Twocubdad

Ummmmmm.....I don't think I would go down that road, Base. First of all, if someone from another unit, whom I don't know from Adam's housecat, calls and asks questions about another family's finances with the unit, they're not going to get a lot out of me. I don't think that's Sasha's responsibility. The parents need to work with the other pack to get a refund, if one is due, or the district, if things get to that level. I don't see where Sasha needs to put on her "big boy pants." She's trying to run her program, which includes paying for the same. Her boys -- and the money will come from her boys -- don't need to make good for the problems in another unit. Of course, we would all see this differently if these families were destitute, but there has been no mention made of that.

If the pack key leadership feels you've done everything you can and are at the end of the line with these families, then my next step would be to meet with the COR and make sure he/she is on board. (Any time you have a situation which could get sticky make sure you have your CO's support. And sometimes, depending on your chartered organization, the CO may have a bit of a rainy day fund and may offer to make up the difference.) At this point, all the jazz with the other pack and what the council has or hasn't done is just background. You now need some procedure for dealing with a family which won't pay dues. Your committee should think of it in those terms and develop a policy/procedure you can live with going forward. Figure our what you want to do and send the families a letter. Copy the DE on the letter. When I was pack CC we had a Webelos II den of about four boys which refuesd to pay pack dues. The DL felt since they had already paid the BSA dues they didn't need to pay for the six or seven months until crossover (she was a bit wacko, never really understood what her issue was.) Since the were current with their BSA membership through the end of the charter and not wanting to go through all the mess of removing them from the roster, we told the whole den they were on their own as far as resources went -- any advancement materials were purchased by the DL or parents, the boys were not given Pinewood Derby cars, the DL was not reimbursed for any den expenses. In that particular case they crossed over prior to recharter, but otherwise we would not have rechartered them. Sounds to me that these families have a bit of a chip on their shoulders due to their experience with the other pack. Makes me wonder if there is more to the story with the other pack. Regardless, you're just a volunteer trying to do the best you can for all the Scouts. Move on.

My mother always said Santa would come as long as you believe in him. After 52 years, I still do and he still does! If some one asks if I believe in Santa, I always reply, "I'd be stupid not to!"

Our pack would likely do just as Fred suggests. But we have over 100 boys and sell something on the order of $30k in popcorn, so absorbing a couple hundred bucks is not worth your time and hassle, much less ticking off the other families. Clearly, if you can afford it, that's the high road. But if you are a more average pack, with maybe 15 or 20 boys and just scratching by, then you need to show the parents your budget and explain the them why you can't afford to waive the dues for them. Do your best to come up with a compromise both the pack and families can afford. Perhaps you could come up with a pro-rata figure for the portion of the year they've been in your pack. Or you could come up with an ala carte cost for the real, cash-out-of-pocket expenses the pack will incur with these Scouts. Try to take the emotion out of it. "But everyone has to pay their fair share" isn't going to be any more productive than the parents crying "but we already paid the other pack." You need to get past that. But the parents need to understand your position, too. Scouting isn't free and you have absolutely nothing to do with the other pack. You can't be expected to make up for the sins of the other pack on the backs of your boys. If they can't understand that and meet you part of the way, then wish them well and move on. And just as an aside, it doesn't sound like the council has done much to solve this problem for you. Basically, they're covering less than $30 for the two boys and are passing it off as scholarships at that. I'd give my DE a call and "thank" him for dumping this problem off on you. No, he didn't have any more to do with creating the problem than you did, but he should have at least as much interest in keeping these boys in the program and their families happy as you do. Suggest this year instead of having a Friends of Scouting campaign your pack holds a Friends of Pack XX night to cover the cost of bailing out the other pack.

Moose -- when confronted with internally-conflicting policies, I take it as license to choose that portion of the policy with which I agree. Simplistic? Yes. But it sure saves wear and tear.

