SiouxRanger

I was treated poorly by a high school football coach during my high school career, as were a number of my classmates. My children attended the same high school. I advised them of the coach's "proclivities" and that they were to report to me any ill-treatment by that coach, as I would have their back, and would take care of it. Nothing ever developed. On another account, a soccer coach screamed and threatened my oldest son, a soccer referee. It frightened him. He was a child. I secured the removal of the coach from the program. Please tell me WHEN did we, you, society, d

But I do think it is "that simple." IT IS JUST THAT SIMPLE! When, EVER, was it acceptable to sexually abuse children? CHILDREN. Ancient Greece? Would YOU, YOU calmly accept your children having been so abused? The U.S. has had "age of consent" laws, I would think for a long time. It is not even a question of statutory "r.....e." (A systematic survey of those laws, and when enacted and such is a piece of legal research work and not needed for this discussion). National has NO EXCUSE. It knew children were being abused, damaged, and systematically concealed t

I don't fully understand your post. My suspicion is that my troop's situation is the same as all the Catholic troop's situations in the entire Diocese. I don't know just how many Catholic chartered troops there are in our Diocese, but maybe 20 or 30. Maybe half that or twice that. My point here is that however many troops (and packs) that are Catholic sponsored, all are in limbo (so-to-speak). And that is not a good thing as we are now in a new scout year. I agree that "signed words should match intent and reality," but we have a bankruptcy proceeding of National in which the "si

There is a provision in the Congressional Charter of the BSA prohibiting military drill, I believe, and that may prompt National's aversion to camo as just skirting too close to the "military" prohibition. But others here may have deeper insight. I have generally been opposed to camo on that basis that it is too far from the scout uniform that I think youth don't see themselves as scouts. And I could be wrong. Camo shorts are not so distracting, but a camo shirt undercuts the scouting personna, in my feeble opinion.

No longer sure where to post this, but an update on my Catholic Diocese and rechartering our troop. 1. The parish priest signed a traditional rechartering agreement. Then, soon thereafter requested the original be returned to him. That was done. 2. District Executive asked that all data be uploaded as if rechartering was progressing normally, even though the DE knew that the parish was not willing to sign any rechartering agreement, at that point. That was done. 3. Chartered Organization Representative asked DE to provide written confirmation, before Janary 1, 2022, that th

I can't recall whether I've said it directly or only by implication. I recall at least 2 references of mine to George Peppard about loving "when a plan comes together." Well, the plan seems to be rotting. Litigation is a huge and complex legal process. Outcome uncertain. As we have all seen in National's bankruptcy. "When the waves turn the minutes to hours." Gordon Lightfoot. National seems to have hoped to do a "quick hit" and exit bankruptcy leaving all its legal problems behind with the Settlement Trust to pick, up the pieces. And the "quick hit" has turned i

Well, with only the recent addition of girls to Scouting, how many moms have "Boy Scouting Experience?" Likely few. Girl Scouting experience-likely some. So, I have no in depth of knowledge of mother/Girl Scout camping knowledge. Maybe mom's just haven't put scouting on the radar. I would not give up on encouraging moms to go camping. We have had several stay an entire week at summer camp. As an aside, I have noticed that scouts at camp, weekend camps and summer camp, will look over to where the adults are hanging out from time to time. I've wondered whether they are looking

I'd note that my mom has a bachelor's degree in mathematics from a land grant university and my 2 sisters have 3 degrees between them, and I worked at Philmont when the first two women Rangers were employed there, and then a year later when 5 women were Rangers. And then on my 4 Philmont treks as an advisor, two of our Rangers were female. And they did a better job than the male Rangers. And one year at Philmont, my responsibility was to train and evaluate everyone on the Ranger Staff but the Chief Ranger and Assistant Chief Rangers. The women set a high standard.

No, not awful. Just two few willing to be involved. And if they don't have a son (and now daughter), involved they are unlikely to just show up "just as part of their civic duty." Many parents don't show up even when their child is participating. As an aside, not being from the West, I have noted that women in the West seem to have much more interest in outdoor (backcountry) activities (from my personal observation).

Seems to me it is easier to make rules for others than oneself.

Just seems like madness to me, that "BSA" ( whatever that means, national, local council, and chartering organization, or all of them) would be liable in such circumstances without some direct and CAUSAL connection between scouting and the abuse. The application of YPT to activities outside of scouting activities makes YPT totally unworkable from a practical standpoint. For example, how is a chartered organization representative to have any idea whatsoever of the activities of an abusive assistant scoutmaster at soccer matches? And BSA (etc.) is liable. That is a VERY HARD CASE

Thanks. This helps to establish in my mind a tad bit of independence of local councils from National. The mechanism of discussions among the Council representatives remains a mystery to me unless of the 250 or so councils, they selected a small number to form an executive group to formulate the formula. As to the mystery of the origin of the formula, I recall it was kept confidential, and perhaps the prior poster did not have it right, or I read it wrong.

