jkhny

If

A hundred or so people show up at an Exec Board Meeting to protest what's occurring in a COuncil,

Dedicated and experienced volunteers - those NOT already removed from positions - are still walking away from supporting Council - with time and contributions

The core of your volunteer base is trying to organize COR's to oust the SE

Despite widely touted claims of enrollment growth, there is none - in fact losses (and though we aren't one of those COuncils where there's enrollment fraud - our new inner city units "disappeared" dead units are still on District rosters and tehre's a 30% difference between 12/04 numbers and 2/05......but seeing as BSA cares so much anbout that issue that any volunteer that raises that gets threatened with removal - and some have been....

when your DIstrict Chairmen have complained to National - but nothing is done......

Well, even the Board sems to be getting annoyed now.....but that's after 3 years of damage

Regarding my postings:

When a CEO runs a company for his benefit, relying on smoke and mirrors instead of real accomplishments to meet the "measurements" set for his success, when that same CEO controls the board that has oversight of his actions (most were "elected" on his recommendation, when that CEO is selling off capital assets to meet short term financial goals, when the "employees" of that company are regular in their complaints and warnings but ignored and when the customers are ignored - and business continues to drop off, there is a problem.

Our Council is like too many companies - with the same "values." My "complaints" are those of many here. If BSA ever took a confidential poll, I'm sure that my comments echo a majority of "involved" Scouters - those that know anything about SCouting locally beyond their own unit (though even plain old parents are fed up with the endless focus on fundraising). In how many Councils have volunteers tried to organize COR'S to oust a SE? (and how often has it succeeded?)

I have seen a program I benefitted from - which my family has been part of for generations locally, decimated by the actions of one paid professional who - quoting someone from his old Council "should be in a desk at Supply." Actually, he shouldn't even be in Scouting. He made a mess of one Council and has done it again - and National knows but could care less. They've heard complaints from District Chairmen - who were ousted from the Board for their efforts. A unit Scouter was thrown out of BSA for speaking up at a Fireside Chat against property sales and the wholesale replacement of District and COuncil officials with political no-shows. Free speech isn't a right in BSA it seems - the same has happened elsewhere.

I am being "brave" and doing what is right and trying to change things - for the better. I got back into SCouting for my kids and as a way to pay back those that did so much for me. Yet I am appalled at what I see beyond the local unit level (and a few other units are no credit to Scouting). This is not the SCouting of my youth. I hope that this is not the case everywhere but there are too many places where it is. BSA has lost the moral high ground it claims with "values" when it won't practice what it preaches. In how many Councils are enrollment "errors" common? Why do we not remove boys until charters are renewed - after December- but add new ones in September - and then ALWAYS quote the inflated "year-end" number. Our District dropped over 20% from December to February after all charters were renewed.

When the head of Youth Protection efforts is arrested and BSA claims he had no contact with boys - they're lying. THis guy came up through the ranks and had been a SE - reports out of FLA said he took week long sailing trips with only 1 other adult and 6 kids at the High Adventure base annually. Would you want your kid to be one of the 6 on that boat, "two deep leadership" or not? What if they BOTH were pedophiles - and it's NOT inconceivable? BSA DOES cover things up at all levels and despite all those chld protection policies - as the case just opened (over BSA's strident protests) in Grand Teton Council shows. 24 boys were molested and at least 7 officials at all levels had been warned but did nothing over 6 years. The files are damning to BSA. BSA didn't even inform all the parents of victims. Would you want to be aprent of one of those kids? How many others remain sealed?

I know a long serving Socutmaster who's thinking about quitting over that hypocrisy - he feels smeared by mere association. But BSA doesn't see that they SHOULD be held to the HIGHEST standard. If they don't want to follow a law, they ignore it, get sued, lose and tehn lobby for a special exemption to the law. If you want to be a "private organization" be a "private organization" - and drop the "Learning for Life" and all else where you're seeking payment and benefits from govenrnmental entities.

The problem behind declining enrollments is that dedicated Scouters are simply walking away, quietly. They don't want to "hurt" Scouting but they find they can't change it and have scruples enough not to be part of the hypocrisy. Others stay despite everything trying to avoid "politics" for the sake of the boys. Whole organizations have walked away from sponsoring B.S.A. units - protesting its "values" only making BSA more conservative and autocratic.

B.S.A. seems to prefer forcing dissisents out instead of answering their questions and addressing their concerns. Volunteers DON'T have a voice in BSA though this organization is suupposed to represent us. District reps are elected on a whole slate that has to be voted up or down. Those reps are chosen by a hand-picked "nominating committee" No competing candidates or slates are allowed. These "elected" representatives get to vote on Executive Board candidates and all other "elected" officials - again only as a whole slate that is again "hand-picked" This is about as democratic and "representative" as Communism in Bulgaria was. The "representatives" coming out of this "democratic" system are our Council's "representatives" to National.

