fred johnson

Also ... I like the idea about making the funds visible. BUDGET IT. The visibility of the budget impact will reflect if it is okay or not.

HOW MUCH? - What are we talking? Two large pizzas and 20 cans of pop? Or a sit down meal at red lobster each month? Also, is this a 100+ person unit that sells $60,000 in popcorn a year and has a $25,000 budget? Or a 30 person unit with a $2000 budget. Reasonable could be $25 to $50 a meeting. I doubt if $10 per person with 10+ people twelve times a year is reasonable. TOO MUCH CASH - Sometimes volunteer organizations with too much money start finding ways to spend it and create internal bickering that can tear them apart. PERCEPTION - This is huge. Depending on how much money you are talking about, you WILL open yourselves up to personal attacks as many will see this as luxious and potentially unreasonable. What will parents and outsiders think? Most scout "volunteers" do incur significant cost themselves. If they hear about this, it will sound extravagent and there will be jealousy. FUNDRAISING - You could also affect fundraising. I myself would have trouble giving money to a unit where I am already incuring cost if it is being spent on other volunteers instead of directly on the program. EXAMPLE - Our district chair buys food for everyone out of his own pocket for the district meetings. EXAMPLE - None of the leaders in any unit I am in have ever expensed gas or transportation unless the distance is 400 miles or longer round trip. THINKING PATTERN - Is it the example you want to set for your scouts? Leaders help units all the time without expensing the cost or thinking twice about it. I did not address child care. That one is way out in left field for my experience. Does the scouting unit choose the baby sitter and/or incur risk if something happens? What is reasonable? Minimum wage? $20 per hour? $5 per kid per hour? I just would NOT get into the child care issue for meetings. Work around it or find another volunteer.

Love it. Great term. "Deathbed Eagle". Just as appropriate as others using the term technical Eagle to diminish the accomplishments of a scout. Seems even more appropriate as the scout won't wear Eagle on their uniform except for their ECOH.

But ya don't know that. 99% of eagles earn it at 17 years old and 11 months. Given that the BSA requirements set it up so that a scout "could" complete Eagle just before turning 13, means that there will be cases of a 13 year old eagle. Or even a 12 year old Eagle. And that's 100% fine if the scout earned it.

Fully agreed. Plenty of previous chances to address issues. Goal tending on Eagle Scout is poor form.

My problem would be with the SM who is subverting the efforts of the scout. That in no way fits in the scout law and is dishonest.

"I'd hate to see any child punished for being motivated and industrious." ... Very well said.

Random comments - If you look for problems, you will find problems. - Scouting is not about punishments. - "Discipline must be constructive." Guide To Safe Scouting, page 2. Constructive discipline, in my opinion, is restorative discipline and teaches lessons. - I don't care for long documented procedural ways to handle discipline. They are never consistently applied and only get called when really serious things happen. At that point, you have bigger fish to fry then a procedure. You are also dealing with leader failings by writing a policy. Remember to also train the leader or find the right leader. *** You can never deal with leader failings by writing a policy. *** - If the scout is a safety risk, you separate the scout from the troop. Period. - If the scout will not behave within the bounds of the scout oath and law, he is removed until he is willing to work within the bounds of the scout oath and law. - The best scoutmaster I've seen handled things with a shake of the head, sometimes a negative chuckle and phrases such as "What happened?" "How does feel about it?" "What caused that?" "How did he react?" "Why do you think he reacted that way?" He'd ask way way more questions and kept the questions very simple and almost naive. Usually the asking of the questions was plenty for the scout to know what he did was unacceptable. Then, he would suggest a way to handle it. - One thing that took me awhile to figure out ... Scouting isn't for every kid. Some kids are mean. Some have bigger issues. Some kids might really really need scouting to teach them lessons, but it can kill a troop. Troops need to identify those scouts and make they fairly and consistently lay down the law before that scout drives many other scouts away.

In our troop, the SM deals with teaching and coaching the scouts. I've rarely seen him direct "punishments". Usually, his guidance is restorative such as "okay, now help fix his tent" or similar. When real punishment is needed such as removing the scout from the troop, that is a committee and committee chair job. We want to keep the scoutmaster as the good guy if possible.

