awanatech

7 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

Looks like the same person. He ended up having all charges dropped.  

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/crime/article158637234.html

 

Under a conditional agreement reached in August, Hanumanthu was placed on 12 months of supervised probation and agreed to pay the school system $5,000 in restitution. He was also required to perform 225 hours of community service, which he was allowed to do outside of North Carolina because he now attends Florida Polytechnic University where he studies cybertechnology. 

Wake County District Court Judge Keith Gregory dismissed the charges Wednesday after attorneys showed that Hanumanthu not only met all the conditions but performed more community service than required – 281 hours. 

Steven Saad, Hanumanthu’s attorney, said his client juggled doing the community service at a nursing home while being a full-time college student with a perfect grade-point average.

Wasn't it his high GPA in the computer that got him into this mess in the first place? 

7 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

And this is going to ring the bell for councils to hike their fees as well.

And as I've noted: it isn't going top stop until 2025 AT THE EARLIEST.

If we make it until 2025.

1 hour ago, RememberSchiff said:

Unsettling phrases "all that was legally required", "moral obligation to contribute" ... just doesn't seem the phrases scouts or scouters would use when "helping other people..."

My $0.01

"Helping other people" is what the Scouts (youth) are expected to do. That same standard does not apply to Scouters, especially at the national level.

Maybe the GSA should try to retaliate & open their membership to males, or those who identify as other than female. That way they can level the playing field.

This is something that would be handled by the Chartered Organization Rep (COR) or the Institutional Head/ Exec Officer.  They should definitely be filled in on what is going on.  Many times, the COR is not directly involved in the unit or it's committee, but one of the roles of the COR is to oversee the Scout unit and make sure that it is operating within the guidelines of BSA & the Chartering Org.  In our area, the Council never really gets involved in internal unit affairs like this.  

On 11/11/2020 at 2:42 PM, carebear3895 said:

Day 1, DE's are told to prevent units from merging at all cost. All it does is weaken scouting. Two units merge....all you end up with is one week unit. Instead, put all your resources into helping that weak unit get back on it's feet. 

 

Kinda makes you wonder why they (National) always go straight to merging when dealing with a weak council then. 

When 2 units merge, that is one Charter Fee that is not collected.  Better for National to keep multiple units to increase the Charter Fees.

On 11/5/2020 at 2:06 PM, SSScout said:

Yep. Any shooting event must have a BSA (at least) trained RSO (me), and be held on Council approved range and NOT be limited to only your own Troop or Pack.   We often fulfilled these by holding a Unit (!) event on a Council camp property (sometimes not the home council)  and actively inviting other units to participate. 

Our council routinely has Packs come to the council camp where they can have a shooting sports day just for their unit. We will have BSA RSOs there to run the range, but the attending Pack does not have to invite nor include other units, at least at our council camp.

We have had three campouts with another Troop this year.  It's a Troop with whom we have done many things with over the years.  We've selected a location, but each Troop has made their wn arrangements as far as food, transportation, costs, etc.  We basically look at it like each Troop is doing their own campout, just at the same location.  Sometimes, the activities would coincide with each other.  Other times, we are doing separate stuff.  We have 1 family where the grandparents are raising the grandsons.  One grandson is in each Troop.  Last year, they had 2 Scouts who transferred to our Troop.  This year, we had 2 who transferred to their Troop.  Most of our Scouts are in school together & see each other outside of Scouting. We each have access to resources that we share with each other.  It has worked well for us, including this year.

We are having a Fellowship later this month, but only as a day event.  It won't be for the weekend as usual.  We also have an Ordeal coming up in mid-November.

With all of the advertising right now by lawyers seeking plaintiffs against BSA, this might not be the best time to use Scouting Heritage in marketing for the area's tourism industry.  It may bring unwanted attention in today's society. I truly hope it does not, but you never know with the way things go these days. 

22 hours ago, MattR said:

I think discussion would be fine. However, I'm not seeing discussion. Minds are already made up. We may be polite-ish about speaking our minds but I'm not sure anyone has ever changed their mind reading the I&P threads. The first example I find looking up the page:

Does this sound like discussion? Not to me. It sounds like someone has made up their mind and no amount of discussion will change anything. So why get everyone's blood pressure up? How does this help the scouts?

I come to this forum to get away from the near constant tribalism I see in politics today. Really complex problems are simplified based on tribal affiliation. Until we appreciate that we're all in this together we're just going to keep arguing.

