Gold Winger 9 Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 I'm sure that someone will chime in here with chapter and verse from BSA to respond to my ruminations but that's not what I'm looking for. The council size thread prompted me to ponder "why small councils?" or in some case just "why?" In many cases, it makes sense to have a small council because the next closest council is 50 miles away over unimproved roads. I'm wondering about councils like the "Piedmont Council" in California (there's another Piedmont Council in North Carolina). 1,000 Scouts? Just one district? Apparently in the same area is another small council that serves only the city of Alemeda Calif. So there are two small councils embedded in the San Francisco Bay Area Council. SFBAC is fairly small, only about 300 units which is the size of my new mega-district Why not merge the three councils and make a bigger council? Marin Council seems to be another small council, only a few miles away. Any thoughts? Link to post Share on other sites
scoutldr 726 Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 Just a wild guess..."politics". Link to post Share on other sites
Gold Winger 9 Posted July 1, 2008 Author Share Posted July 1, 2008 Politics in Scouting? No way! Link to post Share on other sites
Bob White 20 Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 A business decision based on a combination of population density, geographic boundaries, and financial feasability. Or, if it easier to comprehend... it is conspiracy determined in clandestined chambers by unamed cloaked figures who ride in around in top secret black stealth helicopters who base their decisions on the personal information accessed through the misuse of your personal social security number. Whichever you chose to accept. Link to post Share on other sites
OldGreyEagle 5 Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 Don't know, OGE pawn in game of life Link to post Share on other sites
meschen 24 Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Here's my educated guess. Is a combination of two factors: 1. Economics - average home prices in Piedmont are over $1.0 million - my guess is that they aren't real interested in having their funds diluted in the SFBAC pool. 2. Summer Camp - Marin Council has a very nice summer camp in the Sierras. They probably aren't all that interested in having to compete with all of the SFBAC for slots at that site. Link to post Share on other sites
Gold Winger 9 Posted July 2, 2008 Author Share Posted July 2, 2008 Moderator! Bob's being sarcastic!! Link to post Share on other sites
OldGreyEagle 5 Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Gee Gold Winger, if we took away sarcasm where would you post? Link to post Share on other sites
evmori 11 Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 I love the Blazing Saddle reference OGE! Excellent! Link to post Share on other sites
Kahuna 172 Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Personally, I lean toward a combination of Bob White's theories. ;)The small councils I know of in Florida and Hawai'i do not have a logical geographic reason to exist. Maui Council in Hawai'i is in the middle of a council that stretches from Hawai'i to the Marshall Islands. Economics plays a part in that one. Some estate endowed them apparently as long as they stay independent. Link to post Share on other sites
Gold Winger 9 Posted July 2, 2008 Author Share Posted July 2, 2008 "Gee Gold Winger, if we took away sarcasm where would you post?" I'm wounded. I make many posts that have no sarcasm, cynicism perhaps but not always sarcams. Link to post Share on other sites
GernBlansten 10 Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 I vote for BW's #2 reason. Link to post Share on other sites
scoutingagain 20 Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 BW is most likely correct. The number of councils, sizes, locations, staffing etc. are simple business decisions. "A business decision based on a combination of population density, geographic boundaries, and financial feasability." True, but business decisions are often based on many more parameters than just the above. Things like, a national exec's daughter might be married to the council executive, his nephews say are employed by the council summer camp, the council exec is a really good golf player, etc. all come into play as well. I'm sure GM has automobile factories they keep open for what seems like no logical reason to some. SA Link to post Share on other sites
Bob White 20 Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 A small councils main reason for consolidating in to a larger council is because they are in financial trouble. It is unlikley their board would choose to stay in debt in order to support the SE. And no SE with a father-in-law at the national headquarters is looking to stay in a small council when you consider that larger councils pay higher salaries. Your scenario is highly unlikely, although the scouters who prefer rumors and conspiracies will undoubtly buy into it. Link to post Share on other sites
scoutingagain 20 Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 BW, My point was that business decisions are made based on many different parameters, not just profit/loss or efficiency. Personal relationships often are included in the evaluation process. SA Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now