fred8033

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 example has a gymnastics booster club. But there are significant differences between the scouters and the example booster club "A". ---- Booster club "A" supervisory board included gym X owners (i.e. insiders) who directly financially benefit (i.e. dividend) ---- Booster club "A" purchased equipment that was installed at gym X giving the owners commercial benefit. ---- Booster club "A" gymnastics were 100% taught by gym X paid staff. ---- Booster club "A" did not work work with the broader class of gymnasts. They worked with gymnasts training at for-profit gym X. The article hits at organizations that want tax exempt status, but were created more for the profit of those involved than for a public good. A good number of the IRS articles talk about physician partnerships that go after non-profit status. That's why I think this is all clear as mud. Scout groups are created for strong public good and don't have the direct dividend type of ownership or of fundraising. There is no cash draw and the money pays for that which is directly part of the public good. As for scout accounts, the 2002 IRS article raises key points. A few more key parts are these - Popcorn sales have a 1/3 of sales go to the local councils and benefits the larger scout population. Without scouts earning credit, many scouts wouldn't sell. That would directly affect money available to pay for camps. - The funds spent directly hit at the public benefit. Educational Preventing delinquency. Public good. It is also a personal benedit, but it greatly benefits the public. Many service hours donated. Better strong citizens. I wish I could find a 2011 or 2012 article. Your advice is good. I'm just saying it's not 100% clear and very very much depends on the nuances of the specific situation.

Gunny2862 - Nice comments. Beavah wrote "For da Citizenship badge, the purpose of the service is to help 'em see how a particular organization contributes to their local community, and a bit of how organizations like that rely on folks in the community steppin' up as volunteers. The point is to build connections to their community, eh? And understandin'. Not to tick off 8 hours with their head down not payin' a lick of attention or cross-countin' hours unrelated to da purpose of the badge." That's exactly the view the Citz of Community MB counselor. That's what he should communicate. That's how he should evaluate the requirement. Nice work.

Brewmeister wrote: "I also predict that, sooner or later, the BSA is going to say it's ok to be untrustworthy, disloyal, unhelpful, unfriendly, discourteous, unkind, disobedient, surly, unthrifty, cowardly, unclean, and irreverent as well." Democrats ???

Nights of camping - Also if you define the activity as having ## number of nights of camping, you can over-ride that for individual scouts. Very necesasry if the scout did not stay both nights. ScoutNet - We've been using this continually lately. We treat that as the master. Our TroopMaster is just for the lower details. i.e. who was on what camp out. what activities did we do. etc.

basementdweller: ".I was look for a single sheet summary for a scout...." Troopmaster -> Reports -> Awards/Advancement ->Individual History. - Get used to TroopMaster paging feature for multiple pages. It looks underwhelming if you don't page between pages. - Play around with the options. I like to include everything and ALSO CHECK "Omit details on completed ranks". That gets really long. Troopmaster is a piece of software that we've used for years. Hasn't changed at all except minor features. I would love for us to switch to something else. But I have not found a good option worth the work of changing.

bnelon44 - I probably was unclear. If the scout is 2nd class (or what ever class) and working on the MB, fine. I'm just saying that the MB counselor should pay attention to the words in the MB requirement as written. The troop pays attention to the advancement requirements as written. If the service matches the requirements, I'm okay with it. If anything, it's a coordination issue the scout needs to take care of solving. Describing it as "double dipping" or "gaming the system" is just poor sportsmanship.

I just re-read the MB requirement. It says "While working on this merit badge, volunteer at least eight hours of your time for the organization." That puts a boundary saying you can't count hours before you started working on the MB. Other MBs fall into the basic GTA rule stating that you can't credit work done before becoming a Boy Scout. ... IMHO, this comes down to the MB counselor is responsible for the MB. The scoutmaster and unit are responsible for rank. The MB counselor is not responsible for rank advancement and the scoutmaster/unit is not responsible for MB requirements. If the MB counselor believes the scout has met the requirements, it's a done deal. The MB counselor is NOT responsible for rank advancement and NOT responsible to check if "double dipping" has occurred. That's just not his responsibility. Similarly, the scoutmaster (or his designated authorized signer) is responsible for rank advancement. Other than consulting on the choice of the MB counselor, the SM is NOT responsible for how individual MB requirements are completed. If he, or designee, approves a requirement, it's done. MB are NOT a unit responsibility. MB counselors are registered with the council/district. MB counselor is not a unit position. Troops are completely off base when they start doing things such as tracking individual MB requirement details ... OR ... allocating individual units of work to rank OR MB advancement. It's just not their job. Soapbox... This happens when people start thinking the program is too easy on the scouts. Or that scouts are gaming the system. That's just bad attitude. The program is the program and the requirements are what they are. We don't need to find a way to make them more difficult. Just do a good job on each requirement and do a good job supporting the scout. The "double dipping" debate is just noise.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Our "approval" is more like .... SCOUT: Scoutmaster ###, I'm going to work on ###### this weekend. Okay? SCOUTMASTER: Sounds great. Look forward to hearing about it.

