Jschlich

I suggest that everyone take a deep breath and a step back.

I've been in court for 6 of the 7 days of this trial and will be there for #8 as well as whatever follows. I have detailed notes on the various statements by witnesses as well as the comments by the Judge and various lawyers.

Both sides are well prepared and have sober and convincing arguments for their points of view. Neither party is doing this "on a lark" and it is certainly nice to see civil interchange and humor being shared between all parties.

There is some very important case law being established during this trial in light of the fact that this is a major challenge to the Michigan legislation concerning Master Planning and Zoning that was only established just about a decade ago.

My personal perspective is that this is a match of "old thought" vs. "new thought" on many local government levels.

Perhaps there is some judgement to be made about how appropriate it is for a not-for-profit organization to be a pioneer in such a case. However, the same can be said about a small rural township taking on the challenge of this case at huge legal cost.

The saga goes on.

Shortly before the opening of th 96th year at Owasippe the new President of the Chicago Area Council released an "Open Letter" to the local community around Owasippe.

The letter asks for comment from the community.

Getting an update fom the community is always welcome and certainly strikes a conciliatory tone. At the same time the Chicago Council is rabidly pressing forth with long and intense legal depositions of the Township Officials.

I guess that is also is a way to collect comments from the local community but, it is a rather distasteful method to use on people you supposedly want to sit down and talk with. I guess it completely escapes comprehension by people from "the big city" that local opinion and information is formed quickly and efficiently in a small town.

It has been suggested that removing the litigation gun from the head of the Township (at least a suspension of the suit) would be a practical and progressive step. How those who filed the complaint expect to have dialogue with the defendants with the suit in place is beyond me.

I also suggest that reading or listening to the Public Hearing from early 2006 would offer insight froma gathering of about 450 local residents and other interested parties. Nothing really has changed concerning the local opinions about the Owasippe property. The bottom line is NO to any residential development.

The saga goes on. The Council continues to spend some very large amounts on litigation while talking conciliation. For some the phrase "follow the money" will reveal where the Council truely wants to have the matter resolved.

nidscout:

I learned some time ago that the apologists for the BSA Program and the BSA Professionals have a knee jerk reaction in response to most criticism of the BSA. Patch placements, uniform requirements and the sanctity of Eagle Scout requirements come to mind as serious and deep discussion that is allowed by the BSA apologist. Any discussion beyond that concerning the function of the BSA, according to the apologists, is nothing more than child abuse.

The apologists for the BSA Professionals refuse to accept the fact that it takes the work of the BSA professionals combined with the approval and effort of Volunteer Scouters to deliver the best possible.

Surprise! That word approval is there in the above paragraph. I could go on with example after example of possible policies that could be dictated by the BSA Professionals that would tear the BSA organization apart across the country. I believe the attempt by the BSA Professionals to dictate who will be Officials of the Chicago Area Council could be one of the dictates that will tear the organization apart.

When one of those sides digs their heels in and uses intimidation as their tactic for success there is a problem. A problem delievering the best that is possible for the kids.

Let's recap some of the facts that the so called "radical left" can be readily identified:

1) The Chicago Area Council of the BSA was found to be guilty of not executing it's fiduciary responsibility in the operation of the Chicago Area Council.

A Circuit Court Judges said that and I have no idea if that Judge is of the "radical left". I prefer to believe that the Judge took the facts resented by both side and made a learned judgement.

2) The Chicago Council was taken over by the National Council in June, 2006.

The National Council dismissed all of the Officers and Board members who were members of the Chicago Area Council and installed a hand-picked "Executive Committee" made up of a majority of non-Chicago members.

3)On January 27, 2007 the voters of the Chicago Area Council chartered organizations voted FOR 60 of the 72 people on the ballot. 4 of the 5 slates voted on were APPROVED!

The fact that the complete slates were unknown until the time of the vote on the 27th sounds like a third-world election scheme however, almost 85% of the people nominated were APPROVED by the Chicago electorate in spite of the unkown.

Another third-world feature of the election were the monitors sent to supervise the elction by the National Council. I am not aware of any other local Council election being supervised in such a manner.

