Jump to content

Recommended Posts

That is an important distinction, but I think that some people might prefer to take actions that will limit the chances of them appearing before a court in the first place


In that case they're being foolish, eh?


People should do the right thing. That's what we teach in the BSA. That's what we mean by character and values and the Oath and Law.


And if yeh do the right thing, yeh should not fear the courts, because the courts are just society's way of providing a fair venue to resolve disputes.


The CC could just as easily land in court when rraffalo files a small claims action for a refund, eh? Or a defamation action for calling his choices unsafe for children. In fact both are almost infinitely more likely than a negligence claim for sendin' a handful of high school teens with one adult on a commercial airliner.


Our threads on this stuff should never end up in this inane legal mumbo-jumbo. Instead they seem to every time. The big point here is that if yeh can't do the right thing for kids without wringing your hands about litigation worries or other legal nonsense then yeh have no business being in scouting.



(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 127
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

So you and family are going by car from home base to the common departure point for the high adventure trip.

and the rest of the group is going by plane from home base to the common departure poin for the high adventure trip.


What if you did 2 different (or 3) tour plans?

1 detailing the adventures of you and your family to get to the common departure point (and home) or all the way thru the high adventure days and then back home.

1 detailing the adventures of the rest of the group to get to the common departure point(and home)or all the way thru the high adventure days and then back home.


might need to do a separate one detailing the adventures of the group all together to the high adventure base and back again to the common departure place since you'll drop off your wife and other kid.


Seems there should be a way to accomodate the different modes of transportation for the 2 groups without going to that much trouble.


Your family permit would have enough leadership, as you seem to have 2 adults and 2 kids.


but the other group doesn't have a second adult for a second tour permit of their own(eh tour plan tour plan tour plan, will get that change of wording thru the head eventually) How to deal with that to satisfy all especially CC/COR who want to see 2 adults with those kids while they fly on a plane.


You need to find yourself a frequent flier with air miles to fly to the common departure point and home again with them. or the name of the flight attendant or pilot that is flying and get them to sign on as the 2nd adult on the tour. ;)


yes I know this could get a tad bit ridiculous.


As a COR/CC myself it's for a cub scout pack, so at that age I would really want to see a 2nd adult on the airplane with the scouts. At the age of your scouts, well it's still a good idea from a safety point of view to have a 2nd adult on all legs of the trip.




Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm back gang, and I have updates... boy (and girl - moosetracker anyway) has the plot thickened!


First off though... 5yearscouter: "it's still a good idea from a safety point of view to have a 2nd adult on all legs of the trip.'


I agree it would be a good idea. If I were going to be at our home base the day just prior to our trip that is what would be happening. I would never fly out of town right before a trip just to mess with people and go through all this work for nothing. Of course it is a good idea, but it is not an option if I must be that person. I've offered forward the thought that the troop could pay to fly someone to escort them and I have proposed that as a solution, and that it could be on the troop or CC's dime, but not mine.


Quick summary for any newbies on this forum: Legitimately, both the Sea Base opportunity and the family reunion surfaced around the same time this past January. My son and I returned from a Troop meeting one night... "Hey honey, we want to go to Sea Base" Wife: "Oh great! when is it?" Me: "July 18th" Wife: "Ohhhh, I think that is the weekend we just finalized the family reunion" Me: "Hmmm... what is the exact day of the reunion?" Wife: July 16th" Me: "ok, well... why don't we drive to CT the weekend prior and spend time with family and friends, then right after the family reunion scout and I will get on a plane and fly to FL and meet the others from Illinois there. You, and our other two kids can remain in CT and do some other things you've been wanting to do there. Once scout and I return from Sea Base we will fly back to CT and then we'll all drive home to Illinois together"


Each of the past two years I drove 4 scouts 6 hours away to summer camp and I was the only adult in the car. Yes there were other cars, but we were not caravanning. In fact, my GPS suggested a different route and that is the route I took. Our troop has been fine with that. Also, last year we had my co-leader for this trip co-leading a trip at Northern Tier. Directly from that trip she left with one of her scout sons and met us at Tomahawk Scout Ranch in Wisconsin and that week of summer camp actually began the same day that their Northern Tier adventure ended. Guess What???? ... you guessed it! The other adult leader drove the other scouts ten hours back to our home base from Northern Tier by himself.