Focusing on no double dipping is just noise. I agree with previous comment that most scouts have performed service many times over. I know that if I say "There's no explicit rule saying you can't count the same service for both rank and the merit badge", someone will respond that of course not every single possible rule combination is documented. Or that it should be obvious you can't do both. Or why have such low standards. Or .... one of many other dozen rules .... But if we apply the no double dipping rule, it should be done consistently. ---- Camping nights used for both first class rank and the camping merit badge. ---- Cooking meals used for both rank and the Cooking merit badge. ---- Hiking for both first class rank and the Hiking merit badge. ---- Interviewing a community leader for both first class rank and citizen of the community. ---- Lashings for first class rank and pioneering. The list can go on and on. Arguing for "no double dipping" is the first step to get ready to track many requirements and which was already spent to complete a requirement. ... A key issue is that scouting focuses on experiences. You earn the fishing merit badge by catching fish. Not by trying to catch fish. But on the other side, if while a Boy Scout you already caught the fish, you completed the requirement. You've been there. Done that. I view it the same as the service requirement. You did the quantity asked for. So what if it was counted elsewhere too. Do we start auditing school and church too? ... IMHO, focus on that we do service because we are scouts and we value helping others. It's part of who we are. If the hours look at all reasonable to meet the requirement in front of you at the time, credit it and move on. Heck, there is no BSA published guidance saying you can't. If anything, we have the option, why not support the scout.

TAX IMPLICATIONS - I've read on this repeatedly. Generally, the whole topic is clear as mud. As with many legal issues, it is an argument of nuances. How much is the private benefit of scout accounts necessary to achieve the public good of the exempt status? http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-wd/02-0041.pdf Gosh, we had eight eagles who did a total of 2400 hours of community service for their projects. Plus we do service projects at camp (i.e. for a non-profit). We help in the community thru food shelters and local service. We help keep kids from being delinquent. Plus selling grows character and confidence. Good arguements for individual accounts and keeping exempt status. But if the scout has $10,000 in his individual account and buys tickets to the next three world jamborees with first class airplane tickets, that's a strong arguement toward personal benefit and not tax exempt. I wish everyone the best deciding. Generally though, the IRS doesn't go after scout groups. PACK Question #1 - We don't have scout accounts. If scouts want to go to BSA/council/district run camps, the parents pay. For everything else, the pack pays ALL. advancements. pack family overnights. b&g. pinewood derby. everything. The pack spends $135 to $165 per scout. We try to make all "pack" (not den) activities be family oriented (parent, child, siblings). Question #2 - Percent? Zero. Question #3 - Our dues are minimal. We want people involved. If we don't get successful fundraising, we scale down the program. Question #4 - Only push back we find is from parents who know Boy Scouts. They want a scout account to bring forward. TROOP Question #1 - Scouts pay fees for each camping event and activity. Troop pays for advancements, banquets, etc. Question #2 - Goal is 100% of profit. Question #3 - Budget. We find the troop has lower overhead than the pack. About $75 per scout at most. Question #4 - Pushback? If you like or tolerate the other person, invite them to join the committee. If you don't, then don't sweat it. If they push harder, give them the list of other local scouting units.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

