ParkMan

Hi @RichardB, As always, thanks for taking the time to share some insight with us on these topics. I've got very little insight how to communicate this feedback to national, please permit me to proactively share a few constructive thoughts. This is not criticism. Also, don't feel compelled to respond - I'm not asking you to defend this new program. I just wanted to share what I think are pretty common thoughts from out here in the trenches. Frist - and to be clear - I'm taking an open minded approach to this particular topic. I sat through the recent webinar and am likely to tak

Thank you very much for making me aware of that. I didn't know that.

I do believe that there is a fair public policy question here. Should the country have ever removed the statute of limitations and should organizations like the BSA, churches, and other COs be responsible for abuse claims from that long ago? These organizations all have permanence due to the nature of the kinds of organizations that they are. They have all made decisions years ago that if made today would be considered reprehensible and subject to legal action. Should quasi-permanent institutions like these be held liable for the these terrible decisions by people who are long since gone a

Right - this is the claimants pursuing this. Injustices against people aside, my sense is that this started because lawyers and early claimants saw the BSA as a group with deep pockets that was easy to sue and pursue damages against. However, now that everyone has realized that this idea is running out of steam, the lawyers want to expand the pool of claimants and add COs to their lawsuits. In retrospect, this doesn't seem an awful idea. It's a toss-up if Scouting units are more aligned to the council/BSA or the CO. If a Scout was abused 40 years ago who was more at fault - the BSA

It's not good for the BSA to add COs to this lawsuit. But, in a way isn't it the correct thing to do? If you were the CO of a unit 30 years ago that had abuse going on, isn't it their responsibility too?

Having been both a unit leader for a long time and a district/council scouter at times too, I've learned to appreciate that units often feel a whole lot more animosity and distrust of the council than is needed. I've found that units that make a good faith effort to work with the council generally have no problem with stuff getting approved. The council really isn't out there to make life difficult for the units.

They are using camp to denote an event, not a place. This applies to basically all overnight events longer than 1 day and less than 4. If your district has a camporee it applies. If you district has two troops camping together for a weekend in a field, it counts. Basically every camping event that it bigger than a single unit camping alone and is shorter in duration than necessary to qualify for resident camp qualifications. Worse than the standards is now that we have to find people to go through this training. Ugh. I want people to focus on membership, program, and unit servi

That's my understanding from the webinar. Too many Scouters breaking rules and then having issues. I'm sure there were lawyers who challenged that the BSA hadn't done enough to make sure that the Scouters knew the rules. This in turn led to more liability payments for the BSA. The downside is that this is major new initiative requiring substantial volunteer overhead precisely at a time where volunteer bandwidth needs to be focused on membership and unit support. Not the best time for some new overhead initiative like this.

Maybe it's just me, but it sounds like you've got a strong, active pack. I imagine that you also participate in popcorn sales. I'd just have a chat with your DE about getting these things approved. Yes, you can make it work "as is" and off the books, but I'm going to guess that other than a few tweaks, the council will generally go along with this. In the process, you'll save yourself the discussions in the committee meeting about doing it "off the books"

I've heard this comment before from others. I'd be curious for people to expand on this. What are examples were you've seen professionals fired who were doing a good job? No names of course.

Thank you @mrjohns2. It sounds like Mr. Lambert had a distinguished career. I thank him for devoting his career to Scouting and certainly wish them well. Of all the national job descriptions, his sounds like one of the most understandable. I really do wish that the BSA would make their national organization more transparent to us all at the council level.

I don't think it says anything negative if you wear the NESA knot. You still earned your Eagle - so you still has to earn the award. All the NESA knot really says is that you are an Eagle who has decided to become a lifetime member of the NESA. There is no harm in that at all.