Have you noticed how BSA is pretty good at writing very basic policies in a way which communicates a core principle but allows for flexibility? But then some jackass tries to "explain" them or -- God/god/rock/light pole forbid -- create a list of FAQs, the whole thing goes right in the ditch? Examples: "The Boy Scouts of America maintains that no member can grow into the best kind of citizenship without recognizing an obligation to God." or "Be active in your troop and patrol for six months...." The vast majority of us are perfectly happy to take those statement at face value. But then someone tries to tell us what it really means..... I'm inclined to go along with Pack and Moose's EBOR chairman. I would accept belief in some weird notion of a higher being IF the Scout can articulate a sincere belief and explain how he shows reverence toward his faith. Yeah, Meryln, if a Scout can meet this test for a belief in "humanity" or "The Force" if you will, my reading of the DRP says it's not my position to disagree. I will agree the FAQ Merlyn cited is about as nutty as the old FAQ which defined "active" You can believe in anything you wish, as long as you call it God. But calling yourself an atheist even if you believe in a higher power and you're out. Okay, pick one. And just to be clear, let us note the old, goofy definition of "active" and been overridden by the new advancement policy and also note that Merlyn's FAQ on the DRP was written in 1991. You know, we could all save ourselves a lot of grief and aggravation if we automatically ignore any BSA document titled "Frequently Asked Questions."

Seems to me you would see the same results if you substituted just about any youth activity which requires boys to be motivated, active and have parents to encourage and support them. Church groups, sports, academics, community service. Strikes me a one of those surveys which to support a pre-established purpose rather that generate any real insight.

TERMINATOR IV -- Return of the Delawares I've written a number of times I think the Indian stuff -- especially at the callout -- comes across as hokey. I was a youth member and hadn't participated in anything OA for many years until the troop started getting a few guys going through several years ago. Personally, the content of the ceremonies was better and more meaningful than I remembered, but the whole Indian thing served more as a distraction. I'm the first to admit I know nothing about Native American culture. Our chapter ceremonies guys may all have PhDs in anthropology and be 100% accurate in their depictions, but it still comes off as a bunch of white suburban kids playing indian. Do Native Americans really speak in trochaic tetrameter? I would really like to hear what the kids think. My old-fart opinions don't really matter. Anytime I bring a load of guys home from a ceremony, I always ask what they thought. I tend to get a wishy-washy "oh, I thought it was great..." but I really think they're trying to tell me what they think I want to hear. It's always surprising to me how little of the content they understand. Maybe it's the hunger and exhaustion. I would be supportive of some serious updates.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

I appreciate the intent of your OP, Eagledad, encouraging folks to get involved and try to make a positive contribution toward solving problems. Unfortunately, my experience is pretty close to Basementdwellers. From now on, my scouting experience starts and stops at the front door of the troop's meeting hall. Around here, the ol' boys are more than happy to have just about anyone handle the scut work for them -- membership, FOS (they'll always take your check), recharter, and anything Cub Scouting related. But Boy Scout programs, OA, summer camp, camporees, high adventure plus any sort of training is strictly the perview with The Priesthood. New ideas are not part of the equation. So you run through the Serenity Prayer, take care of the 60 boys in our troop and the heck with the rest of it. I'm not going to cut off my nose to spite my face, so if there is a district or council program of which we wish to avail ourselves, we will. But otherwise, phfffftt!

I stand corrected, short. I agree with Calico as well. Must be this weird green tea the wife has me on. Need to go back to the real joe.

Or Calico, how about applying for the lottery then showing up with a lawn chair and cooler to enjoy the view yourself. Sounds like a cheap vacation. Put a "Occupy Santa Monica" sign on the back of the chair so the cops won't hassle you.

Shortridge wrote: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ... pchadbo: As you can see, the First Amendment does not say that "the Government cannot establish a religion." It says that It says that the law shall not show favor to a particular established religion over another. " To say the least, that is a remarkably unique intrepretation of the Establishment Clause. Correct me if I am wrong, but you take the word "establishment" to mean "a business, organization or large institution"? In other words, you read the First Amendment to say, "Congress shall make no law regarding a religious institution..."? Even accepting that, I would still read it to prohibit THE establishment of A religion, that is, the creation of a religion. Certainly creating a religion would show favoritism toward that religion. A couple hundred years of case law tends to agree with that.

