fred johnson

I've read alot about IRS, non-profits and fundraisers. It's a game of nuances. Plus, there is ETHICAL and there is LEGAL.

Not really serious --> Sometimes I think all troops should just be categorized as for profit organizations and publish 1099 to the scouts that earn money. It would make life easier.

BUT ...

(please note that most troops fly under the radar. The IRS does not care about small organizations such as most boy scouts troops. )

- If your troop / charter org wants to keep the non-profit status, you can't REQUIRE participation in fundraisers. IRS clearly calls that out as the EQUIVALENT to paying dues. The fundraiser is then considered to be FOR-PROFIT (the profit of the members) because it is the monetary equivalent to paying dues. Any money collected by a "TROOP FUNDRAISER" must go equally to all members covered by the purpose of the non-profit.

- Our troop does have scout accounts and scout product sales. We treat it as the troop is supplying a channel thru which scouts earn money to participate in scouts. The troop earns 10% for their effort and scouts earn 90% for their efforts (hoping to get to 100% for the scout). The scouts only keep what they earn and it's important to point out that purchases are NOT tax deductible. I think the real risk that our scouts run is that the police might stop them, ask for their vendor permit and arrest them if they don't produce one.

Unit finances are a GAME OF NUANCES and IRS LEGAL headaches. A "fundraiser" for a non-profit better go to help everyone. Popcorn sales by individual scouts better not be called a "fundraiser".

It's like what was originally posted. Selling something such as "buy my popcorn to send me to camp" is probably okay. Selling something such as "the popcorn sales are a troop fundraiser" and then some of the money goes to a specific scout is probably very very bad.

But most troops fly under the radar.

CONSULT A TAX ATTORNEY !!!!

I don't think this is as clear cut. Ultimately, the parents pay either way. Ya pay for this event or for the next event. In my experience, the parents are often the driving force in fundraisers. Plus if there is no money in the scout account, the parent pays. I just don't see the big deal and I definitely do not see it as my place to step into family politics. All scout accounts within the same family IMHO can be used by any family member. I'll leave it up to the family to fight their own battles internally.

Now what I've seen that I really don't like it is when troop $$$ are used to reduce the cost of adult camping. SM? Not preferred, but okay. One or two other leaders. Maybe. Pay for gas for the pulling the trailer, debatable. Ya need two leaders on a camp out and most leaders I know are willing to pay to camp.

My clear line of wrong is any $$$ in troop account (not scout account) going to pay for parent camping.

One of the worst mistakes our troop ever did was over engineering patrol structure and/or assigning patrol structure.

To restructure patrols, the best way I've seen it done is to coach the SPL on a procedure. The procedure being to figure how many patrols can exist. 2, 3, 4, etc. Then have the SPL point out locations in the room for patrol 1, 2, 3, etc. Tell the scouts each patrol can have no less than four scouts and no more than XX scouts. Then, let the scouts choose.

For newly arriving scouts, let the scout choose his patrol.

KEY POINT - Stop the adults thinking it is their job to assign or plan the patrol membership. Scouts won't OWN their patrols if they are bounced around or if they don't buy-into their patrol. You want the lessons the scouts learn being about teaming and working with others. You do not want the lessons learned to be about adults stepping in to tell them what's going to happen. If things are badly balanced or other challenges, then that's a lesson the scouts learn. Fine. It's not the end of the world.

I think the key point is that scouting is for the scouts. Let them have as much control as possible over their experience.

I'm always amazed at the mean spirited abuse others inflict on others by throwing around the word discrimination. It's not about clearly communicating. It's hate speech. BSA has always had a faith component.

Now we can debate if BSA should change that, but it's not discrimination any more than my neighbor discriminating against me when he doesn't want me entering his house without permission.

Personally, I think BSA should leave membership to the charter orgs because it's the only way to avoid the ugly interactions of people we've seen flood these threads for years.

Did an authorized person indicate the requirement is complete?

Stop thinking about where the "official" record is. That's just wrong thinking. Yes, think about where to keep the most up-to-date record. I prefer the Boy Scout Handbook and ScoutNet. TroopMaster is just supporting materials.

*** The correct focus is *** Did an authorized person (leader or appropriate scout) tell the scout he completed the requirement. The "authorized people" are the people the troop leaders say can test/approve the requirement. It's moot whether the recorded is in TroopMaster or the Boy Scout Handbook. That's evidence. It's not the approval. It's all just evidence to support did the requirement get completed.

The only official sources are the person who approved the requirement and BSA ScoutNet. Everything else is just supporting materials.

Okay. Don't laugh at me or chastise. We had been paying $300 each year for a guy to come in and run our race. Well, we instead bought a track and spent $2000 on it. 40 foot. Four lane. Nice timer. Software. Piece parts. We've used it at least three times a year between multiple packs and other events. Great investment. Pain to store, but great investment.

Just create an Excel file listing each piece part you will purchase. Don't forget tax. Then add 10% or similar for unknowns. That's your budget.

Basementdweller ... Your experience is totally opposite from my experience. I've worked with about six or seven DEs now. They've all be great. Outstanding. Definitely not paid enough for what they do. Some better than others. Sorry you've had a rough time of it.