Nobody wants to talk about what's bad - nobody wnats to admit that some things ARE possible. But ignoring these issues only lets them get worse.

Thanks for the guidestar reference.

EVERY Scouter should look up their Council's 990 and see what it says.

Our Council is claiming far more boys served than is the case though frankly it is a large "improvement" over the past SE who was listing twice as many on the 990 as we had.

Our current SE was less open in his last Council - membership numbers were not reported (except for one year) - but amounts are reported for "Membership Dues"

That amount rose dramatically after two years of his "leadership" - even as postings here were decrying what had happened to a great Council. THe year after he left that sum dropped 22%. The new SE was honest and reported "actual" numbers.....

However the whole year end charter renewal and leaving boys on for months after the school year starts, months after they are clearly no longer in Scouting but still adding in the new enrolees is "misrepresentation"

Our District number is down 30% for ALL youth served in the February report - compared to the number claimed on 12/31/05 on our DE's "Quality District" reporting form.

And our SE is paid about $135,000 - which is nothing to sneeze at. Given the cost of living here I'd consider to be a bit low but he's still making far more than most people around here. I'll check census figures later. But he's still living up north where it's alot cheaper and he's still making one big increase over what he was being paid in GA. If he were doing a good job I'd have no problems with paying him more and would write a check myself. But he's not.

A 2000 article cites Ratcliffe - Chief Scout Executive at the time as receiving a compensation package worth $537,314 in 1998 That was a while back -

Sounds like the salary comes with some nice perks which Bob didn't note.

At the same time, the head of the Boys and Girls Clubs of America , a charity of similar size, had compensation package worth $265,962

THAT comparison is worth noting and should raise some questions.

Does Mr. White do anything for Scouting besides blindly defend all and anything BSA on these boards? You can't fix what's broken if nobody will admit there's problems. And NOBODY can say that there aren't problems in BSA. And in some Councils things are disasters because as one poster put it "There aren't enough desks in the Supply Division at National" Why is it that Paid professionals are held in such low regard? - low enough that a GOOD one makes you stand up and take notice - that you end up saying "except for......".

BTW, I've been a Leader in Cub Scuts and Boy Scouts (A Den Leader and one of the adults that is there every meeting and trip Troop and Pack)- serving two units for a while now. I've gotten awards for my service and been a major donor as well. I have a more than a few years business experience and know what's well run and not.

It IS quite appropriate if paid professionals work FOR us that we know what they make. (And I have a right to know where MY money is going when I make a contribution.) And legally that is how things are structured - the SE works FOR the Exec Board which is supposed to represent the volunteers in a Council - and that goes all the way up to the top.

B.S.A.claims stridently to be a "representative democracy" representing US - the volunteers that do the work. That's something they seem to forget.

Pay should be related to performance and when you're looking at declining enrollments and general problems in an organization, the head is held accountable - be it the local SE or the National one. Ask Ebbers - his "I didn't know" defense didn't work.

Roy Williams made much of using "numbers and statistics" to measure "success" in B.S.A......well at least we know where the focus on "numbers" comes from. (What happened to boys?) But the truth is that enrollments in Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts continues to go down - and BSA goes to great lengths to muddy that fact with "Learning for Life" and such. I had an old time Scouter - one with decades in as a professional and volunteer say

"BSA doesn't even care about Boy Scouts anymore - they'd get rid of it if they could - that's where the risk and problems are. They LOVE Cub Scouts - Little kids willing to raise money and parents that don't stay around for long as leaders anddon't pay attention to things. Boy Scout Leaders stay involved for a while - they care and pay attention. BSA doesn't like that."

And from my experience that's true. The focus in BSA is on "numbers and increasing numbers" though I never had A DE help line up Den Leaders. Our Scoutmaster won't even let the DE in the door - with reason. Council's focus is on money and more money - Council pushes popcorn down your throat like you're being fattened for the kill. That topic has ocme up before and is a sore one with volunteers. All the old time Scouters that question things like property sales are treated as an annoyance. The professional staff seems to forget that they are supposed to be helping ans supporting us run units. Instead the ONLY time we see them is when they're asking for money.

We had someone give out some large checks to local units. Our SE was furious because the money went locally - to units where it was spent on the boys - instead of to Council where it would have gone to salaries and overhead. That's happening more because even leaders are fed up and refuse to give to FOS - it's the only leverage we have left to make our unhappiness known.