[At least the folks from Texas had the sense to keep weapons concealed. -OK, cheap shot but history gives the opportunity to say that-]

4) With approval of 4 of the 5 slates the National Council, in the person of Attorney Ellen Babbitt, ranted on about the rejection of the slate submitted by the National Council.

The further statements of Attorney Babbett was that when the National Council next submits a slate the consequence of rejecting it will be the disbanding of the Chicago Area Council.

5) Before, and again after the 1/27/07 election, the voters of the Chicago Council attempted to communicate with the National Council representatives that 4 of the 12 people on the 5th slate were unacceptable and would cause the rejection of the slate.

6) There is acceptance by the Chicago Council voters of 68 of the 72 people who were nominated. 94% of the people that were nominated were found to be acceptable, 6% were objectionable.

Those 6% of the people nominated stand between total acceptance of what the National Council wants and what the Chicago Council voters will accept.

You can choose to label whichever side you want as "the radical left" or whatever.

The facts are being ignored by those who have blind faith in the utterances and dictates of the National BSA Council. Of course it is always possible in the future for the apologists to say, "We believed what they said because it sounded like the right thing to do".

With less than 48 hours until the election there seems to be a scramble by the BSA National Council (which is currently operating the Chicago Area Council) to salvage another train wreck.

It's so sad that the guy at the top of this BSA Management is paid close to a not-for-profit $1-million a year. And at the top of the Chicago BSA Management the compensation is approaching $1/4-million a year.

Of course in this day of $100-million awards to Executives creating loosing business efforts the BSA Management isn't bad....I guess.

READ ON!

For the many of you who have contacted me directly concerning in the dealing of the Chicago Area Council, your message seems to be getting through.

As of today (Friday, 1/26/07) the Chicago Area Council web site includes a statement that reads:

"There are several names on this slate which had been approved by the Nominating Committee, but had not yet agreed to serve when the previous list was published. Since they have now agreed to serve, their names are included and identified with an asterisk." (can be viewed at www.chicagobsa.org) [

[Personal note: In speaking with two of the people added to the slates, they clearly state they never had a prior contact concerning their nomination. Third party information indicates that at least two others now added were never contacted concerning their nomination.]

An analysis of the revised slate shows that seven of the 16 or 17 names of the individuals originally submitted by the Nominating Committee have now been added to the slates to be voted on. It is also alleged that more names could still be added to the slates before the election tomorrow.

Please recall that the election is scheduled for Saturday, 1/27/07 at 5:30pm.

One of the National Council representatives who was appointed operate the Chicago Council for the last seven months has posted a lengthy personal message concerning the election to be held late Saturday afternoon. (can be viewed at www.fortdearborn.org)

None of the other 10 members of the National Council representatives operating Chicago Council affairs has shared their endorsement of the slates, election or other Council matters. The appointed Council President did prepare a video in advance of the election (can be viewed at www.chicagobsa.org).

It is observed that much is being claimed about the composition of the proposed Board of Directors and their involvement with the delivery of the BSA programs in Chicago. The proposed election represents no difference as far as the control of the Chicago Area Council is concerned. The real decision making of the Council has been, and as long as Council by-laws remain, to be solely in the hands of the Executive Committee. There has been no change to that Administrative reality.

*******

In my personal opinion, there has to be question if the membership goal of transparency is being reached with the actions of the last 48 hours. Or, have these last 48 hours been just nothing more than manipulation and the creation of confusion aimed at the voting local Council members. Confusion created by the people who the National BSA Council put into place to correct things to the satisfaction of the National Council.

Provisions are in place for a second election to take place in April. Perhaps by then the representative of the National Council operating the Chicago Area Council can settle on slates that can be considered by the electorate over a reasonable time in advance.

The election is taking place in Chicago but there is no reason why the National Council should let such elections take place under questionable politics. Of course, there are Regional BSA Professionals expected to be observers for the elections. It's interesting how the National Council is willing to treat this as a "third world election".

Thank you for your message local 1400! I had the opportunity to visit Franconia and spend some time on that trip touring through the White Mountains NF. It was awesome! There are some exciting experiences available there and I hope the folks from the East Coast take advantage of them. Mount Washington in the winter would be a true challenge to anyone from the Rocky Mountain States.

Back to the topic!

