blw2

exactly right!

Makes me think of the last time I went to council's camp. It was a WEBELOS event of some sort.....maybe WEBELOS Akela Weekend. Some friends were joking that I should take my motorhome, and I was playing along. Not serious about it at all but thinking that I suppose I could drive and just set it up in the parking lot. When it came time to turn in, i could stroll over to the parking lot, no different to walking back to my parked pick-up truck after all. & Who'd stop me? Well I didn't do it since I actually enjoy tent camping.... but When i got there, low and behold someone was doing just that. I'm thinking that they were just there as a day tip thing though, i don't believe they stayed the night.... but I do remember walking past at some point mid day and the generator was running

that certainly is an unusual arrangement. Why not merge? what sort of CO's do the units have? All different churches? I really can't make sense of doing it that way...... except maybe for the year of merging, just to wait on the paperwork till recharter, but otherwise where is the advantage?

Just because they register, doesn't make them more eager to take the training. I've seen more that a few hold-up from registered leaders not keeping up with their YPT, and many NEVER doing their specific training.... especially with committee. Anecdotally, it seems to me that MC's on average don't take things even as seriously as den leaders, ASM's, SM's, etc.... Interesting observation. I can't say I have an opinion on that angle either way on that but i have noticed that that female majority committees tend to not get the boy lead thing quite as well as I think most men would.....

honestly I don't get it either. Part of the reason ours is so big is they are trying to build the pool for BOR's, and they for some reason want only MC's to sit on boards. Personally, I would not sign on a MC unless they were taking a specific job and indicated interest/willingness in doing it. (treasurer, QM, etc..).... Except I do see value in having a small number (1 or 2 maybe) of general MC's that pitch in at random..... but these would be people with proven track records of attending and doing. We have folks that I still don't know & have never officially met! In our case, I think I would just set up a troop level BOR orientation for willing parents, similar to what is done for MB counselors. That way we would have a pool to pull from, and they would all be familiar with the program and what the BOR is. I would probably require that they have our CO required youth training and background check, but would not register them as MC's unless doing a regular POR type job.

I'll just throw this out there.... calling council really is no big deal at all. I have found that they are very easy to work with. Just call and identify yourself and your pack affiliation (Den Leader in Pack 123), and ask your question. The receptionist will point you to the right person. You might or might not get the answer, or get good information, but then again you might get it. I have found it really doesn't matter how basic or even stupid the question seems. There really is no need at all to be concerned about anything. Odds are good you'll end up having an interesting discussion and you might just maybe get the question answered. Remember, they are working for you..... because you are working for the scouts. ....and even if you do get the answer, there's no reason you can't go through the other exercises with the scouts anyway.

I just thought it might be interesting to get a feel for what might be average ratios scouts:scout masters:committee 22 scouts 1 SM 4 ASM 13 committee (not counting the CO rep) approx 4 of us are very active, 2 or maybe 3 others are moderately active - so the functioning active committee is really more like 7.... although there are still some multi-role hats being worn, without some positions being formally and actively filled

Only based on observations of my troop.... I like Stosh's method. Our troop is bogged down in adult derived policy and procedure.... well I assume it's adult derived.... elections happen on a 6 month cycle scouts that are interested in running for a position have to fill out and sign a form. Said form describes the position, stipulates requirements and perquisites (many of which are troop policy and not what I would call "real" for the lack of a better term, such as minimum rank, attendance requirements, etc..). The form also includes signature of scout's parent, pledging that we will support him in this job by getting him to mtgs, etc.... Scouts in patrols vote for their PL all scouts vote for SPL APL appointed by PL's and ASPL are appointed by SPL The new SPL and SM work together to appoint other troop level POR's (scribe, QM, instructor, chaplain, etc...). Adults have a heavy hand in steering scouts that need a POR for rank into jobs, and steering scouts that don't need it away.... Things we do that I don't like set 6 month cycle (I'd prefer scouts to decide if/when they need a change) and the heavy hand in steering (I think a lighter steering hand in this would be better, leaving it to the scouts to figure out)

yep, all great ideas. I especially like the bling puzzle exercise.... in theory anyway. It brings a lot of the advantages that the uniform method is supposed to bring to the party. A good way to rebuild the record. In reality though I think that the results of it depend greatly on the den and even this scout. I've written this before, even recently, but my son's den never seemed to give much of a care at all for any of it..... the patches, the bling, the uniform.... meh. They just wanted to do something fun and that wasn't it. And correct also, with that bit about doing your best. My real point was that it's not worth stopping the show over, not much there worth stressing about.