I could take or leave the advancement program. The skills taught are great and the adventure is great. The advancement ... ho hum.

FOR MY KIDS ... I have them in scouts to #1 push their comfort zones and develop skills, #2 build "healthy" friendships and #3 get a tan that is not from the basement TV. I view the MB program as something nice to expose topics and broaden horizons. BUT .... Since they are in scouts, I encourage them to also go for advancement and Eagle. If they get it, great. If not, no loss.

I just caught up on reading this thread. I saw that an earlier poster said their unit defined expecations that included " for the last 6 months ".

"for the last six months" ... You can do that because your scouts might not know better. But the BSA GTA doesn't defend that. You can set expectations, but once met, they are met. You can't say "for the last six months". BSA GTA PDF Page 21 4.2.3.1 point three says "If, for the time period, a scout or ....meets those aspects of his unit’s pre-established expectations that refer to a level of activity, then he is considered active and the requirement is met. Time counted as "active" need not be consecutive. A boy may piece together any times he has been active and still qualifying."

I think this is where units often get in trouble. The BSA advancement expectations are actually pretty manageable as far as time is concerned. I think I remember seeing it's possible for a scout who's 12 years old to even earn eagle. BSA only requires 16 total months of activity for Eagle.

Units get in trouble because they lose connection with the scout for a period of time, LEAVE THE SCOUT ON THE ROSTER and then the scout comes back to claim his advancement as is his right. If you choose to have the scout on your roster, then the scout has a right to claim his advancement. There is no "for the last XXX months".

Slight correction. Alternative only applies if troop has pre-established expectations and the scout does not meet those. If the troop does not have pre-established (i.e. written)' date=' the third test is passed. You only use the alternative if the scout fails to meet documented written pre-existing unit expectations. "Alternative to the third test if expectations are not met: If a young man has fallen below his unit’s activity oriented expectations, then.... "[/quote']

 

I asked that very question of Council. What I got back was for the third test was:

 

- Troop has pre-established activity guidelines? If so, the Scout must meet them. If not, then he can explain why using that alternate test.

- Troop does not have pre-established guidelines? Then the alternate test is automatically in play.

 

According to my Council, a unit wants to give the benefit of the doubt to the Scout but establish procedures if he does not meet certain guidelines. To automatically pass a Scout as "active" simply because a unit does not have written attendance guidelines was apprrently not the intent of this passage. At least, that's what my Council said so I have to go with that.

Your council's interpretation is NOT supported by a clear text reading of the BSA GTA. Heck the title itself is "Alternative to the third test if expectations are not met". There is no wording in the BSA GTA 2011 page 21 that defends your council's interpretation.

I've never seen the issues Basementdweller describes other than the profit of each event goes into the council general fund and we are NOT allowed to keep a district slush fund. To hold an event, we have to first get a signed approved budget / spend plan in place that includes a mandatory profit margin for the council. I can understand that though because some events crash and consume council $$$.

I'm just frustrated that we can't keep any $$ from district events to run the district. i.e. funds for a better roundtable or district awards.

This is a huge issue in our district. We have awards that we want to give at the end of the year. District award of merit. Name tags. etc. But we can't use any profit from any event to fund a different event. Each event must stand alone. So we end up charging extra for the awards dinner to pay for the awards. IMHO, that's tacky. To be honest, I've skipped most all traditional dinners. Been there. Done that way too many times. Don't want to repeat.

Don't go half way.

Yeah, I've tried that route. I've had pants that wear our and pants that tear. My boy's shirt say things such as " oy s outs of meri a " because the letters fall off. I've got rings of threads on my shirts. I've had official belt buckles that just give way ... twice from metal fatigue. I've buy clothes elsewhere and have none of these problems. In one year, I had two return two official belts and three pairs of pants. I'm only up for hemming so many pairs of pants a year.

 

So unto BSA gets better quality and I've got enough energy to try again, I'll focus on just replacing my scout shirt every year or two. And I've got the BSA socks. Love the BSA socks. My sock drawer is filled with them.

 

...

 

Two years ago, I was working a university of scouting and helping getting the cooking setup (grates, coal, bricks, cooking surfaces). I wore a junk shirt because I did not want to tear or get my official shirt greasy as I unloaded the truck. I walked thru the midway on the way to the men's room to change and two scout leaders did not say hello to me. After I changed, those scout leaders said hello to me. I chuckled and asked why they didn't say hello to me earlier. They said because they didn't recognize me out of uniform (their joke). I walked away. Those are the type of scouters that drive scouts away and hope my scouts can avoid.

 

I'm sensitive to the the "scouting pants" issue. When the new uniform came out, I bought all my sons the new pants. I bought three pair for myself. All three of mine fell apart. I returned some and got more. They wore out too within six months. So I've got lots of junk pants that I could return for more junk pants. Either they wear thru or disintegrate.

Luckily, I bought lots of the old-style pants for my sons that were on clearance. Saved our budget. So at this point, my sons are properly uniformed to staff scout camp. I wear pants I buy elsewhere that don't fall apart. The first ones I bought ten years ago are still good. Don't fit me though.