The Michigan residents in the Owasippe community have contested the efforts by the Chicago Council every step of the way. The result of the September, 2006 National/Chicago Council attempt to accelerate and slam their rezoning and sales effort through local Circuit Court the Councils got their nose bloodied.

The National/Chicago Council attempts to divert attention towards the make believe world of reorganizing the Chicago Council (there were two additional attorneys added (guess how much that cost)and an attempt to "slam dunk" the local community in court. It was the most recent effort to cram a sale of the Owasippe property down the throats of West Michigan.

The National/Chicago Council was given a delay in the court actions in response to their abusive actions. The Court ruled that the Council attempted to avoid the "due process" that the local community deserves in the matter.

Rather than a trial in February the trial was moved to August. If the National/Chicago Council keeps up with their arrogant attitude they will find themselves in the same situation as the G R Ford Council did when they attempted to sell a camp for residential development in Muskegon County.

It took the Ford Council 14 years to get their property sold and the great bulk of the land is now a State Park (not houses as they wanted). The local Council couldn't win what they wanted in their own community. What gives the the National and Chicago BSA Professionals the idea they, as carpet baggers, will do any better than the local Scout Council. ARROGANCE!

The National/Chicago Council is accepting reservations for both this year and 2008! It is their attempt to cash in on the set-back from the Circuit Court.

That will make 97 years of Scouting camping at Owasippe. It is only arrogance and mismanagement that has taken 12,000+ acres of Scout property to the point of being totally dedicated to residential development.

The staff and rank-and-file of the National/Chicago Council will continue to work overtime through 2008 to deliver an exceptional Summer Camp experience. Perhaps by then the National/Chicago Council Professionals will discover that they are around for a very short time in comparison to the tenure of the members.

Jkhny writes: "And about Chicago? Seems like BSA will do ANYTHING to keep volunteers from having any real say over what happens in Scouting."

*********

The above observation is very true. Here are some of the current up-to-date facts about the Chicago Area Council as operated by the National Council of the BSA.

1) Since June the Board appointed by National to operate Chicago has had an obligation to have an election of Directors and all. There was no specific date given except for the election to be no later than by the end of January,2007.

There was no effort made by the appointed Board to have that election at any time other than as late as possible in their appointed term. It would appear to be considered an honor by the appointed Directors to occupy those seats as long as possible.

If there were true concerns about local control and operation of the Chicago Council the appointed Directors would have been pushing for the last seven months to get their replacements in place. There is no excuse for not having had the election as timely as possible with at least one, if not more of the possible additional votes (in case of slate rejection)done before the deadline.

It would appear to be pretty "heady stuff" to be appointed to a Board position by National that is to be savored and prolonged as much as possible.

2) It is now about three weeks before the date decided for the election and there is still no announcement of what the slates to be voted on look like.

How does a group of several hundred COR's do their "due diligence" in what appears to be foot dragging on releaseing the names that will appear on the ballot? The only possible answer is that due diligence is not desired or wanted by those who are in control of the Council.

When there is a history of COR's being expected to be nothing more than Rubber Stamps, for what the hired help and National Council, you have this type of assumption.

3) Why would the January issue of the Chicago Council publication "The Scouter" not have a mention of the Council's Annual Election?

In a 12 page publication intended to be read by Council-wide Volunteers (including the COR's) there is not a single mention of the Annual election set for the end of January. You would think that one of the seven different calendars that are printed would provide at least the date of the Election. Why shouldn't one believe that this is another example of editing information to keep people ignorant of the facts?

This is just further evidence of the belief by Scouting Professionals that they can hide important information and subvert the open and transparent operation of the BSA.

Watch who takes charge of those endowment dollars! The dividend dollars that are generated is the yield that should be spent on the purpose of the fund, PERIOD!

The experience in the Chicago Council is that there is a disconnect from the "rank and file" and those who have the legal, accounting and BSA education degrees.

The Professionals (the three types cited above) seem to take a "due diligence" and "fudiciary must make every dollar possible" approach beyond all other considerations. They are misguided and believe that the obligations of a shareholder investment company is the same as a not-for-profit principle guided organization.

When overly agressive profit driven Directors run a Council they will sacrifice the endowment dollars of the organization for their misguided obsession with the almighty dollar as their scorecard.