I've seen very little in the way of what paid professionals make. DE's don't seem to make much but that doesn't seem to be the case with higher levels.

I've seen reports of SE's making $100,000, $200,000 or more. I seem to recall a report about the SE in AL - one of the 10 largest Councils making $284,000. Is that true? Id there any other compensation for SE's besides salary? Car, housing allowance?

Anyone know what their SE makes? They are employees of Councils but it seems this number is kept pretty quiet.

What does the Chief Scout Executive make? I read a report over a decade old showing over $500,000 - compared to Bpys and Girls' Clubs head's $280,000.

I expect some will treat this as rabble rousing but it shouldn't be viewed that way. We SHOULD have some idea of what paid professionals make - and frankly, it's awful difficult to find out.

Has Mr. White even read Boyle's book? His position seems to be that BSA is always right. Newsflash - nobody, no organization - is EVER always right.

One of the problems with BSA right now is that ANY serious questioning of even clear wrongs is treated as an attack.

Those reporting the enrollment fraud only went outside BSA because they were stonewalled and even threatened by paid staffers.Funny, but the same problem has been going on for decades. National is putting on pressure to add to numbers - and for some it's too easy to fake it. When a COuncil has to restate numbers by 30-40% FRAUD is involved, not "mistakes."

But then even National is fudging in their own reports. TRY to find specific numbers. When you do they're not even consistent from year to year. The plain and simple fact is that enrollments are falling despite desperate attempts to play games with numbers and program definitions. Instead of fixing what's wrong they're playing games and THAT only undermines their own credibility with the volunteers that are doing the work and running the units.

As far as abuse goes, Boyle's book was objective and fact based. It could be written ONLY because BSA's own attorneys screwed up in one case - where they treated the victim horridly and tried to lay all blame on the kid - and forgot to get a confidentiallity agreement signed. The "Confidenial Files" provided for that case were the basis for his book. Did you read the report out of Idaho? There were numerous reports over YEARS to Scouting officials - obviously at varying levels within BSA. WHat went wrong? BSA did NOT notify the parents of other victims. This has happpened in other cases.

If BSA is going to tout high standards of character and "values" they'd better be sure they meet them before hiding behind them.

BSA has serious problems. Denial is not going to help. I'm from a long line of Scouters and am horrified at what I have seen in my Council. An autocratic SE has made a mess of things and National says "it's a local problem" failing to acknowledge that things are deliberately structured to MAKE things "local" problems. Volunteers have no real voice in their Councils or BSA in general but things are carefully structured so that paid staff have little legal liability. The volunteers on the Executive Board are "in charge" though most are chosen by the SE they are supposed to oversee. Volunteers have no direct voice in things. BSA is a "representative democracy" as BSA is so fond of pointing out. But our "representatives" are hand picked. Just TRY to organize COR's to take on a SE. It's been tried a few times and is rarely successful. Most of our BEST SM's want nothing to do with Council here. They're fed up with the local mess here - and don't have particularly high opinions of National. Akll they see is endless pushes for "raise more money" while we've had most of our facilities sold off. WHere did those millions go? Long serving volunteers have been replaced with political no-shows - and things are falling apart because no work is getting done. There are too many in the paid professional ranks that shouldn't be there. Even the good ones there will admit that - in private. Rule #1 - never speak ill of another paid professional - no matter how bad they are - or you'll get screwed.

If National is going to sit behind closed doors and issue statements saying "not our fault" and "it's against policy" every time thing hit the fan they are going to get crucified. They got offlight on the pedophile scandal last time but didn't seem to learn. 1997 is way after things were supposed to be "fixed" and it's only one of many cases. This one was opened by the courts though. As far as the head of Youth Protection having and DISTRIBUTING child porn....yeah, it COULD happen anywhere but it sure looks real bad when it's BOY SCOUTS.......CNN already gave them hell tonight. Just why isn't Williams or anyone facing cameras?

Blanketly defending what is wrong does not help Scouting. But then an open and honest debate on what is wrong can't be held for just this reason. BSA expects "obedience" even as it ignores Trustworthy....do as I say not as I do.....

I and the units I'm in have done a great job. We are "successes" and we adhere to the vaues of Scouting. But we sure are wondering why BSA is not. It IS embarassing - but it's also criminal.

Unfortunately, B.S.A. tends to be less than forthright in these matters. As far as the reader of "Scout's Honor" - you will be disappointed. B.S.A. has been less than diligent in this issue. WHile it's "not a race" - B.S.A. dragged its feet for decades in addressing child abuse. Only NOW are criminal background checks being run on volunteers.

