Jump to content

Major Change in Chartered Organization Relationship


Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, DuctTape said:

COs ... can use their "sponsorship" of BSA as a marketing tool. Others might argue that giving back to the community by being a CO is (part of) the COs mission. 

Giving back to the community is the reason that I have always seen.   

"Marketing" or promoting depends.  I have never seen CO's use it as a tool to get more CO members or more CO revenue.   Heck, they'd be even more involved if they wanted to do that.  I have SLIGHTLY seen it as "pride"; which in today's era could also be called hubris.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • Replies 227
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Wonder why something like this wasn't in the Churchill project? Also the old form used to require an annual sit down visit with the CO.    Never happened of course so the solution is  let's just

For the most part, there was nothing unexpected. Some of my impressions: (1) The United Methodist Church remains very supportive of Boy Scouting and endorses the traditional chartered organizatio

The answer to pretty much all of your questions is yes, the Church can do and decide all of those things if that is how they want to run their troop. The Chartering Organization, the Church in yo

Posted Images

On 12/11/2021 at 11:29 PM, yknot said:

My point is that there is no real upside for a CO to be involved in scouting. The upside is all on the BSA end.  

 

On 12/12/2021 at 8:15 AM, DuctTape said:

 

 "Most of them have sponsored units for various altruistic reasons -- they want to support scouts or youth or the community."    """ Hopefully, the church CO has enough factual info to be aware of the value of the program.    It is a 'youth' ministry, but having it be a 'Lutheran Youth Ministry' is inappropriate and doesn't work...because then the Youth Minister and all the power-crazies assume that they then RUN the Troop.  After 50 years of an exemplary Troop of about 70 youth, our Council has voted to dump the Charter !!  Those with zero knowledge have preached that if we 'own' it, then we must 'run' it...literally.   This isn't working obviously.  And since the Staff and the 'power crazies' just do not have the time to do that, the Troop must go....??   They have been poisoned with misinformation and misinterpretation.   They have no clue about the 'Boy-run' program.  They were unaware that the Troop would disband without a Charter even though they WERE told that; so now...from some fake compassion and negative feed-back from membership, they are allowing an extension until March 31....but it had been December 31.  They are still working on a 'Facility Usage' Agreement and we are worried as to the stringent 'rules' it will contain....and whatever the rental fee will be as well.  Why has this taken so long?    'Either WE run it, or they go'......!    Black and White thinking process that is unwelcome, and unhealthy and contention-making.     There are no longer Scout-savy people on the Council or even among Staff or with Leadership in General.   A sad, sad day for this Congregation....but very sad for the 70 Scouts who still ask 'what happened'?       There was never any mention of this Troop in any advertising for the Church...any Newsletter or New Member information...Never mentioned from the Pulpit.....But they were not hesitant to enjoy 'credits' when they were public.      The supporters of the Troop are a small group and except for me, have just remained quiet...knowing we were already beaten with this.      ................Now the Troop is working on becoming their own CO....??.....there doesn't seem to be much guidance with this....and there is a 'Church Member'  !!.....an anti-Charter person....who volunteered to be 'Chair' of this new 'Board'...???   Doesn't the Troop decide who is on THEIR Board????

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Iirc, when a "troop becomes their own CO", it begins with the formation of an organization. They might call themselves "friends of troop xyz". That organization would file as a not-for profit with the state, which requires bylaws etc.. This organization sponsors the troop as the Chartering Organization.  In reality the organization is just the troop committee itself, however there are legal requirements which must be met too maintain the not for profit status. See your state laws for info. Lastly, I am not sure that moving forward the BSA will "allow" these anymore. Certainly they have not been encouraged in decades. However as long as they still allow an outside organization to become a CO, the "friends of..." is legally no different than any other.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/6/2022 at 2:49 AM, GrammaScout said:

 