What compounds the problem is that the Professionals will bully and attempt to use their "professional standing" to belittle and browbeat the rank-and-file.

The members of the Council have nothing to do with who is now operating the Council. Effective this past June 1 National took over the Chicago Council.

The ultimatum given by National was going to be either an immediate liquidation of the Council or no resistance to an imposition of an Operating Committee selected by National. That was the no-compromise edit of the National Council.

Seven people from outside the Chicago Council were selected by National to operate the Council and four other people with Council membership were selected to round out the operating committee.

All Professional staff was retained by National.

The Scouter 11 (who won the court case against the Chicago Council) were informed by National that the Chicago Council would be not be rechartered and cease to exist on June 1, 2006. That was unless the Scouter 11 stopped the legal activities to enforce the court judgement against the Chicago Council.

******

Your message in part said, "This time, I hope the volunteers see it through to the end. Complete with regular press releases, talk show appearances, full media blitz to go with the legal side, eh? Lots of daylight helps when folks are spendin' time lurking in shadows."

I have to say this type of comment is way out of line. It is being critical of a group of volunteers who reached very deep into their own pockets, and gave much more than 'an hour per week' to go after what can only be called a proven corrupt Boy Scout Council. Proven corrupt by a Judge.

The Scouter 11 action was not done for the amusement and entertainment of sports fans. It was a damn serious effort to right a wrong and try and get Scouting in Chicago refocused on the youth it should be serving.

In this instance any Monday Morning Quarterbacking of what was done by those 11 individuals belittles the effort they agonized over doing. Those guys and gal stepped-up and put their reputations as well as their dollars on the line for the youth who could be served by the BSA in Chicago.

As you can tell the result of the Scouter 11 effort was an embarrassment to the National Council. National did the only thing that a self-serving bully could do.....take their ball home.

******

The Chicago Area Council now appears to be operating totally outside the laws of the State of Illinois that govern not-for-profit organizations in that State. The Chicago Council continues to solicit and accept hundreds of thousands of dollars under the guise that they are a legal entity operating under the laws of the State of Illinois.

In my opinion the Attorney General of the State of Illinois has not taken the proper action to protect the interests of the people of Illinois. By allowing the BSA to come into the State and run a not-for-profit without following the by-laws of the organization and laws of the State of Illinois is just plain wrong.

4 months since the last post. Here is an update.

The Boy Scouts of America (National) has now directly operated the Chicago Area Council since June 1, 2006.

The Nationally installed Chicago Council Directors have attempted to accelerate the legal efforts to achieve a sale of the Owasippe property as quickly as possible.

Critical, it appears, that the Court action be completed before there is a chance that members of the Chicago Council can vote for a Board of Directors.

The Circuit Court effort blew-up on the faces of the National and Chicago Scout Executives.

In court BSA National and the local Council has been told to follow the legally established due process of the State of Michigan.

Many thousands of dollars (from unpaid bills) are due the local governement by the National/Chicago Council according to statements filed in Court.

Can anyone dispute that more than $200,000.00 of BSA Chicago Council money has been spent, so far, in this effort?

And the band played on.

Well, it's update time again. Is someone doing the outline for a novel yet?

The rank and file Plaintiffs won against the Council in Court concerning illegal governance by the Council President and Executive Committee.

Council went ahead and filed in Appeals Court.

National sent representatives in an effort to "mediate" and to get the parties to make nice with each other.

Rank and file Plaintiffs informed National's representatives that it wasn't likely that they would settle anything since they had already gained a decision in their favor.

National was sort of "blind sided" by this. They had no knowledge that the Court had already decided against the Council.

National Council informs Chicago Council and rank and file Plaintiffs that the recharter of the Chicago Council would not take place. National indicates it would liquidate the Chicago Council, including assets and divide the franchise to other surrounding Councils.

UNLESS Council and Plaintiffs agree to a reorganization plan dictated by National.

National requires the Council President plus two additional Executive Committee members removed from positions and one Executive Committee member plus two Board of Directors who were included as Plaintiffs to be removed from positions.

Also, National disbands Chicago Council's Board of Directors and reduces Council's Executive Committee to four continuing members plus six or seven new Executive Board members selected by National from surrounding Councils.

Also required was that the court actions would be stopped.

