Jameson76

3 hours ago, fred8033 said:

Great comments so far ...

... I was going to add a comment about pack camp outs and the gentleman not being able to share a tent with his girlfriend's Tiger scout son.  So I re-read the G2SS.  BSA documents have been getting more precise over the last 15 years.  Words that are flexible are intentionally flexible and words that are more specific are more specific for a reason.  The G2SS sometimes says "legal guardian" and other times just says "guardian".  In the sections referring to sharing a tent, it just says "guardian".  So if the mom says XXX is responsible for my son this weekend, do we consider that to be enough to establish "guardian"???   Or do we still apply "legal guardian" (a much more specific statement)?  I've seen this situation in my cub pack and I've discussed occurrences with other packs.  It happens all the time these days. 

On the guardian question, I am not a lawyer (though I did watch 12 Angry Men the other night) the only definition seems to imply someone who is legally responsible for someone who is unable to mange their affairs.  Agree that if the wizards in Dallas had put the word "legal" in front of guardian, would be much clearer.  I know for webelos visitation we have had older brothers, grandparents, etc accompany visiting Web II scouts.  If another parent brings 2 Web's for a visit (their son and another Web) we typically will request that the young ones have their own tent.

To get back on topic, he is not the CM if the CO/COR/CC do not approve and endorse.  End of story.

13 minutes ago, walk in the woods said:

approved and under the auspices and standards of the Boy Scouts of America.

Agree it is sort of vague as to whether this would / should be counted in the 15 nights.  As with many things in Boy Scouts, you as the SM will need to use your best judgement to ensure the requirements are met and you are not adding or subtracting to/from them.  Yes you have some latitude.

Approved - that would seem to imply that the camping event and/or outing would need to be reviewed prior to the event with the Troop leadership.  Typically the monthly troop outings would be assume to be approved, can be a grey area for a cub outing with siblings 

under the auspices = with the help and support of (someone or something)

standards of the Boy Scouts of America = well, that is subjective as no leadership from the troop was likely in charge and that is a broad statement

1 hour ago, SSScout said:

What do we call the middle range kids?   

Be reminded if you do call and your are a leader, to make sure it is a conference call with another registered and YPT trained leader so as to be compliant with current GTSS. Also subnote A, if the middle range kid is in fact a youth who is currently identifying as female gender and you as a leader do not currently identify as female gender you will need to include a registered and YPT trained leader who does currently identify as female gender

Gotta be safe......

56 minutes ago, mashmaster said:

I understand that part.  I was just shocked at the picture.   I was commented about the fact that the family filing a law suit isn't necessarily unreasonable and that I am not an expert on the situation.

I lived in the Seattle area and have seen what happens when a freak wind storm sweeps through.  100' fir trees slice through 2 story houses like a hot knife through butter.

 

The camp is East of Atlanta (proper) about 40 miles.  Bert Adams has been Atlanta Area Council property since around 1960 (+/-).   There was a storm front moving through, not all that surprising for mid-summer in Georgia.  My recollection is there was not a long term warning about severe weather threats, just thunderstorms.  There were some microbursts that hit the area.  Those are very random and literally will knock a couple of trees down and 20' away not damage.

Woodruff (the AAC mountain camp) was hit by a severe line on a Saturday afternoon in late June, so no campers on property, and maybe 30 tents and platforms were damaged.

Honestly not sure what can be done other than the obvious.  Remove any dead trees, that is normal.  The tree(s) in question were alive.  Remove any visibly damaged / aged / insect infested trees.  Short of having all campsites and program areas in a big field (which opens up other potential issues) or removing all the trees, there is a limited action.  I guess don't go outside and hang out in an office park would be a solution.

They certainly have a right to sue.  It has been 6 months so my assumption is there was behind the scenes work to have a settlement.  The family may be interested in a consent decree to implement different actions than BSA currently has in place.  Interestingly they appear to be suing the Atlanta Area Council directly.  The suit was filed in Cobb County, where the council office is physically located.  They may also be suing National BSA, but that was not mentioned in the WSB or Atlanta Journal articles

44 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

Follow up article from Forbes...

They are hiring more consultants and reviewing both financial and operational plans....

https://www.forbes.com/sites/debtwire/2019/01/08/boy-scouts-of-america-seeks-survival-skills-to-deal-with-abuse-allegations/amp/

“The organization’s financial state could be in peril should its insurance reserves not adequately resolve the litigation claims, the sources noted. In addition, BSA’s efforts to be more inclusive— by dropping the ‘Boy’ in its main program and welcoming girls and transgender scouts to join— has not resulted in a membership spike.”

Also this is the really really important quote from the article:

BSA’s debt load has ballooned in recent years to help fund the Summit’s development. In 2012, the organization issued $175 million in bonds due 2022, and increased its revolving line of credit by $25 million.

Yes the insurance issues and settlements can be tough, but the ego project of Summit is the real issue

36 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

In addition, BSA’s efforts to be more inclusive— by dropping the ‘Boy’ in its main program and welcoming girls and transgender scouts to join— has not resulted in a membership spike.”

