Lisabob

Maybe I missed it, but what exactly is your role in the pack? Are you the Committee Chair, Cubmaster, or Charter Org. Rep? If not I would say that you need not do anything because it isn't your responsibility to deal with this issue. Supposing that you ARE in one of those roles though... I think I'd want more info before doing anything. There is an enormous difference between boys who are not members of any specific religion and boys who are atheists. There is also a difference between a kid being confused or uncertain about the nature of a higher power, and one who is clear that he's really an atheist. Kids (and even some adults) often miss these differences and mis-label others who have different beliefs or who have questions or who aren't part of an established religion as "atheists." I notice that this is particularly true in places where there is a strong evangelical presence and not much religious diversity. Perhaps that is the case where you are too, I don't know. So, what does it mean to say this young man is an atheist? Is that really an accurate description? According to whom? What do the young man's parents say about it? There's also the possibility that the boy has announced that he's an atheist (fully understanding the meaning of the label or not) but the parents state that he is not. You'd have to decide whose word you were going to go with there. (Personally I figure a typical 9 or 10 year old's views on religion aren't set in stone and since most kids take their parents' religious views and since in cubbing the parents are "Akela," I would go with the parents' word.) As you probably know, BSA policy currently excludes atheists from membership. Whether one agrees or disagrees, that's the policy. So supposing that this falls into your responsibility and that the boy really is an atheist, then you will need to determine the amount of urgency with which you (and the CO) wish to enforce this policy. On one extreme, the boy's membership in your pack could be immediately revoked. This is a pretty serious step so I do hope you'd make very sure of the facts before doing this. On the other extreme, you could leave the religious component of the program up to the parents as "Akela" and trust them if/when they tell you he met the requirement. Many packs do this, figuring that at the cub level, religious instruction is a family matter. Depending on your CO, this might or might not be an appropriate approach for you. I suppose in the middle, you could gently encourage the boy (via his family of course) not to close his mind to other options before he has had the time and maturity to explore the matter in further detail. After all, most people go through times in their lives when they question, explore, and learn about religious faith and maybe this 9 or 10 year old simply needs to have time to do that.

Nike gave you great advice. About troopmaster - most troops around here use it. It can be great for advancement, rechartering, and membership data. I don't see us ever using it as a calendar tool though and doubt it would be useful to you in that capacity. Regarding overall communication, it will help you a lot if you and the CM are in agreement on how you'll handle this. Ideally, you can set the standard and expectations for the committee, and the CM can do the same for the DLs (DLs answer to the CM, not you). DLs should be communicating up and down the chain with the parents in their dens, rather than sending parents straight to you. That reduces the # of people you need to deal with on a regular basis.

Wow. My son's troop hovers between 40-60 boys depending on how many new scouts we get and how many are aging out at a given time. As far as I'm aware, we've NEVER needed to limit attendance at camp outs like you describe. I wish your son the best in his new troop.

I like Beavah's, provided we're talking about several older boys and not just the one or two who might be especially well-behaved whether they had joined scouting or not.

