awanatech
-
Content Count
121 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Store
Posts posted by awanatech
-
-
6 hours ago, AnotherScouter said:
I have some questions about the role and policies of the Chartered Organization. Specifically, our chartered organization recently has become more interested in controlling certain aspects of our Troop. I am wondering if these policies are in the purview of the CO or if they are overstepping:
- They are requesting the key 3 members to use email addresses that are registered with the CO instead of personal email addresses
- They have put Unit funds into an account controlled by the CO and not the Unit, and all payments go to the CO but are earmarked for the unit. The unit's balance and funds are then reconciled by the Treasurer of the CO. They have even gone as far as saying they want to take funds from one scouting unit and give it to another scouting unit, without the scouting unit having a say in the matter. The only exception is rechartering fees which are paid directly to BSA.
- They have decided that the unit leaders will have fixed terms and the CO will select the next unit leader. Again without any input from the unit itself as to who that leader will be. In our case, the Scoutmaster. The troop itself was very happy with the current Scoutmaster, who is very involved in Scouting (Wood Badge, etc). But none of that mattered.
- They are asking the Scoutmaster to work directly with the CO instead of going through the CoR.
I'm not sure if I want to raise a stink by escalating up to the Council or district, but I am still wondering if the CO is within their rights here as a CO, or are they violating some BSA policies?
Welcome to the forum.
While most of that is not common, I think that all of it would technically be allowed as the Chartering Organization can have a lot of say in the day to day operations of the unit. I would be surprised if the District or Council intervened in any of those situations.
-
3 hours ago, seattlecyclone said:
My son's pack has been doing multiple two-night outings each year for decades. I find it hard to believe we could have kept that a secret from our district and council leadership for that long, and AFAIK nobody has told us to stop doing this before. It therefore seems far from universally understood that this rule has been in place this whole time.
District & Council leadership have been known to turn a blind eye to many things that are actually against BSA policy.
-
9 hours ago, qwazse said:
The leaders contact their DE. Sometimes exceptions can be made.
Like many of the "rules". It depends, and we can adjust it if we want to.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:
It seems odd they only allow this for a religious purpose. It seems like that could be targeted by lawsuits ... like the state is establishing a religion by pushing non-religious institutions with taxes they don't apply to religious ones. Plus, it isn't just religious institutions ... it is that + museums. In my state, yes, churches don't pay but most other non profit organizations don't have to pay property tax. They don't just separate out museums + churches.
The fix is even more odd. Why not other youth organizations? Why not other non-profit organizations?
I'm glad I don't run a non-profit in Virginia. Having to pay property tax when you run a homeless shelter or food pantry seems wrong.
The state giving a tax break to religious institutions is far from the state "establishing a religion". There are many different religions and even more denominations broken down within those religions. They can each have very different, sometimes opposing, views on matters of religion. How would be the state be establishing a religion by recognizing so many different ideologies? If the state were to establish a religion, it would give preferential treatment to that particular religion over the over non-established religions. It would not be treating them all the same, regardless of beliefs. Recognizing a religion is very different than establishing one.
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 12/21/2022 at 3:45 PM, skeptic said:
Well, that is simply wrong. Just my view of course, but I would think they might use better judgment. And, the indirect effect on her daughter is shamedul.
She had been told beforehand that she would not be allowed to enter. It's her own fault that she didn't believe them. This had been their policy for a long time and she was aware of it.
-
On 9/13/2022 at 10:35 PM, Jmatt0613 said:
I feel like this is something important to note in this conversation. In the Troop Committee Guidebook, it states in chapter 8: "The Scoutmaster (or assistant Scoutmaster) is not a member of the troop committee and has no vote." (Chapter 8, page 35) This book is old but it doesn't have a newer version.
Troop Committee Guidebook: http://www.commissioner-bsa.org/kit/Troop Committee Guidebook 34505.pdf or just search 'bsa committee guidebook'
This is correct.
-
We never sent any Troop fundraising money to council. We do camp cards & popcorn & they get their share of that. We also allow a FOS rep to come & give his presentation to the parents at COH or Blue & Gold. Whether they give is up to them. I do let the parents know ahead of time that a FOS rep will be there on that night and they can give, or not, as they feel led.
If I had offered the council FOS a gift from our Troop fundraiser and got that kind of response, I would have rescinded the gift if possible. If I couldn't rescind it, I would make sure they knew that we wouldn't be doing that again, in any dollar amount.