Records at council are all that really mater..... and truthfully for cubs, it doesn't matter all that much the date he earned the rank is about it I believe.... Your council will have record of when he earned Tiger. I'll assume he actually earned wolf and bear in the other pack. If he did, his book would probably have that info in the sign offs if he even still has his books..... You could probably just relay this info to council yourself to get it all straight.... or perhaps a quick call to his old council..... or your council may even do that for you to get the record straight. Just give your council a quick call. I'm convinced that for cubs there is zero need in all of this progress tracking. It's all just "make-work" non-sense. In this case, it sounds like he's rejoined the bear den.... or maybe the webelos den If he joined WEBELOS..... if he earned bear, great. If he didn't, no problem. It really just doesn't matter.

yep, that is a hard precedent to break. Something my son looked forward too..... having his own arrow. In reality though, I believe the thought of it was much better than actually having it. Now that he has it, I don't know that it brings him any real feeling or joy, one way or the other.... just like any other dust collector really. Something else that someday he or somebody is going to have to look at and toss. I'm reminded of a book I read on de-cluttering..... the advice, look at an object, and if it doesn't bring you "joy", thank it for the experience it represents, or for the lesson it gave you, and then toss it. Anyway, we had a mom volunteer to head up the plaque procurement. (Store bought plaque and arrow) It shocked me about how much attention was paid to what the adults wanted, and how little was paid to what the scouts wanted. We ended up with a few choices to vote on. My vote was my son's pick. I think one other dad did the same. The rest were against that, upset even that the scouts were made aware of the choice. A couple years prior I considered doing one of those projects of having the scouts involved in making their own arrows, wrapping the various colors to represent achievements. I realized how little they really cared about the patches and such, and figured this would end up being a lot of work for nothing really.

like this, except the straw was taped to the bag and the balloon was in the bag.... same idea though. It's just the way she did it.

As CM, I came around to having the practice of always having some balloons on hand. All sorts of quick impromptu games can be done with balloons to just fill in extra time or if something else falls apart. One that's not so impromtu and took a little prep, but I remember was a huge hit in my son's Tiger den was when his DL (not me) had them do the paperbag races.... drinking straw taped to a lunch bag, and hung with a string through the straw....blow up the balloon and let it rocket.... need at least two lanes for good racing.... As CM I did several different balloon pop relays, soccer type games, and other stuff with balloons

that's interesting. I didn't experience that at all. I tried really hard different ways of bringing that excitement that you are writing about, in advancement to our den. It seems the boys really just didn't care. I tried encouraging the books and sign off, I tried wall charts, beads, instant recognition, etc..... Played around with some totem ideas too. Even tried to encourage regular uniform wear so they would have more opportunity to wear the patches. Nothing worked. They only got excited when fun things happened and could care less about progress, uniforms, patches, or any of it.... I was only the Assistant DL, so it may have been some subtle things the DL &/or parents were doing that countered the efforts, I don't know.

careful there.....

ok, a few comments..... and yes, i agree some treasurer training and/or guidelines would be valuable. I'm treasurer of our troop. We recently went through a whole "restructure" of our finances in setting up a new bank account as I came on board, and I did a whole lot of digging and head slapping through the process..... I'm no lawyer, and I'm not a CPA or any such thing.... and I'm paraphrasing here based on what I have learned, summing it up. Could be that none of this is correct. It's almost semantics, but the bit about the CO owning assets isn't exactly dead on right. ..... The unit owns it. If the unit dissolves, then it is up to the unit to settle out any debts, then the remaining assets go to the CO, for future scouting use or as agreed upon between the council and the CO. The way my brain works, I think of it as the CO ultimately has ownership but it's under the care of the unit. Most units nowadays get their own EIN to establish a bank account. It's what we had to ultimately do. Actually, most units are marching along with bank accounts and such set up long ago, so really I should say most new units would get their own EIN. Take a look at this document http://www.scouting.org/filestore/financeimpact/pdf/Fiscal_Policies_and_Procedures_for_BSA_Units_March_2015.pdf Also, I'd suggest calling your BSA Council office and speaking with the Accounting Specialist. .............................................. So what we are doing is probably a lot more linear and perhaps "traditional". We have a treasurer and a bank account. We have 4 total people listed on the bank account as signers We use a web based hosting service, troopwebhost, for our troop's site, calendar, roster, etc... It has some decent tools set up for the financials, and in fact the author of the site originally set it up for this purpose. He was a troop's treasurer. I like it because everything is there. Parents can log in to see their own and their scouts' stuff. Any committee member can log in and see all transactions, receipts, etc.... transparency and full disclosure is what i'm all about. I also like that it offers a tool for online payments...parents can use paypal through a link on the troop's site to make payments. I use our bank's online banking system to mail checks. If anyone has an expense for reimbursement, they can take a picture of the receipt, email it to me, and I can have the bank mail them a check ASAP. No need to wait for the next meeting and try to remember it. At the pack level, it was pretty much the same. All dues were paid at the pack level, as were fees for activities, campouts, etc... If a Den leader had an expense (supplies, awards, etc...) they were free to submit it for reimbursement. The only difference was we didn't have the online tools or the online banking so things were difficult and slow. ................................................ I think what i would suggest really echoes what has already been said. In the interest of "Cooperative Volunteering" I'd try to not rock the boat too much, especially at first. I like the point about treating the den pots as "petty cash". that's no big deal. I'm not so sure I would push for this, but you really could in theory set up the den leaders as signers on the bank account so that they have their own debit card. they may like that and that could be an in to getting all the money into the bank and accounted for..... and you could set up a fund accounting system so that each Den has a "fund".....one account but $x belongs to den 1, $y belongs to den 2, etc.... The issue with that is the conflict of interest, or perceived potential conflict anyway. The same reason you don't want typically to have the Cubmaster's wife to be the Committee Chair and the treasurer. (the spender, the approver, and the coffer under one roof)

