isvirtual

There is nothing in the Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures book that indicates projects requiring a building permit are not permitted. I believe this requirement is a local decision. If you feel strongly about this, you might consider approaching the district advancement chair and having them justify this isn't adding or removing a BSA requirement.

There are some provisions in the document that empower the council to define guidelines. This might be something identified by the council as an issue. In this case you should probably cooperate.

My opinion is the approval should not take more than 30 days. Ideally, the district target should be within 2 weeks. Of course, this is based on district capacity to review and comment within their 1 hour per week. :-)

The review should look for several things.

1) Is the project big enough for the scout to demonstrate leadership

2) Are there any safety concerns and are they addressed

3) Likewise with youth protection

4) Does the write-up provide enough detail for another scout to complete the project

5) Are the expected hours itemized and reasonable

6) This has been reviewed and signed by the troop and benefactor (3 signatures)

7) The materials match the planned work

8) The work per day is reasonable

All of these and more are reviewed for each project. Sometimes we suggest the scout rewrite sections of the project to include specific information. Other times we will mention it is missing but approve the project with the caveat that it is included in the final write-up. The District Board of Review, then confirms this has been done before completing the Eagle BOR.

The "official" pants are uncomfortable and do not fit. It is a very difficult decision to lay down $30-45 for clothing that doesn't fit well. My experience is the official BSA clothing is designed for adults with zero body fat that tend to be taller and slimmer than the current population.

If the boys and adults wear trousers that resemble the uniform, I give them credit for making the effort.

BSA is missing a great opportunity to serve their members by not redesigning the lower half of their uniforms. My guess is they'll consider this when the current inventory is depleted.

My only concern would be this project seems to qualify as routine maintenance. BSA policies are "Routine Labor, a job or service normally rendered, should not be considered". Since the trail already exists, and simply needs maintenance, it would be a tough call.

If the scout is going to create something new or completely rebuild something, it would be a no brainer.

YiS

Mike

I was no suggesting leaders should hunt down a boy and make them attend the meetings, events, etc. However, there should be clear, consistent, and enforced guidelines for positions of responsibility and attendance that are compatible with BSA policies. To wait until the end of the period to let anyone know they didn't meet guidelines (published or unpublished) is neglegent. I have seen this happen far too often. Maybe we are just in a bad unit.

In OldGreyEagle's examples, both boys have earned their Eagle rank. I don't think it is appropriate to say which is a better Eagle. Both allegedly have earned the rank following the same criteria established by BSA. It MIGHT BE appropriate to ask which is the better scout?

I agree with Bob White.

If the Scout has had the job but not participated, I would want to know why the troop leaders let him proceed. I see this far too often. A scout is given a position of responsibility. He is not held to any kind of minimal requirements. Then when the time has expired, the troop's leadership doesn't want to give him credit.

I get really annoyed when adults and PLC try to punish the scout when they didn't do their jobs properly.

If the boy held the position of responsibility and no one made him perform, I believe the fault lies with the troop leadership. Fix the real problem. Don't punish the scout.

This is run at the district level. The scouts are told to bring 3-4 "friendly" board members. The district provides a district member who is the board chair.

For years, our troop has had ASMs sit on Eagle board of reviews. This year, I became the Eagle Advisor and discovered this is not allowed. When I told my first Life scout some of his BOR candidates were not eligible, his father, the scoutmaster, became livid. He has accused me of setting a double standard and says his son is held to a higher standard in spite of the fact that this requirement is written in several BSA policy manuals and was presented to over 50 people at a troop meeting.

What would happen to the former Eagles if this was escalated to the district or council level?

How can I explain to an irrational parent that everyone will begin playing by the same rules?

I fear he, as scoutmaster, will retaliate against my own son who is also preparing for his Eagle board. Should we do anything proactive to prevent this?

YiS