mrjohns2

This is a good point. For those of us at the far end of the org of a large corporation, legal requirements are just that, requirements. I was on a church board with someone who was pretty high up in a large org. When we said that legal said we shouldn't have wine at a church auction, some of were like that is settle, legal has spoken. This person made it clear "that is the advice from legal, but legal doesn't set the business direction". That was an eye opener for me when you are at the level of a company that sets the direction which may or may not align with legal.

Your understanding is incorrect. They did not “vote to contribute”, the corporation told the court the OA and NESA endowments were protected. They they were not subject to the bankruptcy contributions to the trust. The other side said show us how you did proper record keeping for the funds inputs and outputs. They had no records and had just comingled the funds in the general funds. Thus, they were ordered to contribute the funds. Thus they need to “recapitalize”.

More to participate in the endowment donation program.

The camping requirement has been eliminated for adults.

I'm pretty sure our council does not. I keep asking and often no one knows who the chair is, or they keep pointing to a particular professional. This is a huge issue as one person cannot do it all.

There is a 2 month grace period for both individuals and units. I know my district has been very slow with both.

Is this the trust then suing each holdout insurance carrier?

It took me a bit, but I found the part that defines this situation. Your description is not accurate as the gap would be >5 days. The council could define it as a "day camp" or not if the gap is 5 days or more. "Except for day camps as provided below, a camp is an overnight program . In determining the length of a camp, count all nights where any participants (other than staff) are present with substantially the same camp leadership or camp staff, regardless of what the camp is called, unless there is a gap of five or more nights between sessions . Camp includes the following classifications: 1 . Day camps . A day camp is a council-organized program designed for Scouts for two or more days, under council-retained leadership at an approved site with no overnight . The program may operate at age-appropriate Cub Scout, Scouts BSA, Venturer, or Sea Scout level . A council may choose to treat a one-day event (without an overnight) as a day camp."

Care to point out where it is defined this way?

When NCAP started, day activity like PWD had to follow NCAP? What year was that? Are you sure? It is only like 5 years or so that camporees and OA weekends had to follow NCAP and brought about the "Short Term Camp Administrator" concept. That was a big shock to people.

NCAP does not cover day events. Day Camp? Yes. Day activities? No. Hasn't in the last 8 years I have been involved. It covers: day camps (2 days or longer using council retained leadership), long term camp (4 nights or more with council retained leadership), and short term camp (1-3 nights with council retained leadership / program). It does not cover a day event. It hasn't. No change in 8 years.

Camping event, not day event. I may have missed the first comment, but I wanted to point that out.

This is question can be looked at as where you can improve on using the word stronger (as in, stronger than today). Not areas that you provide strong areas of leadership in. He can provide stronger leadership in Church, if they became more involved. He could provide stronger leadership at YMCA camp. He could provide stronger leadership at School. He could provide stronger leadership at home by leading family activities instead of parents doing it (planning a trip for example or growing vegetables). You and the Scout can put yourself in a box you can't get out of. Or you could choose to encourage the scout to think more expansively.

January numbers will fluctuate all month, drop at the start, grow a bit with renewals/new people. Is your Jan 25 number from 1/1/25? Your numbers are still interesting to compare end of 24 vs end of 25. So... Dec 24 986,520 Dec 25 907,949 Loss of 81,571 or (8.3%) for the year. So, using Krone's loss number, we really lost 341,571 and gained 260,000 to get to the net loss of 81,571. From a strategy standpoint, an EVP of membership and council unit growth executives could/may/potentially help by having people focus on things like renewals and membership vs. an afterthought. I do agree, though, having some additional employees in and of itself doesn't do much. How about a gosh darn renewal system that doesn't break in the last month or the year, or one that works robustly each and every day! That would be a start.

This is a good approach. Also, if/when you sit on BORs, and the Scout clearly doesn't have a clue, go back to the SM and find out why. This is the feedback loop that the BOR should drive.