But that's all easy to talk about in vague terms. How about a concrete example. Tahawk said he's unsure what it's like to be a minority. I have an idea about that. When I hear about vigilantes with rifles I'm worried. So I'm interested in Kyle Rittenhouse. He has become a poster boy of sorts. On the left, he's an example of how white supremacists are encouraging violence. On the right he's an example of self defense. So you just know that if we started discussing this it would devolve into an argument about gun control. The same old arguments will come out. Liberals are this, the GOP is that, blah blah. But all of this arguing misses the real tragedy. Why was a 17 year old kid, who could be a scout by the way, at a protest with a gun? That's a great point of discussion. What forces pushed this kid into the street with a gun? People? Social media? I don't know. But I'm guessing there would probably be very little discussion about how some kid's life was just ruined, along with the 2 people that died from bullet wounds. This is a tragedy. It is a failure of our culture. It's also an example of what some minorities are afraid of. These minorities all know that when things turn violent they get the worst of it.

Now, if you read all that and you really disagree and just want to let me know how wrong I really am, then there's the proof that we should stick to scout related subjects. it's at least something we can agree on. If you absolutely agree with me then that proves nothing. The question is how many of you are thinking this is a really complex issue? I just don't think there are many people in that category. Go ahead, try and prove me wrong.

So, yes, a real discussion could help scouts. It could put some meat on the ideas behind the Scout Emblem. That would be good. I just don't see how it will happen on this forum.

 

 

That same 17 year old, who could be a scout, could just as easily enlist in the U.S. Marine Corps.

https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2020/06/24/answering-common-questions-about-the-bsas-commitment-to-act-against-racial-injustice/

Just as a reminder, the BSA stands with and supports Black Lives Matters. Despite the BLM speakers declaring that (law enforcement) officers should have been strangled by their umbilical cords as babies and that the speakers are ready to shoot the officers. Despite the BLM organizers endorsing the rioting and looting, since businesses have insurance to cover their loss.  Despite BLM organizers justifying the looting, by calling it reparations.  In the Bryan on Scouting article linked above, it mentions the Scout Oath & Law.  I guess we are to overlook the Oath & Law when we look at the words and actions of these Black Lives Matters activists?

https://nypost.com/2020/08/13/blm-organizer-who-called-looting-reparations-doubles-down/

Since the COR is also the CC, then I'd have another committee member sign in place of the CC (their own name, not the CC name) and have the IH sign in place of the CC.  If the fill-in committee member is the parent of one of the Eagle applicants, I'd have another committee member sign that application (not a requirement, but that's what I'd do). I hope the CC recovers soon.

Congratulations!

Hi Cubscoutgirlmom416, Welcome to the forum.

I would not think that you have anything to worry about.  As MattR mentioned, you might let the Chartered Organization Rep know what happened since you are worried about it. I probably wouldn't worry about it, but since someone got cps involved, in wouldn't be bad to mention it.  I would be really surprised if it went further than where it is now and should not necessitate changing plans to become Cubmaster.  

20 hours ago, David CO said:

Scouts can participate in youth sports in school or other youth leagues.  They just can't do it as a scouting activity.  For example, scouts can play on their school football team, but they cannot play football at as a scouting activity.  I don't think this would prohibit boys from bringing a rubber football to the beach and tossing it around.  

 

Where you and I may recognize the difference in playing football vs. tossing it around a little, when a Scout twists his ankle while tossing the ball, that report is going to be written up as an injury while playing football.  If asked, the Scout will say they were playing football. At that point, he was engaged in a prohibited activity.  Insurance claim denied. I don't think that we should have to coach our Scouts on how to use the correct verbiage to make sure that we are jumping through all the proper hoops. We would have to make sure that little Johnny knows to say that they were "just throwing the ball", rather than playing football.

On 7/3/2020 at 1:55 PM, John-in-KC said:

My two cents:  If she donated the property and built the building, and the Council opts to rename them, then the Council owes her heirs the money back, with interest equal to the annual rates of inflation. 
 

It’s the right thing to do. 

My two cents: Once a gift is given, it is the recipients to do with as they please. If it was a conditional use agreement, where they can use the property/ building as long as it stays named after her, then that is a different situation.

Absolutely, we have too many testimonials from survivors that their families and neighbors were complying, because, being the good citizens, that is what you did.  How different might things have looked in the early- to mid- 1900s if millions had resisted early, instead of complying.  I'm afraid that we will have a similar view in hindsight. 

11 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Fortunately, much of the population has the means to resist a new Reign of Terror.

That's true that many have the means, but how many will have the mindset to resist?  Far too many will comply, at least until it is too late to recognize that the time to resist has passed, at which point they may no longer have the means.