This new Executive Committee is charged with reorganizing the Council so that new Board elections can take place in January, 2007.

The interesting twist to all of this is that National has also charged the appointed Executive Committee to review the approved sale of Owasippe. Somehow National seems to have taken on the idea, fed by the former Executive Committee, that the Owasippe sale was the root of all problems in the Council.

That the Executive Committee of Chicago couldn't come up with slates of Candidates for Council positions for three years in a row appears to have been discounted in importance. That the Executive Committee kept itself in position with no election for three years also seems to not have been deemed important enough for the folks from National.

National had been contacted and asked to help resolve the situation early on in the matter. National insisted the issues were "local issues". Why was it only when a Court ruled and began the process of resolving the issues in favor of the rank and file members of the Chicago Council did National find it proper to become involved and it was no longer a "local issue"?

It is refreshing to know that efforts are now going forth to try and settle the Council into a mode that can address program improvements and expansion for the kids. That is job #1 for everyone.

It's just plain disappointing that National only got involved when it was clear that the rank and file had been successful in court. Is it too much to ask for the "Professionals" to respond when problems start?

Here is an update on the Owasippe property status.

The Blue Lake Township Planning Commission voted to not recommend the residential rezoning proposal of Owasippe advanced by the Chicago Area Council. The issue now goes forward to the Muskegon Area Planning Commission for review and, following that, to the Township Board. There are several more months of consideration before the rezoning proposal has a final disposition with the Township Board.

The Township Planning Commission based their recommendation on extensive research and public comment. More than 2,600 people expressed their opinion in writing. Of that total less than 1/2% were in favor of the rezoning proposal. 99%+ clearly let the Commission know that there should be no change to the zoning and Master Plan of the township that would allow residential development of the Owasippe property.

The current zoning for the almost 7.5 square miles of Owasippe is for forest recreational use by institutions. This zoning applies to Owasippe as well as four other camps, operated by other not-for profits, located within the Township.

The Muskegon Area-wide Plan (MAP Project, 2003) has established the following community goals that are relevant to the future of the Owasippe property:

a)Promote natural resource based tourism and the countys quality of life as an economic development tool.

b)Encourage partnerships with government, local organizations and businesses to help achieve local and regional economic development goals.

c)Protect the valuable farm and forestlands, wetlands, surface and groundwater resources, wildlife habitat, and opportunities for passive and active recreation.

d)Limit adverse impacts on environmentally sensitive lands by encouraging redevelopment and increasing densities in cities, where necessary and desired.

e)Protect and preserve natural resources and continually improve the quality of air, water and land resources found in Muskegon County.

f)Foster increased environmental sensitivity and voluntary stewardship through public-private partnerships, federal-state-local cooperation and public education and outreach.

g)Identify strategies that will manage growth and support reinvestment in urban areas and promote rural viability.

h)Link natural resource protection with development to reduce loss of important natural resources and open spaces in urban and rural areas.

i)Develop policies and regulations to address the quantity and quality of water resources.

j)Mitigate environmental and human health impacts to important natural resources.

k)Protect the watersheds and shorelines of Lake Michigan and the inland lakes of Muskegon County.

l)Develop integrated and coordinated land use planning in rural areas to revitalize small towns. Link natural resource protection with residential development and maintain working landscapes (agricultural, natural resource tourism, forestry, etc).

m)Develop policies to ensure land is available to provide employment opportunities, variety of housing types, open space and natural areas, and access to goods and services based on future projected needs.

n)Encourage compatible land use plans between adjacent jurisdictions by updating land use plans, zoning ordinances and regulations.

o)Work collaboratively to encourage economic diversity throughout the region and reduce competition between communities.

p)Prioritize water and wastewater facility improvements consistent with the distribution of the regions population, employment and planning while emphasizing water conservation and reuse.

q)Provide infrastructure systems in both urban and rural communities utilizing existing infrastructure capacity where it exists before developing new infrastructure.

r)Promote coordination and enhancement of arts, cultural, recreation and historic resources in the county.

s)Develop partnerships between government and non-government organizations to improve the health of the environment and individuals.

It is sad that the Chicago Council made no effort to have discussions with local government officials concerning the property before advancing a residential development proposal that is so contrary to the goals of the local community. Tens of thousands of dollars have been and will continue to be spent by the Council to try and work against the desires and goals of the local community. Those are dollars that could be going towards program in the Council.