Shocked face

We had two Scouts who did their projects on the same day at a community organization.  The org was having a work day and wanted to get everything done on the same day.  It was logistically easier for them.  As was previously noted each Scout owned their project, they were separate and coordinated their own efforts.  One thing was one project was ahead of schedule and had extra labor so they wandered over and helped with moving some items for project 2.  Basic labor sharing

SM should not be inserting himself into the process

An interesting question on how to grow Scouting.

One item BSA does not seem to effectively do is benchmarking.  Not that JTE foolishness or Quality Unit intrigue.  But really get into what is the unit that maintains membership, has many service hours, has outings every month, works to use the patrol method actually doing and how are they in fact doing this?  (and no it's not Woodbadge trained leaders).  This would be more than one visit and the actual challenge is what makes a good unit.  One unit may be 100 Scouts and another unit 2 miles down the road may be 25 Scouts.  Both may be successful, but who defines this?

If you want to grow, figure out what the top units are doing, then objectively determine what can and what cannot be replicated.  Likely it will come down to motivated adult leaders, engaged youth, and supportive families.

Agree on Scoutbook.  I am the Life to Eagle coordinator for our troop.  We have 10 - 12 Eagles per year.  The individual report is great.  Helps to see if the Scout has in fact turned in all the merit badge blue cards.  Also the dates are very useful.  I send them the link to the fillable PDF Eagle app and advise them to pull their report from Scoutbook.

For keeping up with the Scouts I have a basic Excel sheet that I sort by birthday and rank.  Also there are milestones like project approved, merit badges, have they reached out to me to review the process, SM conference, etc.   If they are closing on 18 I will check-in.  Still their responsibility to follow through.

There ares notes in the Guide to Advancement.  Lots of note on timeliness

From section 9.0.1.5 Submit to Council Service Center

"There is no requirement that the application must be completed or submitted before the 18th birthday.  Councils do not have the authority to reject applications submitted on of after that date"

At Philmont check-in a few years back, my BP was higher than they liked.  Hung around the medical place, drank water, etc.  One of the medical folks came in, I asked what's the end game here.  They advised that ultimately the decision to head for the trail was my decision.  I told them "and we're done here".  Had a great trek.  80 plus miles, Baldy and Tooth, etc etc

I have not take WB but knowing some of the leaders in our council and from photos, pretty sure NOT a HA and not a physically stressing activity.

1 hour ago, FormerBSA said:

 I remember the days when the local scout executive, not just de, would visit council events and visit camps and go to round tables. I think along with the membership cards those days are over. 

Well...you can't have your CEO out and about with the great unwashed.

Most Boy Scouts do not even realize they have a membership card/number.  That is until they start filling out the Eagle application

Rather than Woodbadge, lead a second summer camp or a longer term summer experience for the troop

8 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

One of the trouble makers wrote a letter asking for permission to camp since son has a peanut allergy. He stated he does not trust his son to use his EpiPen properly. Apparently he also does not trust the other Scouts, nor the Scouters, to be able to treat his son.

You just know that their version of all of this is that the TROOP would not make a reasonable accommodation for their son who had a life threatening allergy.  The TROOP was insensitive to his needs.  The parents graciously offered to attend the outing so as to relieve the burden of this from the TROOP leadership.  The pleas from the parents fell on deaf ears and everything was fine up until this point.  They are not a welcoming TROOP

This stuff will write itself

They have published the 2019 Treks - 

Seems that the middle of the ranch will not be used.  Sort of expected this was going to be the case.  Either south country or north country.  No hiking bear canyon or crossing US 64

https://www.philmontscoutranch.org/2019-itineraries-and-guidebook-to-adventure-released/?fbclid=IwAR0EAgyPzzB6nDK20QvbLg0oKnVvtunDAxmeqtRc7Y7JcUfHk17wOn8rhE8

Option B

As Gerry Bertier's so eloquently stated in Remember the Titans - "Sometimes, you just gotta cut a man loose”

We have Scouts (youth) who are Life or Eagle sign off on the Tfoot / Second Class / First Class requirements.  I guess if we had Life Scouts in the troop that also had a son in the troop we would evaluate if they could sign off, though not likely we will put it in the rotation of things to talk about.  For merit badges scouts find leaders other than their parents to cover that.  We are a large unit so most merit badges (especially Eagle required) have 3 to 4 MBC they can call on.

For our unit no parents can be on their son's BOR.  Same for SM conferences, no parents does those for their son.

We try to recognize key leaders each year as they are being active with the troop.  

For summer activities we have made mugs (large / regular / travel)  and metal coozies over the years.  In August we have an adult leaders "meeting" and review the summer.  We have about 25 - 30 leaders there from various summer camps, HA, and support functions

At Christmas we try to get a small gift for the SM / ASM's / Outdoor

For others they sort of, to paraphrase Dugout Doug McArthur..."Old leaders never die, they simply fade away" (Note that he swiped that from and old English folk song)

Now we did have a long-term SM step down, we had some items for him.