Protesting "as an american"? Really? In every country, scouts is about citizenship and that DOES include the flag and a certain level of patriotism. Now, ya don't need to wave the flag or run and join the military. But it does mean a certain level of "proud to be an american". I'm astounded anyone would question that. It's like saying you are member of a church, but the church doesn't believe in the existence of God and doesn't really have any core beliefs (i.e. UUA). It's like saying you are believe everyone needs to pay their fair share but then protesting when the taxes hit you. But then supporting taxes that hit either the working poor or the top 1%. "As an American" ... ya know ... scouts also say the pledge of allegiance before each meeting. Your scouts from India, New Zealand and the U.K. already have a much bigger issue. How about the Scout Oath? Sorry ... that question did get to me. But to be honest, I know very few scouts who know the outdoor code. They read it once and then tend to forget it.

Business as usual. No announcements. Doesn't affect the scouts. Only becomes an issue when someone wants to make it an issue from either political side. At that point, we'll ask them to knock it off or leave.

Qwazse ... well you were a better teenager than most. Most teenagers are just trying to get by and not yet ready to stand up to hard situations.

It took me a minute to understand the comment direction of the author. This is really a mess but it's a mess that society is in now, not just scouts. All the rules are up in the air. Heck, if you have someone who has declared a homosexual attraction, then the kid that has the gym locker next to the other kid is both stressed by the situation (not just a false perception or a fault of the kid) but also faces some very personal jokes and comments by others in his gym class even if he is not involved in any way other than having a near by locker. But then again, most schools are now removing the grading requirement that you showering after gym is a required part of the class. Same for scouts. If you have an openly gay scout, I could never direct a scout to share a tent with them. That would be wrong same as directing a female scout to share a tent with a male scout. And it is all the exact same issues. Awkward situations. Mean jokes. Misunderstandings. And also real chance that a mis-balance of power could cause one to be pressured by the other. Perhaps the only real choice now is that everyone uses one-person tents or larger group tents like other nations use. That seems like the most reasonable situation now.

Down significantly. At least the school handed out our fliers this year.

Great article ... Fully agree. Please note that I am not an advocate for re-creating the past. My original post was about having a strong character and to know the jobs such that you can say it as it is. (John Wayne scouter). Likewise, there is a value in being laid back and letting things work out (letting the scouts solve the issue) and not getting overly uptight. (Peter Fonda scouter). I was frustrated at the time with the "Felix Unger" scouters and the "Donald Trump" scouters that I was dealing with.

Eagledad wrote it so well. Youth go thru hell in school these days. When I see people arguing over who is worthy of what rank I just get nauseated. Our number one goal as scouters should always be to provide a safe haven for our scouts. Thru skills training and outings, scouts bond and build friendships. Heck, how do you not grow close when camping out in the woods each month. Our troops have had scouts who have threatened suicide while at school and elsewhere. I know scouts who've dealt with drugs and pregnancies and etc etc etc. Our scouts go thru real issues. I am glad if scouting can be their safe haven.

California HR #23 looks like a meaningless feel-good-ism that does nothing. It's hype without substance. I have a friend from Mexico who's school was open. No one forced you to attend class. But if you failed a class, you were out. I'd almost rather see something like that within reason. Essentially you want to learn, we'll teach you. Not wanting to learn, go away. Come back when you want to learn. Might be a GED program. Might be other. But if you don't want to be there, then you don't have to be. Then put it on the families to install in their kids that school is important. Education is important. Employ-ability is important. It might take a village to raise a kid, but it takes the family to really screw him up.

BSA dances on a grey line of running programs, screening volunteers and then also trying to keep arms length and letting the charter org take responsibility. But most charter orgs (except LDS) have very little involvement with the program. So ... I doubt BSA is totally off the hook. For those who care, I think BSA did more than was standard at the time abuses occurred. I'm not saying BSA was perfect and I'm not saying individuals didn't fail to live up to their responsibilities. But BSA had more in place than most of society.

The amount isn't that big but I already contribute plenty and I have many in our pack that are stickers for exact amounts, precision reimbursements, etc. I'm sure we will be fine. But we need to make up the difference. I suspect it will be something silly like the week we go to recharter we will review the roster. If someone has not attended for three months, we will not renew their membership even if they paid dues. 2nd year Webelos? You want us to pay $24 plus $12 (because we've done boy's life in the past) for two months of pack membership. No. They can ask their troop to cover that. Plus, they have to submit a new membership application anyway when they join the troop. Save $36 a scout by not renewing them in December. It just irks me no end. We've already got all the fliers and discussed and budgeted for our year. I am not one to blame national. I love BSA. But someone really really screwed up at national big time to have this happen like it is. If it was my company, seriously, someone would get fired. This is going to have bottom line impact and screw things up for many people.

