CalicoPenn

There is an assumption being made that the Charter being referred to in the Bylaws refer to the Federal (Congressional) Charter. I'm going to toss in this monkey-wrench - do with it what you will. The BSA also has Articles of Incorporation on file with the State of Texas. Articles of Incorporation are often referred to as a Corporate Charter. Most Bylaws will typically be subordinate to an organizations corporate charter or articles of incorporation so the BSA Bylaws could be referring to the corporate charter and not the federal charter. I know about the statement the BSA sai

The Congressional Charter is largely honorific - a recognition by Congress that "you're ok and we like you". While it ostensibly protects the BSA from anti-trust laws and protects their logos, etc., its mostly something the BSA can brag about having. Trademark and copyright laws protect the BSAs logos, badges, uniforms, etc. far better than the federal charter. The Congressional charters started when companies wanted to be registered in the District of Columbia (this would be about 1791). Eventually Congress decided they had more important things to do so they finally gave the D

Sure - things like trenching tents, first aid for runaway carriages, Indian sign language, sock garters, that odd, loping Scout walk/run thing (Scout Pace), the Shaeffer prone-pressure method of artificial respiration. Let's just say that not every change has been bad.

All well and good for 1910 but in the year 2017, Federal Charters are more honorary than actual, the BSA is currently a body corporate and domiciled in the State of Texas, not the District of Columbia and the BSA hasn't used methods in common use on June 15, 1916 in many many decades.

No - the nominating committee selects them and the COs vote on the slate.

I'm sorry but no - I was going to quote from DavidCO's post on this but this one seems even more natural to do. What DavidCO said happened in Chicago did not happen in the way that he is relating it. The Chicago Council nominating committee put forth a slate that was rejected by the COs. The opposition put forth an alternative slate that was ignored. The Council Exec and Board President declared their slate board members anyway. This led to a lawsuit that the Council was not following their bylaws and that the slate was installed illegally. The court ruled against the Council. It

100% of your Friends of Scouting donations go to your local council. Let me repeat that for all of you folks blinded by your rage against National for this decision. 100% of your Friends of Scouting donations go to your LOCAL COUNCIL. For most local councils, Friends of Scouting donations fund about 40% of a council's budget. Where does that money go? Staff salaries, insurance, program costs, scout shop costs, service center costs, physical costs to maintain scout camps, camp program and supply expenses, volunteer recognition, camp ranger salaries, etc. You're mad at National and are dec

That is a very good point Qwazse - thanks for making it. I was speaking more that it could be done this way rather than it should be done this way.

Since it is the PTO that is chartering the unit, the IH would be the president of the PTO, not the school principal (unless the principal is the president of the PTO). Depending on how the PTO is structured, the IH may appoint the COR with either notification to the PTO board, or approval of the PTO board, or the PTO board may approve the COR. Sometimes the IH will appoint themselves as the COR if they have a particular interest. "So that is the IH and COR, together, can change policy?" - Neither can change the policies of the BSA. BUT - they can change the "policies/bylaws" of th

I just figure if someone is making a personal attack, it means they can't deny the truth about what is being said.

Even if they make it clear, we'll have a lot of threads in here trying to figure out what it all means. Remember when we had an earnest discussion of whether a Scout that did 1 and a half pull-ups a month after doing one pull-up met the improved over a month requirement? I'm pretty sure if I looked hard enough, I could find a discussion on what it means to swim one mile for the mile swim. While you're not betting a lot of money that National will properly inform the field, I'm not betting a lot of money that the field will understand what National is releasing - even if they bullet point

Thanks - I appear to have been misinformed

We already have family camping in the Cub Scouts. There has never been any indication from National that they are going to add Family Camping to the Boy Scouts. I've asked before where people got that idea and the only answer was Boy's Life had some articles on Family Camping (I'd like to know when - I looked through the last two years of Boys Life at my local library and didn't find much in the way at all on "Family Camping"), Even if Boys Life was encouraging Scouts to go family camping with their families, I don't see how people can think it means that the Boy Scouts is going to have fam

Do you have any proof of this or is this just based on the 10 or so people you asked in your Troop?

It's been a few weeks since the original announcement - the BSA will have gotten a lot of feedback from people. Back when they made this statement, that was their intention. Did you give any thought to the probability that their position on this might change after a few weeks of feedback before you accused them of blatantly lying? If you asked me for a loan of $100 4 weeks ago and I said I didn't have the money and you asked me again today and I did have the money, would you say my earlier statement was a blatant lie? Circumstances change - they change all the time. Changing ones mind

I think this is an unfair comparison - your keys words here are "Funded by school district". Let me make that even clearer - funded by taxpayers. This puts the school district at an unfair advantage, wouldn't you say? The school district just simply spends taxpayer dollars on these trips. No need for fundraising if you can just collect taxes from everyone and spend it as you see fit. In the meantime, the Boy Scouts have to go out and fundraise - even for a "much leaner and meaner outdoor leadership and adventure experience". They can't just tax entire towns to pay for this. How d

Isn't this just a little misleading? There is a huge difference between a Scout with special needs and a Scout that doesn't have strength or stamina. Special Needs is a pretty specific set of circumstances - lets not try to apply it to the non-special needs young Scout who hasn't been able to complete more than 1 pull-up yet because they don't have the strength. I would expect that the flexibility given to special needs boys would extend to girls with special needs. I would not expect these requirement adaptations to extend to the non-special needs girls who can't do more than on

Oh, you mean societal misfits, criminals on the run from the law, binge drinkers and buggerers (Brokeback Mountain wasn't all imagination).

I like what Tampa Turtle had to say about what manly should mean - and its easily tweak-able to accommodate women: To protect the weak, stand for your beliefs, respect women everyone, seek adventure, be self-sufficient, and take charge when needed. Respect and civility toward the other. Showing leadership when it is needed. Doing the right thing even if it is the tough thing. Knowing enough self-sufficient skills so you can help your self and others in an emergency. Being adaptable. Learning to work in a band of brothers diverse group of people. Do my changes weaken the propo

Harsh? I didn't sense that - Incredulity? That's more what I felt was being expressed. My first (and continuing) reaction is why is the committee even being considered to have a role in all of this. And yes, Prof does actually say the proposal (its not his, we understand that) includes a role - and a fairly substantial role at that - and that would be to review these formal session scorecards and discuss amongst themselves if a Scout needs to be removed from their POR. I think folks have expressed it well - it is NOT the committees job to be involved in evaluating whether the Scouts ar

Council's are their own legal entity - chartered under the non-profit laws of the states they are doing business in. Council property is owned by the Council, not by National. When a Council owns a camp outright (ie not in a trust), it can make the decision to sell or not to sell without any input from National. State law will dictate what happens to a Council's assets if it shuts down. As long as it merges with another council in the same state, it's generally not a problem. But if it shuts down completely with no merger, the assets would not transfer to National but would be held in

Tents? Maybe if you aren't properly prepared and clothed. Cabin camping? No windchll in the building - bring some board games in case you decide its too cold for outdoor activities.

Selling Philmont it is. The reason organizations like the BSA hires firms that do surveys and polls is because its more expensive to set it up and do it on their own. You are advocating for the BSA to create a special survey database for approximately 2 million youth members. They'll have to hire people to do so. Survey Monkey isn't going to work. They'll then have to hire people to track and interpret the results. Now we're up to about $25 per Scout. No kidding - surveying 2 million people will cost millions - multiple millions. That's why no one surveys everyone (and no, those in