-
1
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, GrammaScout said:
But there MUST be a more clear definition of what 'use' really means...and it will be somewhat different for each CO...I still refer to Churches, here. We 'use' the Scouts to do some landscape work every year...does that work? I guess I shall remain dense because I cannot fathom how a Church can 'set up' the Program of a Scout Troop. They can oversee it, of course. We always have had a couple of male members who 'guide' these outdoor projects. What to do...where, etc? But does this say that the Executive Church Committee, picks out the Camp for the Summer every year? Does the CO decide on the Fundraisers for the year? Does the CO tell the Scouts where and when to distribute flyers on food drives? Our District has neighborhoods mapped out? IF the CO doesn't like the neighborhood, do they then pick their own...causing another Troop to make other plans? Does the Church President keep track of which Adults need to refresh training and track them to make sure they get it?....ETC. Does an activity idea from the SPL get bumped if the Church President doesn't like it? I am not being saracstic here...I just do not follow what having the 'CO run the Troop, the Program' means ????
Following BSA's model, the CO would choose adults to be on the Unit Committee, not necessarily whichever parents agree to do it that year. Would it include parents from the unit? Probably, and it should. However, following BSA's model could have a Unit Committee made up of church members that have no direct relation to unit. And so yes, the CO could decide where the troop attends summer camp. And where to distribute food drive flyers. And keeping track of adult training. Those are all committee functions when you get down to it. Officially, everything that BSA publishes points back to a CO based committee rather than random parents who agree to do it. Just because we've all done it differently for many years does not change the legal designation & responsibilities of the CO.
-
2
-
-
On 2/18/2022 at 12:58 AM, SiouxRanger said:
DE.
Hmmmmm.
A DE is likely a recent college grad, and in my Council, many were never a Scout. None have a Juris Doctor degree nor licensed as an attorney, and thereby are not licensed to give legal advice.
And so, given that THE ISSUE on the table (National filed bankruptcy over this issue) is whether adult unit leaders are legally liable for abuse claims against other adult leaders in their unit, why-oh-why would anyone seek advice from a DE?
I have earned a J.D, and am a licensed attorney. Opinions of DE's are irrelevant to me.
How silly of me. My apologies for even suggesting that you stoop so low as to bring in the one who's job it is to work with units. Never mind that it is just a lowly, recent college grad without J.D. or an attorney's license. With your training & education, sounds like you should have it all figured out. With such an attitude towards DEs, why-oh-why would you come on the forum for any advice from any of us? I mean, there's no telling what level of education any of us have. There may be some on here who have not even graduated college (gasp!!)
What an arrogant post that was. And some wonder why participation on the forum is lacking.
-
1
-
-
On 2/6/2022 at 2:49 AM, GrammaScout said:
"Most of them have sponsored units for various altruistic reasons -- they want to support scouts or youth or the community." """ Hopefully, the church CO has enough factual info to be aware of the value of the program. It is a 'youth' ministry, but having it be a 'Lutheran Youth Ministry' is inappropriate and doesn't work...because then the Youth Minister and all the power-crazies assume that they then RUN the Troop. After 50 years of an exemplary Troop of about 70 youth, our Council has voted to dump the Charter !! Those with zero knowledge have preached that if we 'own' it, then we must 'run' it...literally. This isn't working obviously. And since the Staff and the 'power crazies' just do not have the time to do that, the Troop must go....?? They have been poisoned with misinformation and misinterpretation. They have no clue about the 'Boy-run' program. They were unaware that the Troop would disband without a Charter even though they WERE told that; so now...from some fake compassion and negative feed-back from membership, they are allowing an extension until March 31....but it had been December 31. They are still working on a 'Facility Usage' Agreement and we are worried as to the stringent 'rules' it will contain....and whatever the rental fee will be as well. Why has this taken so long? 'Either WE run it, or they go'......! Black and White thinking process that is unwelcome, and unhealthy and contention-making. There are no longer Scout-savy people on the Council or even among Staff or with Leadership in General. A sad, sad day for this Congregation....but very sad for the 70 Scouts who still ask 'what happened'? There was never any mention of this Troop in any advertising for the Church...any Newsletter or New Member information...Never mentioned from the Pulpit.....But they were not hesitant to enjoy 'credits' when they were public. The supporters of the Troop are a small group and except for me, have just remained quiet...knowing we were already beaten with this. ................Now the Troop is working on becoming their own CO....??.....there doesn't seem to be much guidance with this....and there is a 'Church Member' !!.....an anti-Charter person....who volunteered to be 'Chair' of this new 'Board'...??? Doesn't the Troop decide who is on THEIR Board????