Some good perspective from you all, as usual. OGE, On this particular hike the boys only needed to camp one night and go 10 miles the next day along a well-known trail, no real time constraints but they intended to be done by mid afternoon, including eating two meals on the trail (breakfast/lunch). About a year ago when the Venture Patrol got started they elected to do a cycle of 3 hikes along the same trail, at different times of year, to earn a local trails award offered by a nearby council. It's a neat idea but this was the third and final hike, the weather was sloppy, and the boys were more excited the first two times they did this trail than they were this time. They just wanted to get it done - not really a lot of challenge or new adventure in this one for most of them. OGE, Stosh, I'm certain that the adults might have seen some things the boys missed, although there were apparently a lot of raised voices (from what I'm told, mostly adults yelling at boys to slow down) and grumpy people in the group which reduces the likelihood of seeing wildlife or enjoying scenery. And the adults who went are mostly in good shape, but face it, none of us have the same boundless energy as a 14 year old boy. Maybe some of the boys might have learned Stosh's lesson about pacing if they'd been allowed to run ahead. And there were just so darn many adults. The kicker for my son (also the PL) was that at the end of this hike when tempers were a little frayed, an adult told the boys that if they didn't start behaving differently ("doing as you are told"), next time the ratio would be 1 adult:1 scout! As he said (to me), why bother even going. Beavah's right, boys this age are hardly looking for family outings to fulfill their desire for adventure. There are also the same number of adults (or more) at the VP planning meetings. The boys can hardly get a word in edgewise sometimes. Last time I went into a meeting to pick up my son at the appointed time, the boys were all slumped in their chairs looking very bored while the adults discussed stuff. Every once in a while an adult would try to solicit input from the boys without much luck. This went on for nearly an hour after I got there. The boys were far more polite than I was - I got up and wandered off after a bit. When I asked about what I had seen, I got told #1 the boys wouldn't participate so the adults had to, and #2 if the adults were to be expected to support the boys then the adults deserved to have input into the decisions the boys made. Now in the beginning more adult input was often necessary because none of the boys had done any backpacking and had no idea what they were getting into or how to plan for it. (the troop mostly does car camping - and that's why the VP got started, they wanted to do something more adventurous) That was a year ago though. They've done 3 multi-day hikes and several one-day hikes since then. They've learned to select and pack gear, write hike plans, plan appropriate meals for the trail, take care of their feet, etc. Now they need a lot less adult input but they're getting more and more of it instead. I think I'll invite the VP adviser for a cup of coffee and see if we can't agree to whittle down the # of adults participating in planning meetings and outings. THat is something that I think needs to be dealt with on an adult level. It is a bit tough to pit a 14 year old against 6-10 adults whose basic approach has been "we're going and you have to listen to us." I'll also share advice with the PL/my son re: splitting up the groups and having meet-up places or leaving tokens. Maybe that will help too. They have another hike coming up in about 6 weeks.

So my first post was, perhaps, a bit of a vent. Let me try to frame the question in a more action-oriented manner. When you have the majority of adults who have a well-documented problem letting boys alone, what specific things have you done to attempt "re-train" those adults, and has it worked? If you're not the SM or CC and you're in the minority viewpoint when it comes to pushing for more youth leadership and better use of the patrol method, can you still pull off culture change or is it hopeless? Kudu, as for your assumptions, you start out from the wrong place. It isn't your emphasis on boy leadership and the patrol method that I have a problem with and in fact it never was. It is the way you often frame your "advice" and the assumptions you make about those of us who are not as learned as you are in the sayings of Green Bar Bill, et al. And by the way I want it noted, Kudu, that I'm the only person in my son's troop who has attended WB/21st C and here **I** am the one pushing for change! ETA: Just saw Mafaking's post - you hit the nail on the head. It isn't a question of whether or not boy leadership is a good idea; it is a question of how to re-shape other adults' behaviors. (This message has been edited by lisabob)

You know that "train them, trust them, let them lead" phrase? What do you do when you have adults who just don't seem willing to follow through on the 2nd and 3rd parts of it? Background to this question: We had a group of our middle/older scouts form a venture patrol (currently all aged 13-15, ranks 1st Cl-Life). They went on an overnight backpacking hike recently. 8 boys. 6 adults. 4 of the adults had sons participating, the other 2 adults are a former SM who likes hiking and the Venture Patrol advisor. This is pretty typical turnout for their events, both in terms of participants and the adult/youth ratio. On this hike frustration abounded from the sound of it. Granted, one or two of the boys can be handfuls and apparently lived up to their usual reputation. But beyond that, the reports I'm getting are that the boys got frustrated by being forced to travel at the slower pace of the adults and at constantly being told what to do (by any one of 6 adults). From what I hear, the adults were frustrated by the boys' less-than-efficient pace at cooking and camp chores, and constant running ahead of the group while hiking. 2 parents hovered un-necessarily over their sons (which is routine for them). The patrol leader voiced the objection (apparently to all of the adults present, perhaps less-than tactfully) that it was impossible to try to lead with so many people telling them what to do, to which the response was apparently that the boys WEREN'T leading and therefore NEEDED to be told what to do. Sort of a chicken/egg situation, depending on whose perspective you start from. Hmm. So personally, I have a frustrated teen son who wonders why he's doing this. He's in the venture patrol to get a chance to do more, not to have his hand held by all of these adults. Beyond that, I wonder exactly how you get through to adults who just don't seem willing to let go and trust the boys to actually lead. It isn't that I don't appreciate the time they give to the boys, but there's a point where you have to let them do things quasi-independently too, and I don't see much of that in the troop, or in the venture patrol.