I'll comment on this one quickly, but don't have time at the moment to really dive into the treasurer stuff. I had some real concerns early on, similar to yours but in my case it wasn't about financials.....and was given the advice to practice cooperative volunteerism. Remember, you're the new guy. Trust has to be earned. If a person charges in and tries to change stuff up front that can be very upsetting. Sometimes a person needs to just stay the course that was set before they took the helm for a while, before they go turning the ship.... I do agree with you though, it is alarming. In fact I personally would really question the whole thing. I can't really imagine anyone wanting the money. There is just too much chance for people to misunderstand, misinterpret, accuse.... I stayed as far away from the money when i was with the pack as I could. I only took the treasurer job with the troop because that's where the need was. I personally would never ask for the money or control over it, and would not fight to keep it either.... so that's why that DL's reaction would make me question his motives. As treasurer, if someone pays me $20 cash, that same $20 bill goes straight into the bank as fast as I can get it there... and I post proof of it along with the transaction record on the troop's web site for anyone on the committee to see. I never let it blend with my personal cash, and I want 100% transparency. I'll come back to this thread later.... initial questions though am I correct in understanding you do not current have a pack bank account? Is your charter Org a non-profit? what tools do you currently have available or use for unit accounting (software, online service, etc..)?

This advice isn't sage but my 2 cents a couple good reads for any scouter IMHO, both new to get grounded or experienced to get refreshed.... BP's Aids To Scoutmastership can be read online here http://scoutmastercg.com/aids-scoutmastership/ Clarke Green's "So Far So Good" https://scoutmastercg.com/get-clarkes-books/ and I would really focus on Patrols.... with everything happening at the patrol level I like the logic behind what Clarke Green said about one aim one method.... with the aim of building character and the method is the patrol method. Encourage the scouts to do the stuff that scouts do and shield them from the rest of it....

I have mixed feelings..... If not very careful, the idea crosses a line.... well maybe it crosses that line anyway..... Scouting is a game for boys, with the aim of building character. It's really nothing more than that. It's not a men's club, or adult club, or really any sort of thing for adults at all. I read somewhere, i wish I could give proper credit for it.... and I'll have to paraphrase Everything we do as scouters, we do for the scouts ..... but we don't do everything for the scouts. It is from this perspective that i understand the idea that some have to strictly limit the number of adults involved to only the SM and ASM. With the rest of the adults being banished to the sidelines to watch the game as you would a soccer game. On the other hand.....honestly I understand the motivation and personally like the idea. This game of scouting is centered around activities that boys like to do. I'm a boy-man as BP described it. i want to do those things too. So, I guess my gut tells me that as long as it's activities done only while the scouts are doing something else, and it's done without a purpose (intended or not) to increase the adult roster needlessly, then where's the harm?..... It just seems like such a fine line that's too easy to fall from.....