Plus ... SM + MBC is two applications because one is a troop registration and the MBC is a district registration. Two different units.

Not to delay this as it's not key to the original poster's comments...

http://www.samhoustonbsa.org/leader_resources/the_commissioners_concept/rechartering_your_scouting_unit/hints__faq

See "Does a leader need a new application for each time ...". It indicates it's okay at recharter because the IH is signing the recharter. Our council has a short "Change Of Position" form that requires the COR signature (same signature that goes on the new leader application) to approve the position title change. I'm the CC & COR in our units. So I sign that form and it's a done deal. It's really not that big of a deal and not requiring a new application saves a lot of headaches. Plus every time I've rechartered our pack, 50% of the leaders (i.e. most of the den leaders) change position anyway between (TL, DL, WL, CM, ACM, MC, etc)

I've only needed to use the form when replacing the CM or SM or when a leader is chasing knots and needs every month of credit possible.

ADCinNC is right. You have to already be registered in the unit. You need an application to associate with a unit. Each unit is an entity in and off itself. After registered in the unit, you can change position without a new app. Still takes COR signature though. Our council has a single page form. I'm the CC & COR in each of my units. Just makes life a lot easier.

At recharter time though, you can change people's titles almost at a whim within the same unit.

Ummm.... Perhaps your councils are different. In our council, if you are registered in the unit, your name can be shifted around between different positions in the unit WITHOUT a new application. If you are NOT registered in the unit, yes, a new app is needed.

But for years, I've changed leader titles both at recharter and as needed using a change of leadership form.

Tiger den leader --> Cub scout den leader

Cub Den leader --> Webelos den leader

ASM --> scoutmaster

Scoutmaster --> ASM

Committee member --> ASM

If they don't care about reimbursement, then you shouldn't worry. Just remember to thank them for the donation.

I must admit that I'm one to rarely submit expenses. I ask for a check BEFORE when I'm rechartering the pack or paying for camps. If I'm registering one scout and it's mid-way thru the year, I usually don't even bother with reimbursement. On the flip side, I also don't do as much fundraising. My son probably only sells $300 in popcorn. So instead of doing a huge amount of fundraising, this is how my family contributes.

jblake47 ... I applaud your commitment and follow thru. I just wish it was the standard. With today's society, I can easily see why busy UCs might let slide working with units that were not in crisis.

I'm just sort of sad about the whole thing. BSA has many charter partners who have contradicting values. BSA needs to NOT pass this. The damage will just continue. People will ignore the rule to do what they want and the public action groups will continue to beat-up BSA for being intolerant.

Instead BSA needs to pass something that says .... "BSA provides a program structure and materials and leaves membership management to the charter partners to manage consistent with the beliefs of those partners."

If a charter partner has beliefs that contradict too much, then BSA should not have chartered them in the first place. Heck, that's why we are in so much trouble. BSA wants to depend on schools for recruitment but the use private group beliefs.

desertrat77[/url=http://www.scouter.com/member/9031-desertrat77] said it well.

UC is a theoretical idea that I doubt ever worked “on a broad scaleâ€Â. The issue is numbers, a structural issue. There are just not enough knowledgeable UCs with the right temperament who can consistently serve and have the time and resources to serve. Read desertrat77’s post.

Most experienced scouters know the UC concept is broken and most have given up on the UC program. Few take an honest evaluation because UC has a long tradition back to the beginnings of scouting.

Instead district committees keep trying to fix the UC ranks within their own district. A few districts have something that works. … or so I’ve been told … I’ve never seen it. But generally it's not that districts have done a poor job. Heck, most districts are fighting to get enough roundtable commissioners to do a good roundtable.

In my 11 years of leadership and multiple units, I've yet to see a UC visit. I’ve met a few UCs, but I’ve never even heard about a unit visit.

BSA needs to replace the unit commissioner concept with something that works.

Then when you save it says ... Error while saving content: Internal Server Error.... confusing

Last was duplicate .... I tried to edit to clean up. Tried to save when it said to a title is needed. The "Title" box is read only and I can't enter a title. Vicious catch 22.

CO can choose membership. It is an incorrect question to ask if BSA explicitly allows COs to choose members. BSA has a structure and a program. Charter Orgs choose to run a youth program using the BSA framework. I don't think BSA "allows" anything as the CO can choose / filter the youth it offers scouting too. CO's can limit membership because of unit size, religious / location / money / ... ... ... / other affiliation, etc. Similarly, units can ask members to leave for almost any reason.

Personally, I think this is where BSA gets in trouble. On one hand they say they offer a program and let the CO's select the leaders. On the other hand, BSA has thrown specific members out because of non-criminal issues. It muddies the water on who controls membership and who supplies the youth program.

References

"How Scouting Operates", Page 3, http://www.scouting.org/filestore/commissioner/pdf/33118_WB.pdf

Annual charter agreement, 2nd dot, http://www.scouting.org/filestore/membership/pdf/524-182_web.pdf

"The Charter Organization", http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/32196.pdf ... "... to support that goals and objectives". This is about as clear as you'll find.