You know, the funny thing about this is that some of the best leaders I've ever met have none of these accolades, or at least do not publicly display them if they do. With regard to questioning him, I think it would be a waste of your time. It is not that hard to gather enough info about the various aspects of scouting to provide reasonably convincing answers. I was never an Eagle scout, being female, but I bet if I had a gender-neutral user name and if I were so inclined, I could "make up" a very plausible description of "my" Eagle project and the process with no trouble, because I've seen and read about other people's projects and I've done the training to learn the process. My point is, if he's really a liar, he'll just lie when he answers your questions. If he's a good liar, he'll make up a plausible (or at least, difficult to dispute) story for you to swallow. And if he's a bad liar and tells you an obvious whopper, then what? Are you planning to call him on it? If not, how does this help you? If you have your doubts about this guy then I would recommend you not put him in a position where he's in charge of something vital (like the money...). This is more "watching and waiting" and less "let it slide." Just keep an eye on him. Don't forget about 2-deep leadership. If he's basically just a good fellow who is trying (perhaps awkwardly) to fit in, that'll come through. If he's a habitual liar, that too will shine through pretty soon, when he starts revising his history regarding more recent activities.

Nope your CC is incorrect. I've found over the years that, at the troop level, there are all kinds of myths about joining requirements and AoL requirements too. Maybe it has just been a long time since many troop leaders had kids in cub scouts and their memories are hazy, but it isn't that hard to actually read the requirements. Suggest to your CC that he do so - should clear up some myths.

Hey Seagull, keep in mind that none of us know you, the leaders, or your son. This is an internet forum and the responses you get are colored not by local knowledge of your specific situation, but by our various experiences with "similar sounding" situations in our own troops. And I would bet dollars to donuts (now where did that phrase originate anyway?) that ALL of us have met "THAT" parent more than once and maybe have "THAT" parent fresh in our minds too. So you get a lot of conflicting advice from a lot of conflicting angles. It's your job to figure out what fits in your son's case. No need to go hard on us for offering up our experiences and angles though! With regard to the timing of the COH, with respect, you're missing my point. The scouts who did that at our CoH last night showed a poor sense of timing and failure to think about anybody but themselves (and they're all old enough to be a little more aware than that!). But there are other bad times too. In the middle of skill instruction, in the middle of the SM workign with another kid, just as the SM is trying to get into his car to go home so he doesn't miss some family obligation, etc.. And honestly, a week isn't that long a time! There are times when I don't return calls or emails for a week or more, depending on exactly what's going on in the rest of my life. I try to avoid letting that happen, but I can't say it never occurs. After a week I think it is reasonable for your scout to call the SM or email him again (assuming this fellow regularly uses email, not all do). Politely expressing a desire to clear up the matter and requesting a response as soon as is convenient seems warranted.(This message has been edited by lisabob)

