Oak Tree

We have a lot of Scouts, including a heavy number over 14, and we live in a high-tech area with good incomes and early-adopter tech-savvy families. Not one Scout has yet shown up at a troop activity with an eBook.

Review da actual case history for da BSA in your state.

I have often thought that this would be a useful thing to do. I've suggested that it's something they should teach at the University of Scouting, but they haven't yet taken me up on it.

How do I go about doing that? Where would I search? I somehow doubt it's available for perusal at the council office.

Our UC is fairly active and has been volunteering regularly with our units. I am happy to have him as a volunteer. He's a good guy. He is experienced in Scouting. He moved into the area at a stage in life when his kids were out of Scouts.

That said, I'm thankful for the system that brought us another volunteer, but it would seem to have nothing really to do with any of his duties as a UC. By now I probably am more experienced in the ways of the district and council than anyone that they could assign as our UC, and our units are operating well, so there's just not that much that we'd really expect a UC to do for us. I will happily have him come along and camp with us and cook Dutch oven breakfast, though.

IRS Publication 557 has a ton of rules about how to be a charitable organization, most of which are carefully worded to try to stop people from committing various types of tax fraud. There are a few relevant items in there, but there isn't much new there that sheds extra light on the situation.

"No part of the organization's net earnings will inure to the benefit of private shareholders or individuals."

"In order for an organization (including a church and religious organization) to qualify for tax exemption, no part of its net earnings can inure to any individual. "

Fred,

I agree that we are largely in agreement :-)

Thanks for all the research. Nice to find someone else who likes to dig into these things for fun.

So at this point, my understanding is that we are mostly agreed that the typical use of Scout accounts would be contrary to the IRS code, but that there might be some very narrowly constructed situation where the IRS might overlook such a situation.

I'll note that the general case is referred to in the link, and is consistent with all of the previous posts and links that state that such accounts are not kosher.An individual account was set up in a particular girl's name so that drill team expenses incurred by her (absolutely not her parents, such as their own trip costs) could be paid for out of this account. The way the funds were allocated to this account depended upon how many times the parents worked a particular fundraiser for her. For instance, if her parent worked at the ballpark (Texas Rangers games at the stadium) one time, and if the ball park donated $50.00 to the drill team booster club for this, the money would be split 50-50, that is, $25.00 going into the girl's individual account and $25.00 going into the general fund for use by the entire team. Well, come to find out, this is not permissible according to IRS guidelines![emphasis mine]It does further add that the IRS doesn't usually go after groups for this (as we stated)Although many organizations have apparently been cited for this violation, until now, they have only been warned to "clean up their act" but have never been fined ($5000.00 per year). Needless to say, neither our director nor our booster club wanted to be held responsible for any fines of this nature!Even the exception that you quote is listed as being something the IRS will "overlook", not something that is permitted within the guidelines.

Sounds like someone's buttons are being pushed, for sure.

On topic, here's a brainstorming question. Can you think of other organizations where both Romney and Obama have stated that they are opposed to the current policy of the organization? (Don't count foreign governments or terrorist organizations or crime rings - I'm just thinking about normal, everyday, American organizations).

RS, thanks for the correction. You'd think I'd have read all of the posts on the thread first...

I note the error in the article as well - they stated that Holy Trinity had ended their program, when clearly they had not.

The Chicago Area Council news isn't all that surprising. I'm sure that a large number of councils practice a don't-ask-don't-tell policy, or even more than that, don't take any action even if they are told. Really, why would you? If the unit doesn't care and the CO doesn't care, I think most councils would just not rock the boat.

What's surprising is that the Northern Star Council is talking about it publicly. Is their SE near the end of his career? I'd think that you might find some other SEs who were about to retire, who could take that position if they wanted to make a point. As long as the council board is in agreement, seems like there would be relatively little that National could do.

Don't ya just love it?

Anyone can go camp together any time you want to.

Families can go do whatever activities they want to.

We did do some family camping like this. We made it clear that parents were responsible for their own kids, and that there were no (or a specific few) pack activities.

What I would not do is run an activity like this (bb-shooting) for someone else's kid.

I just isn't all that obvious how it is recorded....

When you create an activity (camping trip, service project, etc), you indicate how many nights it is, or how many hours it is. Then when you record that a Scout attended the activity, he gets credit for it.

Saw a couple of updates on the Northern Star Council topic in this story: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/national-boy-scout-policy-against-openly-gay-members-flouted-by-local-counc/

- at least one other council unofficially says they don't follow the policy either - "The sentiment of the Northern Star Council appeared to be echoed in at least one other local Council: a woman who answered the phone at the Chicago Area Council declined to speak officially, but indicated local leaders didnt feel an obligation to hold to national standards on the issue. This is a national policy. Each council is run separately, so what they do, we might not do, she told LifeSiteNews.com."

- And at least one church says they've broken ties with the council due to this policy - "After the Tribune report emerged, Rev. John Echert, pastor of Holy Trinity Parish in South St. Paul, Minnesota, told LSN that he immediately broke his churchs ties with the Twin Cities group" - I don't really know what that means, though. It's not clear whether any actual Scout units disbanded, or what.

Just more and more evidence that the BSA policy is going to change, sooner or later.

TroopMaster does record nights of camping and hours of service work.

It seems to record pretty much everything, and can spit it out in all kinds of formats.

It's not a perfect program, and usability isn't the greatest, but it pretty much does everything. I'd suggest looking at some web-based programs as alternatives - but I don't have any actual personal experience.

Anything electronic is less likely to get lost.

For the most part, we log into TroopMaster and record all the partial merit badge work there.

We do still use blue cards, too, which makes it easier for the Scouts to see.

