Michigan Councils -- Area 2 Project

[T2Eagle 902]

I tried to resurrect the original thread about this but could not find it.

 

I am curious if anyone knows anything new about the plan to consolidate all the Michigan Councils into one mega-council.

[rex2796 10]

It's my understanding that this went to a membership vote yesterday in the Great Lakes Council, however, the leadership was recommending that it be passed. I haven't heard any vote tallies yet. Here is a link to the Area 2 website

http://www.bsaareaproject.org/

 

[Roadkill Patrol 23]

I believe our COR has voted in favor of the project. Our council is in favor of it. Our COR's basis is in the end, the program will be the same for the youth, they won't notice the difference. It may change the demographics for certain units that were on the border of their council. The new field service councils will have border changes. So in the end, it all comes down to where you send your paperwork.

 

The project is based on there only being one 501(3)c Council in Michigan. Under that main council, there could be 7 Field Service Councils that would serve the units. This way only the one main council has to pay the monthly National Dues, therefore saving money all around.

 

At first, I was against this from what I heard. Then I attended one of our council's Fire Side chats and learned a lot more. I was able to get the questions answered that were putting me against the project.

[UCEagle72 10]

Crossroads Recommendation Approved

 

November 1, 2011 will be remembered as a significant date in the history of the BSA. That was the day that nine councils in the lower peninsula of Michigan voted to take a courageous leap into the second hundred years of Scouting.

 

Volunteer Scouters have been watching our units and our membership decline over the past twenty years. The last five years have been even more severe as we have witnessed the outmigration of Michigan workers. Recognizing this negative membership trend, a group of over 100 volunteer Scout leaders and select professionals from Area 2 of the Central Region set out to find a better method of delivering the Scouting program to the youth of Michigan and Ohio. The result of their efforts was the Crossroads Recommendation. Last night, the voting members in nine of the eleven councils in Area 2 passed this forward looking recommendation by a significant margin. This will result in the formation of a new "Coordinating Council" that will lead the Scouting program in Michigans lower peninsula. We acknowledge the efforts of everyone who worked toward this recommendation. Your commitment to Scouting is the force that has driven this program for the past century.

 

The first executive board meeting of the new council will be held on Friday, November 4, 2011. This will become the stepping off point of an exciting new opportunity to design and deliver the program that will insure that more of our young people are Prepared. For Life.

 

Jack Chandler

silverfox297@live.com

 

[Beavah 205]

Yah, hmmm....

 

Good luck to yeh folks in Michigan.

 

I read through da proposal and frankly couldn't find a thing that made any sense to me, other than that they want to sell a bunch of camps to fund more executive salaries. Da size of the new council should guarantee that it's impossible to get the CORs to oppose such sales the way Chicago did.

 

I predict you'll have 2/3 or less of da camps left in 7 years.

 

Beavah

 

[Oak Tree 15]

Wow.

 

That's quite a self-congratulatory piece of writing.

 

Apart from emphasizing how many people worked on this and how much they were really dedicated to good outcomes, there is not that much about why this new structure is really going to be able to be any better. Saying that it's important to provide exceptional unit service is different from having a plan that actually does this.

 

So the only real thing I see here is an opportunity for cost savings by reducing duplication. I do think that small councils are inefficient at lots of things, and it should be fine to combine a lot of the back office operations. And, as Beavah notes, there is money to be saved by closing money-losing camps.

 

Other than some general efficiencies, I'm just not sure there's going to be much difference apparent at the unit level.

 

But it's probably a necessary step, and it's good to see someone take it.

[Beavah 205]

Yah, you'd think there would be savings, but they were talkin' about adding district executives, maintaining offices, and offered no plan for staff reduction. Assuming that they could cut at least a few business managers and office staff, any savings would be taken up by adding DEs.

 

Da theory is that if only there were more DEs, there will be more kids joining. At least as close as I can tell.

 

Guaranteed that since they seem to have pulled off this "interesting development" through a very fast railroad job in this area, you'll see it rolled out in some other areas in the coming years.

 

Beavah

 

[T2Eagle 902]

Think they'll sell the camp with the oil well?

[Roadkill Patrol 23]

Which camp has the oil well? I know the camp we go to has some gas wells, but that is a Rotary camp which is not under the jurisdiction of the BSA so there is no risk of it closing.

[BartHumphries 10]

I thought the point of multiple councils was that if one council was massively sued for doing something really really stupid it wouldn't pull down all the rest of the councils and force all the camps in the state to close to pay the legal fees. It's like firedoors on submarines and ships -- in most subs they're never used because nothing ever happens that might require their use. The unsinkable Titanic sank because it didn't have good enough firedoors (or water doors or whatever you want to call them).