I'm confused at how the Council voted to dump the Charter. In another thread, you talked about how the church decided to not renew, but then decided to renew the Charter until March 31. Was the decision to not renew the Charter made by the church? or by the Council? For the Charter Agreement that was signed extending it through March 31, how did they get that date changed? There normally isn't any provision for selecting your own Charter Expiration Date.
Has your DE been involved in this process at all?
-
7 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:
@InquisitiveScouter you are a
MBC for 61 merit badges and "The average person could do at least 10 or so, comfortably." ??? 
Before covid, I remember a meeting where some suggested MBC's have a simple uniform of a sash with the merit badges they counsel - advertising I guess.
MBCs here wouldn't be able to get a sash with their respective badges. The Scout Shop would require the counselors show our ScoutBook advancement report showing that we had properly earned the MBs.
-
1
-
-
On 11/19/2021 at 11:21 AM, InquisitiveScouter said:
You cannot register as a MB Counselor (for free) and then multiple to a unit. You must pay the adult registration fee. Then you can multiple all you want...
And yes, our council (at least a few years ago when I posed the question) interprets that as registered in the unit. (for unit events)
The council has oversight for HA contingents and Jamborees, so they can vet those leaders...
I've never seen the requirement that the leader be registered "in that unit". I would say that a MBC would be allowed to attend outing longer than 72 hours, as they are registered leaders & approved by council.
I guess some councils may not agree with that, but I look at it as reading the requirements, not adding to nor taking away from the requirements as written.
-
1
-
-
On 11/18/2021 at 9:58 PM, Armymutt said:
Literally in the Cub Scouts forum.
My most sincere apologies for reading the post and not noticing that the sub-forum title contained pertinent info for the question. When I look at the forum, I just pull up Unread Content. I look at all of the content as it comes up. I did not pay attention to the sub-forum that it was in. I read the body of the post itself. I literally read the question in the post as it was written, not the sub-forum title.
Doesn't change my answer though. Yes, they are still required.
-
On 11/16/2021 at 9:40 PM, Armymutt said:
If the parent doesn't attend, who takes care of their Cub Scout? We aren't a drop off Pack.
Your original question didn't specify Cub Scouts. I was thinking how it might also apply to Scouts BSA Troops, where most Scouts do not have a parent in attendance with them on outings.
-
On 11/16/2021 at 10:10 PM, yknot said:
It ought to be every participatory parent (meaning you attend things with your kid) takes YPT, submits to a background check, and the parent pays the (typically nominal) fee. If you want to go on and be a volunteer leader, you pay the higher fee to register. Every parent should be able to observe any aspect of the program. I have no idea why BSA wants to charge all parents $45.
I believe the part in bold is, at least partially, why BSA wants every adult to be registered. $45/ adult starts to add up pretty quickly.
-
1
-
-
On 11/16/2021 at 9:14 PM, T2Eagle said:
I don't quite understand what you mean here. If a parent is also a leader, clearly they will be observing what happens with their child at a scout event because they'll be helping to run or at least guide the event itself.
As @malraux said, it's not exactly open to all parents being able to observe, if we are going to require parents to register as leaders in order to be able to observe. Many parents have their own reasons for not registering as a leader. They should not be excluded from seeing what happens at their child's scout events.
-
1
-
-
On 11/15/2021 at 1:19 PM, jcousino said:
Ok while i like my version better after rereading my quote it looks like it only applies to summer camp . i was wrong sorry
.
I would begin to question any adult that would not do a background check or complete youth protection after any form of 72 hours of contact
I personaly like the idea that it should be cumulative if an adult is attending scouting events in an active role with youth content for that long they have had enough time to decide that they want to be a some type of leader or not.
If after that period they say then still say no then they stay home if the adult plays the parental card then you may have the parent and the youth leave the group.
I side of the protection of the many.
When BSA as an organization has talked about events and meetings being open to parental observation, this mindset seems to go completely against that. Basically, if a parent does want to become a leader (an insider), then they are not allowed to observe what happens when their child is at a Scout event, right?
-
3 hours ago, Armymutt said:
Are permission slips required when parents are attending an event? Seems redundant. I can't imagine a parent taking their Scout someplace and then saying that they are not allowed to be there.
Yes. Things happen where the parent doesn't attend at the last minute. Or the parent has to leave mid-way through an event, but the Scout stays with the event.
-
1
-
-
On 10/13/2021 at 9:00 PM, Armymutt said:
Two totally different situations.
And yet still some similarity also. The point being that BSA standards will often differ from US govt standards. Just because Uncle Sam accepts something doesn't mean that BSA will also.