As near as I can tell, if you don't have internet, you aren't allowed to live within 50 miles of us. I don't think I've run into someone like that in our troop history. Ever. Your demographics may vary.

SSScout has excellent advice.

Realize that the unit gets little benefit out of rechartering. It's really the council that wants to make sure the details are all correct. So make it as easy as possible. The more specific the steps, the better. Give them an FAQ, and/or a web site with answers to questions (and then update that with every question you get asked.) Provide them an email address and/or a phone number for questions.

And I realize this one is out of your control, but if you could allow for electronic joining, that would aid things immensely.

the whole topic is clear as mud.

I'm going to disagree with that point. The IRS rules on this are quite clear. There are documents that discuss this specific issue. (for example, see http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopica93.pdf)

"Inurement of income is strictly forbidden under IRC 501©(3) without regard to the amount involved. Because the financing arrangements of clubs operated like A have the effect of permitting the earnings of the organization to inure to the benefit of specific insiders (the parents and their children), these organizations cannot qualify for exemption."

It doesn't matter whether the organization is doing good. It's just that you can't earn money for yourself through fund-raising.

Private inurement is really, really prohibited. Google that phrase at irs.gov and you'll see it everywhere.

Here'a another example: "

I also say no to this as well, although I don't think you'll find a definitive position in the materials.

With no official answer, it's up to the person signing off as to how he interprets the requirements, and I think it's a reasonable interpretation to say that the service is supposed to be done separately from other requirements for service.

"Da ethic and norms of private association in a civil democratic society are to leave folks alone to do their own thing, not to lobby from without or within to get 'em to change."

I think I'm going to have to disagree with this to some extent. Since private associations do in fact change over time, it's got to be that someone somewhere is lobbying to get them to change.

It used to be more the case that people didn't view it as all that seemly to publicly advocate for change - if you are on the U.S. Olympic team, you aren't supposed to complain about the way the team is run. But nowadays with Twitter and Facebook and everything else, it's much easier to see what's going on inside organizations. So now they can tweet about the ridiculous bus ride, and they don't have to come off looking quite so petty at some news conference.

And I do want to reserve the right to complain about wagon bans. Sometimes you just have to say that some things are stupid.

there are those that have a reason for being overweight.

Everyone who is overweight has a reason for it. And very rarely is that reason because the person has chosen to gain weight. It might be their job, their surroundings, the presence of high fructose corn syrup in seemingly every product in the supermarket, the weather, the ever-increasing automation of everything, the car-based suburban sprawl they live in, the lack of affordable health clubs, the quantity of insulin that their body manufactures in response to glucose, the amount of serotonin or dopamine in their brain chemistry, their balance of leptin and ghrelin in their system, the way their spouse cooks, or the combination of these and 1000 other factors.

So AHG does not do background checks.

Partly this depends on whether you think that "AHG" is only the corporate office, or includes the troops. The background checks are instigated by a registered leader in AHG.

It also depends on what you mean by "do". I'm sure the BSA does not "do" their own background checks, but hires someone to do them for them. In AHG, the central office tells the troops to do the checks. Seems like roughly the same thing. I prefer the BSA model, but I don't think it's fair to say that AHG does not do background checks.

So, what I am hearing is this ~ first try to manually add them on the internet advancement sheet. If that doesn't work fill out a form and submit it to our council. Does this sound right?

Sounds right to me.

In order to be a leader in AHG, you must affirm the AHG Statement of Faith (http://www.ahgonline.org/uploads/FAQCharterRep.pdf)

The AHG Statement of Faith includes the line "We believe that each individual is called to live a life of purity, service, stewardship and integrity." (See http://www.ahgonline.org/pages/page.asp?page_id=19322)

And under that, they specify what purity means:Clarity is further provided to the following terms:

Purity An AHG member is called to live a life of holiness, being pure of heart, mind, word and deed, reserving sexual activity for the sanctity of marriage; marriage being a lifelong commitment before God between a man and a woman. So, from that, I would deduce that they would not allow sexually active gays and lesbians to be leaders, but they might allow it if you were celibate.

Also, I would presume that they would allow that everyone has sinned in the past, and the main thing is whether you are willing to affirm the statement of faith currently.

Girls (youth members) do have to agree to live by the AHG Creed (their version of the Scout Law). It includes the word "Pure". I do not think they would be in a hurry to boot out any girls, just as the BSA isn't.

But the short answer would appear to be, no, they don't allow gay and lesbian leaders or youth.

I realize being attacked by a rabid animal is a serious thing, but that headline still conjures up some pretty funny pictures in my mind.

One of the rules requires annual training of YOUTH in YPT rules.

What rule is that? I know the BSA says the video "should be viewed by troops annually" - but I regard that as a recommendation, not a requirement. But them I'm accustomed to documents where SHOULD means it's optional, and MUST means it's required.

Besides, that video is about the "three R's", and not YPT rules. Where does it say that we are to teach the youth about YPT rules?

Where do you want to correct it? Your records? Council records?

If he has his book and blue cards then he should have actual dates. Otherwise, you may need to approximate them as best you can. Just do whatever you would normally do if someone earned an advancement.

We did away with Scout accounts once we realized that we were in violation of the tax code. The IRS says you can't raise money for one particular person and claim that it's a fund-raiser for an organization. At that point, it's basically a job. You work, you get paid.

1. That said, when we had Scout accounts, we normally used the accounts to pay for anything that the Scout would normally pay for themselves.

2. We did from 50%-100%, depending on the fund raiser.

3. What if the pack falls short today, when there aren't any Scout accounts? Same thing.

4. Whenever we're making a change, we try to get lots of input, give people lots of warning, explain the rationale, and then finally just say, "That's the way the committee decided to handle it."