Seagull, OK, your son has tried to do the right thing and gotten absolutely nowhere. He's tried more than once, in various appropriate settings, not in the middle of something else, right? (I ask because yesterday, not 10 minutes prior to our CoH, several scouts suddenly announced they were ready for their SM Confs and BORs. Even if we'd had time, there was no way they'd be getting ranks that night because our Advancement guy didn't have extras on hand and had no notice that he'd need them for these boys who came out of the woodwork. At least one of the boys couldn't understand why he got what he perceived as a brush off. He wasn't happy with the explanation that his failure to plan and communicate did not constitute someone else's emergency, though of course phrased more kindly than that. Sometimes "not now" really means "this is a bad time to be asking and you need to learn to plan ahead a bit." Under those circumstances, "not now" might be a very good life lesson.) Anyway, assuming your son has been the soul of patience and maturity about this and still gotten nowhere, then yes, now may be the time for you to take that next step, either talking with the SM or perhaps with the CC. I'm sure you'll agree that you can't expect positive change if the "powers that be" (used loosely) aren't clearly and calmly made aware of the issue from your perspective. Now they might all choose to blow off your son, and maybe you too. They might continue to stone wall. They might take a "my way or the highway" approach. They might continue to publicly humiliate the poor guy, which I agree is horrid behavior. All of those are reasons to step back, take a deep breath, and evaluate remaining options (realistically for most parents who are not leaders, either live with it or leave the troop). Of course, there is a small chance that they might also provide a variety of other feedback to YOU (and your son) about whatever else they perceive to be the issue here. And perhaps, in light of that, there will be reason for one or both sides to re-evaluate. Not knowing you, your son, or the SM, it is hard to say which of these is more accurate. I can imagine scenarios that go both ways. But I think you at least have to try to work it out as patiently as possible first, before deciding that this guy is just a jerk who has an unjustified problem with your kid (and I'm not ruling that out, there are lots of power-hungry adults who abuse their perceived authority over the kids too). Even in serious disagreement, there are good lessons for your son to learn here about dealing with other people.

Walking is actually great exercise, and not as hard on the knees and back as running (esp. on pavement in suburbs) can be. I walk a lot, probably 4-6 miles most days. I park a good mile away from my office and trudge in/out. Others complain about parking on the university campus but I never have a problem, parking in the far lots (and they're well-lit so few worries). I hike 5-10 miles on many weekends although this winter I've kind of hibernated instead and need to start doing that again. When I do all of that, dropping 10 lb or so isn't too tough. More than 10 lb requires more serious workouts though, at least for me. I don't like diets and don't really think they work, long-term, for many people. Most people seem to make only temporary changes in their eating, which results in grumpiness (during the diet) and rapid weight gain (after the diet), culminating in self-defeating tendencies. But I admit good bread is a big weakness. Happily (I suppose) there aren't any really good bakeries near my house and I guess I'm a bread snob. Grocery store bread isn't worth bothering with.

Having a system in place where a SM is NOT the gate keeper would require that all of the BOR members fully understand the advancement requirements (how many of you know committee members who are clueless - after all, they're "just" committee members who show up from time to time, don't camp and barely even know the boys, so why should they need to know the rank requirements in any depth?). It would also require a **very** healthy relationship between committee and SM, where committee members felt ok with saying "not yet" in cases where a boy really had not demonstrated his readiness. (Many SMs currently seem to take this as a personal affront from what I've seen, and many committee members are therefore unwilling to do this except in extreme cases). And maybe it would require allowing the committee to probe more deeply into the scout's skill/ability level/satisfactory fulfillment of POR, so as to ensure that unit sign offs were high quality, without being accused of the dreaded "retesting."

Hmm bearshark, your son hasn't yet joined the troop and already you are in a place where the SM and/or CC tells you you should be "retrained" because you disagree with them? Danger, Danger Will Robinson! How are you guys going to manage when you work together all the time and you are faced with the umpteen other ways that these folks are making it up as they go along? (Assuming that's the case - but when people just start making stuff up, they rarely confine themselves to one or two examples!) Like a couple of others have said, I think if it were me, I'd be encouraging my son to look at some other troops, now, before he joins. Yes you can always move later on if necessary, but that isn't without cost and it doesn't sound as if you're very pleased with the approach taken by the adults in this particular troop. Now as for the 2 months bit, for some boys 2 or 3 months is actually a lot. I have known boys who matured a lot in the time between late January/early February and late May/early June of their 5th grade. But that does create other problems (as has been noted in the thread already) and those boys would probably struggle with summer camp. And it certainly is not the case for all boys, or perhaps even most of them. That's why I think an individual decision makes better sense than a blanket decision in either direction.