Quoting current news coverage - B.S.A. was aware of 1800 cases of child abuse that were NOT reported to authorities.

B.S.A. officials have even ben arrested for failing to report child abuse - and law enforcement tends to bend over backwards not to "hurt Scouting." Even after procedures were developed, they are not enforced appropriately - as below. Too often the focus is on protecting B.S.A.'s image and not boys.

The very same procedures that are supposed to be used to remove pedophiles and felons are abused by B.S.A. to remove volunteers that question finances and the actions of paid staffers. A 17 year Scoutmaster - honored by his church and Troop for his service to Scouting was removed by his SE after questioning his Council's spending $500,000 on a new office building instead of programs for boys. He was being "disruptive" and removed under procedures drawn up for dealing with felons and pedophiles. Some would say he was exercising "free speech" and rightfully questioning priorities - along with 23 others that signed a letter protesting that SE's actions. The same SE lied about meeting his fundraising goals after receiving matching funds for this venture - attempting to raise MORE money. The same Council has overstated enrollments and ghost units.

And if you are a member who is unjustly accused of abuse by a boy - looking to "get even" for being disciplined or for any reason....and B.S.A. decides to follow procedures, you're doomed. B.S.A. will hang you out to dry. A case reported here in the archives details a case of just that. Even when law enforcement officials investigated (they were NOT called in as they should have by Scout officials) and found the accused completely innocent, their revocation of membership was upheld by B.S.A.

B.S.A. has real problems with being "Trustworthy." B.S.A. has serious problems with enrollment fraud - far more than the few cases that have been made public. This same problem has existed for decades. The issue of child abuse is buried in confidentiality statements and sealed court records. Rarely is that curtain opened. B.S.A. has problems but hides behind "values" instead of living them. You can't correct things when nobody will admit that something's wrong.

The story below shows "how well" B.S.A.'s child protection efforts work..... and how many other cases have sealed records?

From Channel 6 Pocatello Idaho

It's bad enough when ANY Scout leader is involved in something like this. But when the head of BSA's Youth Protection efforts - as reported by one news organization - is guilty of distributing child pornography how can this NOT reflect on B.S.A.? Note that this was a PAID Professional with 39 years service.

This follows enrollment fraud in how many states now? Enrollment fraud by PAID Professionals trying to show "growth." And this is far from the first time this has happened.

B.S.A. should be taking a long hard look at itself instead of blaming "liberals" for its problems.

If you claim to represent timeless values and high standards of character, you should be showing just that. Too many volunteers are just plain disillusioned and disappointed by the behavior of the paid professionals in B.S.A.

No excuses. No "John Does are to protect boys." No "it has nothing to do with Boy Scouts - it could happen anywhere."

Our S.E. was claiming 5% growth until the AL scandal hit. Now our new "inner city" units have disappeared and enrollments reported in District meetings are down by 15 to 20% - though some folded units are still showing on the lists. I guess all the "mistakes" haven't been corrected yet. And we volunteers aren't supposed to notice all of this? Who's fooling who?

National hides from the press and says "not our fault" for everything. I'm embarassed. This isn't the Boy Scouts I grew up with.

This topic is one BSA has avoided and hidden well.

Read "Scout's Honor" by Boyle

Out of print but available though Amazon used. Any BSA Leader should read this.

So, what DO you do when the SE is the problem?

District numbers are in and we're down substantially AGAIN in Cubs and Scouts. Volunteer fall-off supporting District and Council is substantial. They're now begging for Commissioners after removing those that have done a great job - but since they opposed our SE's position on facilities sales and other issues they can't serve. All the no-show political appointees aren't doing any work.

Funny but after the scandal in AL and elsewhere we suddenly stopped talking about OUR pereviously widely touted new inner city units and the claims of 5 % growth a few months back have evaporated. We're off double that instead - or more.

This SE's former Council had a severe drop in their enrollment after this guy left - the new SE wisely did not want to try to build on inflated enrollment numbers. As posted here years back, that Council saw a falloff in financial support, volunteer support and a wholesale replacement of all paid staff and most of the volunteers in positions of authority. After 3 years they're still repairing the damage.

BSA National can't be oblivious to these problem professionals - and as a member of his former Council said "There aren't enough desks at Supply."

When is BSA going to realize that they're their own worst enemy. The PAID staff are too often the BIGGEST problem volunteers have to face. The same short term focus on "numbers" has led to the enrollment fraud in AL, GA, now Oregon and FL. Volunteers - and in OR a PAID staffer - tried to get BSA to deal with these problems but their Councils didn't want to hear it. National still denies they have a problem after decades of the same thing.

