fred8033

Nice work ... only comment is don't use the BOR to evaluate the POR. BORs should not be a surprise. If the scout is not performing, remove them from the position. Otherwise, it's pretty much credit for time served. I know others will argue. I can only reflect what BSA wrote. BSA also addresses this specific case in an video posted by their national advancement team. http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/GuideToAdvancement/Advancement_News.aspx

Size is the obvious difference but I don't think the significant difference. Biggest difference I've noticed is variety. Most Cub Scout dens do outings, attend pack meetings and cub camp. Though quality varies greatly, activities are very similar. BUT ... Girl Scout troops vary greatly driven, I think, by the troop leader. Some might camp. Some might be more craft oriented. Some might be school work like. Others might be yet different again. Each troop is different.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Eagle92 wrote: "With the exception of 2 public schools way out in the county and one private school, because of the busing situation the "neighborhood school" is no more. So it is not uincommon to have 2 or 3 packs at one school." For our whole council, it's almost exactly the opposite. I'd bet there is less then five or ten elementary schools that have multiple packs and our council has 550+ packs. That's got to be an interesting challenge. How do you choose which pack to join? I'd bet a good number of packs fold as one or the other packs gets favored. Only to be recreated late

dkurtenbach wrote: "For the relationship to continue to work, (nearly) everyone has to be on board, most especially the Webelos Den Leader and the parents of the Webelos Scouts -- every year. If any significant percentage of the 5th grade Webelos in any year go to a different troop, you've got trouble. Not just from the breaking of the "social contract" between pack and troop, but from the new relationships being formed between pack families and the other troop. If the boys who went to the other troop have brothers in the pack, the "partner" troop can really be screwed, and they have to start

ScoutNut - You are correct. I'm talking about the pack, not individual scouts. How exactly does your Pack "support", and/or "promote", Troops OTHER than their CO's Troop? By the pack (not dens) scheduling multiple events with other troops. By accepting den chiefs from the another troop without any inquiries into whether we had any interested den chiefs. The other troop pushes den chiefs strongly as part of their recruitment plan. We've lost den chief opportunities because of that. Generally, I'll support any scout independent of the troop. It just gets frustrating when it's more

Our city has more troops then packs. In addition, several troops have had their packs fail. So recruitment has really geared up. I've seen "smoozing" at roundtable that gets just creepy. There are two troops that have extremely geared up their recruiting to the point that I swear they teach their boys a script to say. I've heard it from multiple scouts at different ocasions. The part that get me is that they refer to our aligned pack as their feeder pack. Usually there's alternating recruitment from the pack. One year they go to us. Other to them. Back and forth. Mainly driven

pchadbo - I acknowledge the BSA shopping model for webelos. I take zero offense if a scout chooses another troop. I might be sad, but not offended. That though is the Webelos scout and/or den. They are working on what's best for the individual Webelos. What's best for the pack and COR and troop is very different. I assert it's always better for the pack to promote their sister troop. The pack (larger group) has no "shopping" model or instruction from BSA. Their sister troop is "ANNOINTED" as partner through the charter organization. As such, the pack should treat their sister troo

Basementdweller - Wow. I knew I posted from different aspects of this point. I didn't remember I posted so many times. It's just a hot button topic for me lately and has become even more hot button lately. It just seems the "pack" should focus on partnering with their sister troop. Webelos dens can shop around, but the pack should focus on the sister troop.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

I'm okay with dens shopping. That's what BSA instructs. But what about the pack. Should they promote other troops or focus on the partnership with their partner troop?

I've been reflecting on the Cub Scout to Boy Scout transition for awhile. I know there is no strict answer and that things can vary greatly. And BSA is pretty vague too on this stuff. Previous posts - Unit alignment ... Earlier this year, I heard rumors of an initiative to align same COR units. So I asked and heard some great comments including a few by TwoCubDad in a 1/17/2012 3:48:51pm post. CLICK HERE to read - Pitting troops against each other ... Later I expressed my frustration at pitting troop against troop for Webelos recruitment. Good discussion. The one I agree

Rotate when you need fresh ideas or new enthusiasm and energy. Otherwise, I strongly prefer long-term scoutmasters. - Personality. A major shopping point is the scoutmaster. A good match is important. A mediocre match is tolerable. A bad match drives scouts out. I'd rather find the good match and stick with it as long as possible. The key is that the personality of the troop is the personality of the scoutmaster. - Experience. Scoutmasters need time to learn and experiment. Though it appears simple, scouting is not obvious. It takes time to learn how to make it work.