I think the viewpoint is wrong on this. It's absolutely great if the pack can choose, prepare and switch den leaders. But, from my experience, that's rare. It's just too hard to find spare leaders who are just waiting for new responsibilities. Instead, view it as you just got a group of new scouts joining as Tigers. They have parents. One of the parents needs to step forward. If none of the parents step forward, you don't have any new Tigers. Hand them back their applications and thank them for inquiring into the pack. Sort of like the youngest leagues of sports. Parents sign up their kids for baseball and soccer in 1st grade. They are put in groups. One of parents signs up as the coach. If none of the parents will sign up as coach, they don't have a team. Same for existing dens. View it as the parents in the den provide the leader. If the current den leader wants out, then the parents in the den need to choose a new leader. If they don't, then the den foldes. Same with accepting new scouts. It's the den leaders choice whether to grow the den. I've only met one den leader who said no to new scouts. But that's their choice. Personally, I'm okay with this. If the entire set of new adults won't help, then perhaps the pack shouldn't take on the extra work of more scouts.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Slusher - Quick clarifications. - He was BSA employed in Germany. I don't see any record he was employed by BSA in US. - Could not bring 1972 issues to local USA police attention as it was not in the USA. - The 1972 case was discussed with the scout parents. The parents didn't contact the police either. - He was registered in a different troop then his original troop when he returned. That troop was probably not notified about him. - Later he was unregistered / removed in early 1976. Police arrested him in 1977. Given how old paper records were handled, I could see issues like this happening. But it sounds like the council / BSA did a good faith effort to get rid of him.

... Mind you all the events surrounding this discussion are sad and creepy.... I am fairly pleasantly surprised with the detail in the files and the effort to handle. It's still creepy stuff, but it does look like BSA was trying to do something. Not always making the best decisions, but clearly making the effort. I was also pleasantly surprised at the timeline included in the documents. http://documents.latimes.com/boy-scouts-youth-protection-timeline/

Gotta admit.... I felt a slight thrill hearing we have a new insignia guide.... I need to get a life. Then ... I started looking for the PDF. At the scouting.org web site I found the following: "A printed copy of this essential reference may be purchased online at http://www.scoutstuff.org or through your local council Scout shop." Why can't documents like this be available? Why do we have to purchase them? Why re-write extracts as a series of web pages that are often out of date compared to the official published document. Just make the PDF version available online. Or save the document as a HTML document.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Another discussion point. http://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2012/08/03/task-force-proposes-moving-to-one-oath-and-law-for-all-programs/comment-page-2/#comment-11017

Beavah wrote: "Average troop size nation-wide accordin' to JTE materials is 14 boys or so. " Yeah, I just don't believe that number. In retail sales, you compare store sales on existing stores and excluding stores that are new or closing down. I think that should also be applied to troop size. Exclude troops that are essentially dead or dying. Exclude troops that are less than three years old. It would be easy to exclude new troops. It would only be possible to exclude dead or dying troops by waiting a few years and then looking backward. ... Part of being a healthy troop is recruiting and teaching new scouts. With a troop of five to seven scouts, your only getting one or two scouts per year. IMHO, that's just not sustainable. With a troop of 14, your getting two or three scouts per year. More sustainable, but difficult. Small troops are fun when your growing them. But small troops that are not interested in growing are probably not really focused on being a traditional Boy Scout troop. Too susceptible to being just like a Cub Scout den. Too susceptible to dying out as scouts age out.

twocubdad wrote: "But given the relationship between the troop and pack, for the Webelos to pretend they then have to give every other troop in town an even shot offends my sense of loyalty. " I fully agree. It also helps from another direction. Right now, families flock to the most successful troop. In our town, the most successful troop will get 20+ new webelos. And then lose 50% of them in the next year. I'd rather see the pack/troop linkage stronger such that there is a continual set of new families that feed into each unit to help refresh it and make it a good program. Right now, with the flocking to the most popular troop it can be running away from what your charter org has done for your for four or five years. I fully believe there should be an assumption that you continue thru the aligned troop. BUT that you can switch if you want to switch. ... I originally thought troop shopping was good for everyone. I don't think that's true anymore. I think it's fine to see how different troops work. I think it's fine to switch if you want. But it should be assumed you follow in the units from your charter org. ... I agree it's a loyalty thing. You dance with the partner who brought you. If the partner is a jerk, fine ... ditch'em. But ya don't show up at the dance and then start shopping for the best dance partner.