Quarzse -- Beautiful! Where can I buy a copy of "Crassly Redacted History of the World"? Can I still order in time for Christmas/Hanukkah/Winter Solstice/Ramadan/Festivus/oh, never mind.... Seriously, In my little corner of the world, every town has one town hall. Some are more traditional grand public spaces, most the newer and/or smaller ones are rather undistinguished office buildings. The next town over has a nice town hall AND and really nice town square nearby. But every town has dozens and dozens of churches. Many of the churches occupy more prominent locations that the town halls. Of course there are thousands upon thousands of private homes and businesses. So why the need to plop your religious display on public property? Tradition? Because you can/could? Because it gives your display/religion more importance or standing? Does it imply community if not official support for your faith? I've never understood how the lines in the church-and-state arguments were drawn. In a rational world, I would think the religious groups would be fighting to have their religious symbols removed from secular locations and displayed only on sacred grounds. I would think people of faith would be the ones upset that government officials are leading prayers and teaching religion to their children. I would think the church would be fighting for separation from the state. A world upside down. (Some dolt previously posted this on the OA thread. Go figger.)

E61's got a point. I do think OA has the potential for a return to the Scouts, but it's just overhead to the troop adults. Our lodge requires the troop to send adults to every event, so from my perspective, it turns into another troop activity we have to staff. We have one ASM who does nothing but OA. I'm sure the rules have changed over the years, but back in the day, our chapter advisor was our leader for OA activities -- I don't recall any of our troop leaders even being in the OA. For the kids who are interested in OA, it does provide an additional outlet for them. Then again, so does marching band, football and chess club. I have probably 15 OA members in the troop. Over the years I've rarely had more than one boy at any given time participate actively in the OA. Four guys went to the banquet last month. Two went to fall fellowship. Only one of the 15 is Brotherhood. If OA was really offering a program which interested and attracted my older boys and gave them another reason to stick with Scouting, it would be worth our investment. It isn't.

Beav is making a point he has made many, many times over the years: we here shouldn't be so quick to assume the worst about a fellow Scouter. No, Fred, the facts are not as stated in the column. The facts are the facts and we have access only to a second hand account of one side of the story. As best I can tell, CubsRgr8 still hasn't discussed this with the Scoutmaster. We have absolutely no idea why the SM, CC and COR would take such a hard line with this Scout. I can tell you some years ago this identical post could have been written about me (save the part about the boy being nominated to a military academy). The part of the story you haven't heard is the part where I met NUMEROUS times with the Scout beginning nine months out from his birthday, reminding him he needed a POR, offering suggestions as to what he could do and even cutting him some slack in meeting the requirement. Also missing is any mention of the meeting we had -- with the troop advancement chairman as a witness -- 5.5 months before the boy's 18th birthday during which I looked the Scout square in the eyes, told him to find the SPL and get a POR that night or he would not be an Eagle Scout. (Yes, I was willing to spot him the two weeks he was short). Of course he didn't do so. About six weeks later the boy's mother called and asked me what he needed to do to finish his Eagle; that he was completing college applications and Eagle would be a boost. Of course my answer was "Nothing", it was too late. Mom cried, dad called me a S.O.B. and things went downhill from there. There were several retired Scouters and one neighboring Scoutmaster the family contacted with their side of the story any of whom could have written the same post CubsRgr8 did. So yeah, without hearing the other side of the story, I, too, am willing to give the people on the ground with first-hand knowledge of the situation the benefit of the doubt. It would at least be nice if CubsRgr8 spoke with the SM and offered us the SM's view of things. And speaking of which, I'm bothered by CubsRgr8's comment that his "friendship with the scout and his parents transcends that with the SM and even the troop." I'm not sure what to think about that. Friendships or not, I don't believe being a troop leader requires lock-step agreement with either the troop, it's leaders or the BSA. But neither should your loyalties fall entirely to the scout and his family either. I don't necessarily think this is a situation where one would be required to resign in order to support the Scout. But I do believe an ASM owes a level of loyalty and support to the troop and SM which doesn't seem to be reflected in this statement. Would you care to clarify, CubsRgr8?

Last year my OA rep called to schedule an election and was told only the SM could do so.