In our troop.... Starts in April. Published in May. - The PLC does it. Patrol leaders are supposed to get suggestions from their patrols. - The SPL leads the planning. - The SM meets with the SPL a day or two in advance to prepare for the planning. - The planning agenda is ---- #1 Agree on the process to do the planning ---- #2 Goals --------- Identify goals. More hiking? My water sports? Caves? Advancement? Fun events? Character? Service? Other. --------- Once all listed, prioritize them. ---- short break ---- #3 Ideas --------- Identify ideas. Spe

Dang. Yet another trolling post to ignore. Merlyn - Don't you have anything else in your life to do?

"bet even Merlyn is hopin' there's such a thing as resurrection" ... LOL.

One of my biggest mistakes years ago in scouting was around the structure of patrols. The patrols were imbalanced. I thought it would be good to fix that. So I brought it up at a committee meeting. Well, everyone had to have their two cents. Hours of discussion before it even reached the scouts. Then, it ended up as something that was forced onto most of the scouts either thru the agreement of the SPL or other. Many were upset. Some quit. To this day, the patrol loyalty is not what it was. IMHO, patrols work well when scouts have ownership and loyalty to the patrol. If you bre

I just don't think anyone can force change faster than people are willing unless you are willing to drive those people out of the unit. So creating plans, vision documents, priority lists and so are only interesting exercises. Focus on .... #1 Continually learning more about the scouting program... #2 Building relationships, trust and acceptance. Over time, opportunities will come. You can slowly make changes as situations permit.

You're in a hard situation. It would drive me crazy to have three former SMs on the committee and to repeatedly hear they did it differently in the past. I'd hope they'd wish you the best and support you as you move to more mainstream practices such as electing the SPL. Heck, that's how it's designed and documented!!! But I get concerned when you write the previous SMs say you are wasting your time with roundtable and being brainwashed. My partially informed opinion is that you have many attitudes and practices to change. Your going to be very frustrated for a good amount of ti

Unit commissioners and unicorns. Two things I've never seen. Don't believe anymore that they can possibly exist.

I've seen lots and lots of adults with ebook readers. Heck, many sit in camp chairs with ebook readers. I view it no differently than if they were to sit down with a paperback. Only difference is cost. I don't really have an issue with scouts using them. We'd need to find a different sign-off evidence path. Plus, the big thing is that kids are rough on things. We don't ban cell phones. We just give parents our cell phone numbers and ask that they don't call us if their son chooses to bring a phone and it gets lost, drowned, stepped on, rained on or just broken when a bag is

Oak Tree - Agree with your quotes and responses. What seems to be okay in the case quoted as the IRS overlooking is that the money was never the unit's money. Whereas allocating money earned at a unit fundraiser to individuals is not acceptable. But if the scout sold cookie dough or popcorn, his sales can be treated as his sales. I'd really like to know if this is "overlooked" or if there is an aspect of the law making it okay. To be honest, I love tax law stuff. I wish I had more time to dig into it.

I think this point is key to justifying fundraisers going into scout accounts. **** Does anyone have more information on this aspect? **** "However, the IRS still will overlook individual fundraisers (i.e., each girl selling cookie dough) in which the girl keeps her own money earned. This distinction between types of fundraisers may seem obscure, but the endeavors involving participation by the group and the amount of money raised, as opposed to one individual at a time, seem to be the deciding factors." ...

Twocubdad is adding to the requirement. Video please. Seriously though, the book is not required. Same as your membership in a troop is optional too. If a troop says that's how their troop tracks and administers advancement, it's part of membership in the troop. You can always find another troop. Though it would be difficult to find a troop that didn't use the scoutbook. I must admit that I'd be gun-shy to use anything else. Ya the adults use TroopMaster and the adults use on-line software. But that's for the adults to coordinate the group. That's the bureaucracy part.

The avalanche has already begun. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. --Kosh Love that show though I'm sad the Vorlons turned into bad guys.

Oak Tree: I should mention that I'm close to full agreement with what you wrote. I just don't think it's a 100% definitive. It's a case by case thing. There is room to argue, wiggle and perhaps options. Also note that most every example presented is written within "COULD", not a definitive "would". Here's an okay summary I had found. Plus a great quote: "... frequently results in illegal private benefit. However, the IRS has stopped short of strictly prohibiting IFAs." That's the issue. There is some room to argue you can do scout accounts. It's a thing of interpretting insubstatial

It's not that clear cut. I'm not saying your wrong. I'm not saying your giving bad advice. Your giving the play-it-safe answer which is always a good choice. I'm just saying it's not 100% clear. The following 2002 IRS article explains my reasoning. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-wd/02-0041.pdf I had read the 1993 article you quoted. That same 1993 document you quote also says: "As indicated in GCM 39862, the inurement proscription is aimed at preventing dividend-like distributions of charitable assets or expenditures to benefit a private interest" The 1993 article examp