2 minutes ago, Terasec said:

Thats not leadership

thats called damage control

We were pleased that they acknowledged there is an issue coming over the horizon.  They made clear the separation of National to Local council.  They specifically called out the properties (Woodruff and Bert Adams) and the VSC (literally in the shadow of the new Braves ballpark) would not be affected.  AAC is clearly in the latter part of this question...do you raise money to have scouting OR do you have scouting to raise money. 

Note that the message is addressed to Parents, Volunteers, and Donors.  No mention of the actual scouts who we are providing program to.

Interesting message from the Atlanta Area Council today.....

• We operate as a financially separate not-for-profit organization and our Council receives no funding from the National organization.
• The Atlanta Area Council is a 501(c)(3) entity incorporated in Georgia. Our Camps, Volunteer Service Center and finances are owned and controlled by the Atlanta Area Council.
• Local Scouting programs, camps and the Volunteer Service Center will not be directly affected by National BSA's consideration of their options.
• All funds contributed to the Atlanta Area Council stay in Metro-Atlanta this includes Friends of Scouting donations, popcorn and camp card sales.

25 minutes ago, Eaglein87 said:

Can anyone confirm costs on Bechtel? Is it true that the cost is close to the total BSA endowment? Some articles out there claim such.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/west-virginia-mega-camp-adds-boy-scouts-troubles-flna6C10643112

"Costs are rising. Initially budgeted at $176 million through 2013, the Summit's cost is now estimated to reach at least $350 million by the end of this year and $439 million by the end of 2015"

 

Yes.  It is a cash drain.

If you read the notes (buried I might add) in the annual report the true picture of the issue comes to light.  There are forward thinking statements about "upcoming fund raising" and "anticipated donations".  Also there is a balloon payment north of $125 million on the bonds in 2021 I believe.  Assume they would refinance that for more interest and kick that can down the road.

Bottom line Summit is sort of a microcosm of what is wrong with "corporate" scouting.  Some group within National (volunteers and pros) decided THIS is what was needed.  This giant EGO project.  A big shiny Disneyesque camp to draw all these Scouts to it, cash would roll in.  They based some of this on the "waiting lists" for Philmont and Seabase, and to a lesser degree Northern Tier.  There was supposedly this unfulfilled population that could be tapped.  Well shockingly that is actually a smaller group. Also Scouts want real adventure and action.  If you want zip lines, mt biking, whitewater rafting, backpacking, water park adventures, and planned climbing; guess what, my unit can do it waaay cheaper locally.  No one bothered to ask if units wanted that or would they spend money to go there.  Answer seems to be nope.

The local unit is where Scouting happens.  Maybe they should ask units what they want and more importantly, what they will pay to actually do.

7 minutes ago, Eaglein87 said:

The honest question that has to be asked is how did we get here. For those of us who really care about Scouting plan for what Scouts will look like in the future where National influence is greatly reduced.

Well that is an interesting question.  IMHO it goes back many many years and continues with inept management.  The program at it's core is solid, the overhead execution is tone deaf and not aware of what is actually happening in the trenches.

• Early 70's - Social tinkering and the introduction of ISP (Improved Scouting Program) that gutted the core outdoor program, in 8 years 40% of Scouts left
• 70's and 80's - National Leadership handles abuse cases very poorly, and continues to handle them poorly
• 90's - Some focus away from the outdoor programs and focus STEM and non traditional Scouting activities
• 90's - Risk management gets to the forefront, BSA is afraid to do the things we used to do successfully
• 00's - Not fully funding pensions, decides (like many municipalities) to kick that financial can down the road
• 00's - More and continued social tinkering with the program drives away some membership
• 00's - Rather than focus on why some traditional units are successful and what draws youth the them, expands into "Scouting for Life" and other non-core offerings, membership shenanigans abound
• 00's - Early in the new century the brain trust decides that what is needed is a NEW and SHINY National camp, so the SUMMIT is born, 1/2 BILLION dollars later (and counting) it continues to be a giant hole to shovel cash into
• 00's - Liability insurance goes up, but National is remiss is passing that cost along for several years, really eating into the reserves
• 00's - The National overhead is not reduced in ratio to the actual number of Scouts, gotta pay the man
• 00's - Due to various changes the LARGEST group that charters Scouts (20% of membership) makes the decision to part ways with BSA

Curious if anyone has had any direct comments or feedback from their local councils?  I wonder is the local councils were in the loop before the CSE e-mail or did it just roll into the inboxes at the office like it did ours?

Not sure if the councils will try to do some damage control or hunker down.

2 minutes ago, Sentinel947 said:

What effect would National's bankruptcy have on the Councils?

I thought (think??) the Councils and Nationals money and finances are separate to a degree.  For example National cannot make councils pony up cash to pay for Summit-a-palooza and all those costs.  Just as National will likely not bail out a council for bad finance decisions and spending.

There is overlap for pensions and the membership dues