The warning signs are clear - a focus on "raising more money" even as leaders stop supporting FOS in protest, endless and irrational recriuiting drives (you can't push for more boys when there aren't enough adults to handle those you have - we're even paying into unit accounts for every new body signed up) and a focus on meeting "quality" measures in any way possible. The adult volunteers see the fraud and get fed up. "Timeless values" - yeah sure. And when you try to do what's right you get punished - removed from District and Council positions - or even thrown out of Scouting. It happened here and the whistle blower in AL was threatened with the same. Seems like more than a few Councils have the same issues. NOT a coincidence. But National hides in TX saying "not our fault" and disavowing the behavior of "individuals" - though their own focus on numbers drives the recurring fraud. When will BSA Inc. return to the "high standards of character" it claims to hold so dear?

About "integrity" - this is not the first time this has occurred. BSA has recurringly had problems with overstating enrollments. National blames "individuals" yet BSA itself sets the tone that encourages this behavior by PROFESSIONAL PAID Scouters. Quoting an accomplished professional, BSA focuses on "meaningless, simplistic measures of success" to evalute paid staff: 1) How much money they raise 2) How many boys are enrolled 3) How many new units are started 4) How many "Quality Units" they oversee. Note the priority.

Every Scouter I have ever talked to has had "roster errors" where boys and adults are left on the rolls long after they are gone - the less obvious way to pad rolls. Even the way boys are added as soon as possible in the fall when school starts - months before those that fail to return are removed provides a window to allow overstated enrollments.

Many Scouters are also aware of Units kept on Council rolls long after they fall below minimum requirements - or have faded completely away. "Quality" awards are routinely approved - whether units qualify or not. Read the requirements for a "Quality District" and see if you believe that yours qualifies. BSA's much touted "inner city" initiatives are not just a problem in Atlanta. We made much of new "inner city" units in our Council - yet no new leaders were ever trained for them. Suddenly they have "disappeared" - with no explanation. It seems clear - they never existed.

VOLUNTEERS (Council Board Members) in Alabama called in the FBI, disgusted with the behavior of their paid professionals. Their Scout Executive had aspirations to "move up" and wanted to look good. Not mentioned in media coverage was the push to sell off Council properties and "consolidate" - many felt that the proposed "new and larger" property was NOT fairly priced.

Nobody wants to see bad in Scouting but this is far too common behavior by paid professionals. Despite National's public disavowal, many professionals guilty of this behavior are NOT punished. BSA seems to more than welcome "success" - at any cost, real or not - and are guilty of the same. Read BSA's National reports to Congress - if you can still find them. The ending numbers from one year never match the beginning numbers of the following year. (And just try to find clear numbers in recent reports. They are vague or buried.) The "error" or "correction" between years always falls in BSA's favor to let them claim an "increase" - well, actually, less of a DECREASE in numbers. Even as BSA contiues to tout "successes" their "numbers" continue to fall.

I do not see how this recurring problem - and it seems to be wider spread than past prosecutions indicate - cannot be blamed on BSA. How does this keep happening decade after decade? If there was a will to stop this it would have been stopped decades ago. Paid professionals would be fired.

Our SE is playing similar games - creating a new District to show "growth" and pushing DE's to add units. An internal memo pushing DE's to "Raise more money! Raise more money! Find new volunteers that will raise more money for us!" typifies an attitude that has left volunteers appalled. Our FOS contributions by registered leaders have decreased dramatically - the only way left to protest. Our SE scrambles to find new sources of funding with "grant writing workshops" and more. National has heard repeated and regular complaints but says it is a "local" problem. A convenient approach.

Communications woth volunteers and professionals throughout the country indicate that there are serious problems with the "culture" among many "paid professionals." The push to meet the simplistic measures of success at any cost has hurt - and IS hurting Scouting. Many paid professionals are upset with what they see but note the unspoken rule - NEVER criticize another paid professional, NEVER criticize BSA. Do so and you will suffer consequences. Is THAT appropriate in Scouting? Criminal fraud is ignored - unless publicly exposed - while efforts to stop it are punished.

You did not read the posting.

The seven year old postings refer to the SAME problems we are experiencing with the SAME Scout Executive - as noted in the posts from his previous Council. The poster from 7 years ago is an accomplished Scouter, now a professional himself. The complaints he raised have been confirmed as valid with others in that Council.

That SAME individual SE has been a source of continuing, similar and major complaints wherever he has served.

BSA has heard the SAME complaints about this person from 2 councils - and his previous Council before those was glad to be rid of him.