From what you write, I agree that it is kind of silly for the SM to be making these judgments based on incomplete information. (And also the bit about being "turned in" strikes me as ridiculous too.) SM's should trust parents' decisions about health issues. Your son is up for Star, no small accomplishment. That suggests that he has been in the troop for a while, probably knows the SM reasonably well, and should be able to approach the SM and have a conversation about this. Even though I agree that the SM is being unreasonable, based on what you wrote, the truth is that there are many seemingly unreasonable people in the world. So before YOU do anything, encourage your son to talk with the SM and explain his perspective. Your son should also find out what the SM thinks he ought to do in order to be "ready" to advance. Perhaps they can come to a more reasonable agreement, even if it isn't perfect. Now if that does not work, you could talk with the Committee Chair over that proverbial cup of coffee. Explain your confusion about why attendance at a training, which is not an advancement requirement and which occurred on a day when your son was ill, is grounds for the SM's decision. The CC isn't going to over-rule the SM on the spot (I hope) but it might result in some additional conversation and clarification between CC and SM. Your son could also request a BOR anyway. It would give him an opportunity to air his concerns to other adult leaders, who could then (perhaps) keep a close eye on the SM and his various policies. BORs do not always have to be focused solely on advancement. If all of that fails, the SM is completely and totally unreasonable, the CC is uninterested in working through things, and the other adults are all in agreement with the SM, then I suggest you evaluate whether this is a troop your family wants to be part of, and/or whether the situation is likely to be on-going. Because honestly, there really aren't too many places to "file a complaint" outside of the troop. You could try to contact your district advancement chair, but that's a major escalation, shouldn't be done lightly, and may very well not work out for you anyway (most DACs are reluctant to get involved in the nitty-gritty about troop advancement, except in really messy situations and when it comes to Eagle). Even if it does, attempting to call in the district folks tends to burn bridges with the troop. So that's the final straw and not the place to start, I hope.

I'll let someone else address the uniform issue. We awarded something to every boy, whether it was a small trophy (one year we got these donated) or a certificate, or whatever. These are little kids we're talking about! One pack we were with also awarded top 3 or 4 trophies for boys in every rank. Another awarded these only for the whole pack. Many packs offer non-speed awards like most creative paint job, best suited to the year's theme, etc. Design and creativity awards like that allowed us to recognize more boys and there were a few every year who cared more about what the car looked like than how fast it was.

Gee, somebody needs to talk with the CC and find out what was said and what was meant. Who knows, those may be the same thing and they may not be. But no, I've not heard of solid troops making that kind of blanket statements to prospective new members and in the absence of additional info, it does raise a red flag. Usually the push to keep kids in cubbing comes from the cub leaders and parents, who aren't ready to see the boys become boy scouts. Sometimes they're even justified and I have seen a number of boys who were NOT mature enough but crossed over anyway and were miserable. Sadly, those fellows don't last very long. Maybe they'd have been better off waiting a bit longer. But without further info on what your CC was thinking, or maybe what the CC knows about these boys in particular that you do not know, it is hard to figure out what's happening there. So if you aren't in a position to have good conversation with the CC right now, find someone who can to get this cleared up.