ARGH !!! Our council is asking us to pay 2014 prices this December when our units recharter. We have already printed our recruiting materials and already received some checks. Are we supposed to go out and ask for more money? Is the money supposed to mystically appear? Or do we guess who won't continue and drop them and use their money to cover the other person. (Ethical issue) This is going to get ugly quick. ARGH !!!

The thing that gets me the most is when a troop leader who has a cub switches from their troop's feeder pack to our pack because our pack is "stronger" or because their troop's aligned pack is struggling. Then starts promoting their troop in our pack without any investing in our pack to make our pack better. Our pack has strong links to two troops and weaker ties to five troops. We don't need another troop promoting their program in our pack. IMHO, I'd rather see that family stay in his troop's feeder pack and try to make that pack better. This has happened multiple times and it does get my goat.

I know that is what we are taught. But I just believe that is the simple analysis of the situation. You are obviously a driven and excellent leader. But, I think there is much more going on that needs addressing and I think "shopping" for troops is a big problem in scouts today. Is the program good? Okay. Of the eight troops in our city, I'd say most are good with strong programs. Though I hate comparing "youth led" as it's more slamming another unit with little basis, those that market the best seem to have the most adult direct leadership. I know your comments. But I just don't buy it. During my time as a pack leader, we've taken the pack from failing with all the leaders quitting to drowning in volunteers and a 70 cub pack. Our troop has multiple scouts working on Eagle and our troop doesn't even emphasize it. It's the kids choosing to do it. But each year our scouts bounce to another unit and several good troops in our city are starving for scouts. Friends are broken up and leaders get pissed at each other.

Ya know ... "every troop meets different needs". I just don't buy it. Some have flavors and specialties but most troops do the same things. And it only becomes an issue when you make a big jump from one unit to another where the units are treated as totally different units. i.e. pack versus troop. If the units had stronger ties such as one committee, you would see that jump and difference issue disappear. Plus ... from what I've seen now from years of involvement is that ... #1 Families new to the program do not know what to look for when troop shopping. #2 Families can't form useful opinions based on just a few experiences. #3 Troops (at least in our area) jump multiple hoops to look better than and different from the other troops. I've seen Webelos "shop" for troops and then flock like a bunch of lemmings to one troop. Every few years the flock changes directions to join a different troop. A troop can be starved for a few years and then drown in new Webelos a few years later. Plus it's abusive to volunteers who have invested so much over the years to then be asked to jump hoops yet again so that Webelos decide to join them. How many different times do we need to recruit the same kids? I live in a city with many "type A" troops, very driven, very program oriented. IMHO, it pits volunteer leader against volunteer leader and gets people clearly upset with each other. Conversely, we have multiple troops with experienced leaders who together have 50+ years in scouting. Yet their "feeder" packs have less than 10 years of experience (i.e. one or two years per leader). Treating packs and troops as separate units is a broken model. Period. Promoting a big decision after five years of scouting is a broken model. Period. Structure that promotes experience heavy troops and struggling packs is a broken model. Period.

Unit dues... Can't see that happening. It would kill many units. Our dues are only a 1/3 of our annual $140 budget per scout. I don't think this is a BSA cost increase. Bull. It's a corporate FOS issue. Lost $700,000 per year from Intel. Lost $150,000 from UPS. Lost $300,000 from Verizon. And that list can go on and on and on. BSA received huge amounts of donations in the past. Now, those donations are drying up because of BSA's political position. So, scouts need to make up the difference. That's the reason for the huge increases in membership dues. One interesting fact. At $25 a year, we will be more aggressive to drop scouts off our charter if they did not pay. We've covered dues for "iffy" scouts for years. PLUS ... the real cost is $37. We also cover the Boy's Life magazine for every scout. So, we need to route $37 per scout to BSA every year. WOW.

Feeder troops and tight linkages only work so long. Other troops contact Webelos directly asking them to come visit their troop and it can quickly subvert years of effort. The "grass always looks greener on the other side of the fence" until you recognize they are just gift wrapping manure.