Jameson76

Just now, qwazse said:

@Jameson76, did you all get trip cancellation insurance?

Airline (Delta) has been responsive, they will have a credit for a year from purchase.  Not sure on PSR fees (assume they will be refunded or credited), calls out to the ground transportation. 

Everything was fine until last Thursday....

We have (had) 2 crews that were to leave on Sunday.  Not sure what the options are for them down the road.

BSA has an opportunity to really make something positive out of this negative OR they can fumble the ball and alienate their most dedicated and involved youth.  I hope they refund all fees AND / OR give them priority for 2019 slots, which may involve adding more slots and trek opportunities

For our troop with PSR Fees, ground tours, flights, equipment the 2 crew are in this for $50,000 +

Come on BSA National High Adventure bases, the ball is in your court, you did not ask for this, but you can WIN this one

Seems like a Council Commissioner trying to fill in a checkbox somewhere without actually doing anything......  "Why yes, our stalwart DC and UC teams have done XXX unit assessments, here are the forms.  They are very busy out with the units"

Personally, I would ignore it, what with generic e-mail and whatnot.  If the UC (whatever that may be) wants to come and sit down and do an actual assessment, then engage

37 minutes ago, walk in the woods said:

"Do not take flimflamasol if you are allergic to flimflamasol" is my favorite.

This pretty much cover it all....

9 minutes ago, NJCubScouter said:

@RichardB, does the BSA realize that at some point, the cost and risk of volunteering ("cost" including time, and "risk" including statements such as appear above) is going to make people stop volunteering?  I think that for some people, the point has already been reached.  I also think that if all leaders actually read the Guide to Safe Scouting, a large number would decide that the point has been reached for them as well.  Does the BSA recognize this as a problem and have a solution?  Or is it just our problem?

That would depend on what you view as providing an engaging and challenging program.  To be fully compliant with the G2SS is possible, but that is sort of like building something in a major city, yes you can conform to the 600 pages of building codes, but is that even something you want to do?

Most of do the best we can and the goal is to safely bring home the youth in our charge

17 minutes ago, WonderBoy said:

...and a healthy percentage of parents too. How do you recruit needed and necessary volunteers when you spend more time explaining what they can't do with the kids than what they can (or should) do with them?.

Not only G2SS but also the NEW AND IMPROVED YPT.  Have any of you taken that yet?  First what they present is valuable information and we as leaders should be aware and understand the potential issues.

That being said, the new YPT veers heavily from  "what to do" type training; if this happens do this, don't do this, etc to a very heavy and constant drumbeat of how much of a public health crisis that child exploitation is at this time.  If I were a new parent volunteer, the tone of the training may make think twice, especially as the comments on being a mandatory reporter, etc

As with the G2SS the YPT rules, while overall simple, can cause confusion.  Most frequent is the two deep leadership and one on one contact.  Two deep is required for an outing, that does not mean anytime a leader is around there has to be two of you.  Same with one on one contact, you are at summer camp and come across one of your scouts walking to his next class.  No reason you cannot walk with him and chat with him about camp (he is by himself as no other troop member is taking that class at that time)

11 hours ago, gblotter said:

My father-in-law attended the annual meeting in Texas. Kool-Aid flowed in abundance.

Everyone - yes, EVERYONE thinks girls in BSA is the greatest idea ever. The only reason anyone thinks badly of BSA is because the press has been plotting against them. Nothing needs to be fixed except the negative messages being portrayed by the media.

Family, family, family. Get on the train or get run over. The demise of century-old traditions - swept away with smiles and marketing speak.

Two high-ranking LDS leaders were there and spoke of the long and difficult decision to sever ties with BSA. It was not their choice - it was the will of God. Tears were shed.

Not a word was mentioned about huge debts and looming balloon payments. What could possibly go wrong?

I suspect they had Kool Aid by the truckload available

Agree that the speak / tenor / attitude from National on down is that THIS change (the admitting girls) is the one that will really do it, this is what was needed.  