Now, our CC/ and COR have firmly dug their heels in saying only; "We have a two deep leadership policy". "We have always had a two deep leadership policy, and that means two adults must be with the scouts every step of the way" Clearly our examples above don't show that and there are many other examples over the past three years that are the same. So, I asked our COR: "when you use to take troops on camp outs or trips were there always two leaders every step of the way, even in cars?" He replied, "well no, but the way we use to take car of that is we lined all the vehicles up and followed each other" Big red flag, right? So, I then asked: "Have you read beyond the title that says: "Two Deep Leadership Policy"? and he replied "I don't want to be reading into anything, that's where you are getting us off track by cutting corners" . "No" I said, " have you read beyond the Policies title, not have your read into it, or have your read between the lines".


While Beavah spanked me for this earlier in the thread I'm trying to get my COR to see that the Two Deep Leadership Policy allows for one leader in a vehicle when you cannot have two. "Just read the policy", I told him.


You see Beavah (and all) while I am very much about the spirit of the policies and believe that approach almost always creates more rational decisions, sometimes you need to deal with the black and white words that are actually printed on the page when that is what your critics are doing. However, not only are they using the black and white words to make their case, they have not read any other words in the policy. And, on top of all that they are simply speaking untruths when saying that we as a troop have always adhered to a "Two Leaders with the Scouts at all times Policy".


So, I put together our Tour Plan, along with my co-leader and I called Council and asked how to fill out the forms so that it would work for them, given the detail itinerary we presented with one leader on the plane. They told me what to do; I did it; I emailed them a draft of an attachment with our Plan's detailed itinerary, and they emailed me back and said, "This looks great! I spoke to our Program Director about you having one leader on the plane and he said that is ok, and you can do it". "You are very thorough" were Council's final words in that email. I then called another Council because I almost couldn't believe how easy that was. I was pinching myself to make sure I wasn't dreaming and I verbally walked the second Council through our scenario. When I got to the point of one leader on the plane the Council Tour Planner paused, said, "Oooooh", and then said let me call National and I'll call you right back. Five minutes later the phone rings... she said, "yep! You're good. National is fine with that"


Wow! All this stressing in the thread for nothing, right? Well not exactly....


The CC and COR still will not sign it, and I think it is because they told me "NO" to this plan a month ago, and they wanted me to find another leader as my replacement if I would not spend $500 to fly back to Chicago just to satisfy them. But, being that I was being ruled with an iron fist by two people that were using the black and white words, "Two Deep Leadership" and they were making their case by speaking in total untruths about how we actually operate as a troop the actual words of the policy began to haunt me (sorry Beavah). My feeling is: if you are going to be a black and white person then be prepared to live by those same words yourself. The fact is: those words always seem to come back to bite you and that is why I believe Beavah is right about using the judgment God gave us to do what is right versus playing a game of semantics. But, in this case, I know for sure "the spirit of the policy" and "let's do the right thing" isn't going to work because they do not want to hear anything other than, "ok, I'll fly back to Illinois because you told me too".


The CC/ and COR are holding firm that when I learned of my reunion running so close to the Sea Base trip that I should have committed to one or the other. But, they don't really over lap. I built my family vacation around the Sea Base trip. And, by the way, the actual family reunion on 7/16 is not just me and my immediate family. There are people coming in from other states for it and there are relatives in their 80's and early 90's that my children and I may never see again.


Bottom Line: They will not sign it and they know that the Council is not going to make them sign it. I'm calling Council tomorrow to get their thoughts on next steps.


Can I get help from those on this board as to what recourse I have? But, before you answer that you need to know that I am committed to obtaining a stamped Tour Plan. I do not intend to give into there wishes at this point. They are not going to make me perform to a higher standard than National using untrue comments to make their case. That is just wrong and someone should be able to govern their power in this situation. Also, our Troop handbook says, "We follow a Two Deep Leadership Policy as per BSA". So, there is no evidence of a higher standard having been established, but now on a whim they want to rest their case on that. I will not tolerate lies ruining this trip for my son and I so I plan to keep pushing this.