FWIW - when we did it, it was tied to rank. We also didn't paint the entire face, more put marks on their cheeks. Basically, we matched the color of the program: Tiger - orange Wolf - yellow Bear - blue Webelos - green & red AOL - green, red, & yellow

We did it in our pack - but I'll admit, we didn't have too detailed a script. It was normally done at rank advancement. The Cubmaster would get up with the Scouts, ask them to talk a little about some of the funs things they did. After that, he'd paint a strip on each cheek - one red, the other green. He'd explain that Webelos stood for We'll Be Loyal Scouts and that these colors signified their journey on the way to becoming Scouts. I find the goal on these kind of ceremony is to tie it to the journey they are on - celebrate something about what they earned. Or, celebrate some kind

Welcome @Armymutt That's a tremendous Scouting background you have. A little secret I learned along the way is that it's even more fun when you are Scouting alongside with your kids in the program. Enjoy!!

Interesting situation you find yourself in. If a video goes out about your son and his work in Scouting that in turn is used to help lobby to pass a tax levy, I am fairly certain that the council Scout Executive would have liked to have known first. I'd send your DIstrict Executive and District Chair a note so that they can consult with the Scout Executive and see if they'd like to give you any guidance. However, I would not stop a discussion first. There is nothing wrong with a leader in local politics talking with a Scout about their experiences. You just need to watch out that

I've made similar comments before, but here's my take on these salaries: I think these seem reasonable for a national organization like the BSA: $794K - Chief Scout Executive and President $445K - Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer $394K - General Counsel and Secretary $349K - ACSE, Development $280K - Group Director - Supply $264K - Group Director - Human Resources $232K - Group Director - Summit You go down that list and they all have to solve very complex issues, run large organizations, or serve thousands of employees and even mo

This is the part of the forum to welcome new members. Coming into this forum and telling a new, enthusiastic parent that: Is just picking on a new member. You want to have that conversation, go over to Issues and Politics and we can hash that out again. I think we've had that conversation there 10 or 20 times now. I'm not even going to get into the merits of your argument here because the "New to the Forum" section where someone else is introducing themselves isn't the place for that.

That's good to know. I always assumed it was very different, but when I read the post I realized that I simply didn't know. Thanks!

It is most likely a long shot (and not one I favor), but I don't think it's really that fanciful. I see two scenarios that make sense: 1. Councils in the US form a new national Scouting association after the current one runs out of money. It's a legally separate entity to protect it from continued lawsuits. That entity would want to acquire the IP of the BSA. I can see this has a 20% chance of happening. 2. The GSUSA has the infrastructure to run a national Scouting organization and is currently devoid of any lawsuits. The GSUSA would like the BSA to not have a program for girls.

That's an interesting dimension. I wonder how that is structured. I imagine the ranks are somewhat common between countries (except maybe for Eagle) and perhaps some of the requirements too. I can envision that some other Scouting Group in the US cannot start using the same rank system. I wonder who controls that - it is the BSA copyright or is that something at the WOSM level.

I hear you, but I think it would take more lawyering than a bankruptcy court judge is ready for. I'm not even sure a bankruptcy court judge has the place to try and determine if it is operating legitimately as per it's congressional charter. Other than extracting more assets from the BSA, why would they go down that path? If a bankruptcy court judge forced a sale of the IP, then I think that the decision would quickly get appealed. Years in the appellate courts before there is any real resolution.

I hope that's the case which would make it something that the courts could not force them to sell to cover their obligations. So, even if the BSA runs out of funds, so what? They cannot be forced to part with this IP. I'm not sure that I follow that it then cannot be transferred if the BSA chooses. But, I am hoping you are correct. I would like this to be considered an asset with a $0 value. The code doesn't state that the only IP the corporation develops is for the use in a program for boys. It just says that the corporation has the exclusive rights to whatever it adopts. S

I have come to understand that it's improbable there is a legal path to an outright purchase of the BSA. Yet, I do wonder if there is still the ability for the BSA to sell it's IP to another entity. A well organized effort that transferred the BSA IP (program materials, badges, etc.) to another entity and then told councils to simply recharter with them would work in theory.

I've seen no COs disassociate from the BSA in the past few years. This is simply not true. Everyone involved knows that the bankruptcy is related to actions many years ago and is not representative of actions of the BSA today.