After last night's board of review, we committee members were discussing the conversation we had had with the scout. We had been having a conversation with the Scout about his frustrations in his POR. He's currently the troops Instructor, and was saying more or less that he gets frustrated when he's trying to teach something and they aren't paying attention. Someone had asked him why he thinks his students didn't pay attention, and his answer was that maybe they don't care. And when asked how that made him feel, he said that it makes him "not care either." So anyway, when reviewing with the other committee members, i said something to the point of this.... Well, really there's nothing wrong with it. It should be that the student wants to learn.... that it's that individual scout's journey to make. It shouldn't be about forcing it. To which, I get a stern..... "it's different when they are this young. you have to push them." I broadened it out to the whole eagle concept saying more or less that if a scout doesn't want to make eagle it should be his choice to make....and if a scout doesn't want to make tenderfoot it's the same thing.... As I write this, I wish that I would have stressed that he'll do it when he's ready.... and that it'll be more constructive that way. At another point in the board, I said something to the scout about making it fun, and that when you boil down scouts just want to have fun, and asked if that was true for him. I was shocked to learn that it's not. He proceeded to spout of something about being in it to learn. I would believe this coming from some few gifted overachievers, but this scout doesn't exactly fit that mold. Smart kid no doubt, and a good scout, but he's just not that scout. I couldn't help but to think that this young scout is a victim of brainwashing, that he's been conditioned to think that scouts is X, Y, and Z..... and that is the correct answer. In my thinking that X, Y, &Z is really nearly opposite of what scouts is or should be. Anyway, it strikes me that there are such vastly different philosophies in our approach to our jobs as scouters. Conflicting even.... and I'm firmly in the minority But it seems that the majority of scouters just have strong counter opinions. They think the scouts are there to be taught. That scouts should be made to do things, pushed to learn. Misguided and to me it seems it could even be downright damaging to a scout's experience. I take the approach that scouting should be fun first. A boy is there to have fun with his friends, doing the sorts of things a boy likes to do. That it shouldn't be so much reading and classroom stuff. That advancement and the like is secondary, or even tertiary, behind fun and character building.....That scouts should be advancing and not even know it almost till recognized. That the scouts should be running the show, and that they should be running as patrols not as a troop. That we adults are just there to help and support them. I buy into what Clarke Green said about there being One Aim in scouting - building character, and One Method - the patrol method We are two sides of the fence. When I say things like I did I guess they think I'm just not getting it..... just like I often think they aren't getting it. I'm open enough to buy that there's advantages in "their side".... that a synergistic blend of the ideas is likely better.....but it's like there is no hope that the program will ever blend. I'm troubled by this.....

so it seems a lot of you just pull form any available adult. For some reason our troop (since before my time with it) seems to think that the board must be made up of registered committee members. Not sure how I feel about it. I haven't been a fan of the idea of registering committee members that have no intention of doing a job, just so that they can be available for reviews. I also am definitely not a fan of any old parent that knows nothing about the program taking a part in it. It seems to me that it's far to easy for well intentioned but wrong ideas to get pushed onto scouts and even other adults. As far as I understand it, part of the point of the BOR is for the committee to "check-up on the troop's program to verify that it's running ok, so that they can advise the SM. Can't do that well if you don't understand how the patrol method works. (although even a lot of registered and trained adults don't get that it seems....) but on the other hand I think a well rounded board makes sense.... like in the days of old when the board would be community leaders not directly tied to the troop. Maybe a good idea would be to have some basic training for parents on how it should go and the sort of questions to be asked and the sort of advice to be given the scout....before they sit on one.... this seems very logical in my thinking. Just smells like a better approach than what we are trying to push. Guess I'll file this away to be dusted off if I'm ever again the CC

So do you register these parents as committee members? That seems to be a hurdle we flip and flop on.... several committee members are registered but are completely inactive, and teh committee seem to flip and flop about registering others....but no, can't because they haven't done the training &/or CO required background check.....but we should register them so they can do BOR's..... but.... ugh, I find it so tiring.....

So how does your unit do it? have a standing "committee is available on the 3rd meeting of the month"? require scout request? SM arranges it? parent request? Our unit was having a problem of scouts popping up during a meeting, needing a board, and then the committee members scrambling because often there wouldn't be three members available at the troop meeting. So, others on our committee instituted a policy requiring the scouts to EMAIL the committee ahead of time requesting a board. So far it has been sketchy, with scouts not following through with it, parents continuing to request, etc.... BUT my issues are there is no protocol of who or how the request is to be handled.... it's still a free-for-all to see if there will be three at the meeting and it just seems like a "make-work" to me. so I'm wondering how other committees are doing it.... I received my first email from a scout requesting a board the other day. and with no protocol, I responded to him saying I'm planning to be there. (also asked him to clarify which rank since he didn't say)

wasn't blue and yellow the old CM knot?

So true..... in this case though, I don't recall knowing any sort of reputation about the course or the prof. It was all assumption on my part! Taught me a lesson about assuming!!