Yet BSA insists that any issues are "local" and will continue, it seems, to foist this person on unwary Councils instead of dealing with his behavior.

While one can say that an Executive Board is at fault for failing to investigate a candidates record fully, BSA National provides a list of supposedly qualified professionals for a Council to choose from. What standards are used by National to screen candidates (do they screen candidates)? Is National clear about a candidate's record? And once hired, it is VERY difficult for a Council's Executive Board to remove a SE - especially if the SE has replaced much of the Executive Board with his own candidates.

The question posed is: What can a Council do when the Scout Executive is the problem?

BSA National refuses to intervene. The SE controls the Executive Board. The only other option procedurally seems to be using the Chartered Organization Representatives and getting them to exercise their rarely used ability to cast votes in the annual Council meeting - a procedure that seems to be deliberately difficult, but the ONLY way for volunteers to have any voice in their Council.

So, what DO you do when the SE is the problem? Ironic, as another in our Council found the posts below in Scouter's very own archives.

When an Executive Board handpicked by the same SE is the only way to remove that same SE, goo dluck trying to oust him. It is extremely difficult to get a hundred + chartering organizations involved to vote their legitimate vote though the effort is being attempted - a huge diversion of time and effort better spent on the boys in Scouting.

So, how DO volunteers deal with a problematic SE, one who cannot lead, who does more harm than good in a Council. National could care less - it seems that it is near impossible to remove a paid staffer and there are obviously not enough desk spots in Supply.

Our SE is the VERY SE cited in the posts below and we are suffering the VERY same problems. Professional staff has fled or been forced out leaving our SE as the longest serving professional of any importance and long serving volunteers have been driven from District and Council positions to be replaced with short serving leaders or novices willing to accept the dictates of our SE without question.

Rules are bent and broken - and Council has yet to "find" a copy of Council Bylaws despite requests from volunteers for copies......The Exec Board approves a new District Chairman BEFORE the District votes on him - even though the SE has "stacked" the District with new reps. Nominating Committees are handpicked to remove long serving volunteers who have aired criticisms.

There has been a wholesale alienation of volunteers, a falloff in donations (we have not met FOS goals since this SE arrived - this being the only way left for volunteers to register their dissatisfaction. Our SE's response is "Find new volunteers that will raise money for us!" Our SE pushes popcorn sales - which cannot hope to offset the losses in donations from long time contributors upset with HIS actions.

So, what DO you do? These are not the opinions of a few disaffected people. These sentiments have been expressed independently in the very same terms, in two widely separated Councils by a wide range of dedicated Scouters. Actually, three Councils if one takes second-hand reports from his last Council as true. Both his previous Councils rejoiced at his leaving.

The sentiments expressed below by one person have been confirmed by others. Actually, THAT poster's accomplishments in Scouting are substantial - He is now a professional Scouter himself - a very successful one.

There is a wide consensus about this SE - he is bad for Scouting. Why does National simply "circle the wagons" when confronted with such a problem? My SM taught that you acknowledge mistakes and work to correct them.

Volunteers here are dismayed with all of this. OUR program is being hurt and the ideals of Scouting are being so widely ignored than many question their committment to Scouting. When a SE manages to unite a diverse group of volunteers AGAINST him, something is very wrong.

The SE does NOT have the right to kick someone out for whatever reason - the procedures do NOT state this.

Under "How to remove a VOlunteer" in various Commissioner and District publications it is clear that even if there is a reason, ONLY the chartering organization can remove a unit Scouter - if they are uncooperative or whatever. But steps are supposed to be taken to deal with the issues before removing that person.

Council can act to remove someone for "cause or grounds for legal action, misrepresentation or immoral acts" - but the person is still allowed to file an appel.

However, how does one file an appeal if NO FACTS OR REASONS are given for the removal? How can you refute facts that are not provided?

This is simply cowardly. You're guilty - you're out.

Too many people seem to be willing to follow and not question. Evil thrives when good people are silent.

Right has no reason to fear light. Wrong seeks darkness to hide.

As noted elsewhere, our Council is in turmoil - with wholesale replacement of long serving volunteers in District and Council positions. Anyone criticizing the sale of Council assets has been "punished" in this way. FOS is being boycotted and hasn't made its goal since our new SE showed up. He has managed to unite volunteers into a way no other SE has - against him.

A unit leader had his registration revoked after criticizing the proposed sale of a facility and the treatment of volunteers. There is clearly no "cause or grounds for legal action" to justify his removal and the units he's in are upset with his removal.