- 25 is not a large troop. It's an average troop. - 5 to 7 is a "starter" troop. It's a troop with one patrol and no SPL. It should have a goal of getting to the ideal of 32 scouts. Avoid the troop if it doesn't have that goal and a plan and a candidate pool of future scouts. - 50+, 60+, 70+, 80+ is a large troop. The trouble with a troop of 5 to 7 scouts is... - If a few quit, you don't have enough scouts - If a few scouts don't go on a camp out, you can end up canceling events. - Every parent needs to help. Not enough families to just have a few families help. - Not enough scouts to spread responsibility. - Not enough scouts to have more than one patrol. - Not enough scouts to have a real PLC. If it is a starter troop with a goal of getting to 32 scouts, great! Go for it. It can be fulfilling to start a new troop. If it is a troop that's struggling for membership, be wary. Use your judgement. If you think the troop will grow, then you decide if that situation is better than the other one. BUT if you think it will stay at 5 to 7 scouts and have membership struggles, I would not personally join. It's just won't offer a rich scouting experience.

ParkMan wrote: "Personally, I'm a big fan of the Webelos being Webelos - an almost separate program from the Cubs or the Boy Scouts. " Me too. Webelos need to viewed and structured as separate from both Cubs and Webelos.

Horizon wrote: "When I was growing up, Jane Fonda movies were not allowed to be shown in our house. My father despised her for her actions during the Vietnam era. I don't think that hurt her much." Jane Fonda's career took a HUGE HUGE HUGE hit because of that incredibly insensitive picture she took and all the surrounding comments etc. And rightfully so. Our soldiers were getting killed every day in Vietnam. And she (i.e. Hanoi Jane) was sitting on artillery aimed at our soldiers. There are multiple generations that remember that picture. http://www.iconocast.com/07-10-2012/74/Jane-Fonda-regrets-missile-picture.php I thought of the Jane Fonda parallel with the Dixie Chicks too. The one I get a kick out of is the generation of men that won't support the Red Cross because the Red Cross charged them for donuts and coffee in London during WWII. Boycotts are interesting. But lifelong brand damage is a whole different level.

I remember the Dixie Chick controversy back when it happened. I had to look up the details. Then read about their 2006 tour. Wow. Adding concerts in Canada. Canceling and downsizing concerts in the US. Now touring as an opening act. Not as a headliner. Hmmm.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accidents_%26_Accusations_Tour It's also interesting in that they've won multiple Grammies (plural of Grammy???). Shows a disconnect between sales and awards. Interesting.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

I was thinking Webelos still attend the monthly pack meetings at the pack meeting site day and time. But then hold their den meetings at the same date and time as a troop meeting. Start together for flag ceremony. Then branch off to run their own den meeting. I don't even think you need to limit this to 2nd year webelos. You could do this with 1st year webelos too. In fact, I think it would help the most if you start it with 1st year webelos. Zero impact on the pack. But the Webelos start seeing a much more mature program, see boys they can look up to and see activities they want to do themselves.

ScoutNut: "What about those Webelos who might not want to join that particular Boy Scout Troop? When they are "forced" to attend to Troop meetings of one only Troop they get the impression that it is that Troop or nothing. Can't say I am a fan of that concept at all. " It sort of goes back to the old model of joining the troop that's aligned with your pack. Natural transition. But there's no rule that you have to join the same unit. "I believe", ... no special knowledge ... , that model is being revisited to bring a smoother program.

IMHO, den chief often doesn't work. It takes either a very special unique Boy Scout or a Boy Scout who's younger brother is in the Cub Scout den. The biggest challenge is transportation. Either the scout needs to live very close or depend on a parent who's already going because of a younger brother in the den. Though I suspect some den chiefs do great job, I've yet to see it. Mainly because the den chiefs that sign up to help us have had no transportation. Or they've had other obligations too like school and sports. In a way, that's why I'd like to see Webelos dens meet at the same location as the troop. It would give mentoring opportunities to the boy scouts and possibly help den chiefs solve the transportation issues.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Do something like the following... Proposal - Hold Webelos den meetings at troop meetings. Webelos could line up just like another troop patrol. Stand thru the flag ceremony. Then as soon as the flag ceremony is done, they break off before troop announcements and business begins. I think it would help with scout retention. Plus the young scouts could see the example of the older scouts and develop the desire to be like those older scouts. They'd also get to see how a troop is run by the scouts and the type of activities they get to look forward to doing. Webelos is already a transitional program where they work on skills needed as a Boy Scout. Right now, they are tightly linked to the Tigers, Wolves and Bears. Those are programs that Webelos are already out growing. I think it would help to break that link a bit and start growing the ties to Boy Scouts. Comments?