 "Most of them have sponsored units for various altruistic reasons -- they want to support scouts or youth or the community."    """ Hopefully, the church CO has enough factual info to be aware of the value of the program.    It is a 'youth' ministry, but having it be a 'Lutheran Youth Ministry' is inappropriate and doesn't work...because then the Youth Minister and all the power-crazies assume that they then RUN the Troop.  After 50 years of an exemplary Troop of about 70 youth, our Council has voted to dump the Charter !!  Those with zero knowledge have preached that if we 'own' it, then we must 'run' it...literally.   This isn't working obviously.  And since the Staff and the 'power crazies' just do not have the time to do that, the Troop must go....??   They have been poisoned with misinformation and misinterpretation.   They have no clue about the 'Boy-run' program.  They were unaware that the Troop would disband without a Charter even though they WERE told that; so now...from some fake compassion and negative feed-back from membership, they are allowing an extension until March 31....but it had been December 31.  They are still working on a 'Facility Usage' Agreement and we are worried as to the stringent 'rules' it will contain....and whatever the rental fee will be as well.  Why has this taken so long?    'Either WE run it, or they go'......!    Black and White thinking process that is unwelcome, and unhealthy and contention-making.     There are no longer Scout-savy people on the Council or even among Staff or with Leadership in General.   A sad, sad day for this Congregation....but very sad for the 70 Scouts who still ask 'what happened'?       There was never any mention of this Troop in any advertising for the Church...any Newsletter or New Member information...Never mentioned from the Pulpit.....But they were not hesitant to enjoy 'credits' when they were public.      The supporters of the Troop are a small group and except for me, have just remained quiet...knowing we were already beaten with this.      ................Now the Troop is working on becoming their own CO....??.....there doesn't seem to be much guidance with this....and there is a 'Church Member'  !!.....an anti-Charter person....who volunteered to be 'Chair' of this new 'Board'...???   Doesn't the Troop decide who is on THEIR Board????

 

I'm confused at how the Council voted to dump the Charter. In another thread, you talked about how the church decided to not renew, but then decided to renew the Charter until March 31. Was the decision to not renew the Charter made by the church? or by the Council? For the Charter Agreement that was signed extending it through March 31, how did they get that date changed? There normally isn't any provision for selecting your own Charter Expiration Date. 

Has your DE been involved in this process at all?

Edited by awanatech
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/7/2022 at 8:16 PM, awanatech said:

Has your DE been involved in this process at all?

DE.

Hmmmmm.

A DE is likely a recent college grad, and in my Council, many were never a Scout. None have a Juris Doctor degree nor licensed as an attorney, and thereby are not licensed to give legal advice.

And so, given that THE ISSUE on the table (National filed bankruptcy over this issue) is whether adult unit leaders are legally liable for abuse claims against other adult leaders in their unit, why-oh-why would anyone seek advice from a DE?

I have earned a J.D, and am a licensed attorney. Opinions of DE's are irrelevant to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/18/2022 at 12:58 AM, SiouxRanger said:

DE.

Hmmmmm.

A DE is likely a recent college grad, and in my Council, many were never a Scout. None have a Juris Doctor degree nor licensed as an attorney, and thereby are not licensed to give legal advice.

And so, given that THE ISSUE on the table (National filed bankruptcy over this issue) is whether adult unit leaders are legally liable for abuse claims against other adult leaders in their unit, why-oh-why would anyone seek advice from a DE?

I have earned a J.D, and am a licensed attorney. Opinions of DE's are irrelevant to me.

How silly of me. My apologies for even suggesting that you stoop so low as to bring in the one who's job it is to work with units. Never mind that it is just a lowly, recent college grad without J.D. or an attorney's license.  With your training & education, sounds like you should have it all figured out.  With such an attitude towards DEs, why-oh-why would you come on the forum for any advice from any of us? I mean, there's no telling what level of education any of us have. There may be some on here who have not even graduated college (gasp!!)

What an arrogant post that was. And some wonder why participation on the forum is lacking.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize I’ve asked this before, but thought I would try the old material in front of a new audience. By any wild chance might someone have a link or digital copy of a Charter Agreement from the 70’s or 80’s? I’d be much obliged to see it, if so. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/8/2021 at 1:37 PM, fred8033 said:

View it this way ... 

The old charter agreements were used as a marketing tool by BSA to get more buy-in from local organizations ... to get those local organizations help with BSA's youth program objectives ... to get local orgs to view packs and troops as an extension of the local church/school/other.  Many local orgs took it with a grain of salt and never did anything.  Most everyone knew that's how it worked.  Even the document itself looked pretty weak and light weight.  

Think of it this way ... US GOV charter to BSA is honorific.  Just really good marketing with little effect.   Charter between BSA and local orgs was mostly honorific too.   

Then over the last few decades, it's inferred more and more.  Lately the signed charter agreement has been used as a legal liability too.  It's a contract right?  I doubt many churches viewed it as a very significant contract.  Just an honorific thing.  