12 hours ago, elitts said:

I suspect this is simply a hopeful delusion.  Lawyers have been trying to do this same thing with Catholic diocese for the last decade or so and still haven't managed to pierce that veil.  And i don't think anyone would argue that the Vatican has control over the assignment of priests and bishops.

While there are certainly a lot a similarities, I would guess that the Catholic diocese is afforded religious protections that the BSA will not have. It's not exactly an apples to apples comparison between the religious body of Catholicism and the non-profit organization of BSA.

3 hours ago, yknot said:

 

If any help was coming from Congress, it would have been here by now. I'm not sure what value anyone thinks that charter holds. I'd love to see Congress step in and buy scout camps en masse as a national initiative. In the summer they could serve as scout camps or dual community/scout camps; off season they could serve a host of other purposes that this recent crisis has identified. However, it won't happen. 

I don't believe that it is the purpose of Congress to step in and buy assets or property that would be primarily for the benefit of any particular business or non-profit org. The government already owns enough property that could be utilized if that were the case.  As a taxpayer, if the government bought the properties, I'd want them opened up for public access, not kept nearly exclusively for the use of any particular private group.

On 4/29/2020 at 5:55 PM, HashTagScouts said:

MBCs don't pay.  This is why there is a difference between "registered adult" and "registered adult leader".  MBCs are not required to take any training beyond YPT and MBC training.  They are not satisfactorily a leader, as they don't actually lead- they consult on Merit Badges.  For the purpose of a virtual meeting- OK, no problem, adults are not expected to be leading troop meetings, the SPL is.  What troop org chart have you ever seen that has MBCs on them, and what reporting lines they have? 

So it all comes back to the money? Our Committee Members don't generally lead anything either. They do show up on a troop org chart, but that chart has no bearing on actually leading anything.  Hashing out the details of the annual budget as treasurer, keeping track of advancement as the advancement chair or the registration chair preparing the recharter/ processing applications doesn't really constitute "leading" either, yet each of those positions would count as your "registered adult leader".  Or are you saying that Committee Members do not count as "registered adult leaders" also? 

9 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

The policy as written is poorly worded and unclear, specifically about what positions qualify as "registered adult leaders."

You will not find this clarified anywhere in "official" publications.

I recommend, until BSA amends the wording, you follow what you see as the plain language common sense interpretation.  If that means you see MBC's as "registered adult leaders", then go with it.

This council does not intepret it this way.  In this council, MBC's are not "registered adult leaders."  And I have it directly from National Director of YP that councils may apply stricter standards than National intends when it comes to Youth Protection.

It is a long sordid story, as Eagle94-A1 can attest, so I answered it privately because it is these kinds of questions that have gotten me blacklisted from district and council positions in our council.  (Still proudly serving at the unit level.)

IMO, this has nothing to do with YP, and everything to do with generating revenue for National.

Many units figured out that, since membership costs are unreasonable, they can cut their re-charter costs (by a third or half??) by registering the minimum number of adults to satisfy charter requirements, and having all remaining adults register as MBC's (which is a no fee district position.)  Since this tactic does not change your YP stance or background clearance requirements, you should forge ahead and change only if your council calls you on it. 

I also recommend that you do not ask for an official answer.  What you get back will only restrict you further, cost you more, and gain you nothing in actual YP. 

But, if you wish to go down that road, please email your SE.  If you don't like the answer they give, then stick your neck out and email Youth.Protection@scouting.org

Be advised, National will trace you and email you back with a cc to your SE with any response. 

I have no desire to go questioning at Council level, and especially not at National level.  I got to the point a long time ago where I don't go seeking more clarification when it's clear that nothing good will come out of it.  At least not through official channels.  I had never heard that about MBC not being considered a "registered adult leader", since they fill out an adult application, it is submitted to Council and they are approved (registered) or not. Along with that is the YPT and MBC training.  Sounds like they satisfy all the requirements of the term "registered adult leader".  But I've been around enough to know that many Councils will have different interpretations and policies.  It's just amazing sometimes how hard we try to make it within BSA to get & keep good, willing, qualified adult volunteers (who get to pay for the privilege of serving).

11 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Answered privately to protect the innocent 😎

I would also like to know where it states that MBCs do not count as registered leaders.  I have not seen that anywhere.  And isn't answering privately exactly the kind of thing we are trying to prevent with YPT and GTSS requiring 2 deep leadership, lol?

I agree with @scoutldr, the Council doesn't want the competition.  They know who their donors are and don't want to show up to solicit funds, only to find out that they've already donated their allocated Scout gift budget to a specific unit.