We have no bylaws as a Troop; there is no higher standard that has ever been created, voted on, and documented with respect to this. They do not even have a way of training or communicating this higher standard to new leaders that join the troop every year. We do not always do what they are trying to say we always do, so there is no solid precedent that it must be the way they are telling me I must do it. Now, recognize, we have had many trips over the years, including High Adventure, many of which our CC and COR attended where there was two deep leadership every step of the way. I know there are many examples of that too. So, they are trying to make me do it like they always did it. If I were currently employed I might do it their way to just save me time at this point.

But, I owe it to my son to be in this for the long haul; while I have told him we are dealing with a leadership issue which may keep us from being able to go this year he is not privy to any of the detail. Right now he thinks we are not going, and he does not know that I continue to try to work through these issues with the CC and COR. So, when you answer the question above you need to know that I am digging in and this is far from over. In fact, it may have only just begun.


I'm looking for thoughts from you on... how do we schedule a committee meeting, and have a vote? Is it possible to do that? What are the rules behind scheduling a meeting, conducting a vote, having a quorum, etc.? (again we have no bylaws that I can turn to) Also, we have two, yes two, Charter Organizations. We do not, however, have a representative registered with our second Charter Organization. How long would it take to register one of their members so that we can get our COR signature from that person?


Please provide me your thoughts on whatever you believe I can do to resolve this. I'm sure many of you have had great experiences out there with challenging situations like this. Please help where you can.


Thank you ~


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a bit confused. Two days ago you had a tour plan put together, but had no idea if your council would approve it, or who to talk to at your council about your two-deep problems.


Now, you say that you had in fact already talked to not only your council, but some other council, and National as well, and been approved by all three.


A bit of a shift there.


As to your "recourse" - you can not "schedule a committee meeting", nor can you call for any kind of "vote". You state that you are a volunteer with your Troop, but not a registered leader, so you have no standing on the Troop Committee.


Your Charter Organization Representative(COR), as the representative of the organization which OWNS your Troop, is well within his rights to take a stricter stand on a policy than National.


It seems to me that if you truly want to push this issue, the only person that you have left is the head of your Troops Charter Organization(CO).


And NO, your Troop can NOT have two Charter Organizations. I suggest you call your council to see what CO is listed on the charter, as well as who is listed as the Institutional Head, and the registered COR, and get contact information for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah.. As ScoutNut states, your Charter Organization OWNS your unit.. With that the COR & IH (institutional Head) have the right to make up stricter policies on a case by case basis, without having it in by-laws, or pre-exisiting policies.. They must follow the BSA policy, but have every right to make things stricter..


The only person to override the COR is the IH.. But, the buck stops there..


Unfortunately, you may have burnt your bridges, you dug your heels in and became stubborn and unbendable.. They rose to the fight and became stubborn and unbendable also..


A committee vote can override a Scout Master or Crew advisor, they cannot over ride a COR or IH.. The COR & IH can override the committee vote..


The IH can override the COR, but my guess is they will support their COR.. That is what they should do, or they will need to start looking for a new COR, if the COR does not feel they will have their support.


When you kept comming back with responses by the CC through email, I worried that you might be getting them pumped up for a battle they would not back down from.. The support of the COR on their side, put a nail in your coffin.. The fact that the COR is now pumped up and ready for a battle they will not back down from, pretty much has your coffin in the ground..


You might have won the battle, had you refrained from discussion with the CC after their initial announcement. Gone off gotten the information from council and National, and come back with the research in hand.. At that point it was the CC who was mis-guided on their information, and not set up to do battle with you. But now you have both CC & COR ready to do battle with you..


Your research though should give you a good foundation to get your money reimbursed though.. You have alot of proof that you were willing to go through with the trip, and it was not you personally changing your mind nor BSA's policies that stopped you from going, but the rules of the CC & COR.. Therefore you should not loose money to that decision..


Now, if they cannot get someone to replace you, and the whole trip is threatened to be cancelled. You may have another shot at it.. Because again it is a lot of people who stand to loose money for a trip they all could attend, if not for the rules being put in place by the CC & COR.. If they have a glimmer that they might have everyone demanding the CO or the unit reimburse them because it is them that is standing in the way of you going.. On a rule they just made up, that is not documented in past policy.. The cost of not giving in to the demand they reconsider their stance, may have them rethink about if this is the hill that they want to die on.(This message has been edited by moosetracker)

Link to post
Share on other sites

ScoutNut (and all):


You are not confused. I've been busy! I've taken the advice of this board, called our tour plan person at Council and spoke with her. I then emailed her a draft of our detailed itinerary and explained the leadership situation with only one adult on board the aircraft. She not only told me that was ok, but then emailed me back the same day saying that the detail of our itinerary looked great! She appreciated how thorough we were.