The FAMILY emphasis is the one that will be a challenge down the road.  The law of unintended consequences.  While signing up the whole family (Scouting for Dogs anyone??) may be great for the numbers, not sure of the impact to leadership and personal growth.  If the youth and Family are so closely tied through 6 years (yes 6 years) of Cubbery, the move to what was traditional Boy Scouts will be quite a change.  While the program elements and requirements are not changing (yet) likely in many units the delivery of that program will be substantively altered.  Even now troops within the same are vary greatly.  As Girl Troop and "Linked" (coed wink wink) Troop become active they will effect the landscape.  

LDS decision is the LDS decision.  Possibly some LDS scouts will continue in non-LDS units but I am not versed in LDS family culture

The old adage, follow the money.  If you read and review the original Summit justification, there is no way that location can become self sustaining.  From a High Adventure viewpoint the need and numbers were never there.  Yes there may have been some waitlisting, but that is sort of like beach hotels on Memorial Day and the summer.  Sure if you have a 200 unit building you could fill up a 600 unit building for some period, but for 9 months of the year you only need less than 100.  Overall capacity was fine, there was some surge capacity that was a challenge.  The financial woes of the BSA on the National level; Summit costs, bloated staff and salaries, underfunded pensions, insurance costs are where the real trouble is brewing for the future.

33 minutes ago, CalicoPenn said:

It seems we may need a reminder of who the G2SS is designed to protect.

Ostensibly, the G2SS is designed to protect the Scouts and the Scout Leaders.  Follow the G2SS and things should go just fine for everyone.

But - the G2SS is not designed to protect Scouts and Scouters.  It is designed to protect the corporation known as the Boy Scouts of America.  It is designed to deflect liability back down to units and unit leaders.  Scout drowns while swimming on a Troop campout - parents sue (of course naming the BSA - deepest pockets).  Did you follow the G2SS and the Safe Swim Defense?  If the answer is no, or even a tepid "well kinda", National's lawyers and insurance company can make a case that they provided you specific guidance and you failed to follow it, therefore their liability is limited.

Why this language about no one on one both inside AND outside Scouting?  Too many cases of Scout leaders molesting lads they know through Scouting on non-Scout related outings/meetings, etc. where the BSA is sued because the Scout leader met the lad through the Scouts and the BSA response of "The molestation took place on a non-Scout related trip" not being strong enough to absolve the BSA of some liability - but if the G2SS says that a Scout leader can't meet one on one with a Scout outside of Scouting, their case becomes stronger - the leader, who the BSA can prove took the online YPT class, has been warned - and now is violating the BSA policies as well as breaking the law.  Lower liability for the BSA.

Does that mean your son's BSA friend can't come over to your house if your the only adult there?  Of course not - the BSA doesn't have police to enforce the G2SS and if a complaint is filed - unless there are criminal acts taking place - its doubtful it will really go anywhere. 

Agree - 

G2SS original intent is good, but this has evolved into nothing more than a Corporate BSA cover document.  Very much like when you get a new lawnmover and it explain not to mow inside.  Obviously someone at some point did that, so the legalese solution is to pretty much put the kitchen sink into the "Thou Shall Not" section and move the liability down the road

5 minutes ago, fred johnson said:

I have understanding for the shared views.  I'm looking for any clarification BSA sends or provides.  

So - Looking at the G2SS

• Electronics are not mentioned in G2SS
• Phone is mentioned multiple times, no clarification or guidance except:

No firm guidance from BSA

The electronics and phones are a challenge.  You certainly want for the Scouts to engage with the unit and not be on their phone during meetings, outings, and summer camp.  They can be a useful tool and are great for reviewing requirements, getting food costs, etc.

For our troop the go to policy (actually more of a guideline) is we do not encourage or support phones and electronics on outings and meetings.  If we see them during the meeting and event they will be secure for the Scout until the end of the meeting and event (would not want anything to happen to it).  

This can be a challenge and actually do not have great solution.  So many parents want that instant access to their Scouts 24/7.