Well...... if they would go to Wood Badge and listen to the sessions on team development, they would understand why ad hoc patrols are such a bad idea. One reason our troop no longer participates in the district camporees was their refusal to adjust the camporee rules to accommodate out natural patrols. Interestingly, the folks who were preaching to me the need to combine and/or split patrols for their camporee either were or have since been WB course directors responsible for teaching the very principles their rules violated. It would seem obvious to me, but one thing districts and councils should be doing is making sure their programs support the patrol method or AT LEAST don't actively work against it. Back to your list, E92: -- Too many boys are just lazy. They really don't want to put the work and effort into running patrol activities. They've know if they sit on their butts long enough some adult will step up and put on acceptably interesting programs with little or no effort on their parts. -- If the adults don't put on really exciting, interesting programs the boys will drop out of Scouting (my committee chairman has told me this a number of times.) -- The older Scouts may be working hard to lead the group and plan interesting programs and outings, but if they come up short, the younger boys are the ones who suffer through crummy programs.

I got the same email and assumed this is alumni part of Scouting.org, with which I have already registered. I didn't get as far as seeing the $35 membership fee. Like ES96, from an actual value standpoint, I don't get it. I certainly don't know why you would want to pay for both this and NESA. Seems like plowing the same ground twice. Clearly, this is just a fund raiser. Okay, fine. But where does the money go? Just another rat hole? What's the purpose? I used to go to a dentist who had clearly been to too many marketing seminars. His waiting room contained nothing but ads for various services. You got to "watch TV" during checkups, but that was just more advertising. When he would come in, his first question was always, "are you happy with your smile?" What the heck! I finally got to where I didn't trust the guy and found another dentist. Seems like BSA is getting there. I understand BSA is a non-profit. But instead of selling me a bunch of crap, like $70 silver tokens or baloney memberships, treat me like an intelligent human who is ALREADY donating thousand in time and money and approach me with one reasonable annual request. I understand that's FOS and the local councils' side of the street, but figure it out. They're starting to sound like my old dentist.

Two years ago, the troop taught Home Repair MB skills during troop instruction time. Over a few weeks, the Scouts learned to wire an electrical outlet and switch, sweat copper and glue PVC, repair/replace the guts of a toilet and how to cault. The boys had a blast, especially sweating copper, and the parents LOVED us. Seems like there used to be a lot more trade-related MBs. I've always thought there should be an overall "construction" MB which would focus more on stuff like estimating, reading blueprints, scheduling, etc.

You sold right through the close, Merlyn. Sounded to me that folks, Beav in particular, were trying to agree with your OP. While claiming Perry violates childrens' religious right is a clever rhetoric twist, (and believe me, I don't support Perry in the least), I do agree with your underlying idea that all sorts of prayer is -- and should be -- allowed in schools. Beav is spot-on that much of the problems with applying school-prayer decisions has come from local idiots who don't understand the nuiance of individual prayer vs. state organized prayer. As many folks have noted, anyone who thinks there is no prayer in schools needs to stand in the hall before a calculus final. On the other hand, if you just came to pick a fight, go right ahead.

Eisley's right. Talk with the SM first and get the whole story.

Here's your problem: email. Pick up the phone and give these guys a call. You've only got 16 calls to make. That way you can have a dialogue with the SM, educate them, overcome their objections and offer to explain the program over a cup of coffee. I can imagine a fair number of SM were not in Scouting as youth, crossed over from cubs and got about 20 seconds of OA at Scoutmaster specific training. To them, your email is just one more person from council wanting their time and attention. Inviting them to go to an OA election team training serves your purpose, but look at it from their perspective. They're not running OA elections, is sitting through the whole training a good use of their time? Would they think so?

Off topic but funny -- We were traveling with the troop this weekend. We had prearranged meals for the road -- pizza one night and a cooler full of subs for lunch. When we picked up the pizza, one of the boys announced he wouldn't eat pizza with sauce on it. Easy enough, we had plenty of subs for the next day, so one of the moms one for him. The mom comes to me and tells me he won't eat subs either. Scoutmaster 101: no one dies of malnutrition over a weekend. So I told the mom he could eat the pizza or the sub, but 150 miles from home we couldn't do custom menus (we don't do custom menus 150 feet from home, but I digress). By now the boy has walked up and listening to the conversation. "Besides," I told him, "These aren't subs, they're sandwiches." "Really?" "Absolutely." (Sigh) "Okay." So he takes the sub/sandwich and eats it. If you can't outwit a 12-year-old, you're in the wrong business.

That's a shame.

Seems to me the goverment is run by the EDGE method. But the just never get past "explain."