I called the other Council and just spoke in generalities and quickly laid out the leadership issue on the plane, so as not to waste her time. She decided she wanted to check with National, quickly made a call and gave me her answer. So, while you could say that it was approved by "all three" it was verbally approved by her with an assist from National.


I still do not have a stamp on our Tour Plan from our Council, however, because our COR is not signing and instead he is lying. Our CC has said he will make no further ruling on this; he is deferring to the COR. Our CC's is going on the trip with us (awkward now) and he is fighting against us, apparently now because it's just a grudge match between he and I. He doesn't want to be the one to "remove" me from the trip, because it would be very unpopular to do that to me, so he is going to let the COR continue to be the bad cop, while he sits on the sidelines.


Sorry that my leadership status with the Troop did not come to the surface earlier. I have been identifying myself as an adult volunteer who assists with Boards of Review and other volunteer duties as needed. One of my biggest duties has been driving scouts to camping trips, pulling the trailer at times, and camping with the Troop. I have enjoyed that time with my son over the past three and a half years. It is not that I have been trying to hide that I am also a Committee Member I've really just been trying to keep is simple. I agree that the length of this thread totally contradicts my desire to keep it simple.


So, we have 13 committee members including our Committee Chairman. My co-leader and I are both Committee Members and we think we would have enough people on our side to win a vote if we had a meeting to discuss this.


There was an earlier reply to this thread that suggested the CC must do the Committee's will, and he must sign if the Committee votes that he must sign. Should he then refuse to sign he must resign so that we can get a Committee Chairperson who will sign. I think I also read that someone used the word: Consensus vs. winning a vote 7-6. Not sure what was meant by that, although I am aware that Consensus means unanimous. So, would the Committee have to be at Consensus? Clearly we would not because the CC is refusing us his signature. He will not change that in a Committee Meeting if we need to gain consensus.


Also, I am requesting that our Program Director at Council speak with our COR today. If he cannot get anywhere I am going to ask our Program Director to call on Richard Bourlon who offered his assistance earlier in this post. I'm hoping he'll have something up his sleeve that I do not yet know. I have suggested to the CC that we would build a Tour Plan that has the initial travel to Fort Lauderdale not considered part of the scouting event, since there is really no good reason for the success of the trip that we must travel together until we all arrive in Fort Lauderdale. Once we gather in the Fort Lauderdale airport we would then become the Scout Unit attending Sea Base, and have two deep leadership every step of the way. We would be traveling 2.5 hours by van to Sea Base, and as we drive up the front entrance to Sea Base we will have been together for over 100 miles and over two hours as a full crew with two adult leaders. The CC seems not to want to hear that solution. He is insistent that I must travel back to Illinois to be with the other leader and the five scouts will be traveling with. He does not care if my son travels back to Illinois to also be with the troop from the beginning. He has told me that I may leave my son behind in CT and he may fly alone to Fort Lauderdale if I want to save money. So, this is where Beavah's "doing the right thing comes into play". Basically, we should be doing what makes sense for the safety of all the scouts, including my son. We should be able to reason this out using the spirit of rules as well as the black and white. The interesting part about this is that I am on the right side of this argument when you look at the black and white words of the policy (as is clear by having Council and National's support), and I believe the way I am reasoning through this using common sense and the spirit of "doing what is right"; I think my stance holds far more water than his. I will not have him fly alone, not because I'm afraid of him flying alone. I'm actually ok with that. But, as for the principle of it... our CC is claiming he wants me back in Illinois because he wants to do what is best for the Scouts. Well, my son is one of those scouts. And, if he is going to use his "two deep on the plane" argument, then he should be equally concerned for the supervision of my son on the flight he would be on alone (completely alone). He argues that my son would be flying "on his own", not as a scout on the first leg of the trip. So he is ok with that, but he will not let us all fly the first leg of the trip as a non-scouting event. My co-leader and I are the parents of 3 of the 6 scouts on this trip. The CC's son makes the 4th scout on the trip. I have personally received the permission from the parents of the other two scouts on the trip to have their son fly the first leg as part of a non-scouting event. The CC is not giving that permission because he wants the trek to begin at our home base because that is the way it has ALWAYS been done, and he wants to gouge me for $500, making the point that I need to be more dedicated and more committed. He said I must choose between this trip and my 80 year old relatives, or I can do both, but unfortunately will need to spend money to fly back prior to the beginning of the trip. By the way, his son is 16 years old. It's not that he has a problem with his son flying with one leader; it's that he wants me to do it his way. So, he's blocking every potential solution by denying his signature. He wants me to fly back or step down; if they cannot find another parent to take the trek then I would be the bad guy because the whole trip would have to be canceled. I'm not stepping down. I believe he must remove me from the trip if he is not going to sign the Tour Plan. He is afraid to do that, because if they then cannot find another leader he will be cited as the one that blew up the trip. That's the impasse right now.