NOW ... Scouting is a real  liability.  Real risk.   You could get sued.  So ... is that scouting youth program that critical to your own purposes as a local organization?  If so, you should actively manage it and be involved.  

I myself am recommending our church change from a charter agreement to a facilities use agreement.  We've had discussions.  They have zero interest in overseeing the scouting program.  They are glad to lend use their facilities though.  They just don't want to own and be responsible.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/8/2021 at 10:33 AM, fred8033 said:

Ummm ... The words manage, direct, operate, etc are not explicitly there.  What is there are words such as:  "The Chartered Organization, as a duly constituted organization that serves youth, desires to use the program(s) of the BSA to further its mission respecting the youth it supports."

The CO agreement says CO wants "to use the (scouting) program".  By use, it means it's running the program.  Further words are similar to that.  Then, each leader app requires a charter org rep signature.  The charter org selects the leaders and can setup the program as they want.   Those unit leaders are effectively CO representatives running the scouting program. 

Unit failures are CO failures.  Units that don't follow G2SS or leaders that don't get trained or ... etc do reflect CO negligence.  
 

The CO is NOT required  to use their Troop as part of THEIR Youth Mission.  It can stand by itself.  'Use'...does NOT automatically mean 'run' it.  It means that it 'uses' it...in some way...to further Youth Ministries.  Just by being the C
O and supporting the BSA they ARE supporting Youth.   You must realize that all Troops are 'different'...the size, the location...rural or urban...what part of the US...any volunteers from the CO...or are they all parents?   The Charter is worded such that any of these situations can mold their Troop to fit the situation.   After 50 years, we find now that we no longer have any former Scouts on our Leadership Board.  Making decisions when they are uniformed or ill-informed is rather dangerous.  The Adult Leaders must have a second Background Check done fopr the Church and the COR and the Scoutmaster and the Church Executive Committee do a brief exam of the qualifications of each.  For the uninformed Leadership to actually 'pick' the Adults is absurd...they don't even know what good qualifications are.

 

The Scout Troops are 'Boy run'....I am sure you may have heard that.  They cannot possibly be' Boy Run' if the Church is doing it !!   The CO to 'set up the program'...I don't think so.  Not if they have no clue what a Scout Program even looks like.  

Giving CO's the hint that THEY run it...is a monumental mistake.   Our Church Council has just voted to destroy the exemplary Troop of 75 which has run very well for the last 50 years.  They say they don't have 'time or staff' to run it.  No one told them that they had to...except for the terrible misinterpretation of the Charter wording.   They have not 'run it' for 50 years.   Why now?    This has caused some major contention in this Church.  There must be a way to write a Charter so that this does not continue to happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, GrammaScout said:

It can stand by itself.  'Use'...does NOT automatically mean 'run' it.  It means that it 'uses' it...in some way...to further Youth Ministries.  Just by being the CO and supporting the BSA they ARE supporting Youth.   You must realize that all Troops are 'different'...the size, the location...rural or urban...what part of the US...any volunteers from the CO...or are they all parents?   The Charter is worded such that any of these situations can mold their Troop to fit the situation.   After 50 years, we find now that we no longer have any former Scouts on our Leadership Board.  Making decisions when they are uniformed or ill-informed is rather dangerous.  The Adult Leaders must have a second Background Check done fopr the Church and the COR and the Scoutmaster and the Church Executive Committee do a brief exam of the qualifications of each.  For the uninformed Leadership to actually 'pick' the Adults is absurd...they don't even know what good qualifications are.

 

The Scout Troops are 'Boy run'....I am sure you may have heard that.  They cannot possibly be' Boy Run' if the Church is doing it !!   The CO to 'set up the program'...I don't think so.  Not if they have no clue what a Scout Program even looks like.  

Giving CO's the hint that THEY run it...is a monumental mistake.   Our Church Council has just voted to destroy the exemplary Troop of 75 which has run very well for the last 50 years.  They say they don't have 'time or staff' to run it.  No one told them that they had to...except for the terrible misinterpretation of the Charter wording.   They have not 'run it' for 50 years.   Why now?    This has caused some major contention in this Church.  There must be a way to write a Charter so that this does not continue to happen.

I hear your frustration.  The issue is as you infer in your last sentence.   "There must be a way to write a charter so that this does not continue to happen."