-
On 10/9/2021 at 9:44 AM, Armymutt said:
I got the polio sugar cube in a British high school around 1992. I don't think any sort of record made it into my medical records. It's on my Army vax record, so they probably transcribed it from the form I filled out before entry. If it's good enough for Uncle Sam, it's good enough for BSA, from my perspective.
I wouldn't assume that to be the case. It certainly does not apply to BSA Shooting Sports. I've had our Camp staff tell US Army Infantry Instructors that they could not work a Day Camp or Spook-O-Ree BB range if they did not have the BSA credentials.
-
On 10/9/2021 at 9:06 AM, SSScout said:
Aha, a "talisman". A horse shoe, rabbits foot, St. Christopher's , Grandmom's handkerchief, Charlemagne's reliquiy, "He chose.... poorly".....
I do not seek to disparage your desire for "protection in battle", not in the least. If there is a protection inherent in the object, certainly that is a reason to claim it. The proof will be in the pudding, yes? Perhaps it would be better not to test that "protection"?
Perhaps it would be better to find a way to prevent or avoid battle?
B-P's final desire was that Scouting be a way to World Brother/sisterhood. It is all over his writing thru the later years of his life.
Please see: https://www.scout.org/sites/default/files/library_files/Education In Love.pdf
Scouting can do that.
See you on the trail.
While it is, of course, preferable to avoid the battle, that is not always possible. Sometimes the battle is thrust upon you not of your own choosing. Those are times where any assistance or additional protection, whether real or perceived, would be welcomed.
-
On 10/1/2021 at 11:18 AM, MikeS72 said:
Considering that we usually only have one professional staff person (DE) per district, it kind of falls to the CO (or unit) to do this. I am sure that while some CO's and units take this seriously, many just sign the adult app and depend on it not getting kicked back during the background check.
Again, with that one DE in most instances, it is nearly impossible to meet with all volunteer on a monthly basis. We do see our DE at most of our Roundtables, but since attendance at Roundtable is not mandatory, there are, as you state, many volunteers who have never met a professional. I really wish that there was a way to mandate all direct contact volunteer attend a minimum number of Roundtables during the year, at least one of which would be dedicated solely to YPT and how to implement it correctly.
I would support adding a social media disclosure form to the application process. Just like those people who say 'I changed my mind' about registering after being given the CBC form to sign, anyone who objects to someone seeing what they post on social media has a reason for doing so. I know that toward the end of my 4 decade career in education, we looked at social media before even interviewing applicants. In Scouting, I have occasionally come across the social media accounts of some of our parents, and have been more than a little disturbed by some of what I saw.
I've attended, and help lead in various capacities, Roundtables for many years. Some might say that if Roundtables had info that helped units day in & day out, you wouldn't have to mandate attendance. Leaders would come of their own accord because the info would relevant & useful. I don't think mandating RT attendance is the way to go.
Many would not want to share their social media info. You are correct that anyone with objections to that has a reason for it. But those reasons may not be anything close to what you think. That's a similar argument like when you get pulled over by law enforcement and do not consent to them searching your vehicle. There is a reason that I won't consent to a search, but it's not because I have anything illegal. Don't be too quick to judge the actions of others based on your inaccurate assumptions as to their motivations.
-
2
-
-
8 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:
There have never been that few.
I don't believe there's ever been as many required as now either. There is no reason they couldn't go the other way have an unprecedented low number of required.
-
1
-
-
On 8/20/2021 at 6:58 PM, Eagle1970 said:
Ok. Mandatory reporting. I get that. I should have read that. My abuser likes guns. Great. Thanks BSA. My proof already made its way to the Catholic Insurance Fund. Might just as well put it in the paper. This whole thing has gone from helping victims into an all-out S### show. I don't need the minimal compensation as much as I need my security and well-being. Just sorry I ever filed.
I guess this leaves me kind of confused. I thought that those who had been abused were wanting justice for their abusers. Wouldn't this law enforcement action be a good thing in that it would hold the abusers accountable legally for their crimes? Or is that some who filled out the Proof of Claim forms were wanting some (a lot?) of money, but not necessarily for justice to be served on their abusers?
Pack Merger - How To? - Ideas? - Tips?
in Cub Scouts
Posted
We did this a couple of years ago, going "outside" the system. We were the unit that merged into another one. Our Scouts & myself transferred into the other unit. In our case, doing it within the system would not have worked. We did not need council intervention into it. They haven't had anything to do with us prior to that, so we didn't need their help in that either. Both of our CO's were supportive (or at least understanding) of the change.