He was NOT given any reason for this action. Nothing was said to him or his units before he was summarily removed. Two staffers showed at his door - no volunteer with them as BSA procedures state. BSA seems to claim that reasons are given verbally but even their own procedures state that those delivering a letter in such cases should not give specific details. "You're guilty of something - defend yourself." BSA should be ashamed.

BSA refuses his request to have reasons stated in writing and won't even cite the rules he was removed under.

His SM has been told that he can't be told the reason for this leader's removal, but that the reasons for this do not involve boys - that he is no threat to boys and that he is welcome to participate as a parent in any Scouting activities - it sure seems like he was not removed for cause. And if that's the case, only the chartering organization has authority to remove a unit Scouter.

So, how does this leader appeal this action if he has no facts to respond to, no incident to give his version of? If not told WHY, he can't defend himself.

This is like something out of some Communist of Facist state. What about Due Process? If he's not a threat to boys, which was made clear, what's going on here?

This is a leader whose history is exemplary. He's supported by the units he's in. There aren't any valid reasons to remove him. What's going on and what should he do?

BSA is stonewalling - for "his protection." Sounds more like legal tail-covering. Nobody believes there's a valid resaon for his removal. Most believe that this leader was removed for purely political reasons. He spoke up against what many people believe are wrong and got punished for doing so. He didn't hold any District position to lose so out he went. Hang him as an example. That seems to be this SE's approach. Intimidate when you can't lead.

And BW can blindly defend all he wants but this is just wrong. If boys aren't at risk, why should BSA treat a long serving leader so badly. What about Due Process, Innocent until proven guilty and other lasting AMERICAN values? We should be ashamed - and worried. So much for BSA being fair to volunteer leaders. You'd better watch your back - free speech, even when speaking out for what's right, apparently isn't a right in BSA.

Not to rebut all points, but we have had only one SE last more than a term - 12 years I think. They're on 6 year contracts.

We have MANY MANY 20, 25, 30 and 35 year volunteers. Our Community has many ranging from 5, 10, 20 up to a 50 year that just died. Many serving at Council and District level have had VERY high level and successful business careers - careers with far more responsibilities than our SE. Frankly, many of these volunteers have or hold far more important and prestegious positions than some of our Executive Board members.

And these volunteers are paid nothing for the long hours and effort they put in.

This SE seemingly came from a poor background and is doing pretty darn well at the present. This is an affluent area and a large council. He's paid well "for a poor kid from XXX" as he so often says and well for this area compared to many with comparable management positions. He's been ambitious and has a history of agressively "climbing the ladder" on the backs of others - as too late research has shown. He's a great salesman but a horrible leader.

Past DE's were focused on money and numbers too. They have 3 year contracts. One troop was kept on the books with 6 kids and 2 adults and the roster padded with ghosts because they didn't want to lose a unit. DE's had number to make. There are lots of similar cases.

A DISTRICT CHAIRMAN position was left vacant, not a mere Commissioner or ADC. - on purpose. That position is supposed to be the Council's voice at the Council level. One of two Vice Chairmen for that Council is totally unknown to Scouting with no experience.

When a SE instructs DE's to "get rid of long term volunteers and get people who will raise money for us" he's showing what he cares about.

And visitors of any kind are not so welcome in Council Offices. You now have to be "Announced" and escorted.

No amount of spin can make any of this look good.

Even BSA makes some big mistakes. Unfortunately, they can be hard to clean up and do real damage - not just to a local area but Scouting itself. Refusing to acknowledging what is wrong and justifying or excusing it does no service to Scouting

Personally, I try my hardest to give people the benefit of a doubt, but this SE has been horrible for us and horrible for Scouting. When someone can unite HUNDREDS of people - quite literally - in universal loathing, I rather doubt that there's been a misunderstanding.

I'm gone. I rather doubt this SE will show up at camp this year. He ran out of a meeting he tried to hold last year when everyone started hitting himm with questions he didn't want to answer. A good leader commands respect by his actions. A poor leader tries to intimidate others into obedience.

Everyone is making lots of assumptions based on their pov. However, I am also getting the feeling that getting one's hands on "rules and regualtions" my initial question - is NOT easy - deliberately so.

A free and open society (American values)or an organization espousing those values should NOT have anything to fear by having such information readily available. What's to hide.Other BSA publications sure reference them enough.

Those that presuppose that BSA is always right and that those pesky volunteers simply don't understand do BSA a disservice. In my experience, the long serving volunteers that are the core of Scoouting are far more true to its values than the paid staff who come and go. Paid staff want to make their goals and move up. The volunteers are in it for "the boys" and "Scouting" - for the long run.

