly (senior member and all that), the code for committee member is "CM". I presume that the adult volunteers in your pack filled out a form and are registered. If not, then you have more serious problems. It is absolutely incorrect that parents cannot be committee members. As noted by other posts above, most committees are composed of parents. You ought to try to look at your charter document. This is a printout provided by council, usually through unit commissioners, for units to use in their annual rechartering process. The name of every registered adult and youth should appear on this printout. The position code for every adult should also be shown. Technically the committee oversees the adult leadership (cub master, den leaders, etc) in the execution of the program. The committee is technically responsible to the chartered organization (church, school, or whatever). If you don't know who your sponsoring organization is, then all the more reason to ask to see the charter. Somebody, the cub master or committee chair, should have a copy of this.

There is a wonderful quote from Mark Twain (my favorite philospher) that, while specifically referring to a dad, probably applies with equal force these days to moms. The quote goes something like, "When I was eighteen my father was the most ignorant man on earth. I was amazed at how much the old man had learned by the time I was twenty one."

Access to public facilities in the face of local policy hostile to scouting's policy on homosexuality is a real threat. This issue was litigated in Broward County Florida successfully by BSA just this year and a federal judge ruled that the scouts could not be treated any differently than any other organization. The kind of lease at issue in San Diego is probably in a different class however. What we have seen throughout California is a willingness by some elected local officials, who believe strongly that scouting must be brought to heel on this issue, to do almost anything within their power to destroy scouting, if that is what it takes to make their point. Elected officials who may be neutral or friendly to scouting are often intimidated into going along. Sad but true.

I usually click on the text title of the thread, and I still am not getting counted here.

Thanx for the post. We could probably all write volumes about our great experiences in scouting at all levels if we had the time.

neckerchief2tight, As you can see from the above, a great many, if not most, scout units do reimburse at least partially for expenses borne by volunteers. Any policy you might adopt in your committee depends on your objectives and your means. Reimbursing expenses, particularly for outings and summer camps, encourages adult participation and support, which is usually in short supply. I do suggest that reimbursement policies be committed to writing, and an estimate of overall budgetary impact be considered in adopting any particular policy. It is also important that reasonable financial controls be in place, so that people like the scoutmaster are not simply reimbursing themselves without anybody else knowing about it. That is not the kind of situation you want to create.

Many units have a "parent manual" for new parents that lays out the policies and procedures of the unit. If your unit has such a thing, that would be a great place to state the policy. Kinda like putting up a no smoking sign.

KL Wisconsin has made the right distinction. If you are talking about some kind of honorarium or fee for participating, then the answer is no. If you are talking about reimbursement for legitimate expenses, then there is no problem with this in general, although the committee needs to think about what it will reimburse. For example, uniforms and auto mileage to and from meetings and events are properly, in my opinion, borne by the individual. Our unit covers all fees for lcoal training. Expenses such as postage and reproduction should be reimbursed. Expenses for outings, including summer camp, are another matter. In my opinion, adults who commit week to go to summer camp should not pay for the privilege. This should be taken out of general troop funds or spread across the boys going to camp. On those major outings that I personally have led, I spread the costs for the adults over the boys, including my own son, who went on the outing. One outing expense that is not covered under my personal policy is meals consumed coming and going. Our unit does not cover the costs of adults going to Philmont. So you have a lot of options. Another thing you should share with your committee is that unreimbursed expenses, including uniform costs, are tax deductible as a charitable deduction. Talk to your tax advisor, but I think that people who do not itemize their deductions can deduct charitable contributions. I always keep receipts for publications I buy, maps, uniform parts, and anything else for which I am not reimbursed. Needless to say, if the unit reimburses an expense, it goes against the scout law, and the internal revenue code, to deduct things for which you are reimbursed.

jmcquillan, Rooster7 is right, the most recent smoking controversy was in Maryland. As I understood the reports, you could have been fined $750 for smoking INSIDE your own home if a neighbor complained. We should not talk about this too much, because some anti smoking fanatic here in California who has been sleeping through this will pick up on the idea.

Again, it depends on partly where you live. If you live in a part of the country where smoking is still quite common, and there are few restrictions on smoking in public places, it is easy to see where conflicts might arise. Here in California you cannot smoke inside public buildings and most public accomodations. Therefore smokers are already forced to go outside. I have known a handful of scouters here who were smokers and all of them handled their habit discreetly. I don't think the boys paid five seconds of attention to it. Kids today are all aware that smoking is also addictive, and I suspect they look at older people smoking simply as addicts. As long as it is kept out of the way, no big deal. Aside from the smell, smoking is most dangerous to the smoker himself or herself. The dangers of second hand smoke are, in my opinion, highly overstated. I would not refuse the services of a competent adult volunteeer solely on this issue, as long as they used common sense and adhered to BSA policy. For the record, I still occasionally enjoy a good cigar outside on my deck, and have never had a smoking habit.