See... it is that kind of mixed up rationale that I have very little tolerance for. It's poor leadership on his part, and he is using circular logic to try to make a point to support his ridiculous position on this. He is also perpetuating a lie by saying that this is the way that our troop has ALWAYS operated. Not True...


So, I'll see if Council can make progress with our COR, but I don't think our COR will bend. I will then ask Council to call Mr. Richard Bourlon for his advice and Council.


BUT, since we have no troop bylaws I'm not sure as the Committee Member that I am (and my co-leader is) how to call a Committee Meeting with our CC presiding over the meeting. I'm contemplating tabling this issue in a Committee Meeting, taking a vote, and then gaining he CC's signature if we win the vote. If he then fails to sign I will then call for his resignation on the spot so that we can appoint or vote on another CC; A CC that will sign our Tour Plan...


Can I do that? And, if so is there a specific process I must follow to do it correctly?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moose Tracker:


Very thorough and helpful. I only need the signature of the CC or COR. If the CC is replaced and I were to become the CC can the COR stop me from signing it? I don't think he would get involved at that point. If he does I would move to get the Committee to remove them as the Charter Org and move to the other Charter Organization that we have on the sideline.


In the end, I'm willing to miss this trip with my son if they keep pushing, so I'm far from in a coffin in the ground. But, I'm going to push them to go so far as to have to remove me. If they do that and jeopardize the trip then they can take the heat from the others for making higher standards that make no sense.


Boy... this is getting good! It might even make a good newspaper article. How do you think they would handle that heat?


While they may win on technicalities; they certainly are not going to win the popular vote. Usually, people that mis-use their power end up in the coffin, and that is what I suspect is going to happen in this situation.


They are just going to end up looking ridiculous and eventually they will lose their power over poor leadership. It may be after our Sea Base trip, but it will be inevitable nonetheless.



Link to post
Share on other sites

First off the committee can only vote to replace the CC with the support of the COR.. The COR would have to sign your Application as the new Unit's CC.. If the COR is supporting the CC, I doubt you will get their approval for the change of position..


Interestingly enough thier is another thread on that very topic.. That has some saying that the committee can not vote to replace any adult leader position, and Beavah & I stating that they can, but had better have COR approval before doing so because they can overturn their vote. If you want to read that thread here is the link.




Frankly I don't see your COR supporting your committee decision to replace the CC based on this ruling when they are supporting the CC with this ruling.


I think everyone concerned is way too overheated over this issue for any of you to be thinking rationally..


Council will support the Tour Plan as you know, but they will not tell your CO or COR what policies they can and can not do in their unit, so long as the BSA policys for saftey are met.. They will not run the risk of loosing a unit by fighting your battle for you..


By BSA policy you could have flown seprately.. But BSA policy is not that you MUST fly seprately.. Therefore the CO putting in a ruling that you must fly as a group is not breaking a BSA policy..


RichardB. in National would have clarified the BSA policy, but he will not tell your COR that the policy is that you MUST fly seprately.. He will not force your COR to allow you to attend rather then your CC.. If you have two deep leadership, then National will be fine with whatever plans your unit makes.. They are too high up to fight the individual battles of the little guy, and really can't, your unit is owned by your CO, not the BSA.. They will only clarify the policies for you, in order to help & guide you..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes... I get it. Thank you, and I would not want National to fight our battles. They have too many other things to worry about. Bottom line: The COR can do what he wishes, and in this case he is mis-using his power even though he is not breaking any rules.