On 5/23/2018 at 11:18 PM, KYScouter said:

I found this interesting (from section I):

"One-on-one contact between adult leaders and youth members is prohibited both

inside and outside of Scouting."

 

A literal reading of this would mean that I can never again babysit my scout nephew, even if it's not a scouting event.  Yikes.  (Of course an even more literal reading of this means my brother can no longer take his scout son to school while mom takes younger brother to daycare.)

Taking the portion out of the paragraph, section, and overall context may lead to varying interpretations, though the literal reading may be the intent.  Though not very practical depending on your troop and community.

The section is I. Youth Protection and Adult Leadership.  The entire section speaks to Adults leading and interacting with youth.  The sections following this line speaks about what to do if a conference is needed and digital communications.  Possibly they are speaking to and calling out meetings, communications, etc that will inevitably fall out of "Scouting" which would be meetings, outings, summer camp. 

Kid who is in your troop, lives in the neighborhood, your are friends with family and you help him with a school project in your shop, not sure that is a YPT issue.  Reason being that if something did happen there the reporting would be to the police, not any Scouting group.  Yes the acquaintances may overlap, but your SM would not report the incident as it was not his purview or responsibility.

Wow there is a lot wrong here.  Only speaking for our unit but actually kicking someone out has only happened once in maybe 20+ years

In that instance the Scout was asked to not return after multiple meetings with the parents, a suspension from outings, suspension for a period and no improvement.  IMHO an expulsion from the troop should not come as a surprise to the affected.

We have of course had issues between Scouts.  In all cases there have been conversations with the SM, CC, parents, and the Scout.  Key is to get all the detail and as many have said, insure you have an informed, fair, and impartial decision.  Main goal is to keep the Boy Scout active in the troop.

5 minutes ago, carebear3895 said:

I actually asked someone at national the exact question "are you going to keep calling it boys life" and they told me yes. 

I feel straight up lied to by National. 

I bet they said "Yes...as of right now"

2 hours ago, Gwaihir said:

Everything CSE said about the BSA understanding and embracing the differences of the genders and supporting single gender instruction is a bald faced lie. 

Our CSE.... maybe needs to read up on the Oath and Law as he makes statements

1 minute ago, gblotter said:

I finished my last Eagle-required merit badge in December 1973 and passed my EBOR in early 1974. An ISP survivor here, too.

If you finished Eagle December 1973 (NOTE - as did I and we took paperwork to Council office on like Friday 12/28 or Monday 12/30, stood in line, and got it filed) then you were under the original requirements and hopefully avoided ISP, berets, and asking the kindly policeman for directions while out on a hike.

5 minutes ago, gblotter said:

BSA will see those kinds membership declines next year just from the LDS departure. The additional attrition over the next decade will be much more severe.

I was being kind...also haven't you been paying attention???  THOUSANDS of GIRLS are signing up, plus the LIONS, plus the FAMILIES, and did I mention the GIRLS, and STEM, and SOCCER, and LEARNING FOR LIFE, why the tent is HEEWGE and will need to get HEEEWGER, what with all of this influx BSA (current corporate name but not married to it), will need to no doubt add (wait for it) SUMMIT WEST to handle the need for High Adventure

https://scoutingwire.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/2017-Annual-Report-Combined-FINAL-App-Version.pdf

Always interesting - you have to really read the notes. 

The National Council’s controlling interest in its unrestricted net assets decreased by $6,479,000. The decrease in net assets was driven by payments made to the Boy Scouts of America Retirement Plan for Employees totaling $14,400,000 claims and provision expense related to the General Liability program totaling $57,427,000. Offsetting the decrease in net assets was increases in investment income totaling $58,745,000.

Total expenses increased by $19,864,000 to $283,604,000 in 2017, up from $263,740,000 during 2016. Of this increase, $33,221,000 relates to cost attributed to the 2017 National Scout Jamboree. Offsetting the increase are declines in expenses attributed to pension and insurance cost of $13,564,000 (Note under REVENUES that Fees increased in 2017 by $24,426,000 primarily due to the 2017 National Scout Jamboree - so I guess we lost $9,000,000 at Jambo)

The National Council’s financial condition for 2018 and the next few years will depend, in large part, upon three factors.

