David CO

9 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

The two should align.  Reimbursement and liability protection.

The 3 should align.  Reimbursement, liability protection, and YPT.

1 hour ago, fred8033 said:

If 1 & 2 are not covered, why would LDS enter into the agreement.  These are major holes in the liability protection that make a person question it's worth.  

 

I agree.  In some units, where the scouts are all members of a Chartered Organization, like a church or school, all of the scouts and scouters have some sort of connection or relationship outside of scouting.  A settlement would settle nothing.

36 minutes ago, SiouxRanger said:

HEY!   I've spent a lifetime with raw knuckles and still can't figure out what I'm doing wrong.

 

Try walking upright.

2 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

No smart comments, any of you.

This is a scouting forum.  We never make smart comments.

3 minutes ago, SiouxRanger said:

That makes perfect sense.  A lawyer "not being prepared to speak" who reads from a script...Hmmmmm...

Who does he think he is fooling?

Did he say he wasn't expecting to speak, or he wasn't prepared to speak.  There is a difference.  If he wasn't expecting to speak, but he came prepared to speak anyhow, I'm impressed.  Be Prepared.

, 

10 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

How long is the recess? I had to go assault and batter my heavy bag and missed  it.

You missed the bag?  

13 minutes ago, 5thGenTexan said:

Is it bad I'm feeling like it's too much?

It is too much.  I would never ask a parent to take on more than one leadership position at a time.  You have been a parent long enough to know that you can't help with all of your kids' activities.  They know it too.

19 minutes ago, 5thGenTexan said:

Every weekend we have camping we all go so it involves boarding the dog.  

This clinches it.  Dogs should be treated like royalty.  

On 9/26/2021 at 8:44 AM, UpstateNYCC said:

Any other suggestions on how to handle?

Drop it.  

1 hour ago, skeptic said:

So please do not make comments about me not caring.  

Fair enough.  

3 hours ago, Sentinel947 said:

Most of the Scouters here would like to see the BSA survive and the victims compensated to the extent possible. If you can't stomach that position, perhaps you shouldn't be here in a Scout leaders forum. 

I can't stomach that position if that position means the old guard, who guided us into this foul abyss, remain in their positions on the national and council boards.  They are the ones who shouldn't be here.  They should be gone.

I can't stand the idea that BSA will lose billions, we will lose our camps, membership will plummet, the remaining kids will pay skyrocketing dues and fees, and yet the silver buffalo crowd will all hang on to their positions of honor and power in BSA.  It makes my blood boil.

2 hours ago, 1980Scouter said:

Then a well maintained camp would draw more use and make it more sustainable. 

I think you've got it backwards.  People haven't stopped using council camps because they aren't well maintained.  The council camps aren't well maintained because people have stopped using them.

2 hours ago, 1980Scouter said:

What if this was years before the lawsuit and the LC's seeing that many of them have tens of millions in cash, decided to update and repair all scout camps in use?

How great would that have been?

If that had happened, the councils would be getting a much better price for their camps.  

If a Catholic diocese went through bankruptcy a few years ago during the clergy sexual abuse scandal, are their CO's still on the hook for the BSA lawsuits? 

I'm surprised the moderators haven't stepped in.  We are drifting pretty far off from the topic of this conversation.  

1 hour ago, HelpfulTracks said:

Curious take on your part considering many think you take on CO's is fringe/fanatic.

Very true.  Many scouters on this forum have said as much in past topics.  Many have also stated that the CO is more of a sponsor of scouting than the owner of the unit.  

1 hour ago, HelpfulTracks said:

Really, I have never hear of an IH that was not the head of the institution. 

Neither have I.   I don't think BSA would recognize someone as IH unless he/she is the head of the Chartering Organization.  This doesn't mean an IH cannot have someone above them in the hierarchy.  

AD/Parish/Diocese/Holy See      or       PTA/school/school district/state

24 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

The discussion leads to that if you are planning to have an outing, and if you wait for all the conditions to be perfect, you will likely never leave the porch. 

I understand that thinking.  It might work if the scout unit thinks of itself as a stand-alone entity rather than an integrated program of a CO's youth outreach.  

A CO will often try to make rules and procedures so that they can apply them to all of its programs.  That way, nobody feels picked on.  The rules apply to everyone.  We don't want sports programs and scouting programs complaining that we favor one over the other.

So it goes both ways.  Sometimes the scouts greatly benefit by it.  Sometimes the scouts feel unnecessarily restricted by it.  I think it all evens out over the long run.

3 hours ago, HelpfulTracks said:

As a CC my job it to do everything I can to help deliver the program the Scouts have planned while reducing potential risk as much as passible.

As an IH, my job was to ensure that the scouting program follows the rules and procedures of the Chartered Organization.  

2 hours ago, HelpfulTracks said:

I disagree with you on almost all of your post, your concept of a CO powers is way to broad, and your view of a scouting program way to restrictive.

Most of the scouters on the forum would agree with you.  

2 hours ago, HelpfulTracks said:

Fanaticism? Keep them, in check?

Absolutely.  Every activity has its fanatics.  Scouting isn't unique in this, but neither is it immune to it.  The fanatics need to be controlled.  If they can't be controlled, they need to be removed.  

19 hours ago, fred8033 said:

 QUESTION #2 ... Inheriting CO liability from another CO

If a unit moves charters ... and this is very common ... does the new CO inherit liability? 

It's possible.  The CO owns the unit.  

I never liked the idea of transferring units and CO shopping.  This adds one more reason for me to dislike the practice.  A new CO should always start out with a new unit.  New number and everything.  No inherited baggage.

I've been hearing that some councils don't want to take on the charters of these old legacy units.  Do you think they might know something about this inherited liability question? 

As usual, not a word about it from BSA.

3 hours ago, mrjohns2 said:

The OA is not a unit activity. Not at all. 

I totally agree.  OA is not a unit activity.  Not at all.

3 hours ago, mrjohns2 said:

So, it has nothing to do with the CO. 

Except when the CO needs to clarify its position that OA is not a unit activity. 

1 hour ago, johnsch322 said:

Feedback when something is deleted would be welcome.  It seems a post or two of mine have mine have been deleted and I am not sure why.

Your posts are so well written, it puts the rest of us to shame.  Since a scout is kind, It would appear that the moderators have graciously consented to remove some of your better written posts in order to save the rest of us from the pain and humiliation that any comparisons of your posts with the posts of other members of the forum would surely cause.  On behalf of myself and other members of the forum, we hope you understand.  

14 hours ago, skeptic said:

Ours has already informed us that we will move to the facilities model.  Other than that, they assure us that they still consider us part of their ministry, just under a different format.  

I don't know which is more frustrating, a CO who doesn't realize it owns the unit, or a former CO who thinks it still owns the unit.  Once a CO gives up its charter, it isn't their unit anymore.  They don't own it.  It belongs to someone else.  It is not their unit under a different format. 

2 hours ago, SiouxRanger said:

There is NO WAY anyone will persuade me that the title "Just Ku Kluxin Around" is anything but shining a jovial, light-hearted touch on racism.

I don't know if that was the OP's intent, but it was certainly the intent of the KKK members who first used that title in their publications.  I can tell you, from first hand experience, that this is exactly how the KKK presents themselves to prospective recruits.

1 hour ago, mashmaster said:

Ours just told us they will no longer charter units after this year.....  The search begins

I don't think I would recommend that any CO adopt an existing unit.  Who knows what baggage comes with it?  If it is discovered that a scout in that unit was molested 40 years ago, it is possible that the new CO will have its name and reputation dragged through the mud as well.