There is a vision for the Owasippe Property that has been advanced by the Owasippe Outdoor Education Center that can meet the goals of both the Council and the local community. That vision is shared at www.ooec.org.

Thank you to all who have supported the effort to preserve the Owasippe property. More work will is ahead and your continued support is needed to reach a resolution that can benefit both Scouting and the local community.

LongHaul - I accept your point as you present it. Yes, there are many actions by the Council Professionals and the CAC Board over many years that are felt to not be in the long-term interests of the rank and file of the Council. I can accept that the decisions concerning the sale of the camping properties may have been the "straw that broke the back of the volunteers."

The difficulty I have in recognizing the lawsuit in Chicago as "two fronts of the same war" are several.

First, I have no expectation of a new Board to be able to dismiss a sales agreement for the property by a vote to recind the agreement. In all likelihood the agreement that the Council has is legal and binding. While there is much to be said about the manner in which the agreement appears to have been created, it is likely that any future Board will need to show an honest effort to follow through on the agreement.

Second, there is some factual basis to the concerns about the economic viability of the Owasippe property AS IT HAS BEEN USED BY THE COUNCIL. While it is true that there are many additional revenue positive programs and uses that COULD mean long-term viability of property ownership, the question is about the will of CAC Boards of the future to keep that vision. In other words, how do actions now assure that this current situation is not revisited in the future? What would happen if the Council were consolidated with another Council in the future is just one example of how the current situation could be revisited.

Third, there are additional parties who have an interest in resolving the issue of a sale of the Owasippe property. The township, county, Holton and Whitehall school districts, fire protection district, emergency medical services, soil and water conservation district, county and regional economic development authorities, local and regional planning commissions and more.

The fact that the Council has brought forth the subject of the sale of one of the largest parcels of privately owned land in West Michigan means there will be no going back to the 90+ years of quiet coexistence of the Council and local government. The local enities have a much larger public to serve than the Council.

I believe that the Owasippe Outdoor Education Center was created as an effort to find a single solution that satisfies all interested parties. Fundimental to the OOEC effort is that the property remain zoned FR-I, not rezoned to allow residential development.

Don't get me wrong. I'd love to see the Council recind the sale and go forth with a long-range redevelopment plan for the Owasippe property. It is something that could have been done decades ago.

PLEASE - refer to my November posting. Owasippe and Chicago Council goverance are two entirely different matters.

OldGreyEagle - sorry, splitting hairs about what is a "democracy" in the BSA is exactly what the Chicago Council SE and Board President got into trouble about.

It was eleven Chicago Scouters, COR's and Board Members who went to Court to get the matter heard. The Court seems to understand "democracy" while others seem to want to protect the megalomania of BSA Professionals and Officers.

Years of operating in the red and the inability of well paid Professionals to achieve basic fundraising goals is at the root of the Chicago Council problems.

Concerning Owasippe. Cramming residential zoning down the throats of a rural township simply because the Council has deeper pockets will not work this time around.

This is going to be a public relations disaster as well as a cost of several hundred thousands of dollars for the Council. Another example of BSA arrogance.

I have to give a bit more perspective on the Owasippe matter.

The court action in Chicago is concerned about leadership of the Council at the Board level. The Council has had continuing problems for more than a decade. The fact that Learning For Life represents 70%+ of what the Council counts as "membership" is more an indication of the long-term problem in the opinion of many traditional Scouters. Are there other Councils where the traditional scouting programs represent 30% or less that what the Council reports as their membership?

The Owasippe sale is a seperate matter and something that has continuing difficulties because of the Council's residential rezoning request for the 7 1/2 square mile property. The summary of that issue is that there is no local interest in adding 3,000+ new residential homesites in the middle of a rural township. Unfortunately the Council has started court actions to cram their opinion down the throats of the local community.

There are a total of five different camp properties in the township, one being Owasippe. Camping, recreation and education on these properties is looked upon as the local industry and an economic base.

In essence the Chicago Council, after 95 years of camp ownership, is saying they don't care about local concerns....just do what we tell you to do so we can go home 225 miles away with the biggest wad of money.

Two entirely different matters involved here.