First, Kudos to you and your wife for stepping up and volunteering. That's definitely a move in the right direction. Don't forget that cub scouting is supposed to be FUN, for boys and for their families too. And DLs have the most fun of all. With regard to splitting the den and communication w/ the existing Tiger DL, I agree with ScoutNut. If at all possible you want to talk with the DL about this in a non-confrontational way. I'd be really shocked if he put up a fight to stay on as DL. In fact he might be relieved and thankful that you are solving a problem for him. (This is based on what you've said in other posts.) But blindside him, or even have the appearance of blindsiding him, and now you have bruised egos to deal with. As for your CM, I understand what he's trying to do but the way he has suggested will inevitably cause problems. Some parents will feel anxiety about "betraying" the current Tiger DL by leaving him for your new den, and some will feel you've "deserted" them and caused a problem by forcing them to choose sides. All a lot of goofiness but adults are not immune to that, in my experience. Anxiety often results in anger, leaving you, again, to manage egos and feelings. Some will take this apparent competition for den members as (yet another?) sign that the pack is poorly run and not worth sticking around for. You could do without that too, I bet. So I guess I'd go back to the CM, let him know you plan to just talk it over with the DL like an adult should do. If the DL agrees, then great, you'll be the new Tiger DLs. If for some reason he doesn't, then either the CM needs to have a meeting of the minds with the fellow (and then you are willing to become the DL) or you'll regrettably need to find a new pack. But ScoutNut's right. No behind-the-back stuff or it can blow up. Oh, and I suppose it goes without saying that once you are a DL (however it happens), no point in discussing past failings of previous leaders!(This message has been edited by lisabob)

The troop I've been with runs a fairly structured 1st Year program these days, so boys who join in Feb/March/April get the benefit of that. Boys do join at other times, particularly around October. They are welcome too and we fit them right into an existing patrol. THat can work just fine in some instances too, but it can be challenging for boys who are very shy or insecure to enter into a dynamic where they're the only new kid (unless they know the other kids venues like school). In those cases sometimes we assign them a "cool" and kind older scout to be their buddy for a while until they get settled. What I think it comes down to is the type of boy you are talking about. Some boys want to stay with their den mates, form tight group bonds, etc. Some boys need a break from the group. Maybe there are some strong personalities who rub each other the wrong way or maybe a couple of kids are consistently on the outside of the group anyway. And some boys are less mature or more mature than their den mates too. Those guys probably would be just as well off transitioning on their own schedule, rather than sticking with the group. Boys who are a little immature for their age but who cross over anyway just because it's February (or whatever month you do cross-overs) tend to suffer in their first year as boy scouts and many quit. So in your situation I would have an open discussion with the parents. Let them know the pros and cons of the various options. Talk with the local troops to see what they prefer. And then let the boys know what options they have. If you have some boys who might want to make the move early or late, make sure everybody knows that this is pretty normal and that nobody is dictating that everybody join together. And while you're at it, make sure everybody knows that boys in the den can choose different troops too! THere's no such thing as a den decision about where to go - that's an individual choice.

Well I would not say I serve our CO, only because I've never been part of a scouting unit where the CO had (or seemed to want to have) a clue. In fact, in 2 of the three units I've been part of, I think that the CO thought of us as a pain in the neck and an imposition to be dealt with, when they bothered to think of us at all. This, despite making attempts to improve the relationships! So I'd say I serve whatever youth are in the program at a given time, and perhaps our community by helping to raise kids who feel connected to something other than themselves and their game controllers. For all that H. Clinton got laughed at for talking about African proverbs and "it takes a village to raise a child" I do think she was right. I'd like to think I'm part of the village.

ScoutNut, I can't speak for scoutldr but I did not read anybody's comments here that way. I do think it is the DE's job to help maintain a healthy relationship between CO and unit, in that DEs are supposed to visit each charter partner at least once a year. I know for a fact that my DEs (past and present) didn't/don't do this because they haven't got the time. But when it comes to a point where units are shopping for a new CO, the DEs tend to be very concerned and will make the time to try to help. The fact of the matter is that DEs are judged on the overall increase in # of units, and if a unit is dropped then they have to scramble twice as hard to get ahead. And realistically, units who move or split up probably are more vulnerable for a period of time after the move occurs. So yeah, I do think the DE ought to be involved and I do think any DE with half a brain will want to be very involved. That doesn't mean it is entirely their responsibility but they're the only ones in this equation getting paid for maintaining a certain # of units.

