vol_scouter

The only explanation of which I am aware is the threats that have been made on the lives of many in upper management. I am not defending the practice.

Having seen the attendees for about a decade, those attendees to the NEB have changed - my feeling is a reasonably large amount but perhaps it was not as large as my perception. The NEB is more diverse too.

The BSA has turned over the upper management that was present only 5 years ago with the exception of the general counsel. The National Executive Committee (NEC) and National Executive Board (NEB) have had significant changes during the same period and both are very different from ten years ago. The NEC and NEB have been working to make Scouting safer and the initial results look like they have succeeded. The current BSA management, NEC, and NEB are not the ones who were in charge when the problems occurred. So the changes have been made.

Certainly agree. There is no science to a straw poll so even if some particular response is overwhelmingly selected, it means absolutely nothing. It could agitate people as those who believe that nothing less than chapter 7 for the BSA, LC's, CO's, and maybe insurance companies is the least that should be done as contrasted to those who want a sooner rather than later decision and would consider accepting some version of the BSA RSA proposals. Those who have not been abused and are Scouters will wish claimants to be compensated but will likely wish less severe financial payments. Let

My understanding from folks in the know at the BSA, the BSA must be able to submit a viable 5 year business plan to emerge from Chapter 11. So if the LCs are not part of the settlement and will face lawsuits and be quickly forced into Chapter 11 or 7, will that not negatively affect the BSA business plan? If major COs totally drop Scouting, units could have difficulties finding meeting places causing many to fold. That would adversely affect the BSA emerging from Chapter 11. Seems to me that the BSA needs to thread the needle and satisfy the claimants representatives, LCs, and COs. No

Many councils.

Yes. Several new traditional units. Dens, Packs, Troops, Crews, and Labs. STEM Executives have started about 30 new units a year.

@CynicalScouter If I read what you are saying correctly, the judge must approve the TCC, FCR, and Coalition to have attorneys present. She could approve the insurance companies but deny the TCC, FCR, and Coalition. Is that correct?

So there were two aspects to the LDS in BSA decision making. LDS volunteers have been and are (as individuals) active at all levels in the BSA so had a presence on national committees, the NEC, and the NEB. So they influenced decision making by being part of it. The other aspect was unlike other institutions such as the United Methodists, Catholics, etc. who have local churches that charter units, the LDS church paid for all the local Stakes, their Scouts, and volunteers. So that the LDS church could withdraw ~1/3 of the membership all at once. That was what happened though it was with mu

@CynicalScouter You are correct. The LDS were signed up in 1913. The Scout Oath and Law date to the formation of the BSA in 1910. The USA was rather Victorian in 1910 and very heavily Christian. When one reads William Hillcourt's biography, "Baden-Powell: The Two Lives of a Hero", it is clear that B-P's mother is the central figure of the family (his father died when B-P was young). His mother was not very religious and neither was B-P. As you said, B-P wanted Scouting for all children to be able to join Scouting and London was even then a very diverse city. So not having a Duty to G

I have no other solution except to move to my council.

The BSA was competing with many other Scout organizations until it was awarded a congressional charter in 1916. Part of gaining the charter was its size.

So in 1913 you would have turned down an opportunity for significant growth? I agree that the LDS influences on the BSA was not always in the best interests of the BSA but in 1913 growth was immediate and those problems likely were not seen. Churches became the majority CO's when PTA's (PTO's) withdrew following CSE Ben Love making a no gay policy for the BSA.

@yknot CSE Surbaugh was honest and forthright. He did as he said. The BSA sent surveys to the LC's because the BSA in the past has let the LC do the majority of communications with the volunteers. Some LCs only supplied the survey to the K3, some only to the EC, some to the EB, and some to everyone in the council. National was not in control. The results were not even close.

So you would not follow your legal advice? You would risk losing the LDS years before (~30% of the membership)? Risk losing other chartered organizations? So you would continue to have outside groups slander the BSA over a non-existent transgender problem or once again anger volunteers and CO's who assumed an anti-transgender policy? This is not an effort to argue about past decisions but to say that the leadership has been competent but our recognition of the best course of action we believe to be clearer retrospectively. Of course, had any other course been pursued, we canno

Character assassination does not make your inference correct. I have seen the raw data and questions. The published results represent the views of the people surveyed. Do realize that the local councils, not national, determined who in their council would receive some of the surveys. Just because you do not feel like this would have been the result does not mean that it is wrong.

So how would you have avoided filing for Chapter 11? If they are so bad, just let us know how to avoid the lawsuits from men who deserve compensation? Would you not bring adding girls up and be sued time after time in the 16 states at the time that allowed parents to determine the gender when legal opinions said that the BSA would uniformly lose those cases? Today's young families want a single set of activities for the entire family. Want to continue to lose the opportunity to recruit the families with girls? Once again, if all of you had the same information as the volunte

In my discourse, I noted that volunteers need to control their nominating committee if it is not getting the nominees that the council needs. I do not know the reasoning behind the change in the requirements for earning Eagle Palms. The survey results about girls were published. Every group was ~75% or higher in favor of having a program for girls with Cub Scouts and Scouts BSA being single gender. As I recall, the OA was closer to 90%. Regardless, all groups were very pro adding girls.

No professionals were consulted. The NEC did this and the professionals were told what they were to do. Your feelings are completely wrong. Some of the surveys from the Churchill committees were rather poorly done and seemed designed to reach predetermined conclusions by the volunteers.

@yknot So it is not a rudderless ship. The problem is that whenever there is an issue that was not resolved in the manner that forum member _______ thinks is appropriate, then national is stupid, disconnected, does care, cares only about money, and many other knee jerk criticisms. Yet when I have been in committee meetings, the information is carefully examined, changes are taken very seriously, and the solution is one that most of us possessing the same information would make. I know of no corporation for profit or not for profit that details all of the information that leads to a decisio

Anthony Berger is an excellent professional who was an SE before in Georgia. Just remember that all he can do is to take ideas to the Cub Scout Program committee composed of volunteers who must approve any changes.

This is not BSA policy so was enacted by volunteers in your council. It has a chilling effect on volunteers. I support all board members contribute something to the council - time, money, or both.

It has never been an issue in my council where I have been a executive board member (some years executive committee too) without deep pockets since the mid-1990's. It is not a requisite on the national level though there is a cost of going to committee meetings three or more times a year in Dallas and wherever NAM is held that one must be able to afford.

The NEB voted to allow the volunteers to vote on gay Scouts - more than 60% voted in favor with an outside firm overseeing the vote. The discussion at the NEC and NEB was vigorous but girls and gays were both highly supported. It is my supposition that the NEC and NEB wanted unanimity on the official vote to show support for the direction.

Not true at all. I do not have the ability to write a large check even on the local council level let alone on the national level. I served on a national committee that I eventually chaired and the later chairs were not wealthy either.