The current charter does say "to use" and "Conduct the Scouting program consistent with BSA rules, regulations, and policies."  Most importantly, those are prefixed with "The Charter Organization agrees to:".  The CO is accepting the responsibility to perform a duty.  The duty is to "use" and "conduct".   The CO has actions it must do.  Not performing those duties or poorly performing or incompetently performing those dues is negligence and exposes the CO to legal issues. 

Even without a legal crisis, is it moral to sign a document with no intention of performing those duties?  Sure, senior pastors and PTOs and school principals want to help the community.  They should do that by opening the doors and making their facility available and welcoming scouts with a smile; not by agreeing to words they will not fulfill.  

I agree 100% that the contract is the issue.  ... Signing an agreement is not honorific ... It is a contract.  COs need to either perform their written responsibilities in the contract or not sign the contract.

The facility use agreement more correctly reflects the relationship between churches/schools/others and the scouting program.  It's not 100% perfect, but it's moving in the right direction.

The key point is ... BSA needs to continue to fix the outdated, problematic chartering model.

Edited by fred8033
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

But there MUST be a more clear definition of what 'use' really means...and it will be somewhat different for each CO...I still refer to Churches, here.  We 'use' the Scouts to do some landscape work every year...does that work?  I guess I shall remain dense because I cannot fathom how a Church can 'set up' the Program of a Scout Troop.  They can oversee it, of course.  We always have had a couple of male members who 'guide' these outdoor projects.  What to do...where, etc?    But does this say that the Executive Church Committee, picks out the Camp for the Summer every year?  Does the CO decide on the Fundraisers for the year?   Does the CO tell the Scouts where and when to distribute flyers on food drives?   Our District has neighborhoods mapped out?   IF the CO doesn't like the neighborhood, do they then pick their own...causing another Troop to make other plans?     Does the Church President keep track of which Adults need to refresh training and track them to make sure they get it?....ETC.  Does an activity idea from the SPL get bumped if the Church President doesn't like it?   I am not being saracstic here...I just do not follow what having the 'CO run the Troop, the Program' means ????   

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GrammaScout said:

But there MUST be a more clear definition of what 'use' really means...and it will be somewhat different for each CO...I still refer to Churches, here.  We 'use' the Scouts to do some landscape work every year...does that work?  I guess I shall remain dense because I cannot fathom how a Church can 'set up' the Program of a Scout Troop.  They can oversee it, of course.  We always have had a couple of male members who 'guide' these outdoor projects.  What to do...where, etc?    But does this say that the Executive Church Committee, picks out the Camp for the Summer every year?  Does the CO decide on the Fundraisers for the year?   Does the CO tell the Scouts where and when to distribute flyers on food drives?   Our District has neighborhoods mapped out?   IF the CO doesn't like the neighborhood, do they then pick their own...causing another Troop to make other plans?     Does the Church President keep track of which Adults need to refresh training and track them to make sure they get it?....ETC.  Does an activity idea from the SPL get bumped if the Church President doesn't like it?   I am not being saracstic here...I just do not follow what having the 'CO run the Troop, the Program' means ????   

I'm not a legal scholar ... but it seems to me to at least mean checks and balances with real knowledge of the unit.

 

Edited by fred8033
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, T2Eagle said:

The answer to pretty much all of your questions is yes, the Church can do and decide all of those things if that is how they want to run their troop.  ... The Chartering Organization, the Church in your case, has absolute control of the program --- who can belong, scout or adult, what roles they can have, what decisions they can make etc. ... Everything the troop does, it does in the name of the church. ... Fundraising: ...  Summer camp: ...  Training: ...  

Well written.

Related to previous post.  This does not mean it can't be boy-led or operate as a troop.  As with all things everyone does in life, the CO should exercise discretion using people skills.  

As Ben Parker said:  "With great power comes great responsibility."

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the phrase needed is the CO is legally responsible for the unit. Finances and youth safety being the biggest issues. If something goes wrong,  who owns the mess? That's supposed to be the CO. It can't be a volunteer. Given that the CO is responsible, in order for the unit leaders to have any autonomy there needs to be trust between the unit and CO. Primarily, that means the CO needs to trust the unit leaders.

That takes time and effort. It's the same thing for when the unit leaders allow the scouts to lead. Without trust the adults won't let go. Again, it takes time and effort to develop trust. Both sides need to actively work on it.

  • Upvote 2
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...