I was under the perhaps mis-impression that National dictated the amount each council would contribute. "Representatives of local councils determining the amount each council would pay" seems a recipe for chaos. "Fine with my council that YOUR council pays "$XXX." (And this scenario plays out with 250+/- councils?) My mind flashes to the scene in one of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies where the council of the pirate kings all vote for themselves and the deadlock perpetuates. Somewhere along all the posts on the many threads, I believe I recall a mention that no one knew how he

I am not giving up on a failure of Plan 5 and the TCC having its say at the table with the added clout of a failed vote on National's Plan. I am not sure I understand how the LC's have a say in the amount of their contribution, considering: 1. Scout Executives are beholden to National for their career advancement, not to the local council, so Scout Executives have little reason not to toe the line with National's demands. 2. If National collapses and liquidates, of what benefit is it to a local council to decline to pay what National dictates if that refusal leads to the lost

I have long maintained that the Scouting is in the entertainment business. It provides fun and challenging times (shooting, swimming, playing with fire (safely), knives,) learning new things, and comradeship with their friends, while those devious adults slip leadership, assuming responsibility, planning, ethics, morals, into the program to be absorbed seamlessly (perhaps with a bit of suggestion now and then).

"If common sense were so common, it would not be so valuable." -Ronald Rotunda (And almost certainly quoted by him from somewhere, but from him I heard it first.)

(Must have "clicked off) and lost a part of a sentence.) No one from the council ever became involved in the transition of tangible assets to my troop. All fo the stuff my troop received was of marginal value. We pretty much just took whatever was offered and much of it was useless, and disposed of.

I just throw this out there... @scoutldr's comment just has an interesting perspective to me. And that perspective relates to the DE being involved in negotiating the disposition of a CO's (troop) assets if the CO is is bowing out of the business of scouting. And this is not to counter @scoutldr's post, for I believe that many councils function along the lines he/she has experienced. In, and from, my experience, in my council, council staff have no interest in anything controversial at unit level. (And I have witnessed doozies.) Nor, would I, with my experience over 25 yea

Bingo. Double BINGO!! That is precisely the problem, and as I can't afford the time to follow this micron by micron, maybe someone in the case has raised the issue, but as near as I can tell, no one seems to care (Judge, U.S. Trustee...) At its simplest case, any attorney who represents a client from a state with an open statute of limitations and a client from a closed state who does not have a legally enforceable claim, is in an inherent and obvious conflict of interest. An irreconcilable, ethically fatal conflict of interest. Period.

(I've mentioned goings and doing with respect my Troop's Catholic Diocese in the past-which thread I have forgotten.) Ever thus, an update: Despite my several inquires of my Troop's Diocesan Scouting liaisons, one never responded and Diocesan legal counsel referred my other inquiry to the head insurance person whose response made no sense whatsoever. (And I am in the business of making legal sense of legal things.) So, some month or more later after my inquiries, the Parish pastor having signed the traditional chartering agreement contacted the Troop Chartered Organization Repre

Thank you @yknot. And, your last point "that bears repeating" does truly bear repeating. Loud and boisterous fools and idiots can cause a world of pointless, expensive, and damaging rampage. My totally unscientific, statistically unsupported analysis, (having Aced my 300 level statistics course) is that the typical spread of forum registered folks compared to unregistered folks on the forum is about 5 to 130, so about 90% to 94% of the folks viewing the posts on this forum are not registered (and that is fine). And so I say again, chat and discussions among registered posters i

@mzzgwenef-- Welcome to the forum. Let the moderators help you get your message out.

Gee, a downvote for merely stating the "blackletter" (default, basic) rules of law pertaining to the formation of not-for-profits, related tax issues, and the liability protections and risks. No opinion. No position taken or advocated. Just the mechanics of it all. Like a downvote on a YouTube video explaining how to replace an oil filter on a truck. Hmmm. Never been a legislator, so don 't blame me for the rules.

By way of background: States issue corporate charters to folks who want to incorporate not-for-profit corporations. It is analogous to a birth certificate-it establishes the legal existence of the not-for-profit corporation. There are state fees to incorporate. Check with your state's secretary of state's office for the amount. There will be an annual renewal fee, also. Factor that cost in to the annual budget. Corporations, including not-for-profits, should have written By-Laws (about 30 pages of rules governing the corporation's operations-generally only prepared once at the t

As with all of the "legal paperwork" relating to National and the local councils, it is a mess. Either intentional or by neglect. Had folks donating property for the use of Scouting truly wanted to limit the use of their donation to that as a scout camp and no other. And to prevent the sale of their donation, the legal path to do so is ridiculously simple, but apparently rarely used. The deed of conveyance of the donated property to the local council should have contained all of the restrictions desired by the donors. It also should have included was is called a "right of reverter