A paid for facility - on prime and irreplaceable waterfront property - WITH a trust fund for maintenance and upkeep is a jewel that should be preserved for perpetuity. It will never be replaced. Selling off such assets is the act of a desperate organization that is failing to address fundamental financial issues - or one that is looting those assets. Asset sales alienate large donors and continue a downward spiral in the donor base. Popcorn sales cannot make up for wholesale alienation of major contributors.

The SE IS directly responsible for wholesale changes in staff and volunteer positions. HIs actions are NOT for any justifiable reasons. Replacing an ADC with a complete novice was a direct act of retribution. NO long term volunteers would take the position, so the SE had to use whoever would take her place.

There is NO justification for leaving a District position vacant. That DIstrict has been the most vocal critic of the SE - denying them a voice at COuncil Level is retribution.

As far as enrollment being up and the SE doing "something right" - demographics dictate the pool available - and though enrollments are up - they're up because there are lots more kids. Actually, percentage wise, out of the numbers available, I don't know if there's any real growth. Nobody's looked at it that way.

Since fund raising is way down - specifically because units have chosen this as the most direct method of registering protest - something is clearly very wrong. A SE that inspires units to boycott Council fundraising may be unifying volunteers but not in a positive way for Scouting.

I'm not trying to rabble rouse. I'm concerned. And the answer to my initial question was not reassuring. If Council is the "keeper of the rules and regulations," lots of luck in getting a good look at them if you're questioning the actions of the SE. So, just why aren't they available through supply or elsewhere anymore? What is the justification for limiting access?

No more responses from me. I'm off to summer camp.

There are a number of issues of concern. Our SE first alienatd a large number of volunteers over the sale of a now Council owned facility - this action is being fought in the courts. This is a waterfront facility with a pool - its used for swimming, boating, sailing and scuba and is the site of summer camps and events. It was donated with a trust fund for upkeep and maintenance. THis facility could NEVER be replaced.

We've seen almost all of our area's assets sold off over the years - for millions of dollars - but somehow Council always needs money. If enrollments are up, why are they still selling? Where has the money gone?

There are clear attempts at "retaliation" by the SE - with long serving volunteers being removed from positions. One District currently has its top position delliberately left vacant. A long serving Assistant District Commissioner with 25 years in Souting was replaced with a novice Cub Scout Leader. Complete unknowns are anmed to District and Council positions while volunteers with decades of service are shoved aside. Nominating committees for Districts are "stacked" to obtain these results. Political "loyalists" do what the SE wants.

Letters to local papers protest some of these actions but things haven't broken wide open yet. The SE seems to be rewriting the rules and doing what he wants. Aren't SE's supposed to SERVE and SUPPORT the volunteers?

There has been a wholesale replacement of paid staff - pormpting a massive outpouring of support for one fired staffer in particular. A web site set up in her support has hundreds of entries - many calling for the removal of the SE.

There are also rumblings about a leader having his registration revoked. No reason was given for his removal - the local unit he's in had nothing to do with it. But he vocally - and validly - criticized the SE at a District Meeting. The reasons for his removal "have nothing to do with boys" and he can "remain involved in any Scouting activities as a parent." Anyone ever heard of anything like that?

Units are boycotting Council fundraising - popcorn sales and FOS. Things are near open revolt. The SE told staff to "get rid of problem volunteers and find new ones that will raise money for us." Units are avoiding Council - some going to summer camp out of state.

This SE is only 2 years into a 6 year contract and has managed to unify a diverse volunteer base against him. Some accomplishment.

Even members of the Executive Board feel that the SE has exceeded his authority. However, it seems like even the Executive Board has been "stacked" - it's heavy on "suits" and light on those with real Scouting involvement and experience. Like too many "corporations" of late, we've got a CEO running out of control and a board that could care less.

Over 100 volunteers showed up and an exec Board meeting in protest and were basically told they don't count for much - the SE and Board can do what they feel is best.

"Rules and regulations" used to be readily available - but not now. It seems like lots of rules and regulations are being violated but if you can't get a hold of them....

BTW - National could care less. Appeals have been made but this is a "local" problem.

BSA is a big non-profit corporation & our Council has the same orientation. Focus is on money and "numbers" - that's what boys are to them.

Just where does one get a copy of the Byalaws and the oft-referred-to "Rules and Regulations of the Boy Scouts of America"? They used to be available in the major Scout Stores but they're not there now and no reference can be found on Scoutstuff or any place else? Where can you get a copy?

Seems like these been relegated to "Top-Secret" Status.

We've got some serious issues at Council level and are looking for answers. Nobody seems to want anyone to see these items.