1. The first is the outcome of the litigation discussed within this report (see Note 9) and the impact to GLIP (Note 7).
2. The second lies with the success of securing donations for the Summit project in order to continue to pay bond payments as scheduled and maintaining compliance with debt covenants.
3. The third factor is the economy and legislation and their effect on market conditions and liquidity requirements. 

Quite a few notes and comments on Summit - Here is one

In March 2012, the National Council issued debt to finance the development of the Summit. $175,000,000 in 10-year, tax exempt bonds was added to the existing 2010 Series A and B bonds, and the 5-year $50,000,000 line of credit was increased by $25,000,000 to $75,000,000. Bond issuance costs were $100,000. The Series A bond was paid in 2015 and the Series B bond has monthly principal and interest payment with a balloon payment of $40,363,000 due in 2020. The $175,000,000 bonds payable, requires monthly interest and principal payments with a balloon payment of $136,834,000 due in 2022. 

Well...let's see 10 years down the road

• All packs / troops / units will be coed
• The uniform will be a suggestion, more just a shirt likely
• Duty to God and Statement of Declaration of Religious Principle will be greatly amended, watered down, or tossed
• The current 266 Councils will be consolidated to under 150
• A financial reorganization due to the Summit debacle
• The registration (showing 2,659.439 in 2017 annual report) will be down to well under 2,000,000
• The number of units (showing 99,814 in 2017 annual report) will be down to well under 80,000
• Major requirement changes and updates, less emphasis on actual outing and more emphasis on "events"
• Also more options and paths to advancement, so as in the 70's, you can likely get to Eagle and never actually camp, start a fire, leave the house
• Summer camp will be vastly different in appearance and scope
• Families and family "events" in the program formerly known as Boy Scouts will be common place
• More emphasis on STEM and non outdoor items, leading to more dilution of the brand

4 minutes ago, Gwaihir said:

So so dumb.  Everything CSE said about the BSA understanding and embracing the differences of the genders and supporting single gender instruction is a bald faced lie.  Actions speak louder than words.  Spinning off a brand new magazine for girls, have some overlap in articles but also showcase things outside of scouts that interest girls should have been the obvious direction.  

So so true - 

Missed opportunity to brand the Girls program for 11 - 17 year olds as something new, same requirements, but they will be the program not called Girl Scouts.  Then there is recognition  of the differences, Boy Scouts stays the same...win win

Same with youth oriented magazine.  Though honestly with the membership price increase we may keep annual troop dues the same and have the upcharge for Boys Life (or whatever Life)

12 minutes ago, Oldscout448 said:

well at least Pedro isn't wearing a skort.    

Yet

The National Meeting is still going one...so who knows

Wonder if Pedro (a male given name from/in Spanish, equivalent to Peter) will be given a more gender neutral name or will there be a new addition in XXXXX Life with a feminine twist

Ahh.....This should be good (spotted at National Meeting)

16 hours ago, FormerProfessional said:

Every council has a list of “blackballed” scout volunteers.

God I hope I am on that list...wonder if there is a patch???  Seems to be a beer for the club

1 hour ago, an_old_DC said:

By the way, I don’t worry about what a DE or DD thinks.

Agree

Even though our CO has the largest unit(s) in the district (Cubs and Boy Scouts) and highest FOS and community service hours I can honestly say in the last 10 years we have only seen the DE or any professional outside of RT or when they wander by our winter COH (read money time) exactly zero times.  Granted we do not do any camporees, district events, council camporamas, etc.  As for the fabled white unicorn of Scouting (the unit commissioner) maybe twice in the same period.

They may be scared of us and we hope to keep it that way

20 minutes ago, Oldscout448 said:

Why Jameson76 ,  do  I detect a wee bit 'o sarcasm ?

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it