Just thought I'd mention that this topic prompted the BSA to be featured as the "Alpha Dog of the Week" on the Colbert Report this week (Wednesday or Thursday, can't remember which one). He even featured the Outdoor Code.

Beavah, I hear you regarding units being more pro-active about removing problematic people. But my observations as to why that doesn't often happen: 1) The line between someone who dissents when faced with a situation where the troop is way off base and someone who is just difficult can be blurry. Troops who are straying significantly might also be likely to view any open disagreement as grounds for getting rid of the person who speaks up. Not sure we want to encourage that. 2) People who are really difficult often manage to do their destructive bit in ways that are hard to pin down. 3) Most people prefer to avoid confrontation and will attempt to "manage" rather than face unpleasantness head-on. 4) Many units who are struggling to find any volunteers at all are loathe to turn away anybody for all but the most egregious behaviors. Again, probably shouldn't be this way but I bet most of us on the board have seen this.

DeanRx, here's another angle. When you take other people's children on a trip, you are asking parents to trust you with their children's well-being. Parents know and understand the scouting rules, and the no alcohol rule in particular, is clear-cut. When making a judgment about whether to trust you with their children, parents ought to be able to expect you will follow the rules as written. So for me this comes down to an issue of trust, as much as anything else. Personally, I might not find ONE drink a problem (though there's always that temptation to have more than one, and if you introduce it into a group you'd better be darn sure nobody there succumbs to that temptation - which might be awkward, depending on the backgrounds of the other adults present). Heck, hypothetically speaking, somebody might not find ONE puff on a joint especially problematic. And somebody also might not find ONE little foray into the tent with another unmarried leader especially problematic. Etc. (I'm using hypotheticals here people, please don't jump on this) The fact remains, though, that the rules clearly prohibit these sorts of things and parents who are trusting you to look after their children have a right to expect you to follow those rules. You want to have a little spike in the bug juice? Great, do it on your own time. And don't think the scouts won't notice, either. Teens are surprisingly perceptive when it comes to adult behavior and especially adult hypocrisy. And they're not likely to keep silent about it.

I agree w/ scoutldr about the DE doing his job. We ended up not making the switch but we did look into it in some detail. Our CO does not provide us much support except to pay a portion of our recharter fees (and while we are grateful and that's no small thing, it has often been done quite grudgingly in the last few years). A couple of years ago it got really ugly when we told them our scouts could not stand in front of stores, in uniform, and fundraise for them. So we looked around a bit. At the time we had a very experienced DE. When we talked with him, he became very alarmed and immediately offered to meet with the CO to clarify the relationship between CO and troop. His main concern was keeping us with the CO, but his secondary was ensuring that if we did move, it happened as smoothly as possible so as not to break up the unit. We also have significant troop assets in terms of gear and memorabilia (the troop has existed for 70 years) and we didn't want to lose it. One thing I learned from all of this is that (at least in our council) the CO is not required to provide an actual meeting space. They are only required to help procure a suitable meeting space. Consequently, the fact that we meet in a public school cafeteria and that storage is our problem (thankfully a couple people have barns) was not considered an issue. And honestly our CO didn't even help us procure that - we did it on our own. It sounds like you are in a similar spot. In your situation, I see two possibilities based on what you describe. One is to get your DE in as middle man to ensure as smooth a transition as is possible. If you go this route, make sure you and all the other adult leaders (treasurer especially) have a very clear understanding of what can happen with "troop" property before you even begin, and for that matter, what belongs to the troop vs. what's on long-term loan from friendly troop leaders. Might be a good idea to have the DE come in and talk with your committee about it, in fact. The other is to start working your church membership from the ground up. If the membership WANT a scout unit, ask them individually to let the church leaders know it. You, by yourself, are just one voice. Your scouts may not even be members of the church. Get some support on your side and start lobbying. By the way, roughly how big is the congregation of this church? And roughly what percentage of your boys (incl soon-to-be cross overs) are members?