Now, once he does this to me he will have to live with this in future decisions he makes. That means, two leaders in every car that is going to summer camp. While not requiring it would not be breaking the rules he is certainly showing this is personal.


I don't think our membership will tolerate this...


Are you saying that we cannot work with Council to change our Charter Organization if we have another, and we do, that is willing to be our CO.??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, you can always vote with your feet.. You can go to another unit.. You and half the unit can go to another unit.. Or start up a new unit..


Can you take your unit to another CO?.. No, the CO owns the unit, they own the funds in the account, they own the equipment, they own the unit number, they own it all.. Unless they are wanting you to find another unit, in which case they may (don't have to) sign over the equipment & account funds to the new CO (not to the unit, as it is never owned by the unit).. All that your unit owns stays with them.. They can use it to rebuild the vacancy you and your followers leave when you walk out.


Even if you have enough walking out that the unit folds, they can keep the funds and sell the equipment on Ebay if they wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah, hmmm...


Well, first off, da COR certainly can do what he's doin'. Yeh can't win that fight if he plays CO trump.


Da question would be whether he is honestly and accurately representing the position of the CO on the matter. A COR is not meant to be a tin dictator, but the representative of the owner.


Yeh resolve that question by having a meeting with the COR and IH. I would bring your UC or council program person or DE if possible. The question is a simple one: is this really the Chartered Organization's policy or has the COR misinterpreted the IH's and organization's position? Making it clear that it's not a BSA requirement, and making it clear that the trip will be canceled without your participation, and making it clear that it might result in a mass exodus from the unit helps focus that conversation.


Da CC signature issue is now moot, eh? Before the COR got involved yeh could have just gone to the committee for approval. Now that's off the table.


Honestly, I think you're probably too hot around the collar to have the COR/IH conversation without doin' more harm than good. As moosetracker says, unless it's handled with a lot of finesse, a decision to override da COR and CC on a contentious issue is essentially a vote of "no confidence" in the COR and CC. It's really a decision to replace both of them, because yeh can't have people traipsing off to the IH on silly stuff like this. It's the stuff a CC should be handling. That burns a lot of bridges and relationships, eh?


So yeh have to ask yourself, is this issue worth all that damage? Do yeh really want to tear your troop apart because of your family vacation? I guarantee you'll lose half your boys and families from scouting. Sometimes being right is da wrong way to go, if all it leaves is scorched earth. Being an adult also means compromising and workin' with others who are at times difficult.


I can't say from afar what's right for you and your unit. Yeh know the people, and you know the kids that will be hurt. Da choices to me seem to be


1) schedule the meeting with you, the co-trip leader, the DE, and the IH (and the COR/CC at the IH's discretion), or

2) quit the trip because of your prior family commitment, expect a full refund, and let the chips fall where they may, or

3) be the adult in the situation, chalk it up to bad communication, and either eat the RT airfare for yourself or ask for reimbursement for it so that the trip can run.



(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Link to post
Share on other sites



So you are bound and determined to "fight to the death", either you or the CC. Is this senario really in the best interest of the troop?


Remember who Scouting is for: the Scouts. And yes that includes your son.


Seems like this kind of fight could severly harm the troop regardless of who is right or wrong.


I would suggest that you take a calm approach and see what can be worked out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop where you are right now!!


print a copy of the tour plan you made.

print a copy of the emails back and forth [might want to edit out anywhere you called the CC or COR stupid or misguided ;)]

a write up of your discussion with council(s) by telephone


write up a SHORT document that says


"This tour plan would be approved by council with your signature Mr. CC.

As CC if you do not sign the tour plan as it stands,

or alter the tour plan with the name of a 2nd adult who will fly with you,

then it appears that the trip is cancelled.


I [cannot/will not/am unable/can't afford whatever reason you wish to put] fly to and from where you wish me to fly.


As CC, I suggest that you to talk with our COR, SM and IH about this.

If you want to clarify with council, the phone # for contact is xyz, nation is xyz.


I don't want to argue about this any longer, Please let me know your decision."


Hand it to the CC, copy to the SM & COR, maybe to the IH and see what they do.


It is not your job as committee member and person going on the trip

to fight over the tour plan or to make it work out.

It's their job as leaders of the unit to figure out if they can make it work.

(This message has been edited by 5yearscouter)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...