Here we go again. ____________________ City Council Readying For Scouts Controversy San Diego City Council is set to decide Tuesday whether to extend the Boy Scouts' lease at Balboa Park, a decision made somewhat controversial by the organization's stance on gays and lesbians. For more than 80 years, the prime location has cost the Boy Scouts next to nothing to lease, 10News reported. Now critics wants to see that deal brought to an end. Camp Balboa has been home to the Scouts since 1948. In 1957, the organization signed a lease deal with the city costing just $1 a year for 50 years. While the Scouts haven't had to fork over much for their lease, they have put nearly $5 million into its headquarters on the land, 10News reported. With so much invested, the Scouts are looking to work out another long lease. But opponents want the group out of the city park. "This is a matter of discrimination, as far as I'm concerned," said City Councilwoman Toni Atkins. But last year the U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites) upheld the Boy Scouts' right to exclude gays because it is a private organization. "We are certainly not about telling anyone what lifestyle they should choose," said Dan McAllister of the Boy Scouts of America. "We are certainly not about to say everyone needs to be a Boy Scout. After all, this is a world of choice." Supporters of the Scouts also argue that the organization provides a service to the community. "All of that outweighs any controversy a vocal minority makes over this issue," said City Councilman Jim Madaffer. Critics of the Scouts don't necessarily argue with the group's contribution to society, but argue that because it is a private organization that discriminates against gays, it should not be allowed to operate from a public city park. So far the City Council appears split on the issue, 10News reported. If approved, the lease would this time include a $2,500 yearly administrative fee.

Actually there is a BSA policy on smoking. That policy is simply that smoking should not be done in front of youth members. This really is not an issue for our unit since so few adults in our community smoke at all. I like the idea of the boys taking the initiative on the issue.

Is it my computer or a problem with the website? As of 9:05 AM Pacific Time Monday, December 3, this thread shows zero replies, yet there are several. Has anybody else observed this?

I suppose that the reaction to camo depends in part on where you live. I can easily see how in some communities this would be no big deal at all. I can only say that, here in the San Francisco Bay Area, the media is always looking to jump on a boy scout story in a less than favorable way. If there were a bunch of scouts spotted in a park or camp ground, all wearing camo, we would never hear the last of it. There are parents in this area who seriously believe that the BSA is the US version of the Hitler Youth. Their sons don't necessarily buy this, and want to be part of the adventure. I don't want to put one more objection in such parents' minds to letting their boys get into scouting.

I am not aware of any formal guidance on financial matters other than fund raising. There is a recent thread on this subject. See the thread, "I am new and wondering..."

Robinton, Please do not use all UPPER CASE in future posts. It is hard to read. sctmom's point is well taken. I have seen many males say that women are welcome, but there are non verbal ways of sending the message that they really aren't welcome. I also have talked with thoughtful men and women who all want strong positive male role models for their sons, and look for that in scouting. This is particularly true of single moms that I have dealt with. The difficulty is that there are not enough male volunteers to do the job the way it must be done. If women can step in to deliver an effective program when the men cannot or will not do so, then power to them.

As far as I can tell, the only real reason for having six month terms is to give more boys a chance at a leadership position. Every troop I have been involved with has six month terms. My impression is that twelve month terms would get a better result for the unit as a whole. We do try to establish pre requisites for patrol leader, SPL, and ASPL positions. We want boys to have gone through JLT before they take this on. We still get a mixed result, but that might have nothing to do with the training. If you don't make training a pre requisite, then you should work it into your program. It really is unfair to give a boy a job that he is clueless how to perform.

mwhittington, Sounds like this could get very ugly before it is totally resolved. Good luck. Let us know the outcome. We can all learn from each others' experiences.

To digress a bit... It is pointless to pretend that there are no links between scouting and the military. The links are there and we should not be ashamed of those links, at the same time that we should make it clear to ourselves and others that scouting is not a para military organization for youth. There are at least two other ways that scouting mimics military practice. The "knots" that most adults wear on their shirts are abbreviated forms of insignia for various accomplishments the adult has done and that scouting recognizes. This is very similar to the ribbon insignia worn by military people on their class A blouses, that are abbreviated insignia. How many people have ever been up close to a unit flag at the batallion level or higher for either the marines or the army? Ever notice those "battle streamers" hanging from the flag? Those are awarded to the unit for participation in various campaigns. Don't ask me how the military identifies a "campaign" for this purpose, but somehow they do. In parades where the service flag is being carried for the entire armed force, all the battle streamers ever awarded should be present. This makes for a pretty heavy flag. We do the same thing with camporee streamers and similar unit level awards. Just because we mimic a practice of the military here doesn't mean that we should stop doing it or that we are paramilitary.

There is no question that the information provided is intended to support a point of view. Just as the information provided in pro gay and lesbian websites is intended to support a point of view. I still believe that the information is helpful. For example, there is the old canard that one in ten men in the US are gay. Apparently this came from the original Kinsey studies based on responses to a single question, "Have you ever had a homosexual experience?" It could easily be true that one in ten adult males have had a homosexual experience, but it does not follow that one in ten are actually gay. How many of those reported experiences were forced upon the respondents? The site goes on to provide more accurate survey information about the incidence of homosexualtity in the United States and other western societies.