pbcheesehead

13 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

You wrote "with".  Did you mean "will" as the council WILL appoint the same individual?  I'd get that fixed.  This feels like a way for the existing COR to stay involved; essentially self-interest by the COR.

Also, I am confused.  It feels strange for the COR to provide negative feedback to the council when the COR is the person selecting the leaders and then staying at arms length.  The COR should not be complaining about the unit to the council as the COR can replace the unit leadership and the COR should not be seeing day to day execution as the COR does not attend camp outs or weekly meetings.

I did mean "will".

Also, the COR has a Scout in the Troop - his 3rd. in-fact. He was only sporadically involved previously (MBC, pull trailer), but has served as COR for 4 years, although he did not voice any concerns the first 3 years as COR. I've been involved for 6 years, the first 5 of which I really enjoyed. It is frustrating that Council seems to accept his narrative without question or follow-up. The Scouting community is small, and we are worried that the "chatter" at district and council level will hurt us in recruitment, especially over the next few years while dealing with the COVID effect on the # of Cubs crossing over.

10 minutes ago, ToKindle96 said:

Does that COR still have a say at all? He is representing the Charter Org that is no longer going to sponsor a scouting unit. Wouldn't a new COR come with a new charter org?

That is a question I have as well since the old CO has signed signed the Unit's release. However, the paperwork was not processed by Council. 

The prevailing thought is that the (old) COR is driving the narrative at Council and Council with appoint the same individual as the rep once the Council Charter paperwork is completed.

Can the Council require a Unit to be Chartered under the Council and execute a facility use agreement with the previous CO?

Backstory -

The local Council notified units in July that the Catholic Diocese elected not to continue Chartering Units. Our troop formed a subcommittee, chose another Church (Lutheran) who has a history with Scouting units The Church  previously had a Troop that folded, and currently is the CO for a Troop that moved to them when the Methodist Church elected not to continue as COs. That Troop still meets at the Methodist Church. Our plan was to meet at the new CO facilities. After the CC received the release signature from the previous CO (Catholic Church) and the signature from the new CO (Lutheran), he received a call from the Council Commissioner telling him that the Troop needed to stop moving forward. 

Subsequently, the Troop received an e-mail from the Council Executive listing multiple reasons why the Council would not allow the Troop to go under the new CO and MUST be chartered under the Council and execute a Facility Use Agreement. The reasons listed were based on dialogue the Council had solely with the COR, who has seemingly had an agenda and caused issues for the Troop for the past year.

The issues raised 1) had previously been addressed, 2) categorically false/incorrect, or 3) so vague that no active leader knows what it is referring to (incident reported to National by a parent - not reported at the Troop, District, or Council level). The Council's decision was done without consult with any other member of the Key 3 or anyone else  part of the Troop Adult leadership.

I understand the Council has the ability to not renew, revoke, or otherwise a Charter, but the Lutheran Church has an existing Charter for the other unit, and there were no communications from District or Council prior to this.