Jump to content

Statement by the United Methodist Church


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 206
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Thanks for the welcome and encouragement! I was SM and Committee Chair for the church-Chartered Scout Troop and CM and Committee Chair for the Pack. Currently, I'm Chair of the church Trustees an

I've been lurking for a number of months on Scouter.com.  I finally took the plunge and registered. Understaffed LCs can't support the administrative requirements associated with an LC-sponsored

The desire to be a CO is still there, but there are some issues that need to be addressed.  As a CO, you have been told for years that you are covered under an insurance policy only to find out you we

Posted Images

12 minutes ago, 5thGenTexan said:

So, may I assume there are no substantive changes other than a few difference in language in the Affiliation Agreement?   No extension till Dec 31 as possibly mentioned earlier?

 

 

As far as I know those are largely separate tracks: The tinkering that resulted in the 8/26 affiliation document is independent of the extension which gives units more time to sort this out. In a strategic sense it also allows BSA to show optimal membership numbers in its  2022 year end report for December. Some of the UMC units in limbo may ultimately drop but this way they won't be reflected until 2023. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, yknot said:

As far as I know those are largely separate tracks: The tinkering that resulted in the 8/26 affiliation document is independent of the extension which gives units more time to sort this out. In a strategic sense it also allows BSA to show optimal membership numbers in its  2022 year end report for December. Some of the UMC units in limbo may ultimately drop but this way they won't be reflected until 2023. 

I honestly don't care about their membership numbers report.  The only reference to the Dec 31 extension has been in this thread and nothing from Council.  I would like to know if its legitimate or not.  The lack of communication at the Council level is frustrating.  I am a CC for two Units and it would be nice to know what my real timeline is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, 5thGenTexan said:

I honestly don't care about their membership numbers report.  The only reference to the Dec 31 extension has been in this thread and nothing from Council.  I would like to know if its legitimate or not.  The lack of communication at the Council level is frustrating.  I am a CC for two Units and it would be nice to know what my real timeline is.

 

Do you have this link?

https://methodistscouter.org/a-new-agreement/

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

My LC just did a zoom meeting and stated that ALL UMC units will be council chartered, NO EXCEPTIONS.  

They feel that this is the best way to move forward.  Lots of resistance on the zoom meeting. Do not think it will go well.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Do not think they can dictate that.  If a unit wants a different charter but with the facility arrangement it should not be any business of the LC.  And, since it appears LC's are balking in some areas anyway, not sure where they are coming from.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This same LC hinted that ALL units may be council chartered in the future. A leader asked about switching charters as they found a new CO and the SE said absolutely not, council chartered is the only option for UMC units.

 

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just reached out to Steve Schied who is involved on the national UMC Scouting committee in regard to this.  We have been offered charter with the Masons and also the facilities aggreement.  As has been discussed off and on, there is not complete confidence in LC sponsorship, especially with the idea of them owning our physical equipment and our bank accounts.  I will share his response when I receive it.  I also received an email from our church locally with what appears to be a similar opinion as stated in this recent comment.  I am not sure that there are absolutes with it, only recognition of the LC with facility as viable.  It would help if we were actually seeing the LC reach out to us directly, rather than just wait for us to move.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 1980Scouter said:

This same LC hinted that ALL units may be council chartered in the future. A leader asked about switching charters as they found a new CO and the SE said absolutely not, council chartered is the only option for UMC units.

 

If you look at the issues with liability, oversight, and organizational structure, it's kind of the only model that makes sense from those perspectives.  A lot of units have reported getting dropped by church COs and shifting to community chartering orgs like American Legions and VFWs but those create new problems. For BSA to survive going forward, it has to more tightly manage the relationship with local units through its councils. A non council CO just adds a level of liability and extends the managerial length of arm. You can see why they might be heading in this direction if true. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

JMHO..but LC sponsoring ALL units probably ends the program.  Sponsors will withdraw all their support from the BSA causing greater financial shortfalls and increased lack of community support.     LC sponsoring ANY units is the way to go as LC neither have the time nor manpower to properly sponsor so they will hire new people just for that purpose and have the units pay for these positions with increased council fees over and above national, expect increased FOS and fundraising support, require "their" units to only go to the council camp and programs.  Of course the LCs will have access to bank accounts and equipment they will divest. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, PACAN said:

JMHO..but LC sponsoring ALL units probably ends the program.  Sponsors will withdraw all their support from the BSA causing greater financial shortfalls and increased lack of community support.     LC sponsoring ANY units is the way to go as LC neither have the time nor manpower to properly sponsor so they will hire new people just for that purpose and have the units pay for these positions with increased council fees over and above national, expect increased FOS and fundraising support, require "their" units to only go to the council camp and programs.  Of course the LCs will have access to bank accounts and equipment they will divest. 

The LC that made the video had a link to the agreement form. It said it is mandatory to do FOS, popcorn, flowers and any other fundraiser at the council level. Camping is allowed at other council camps though. including for summer camp.

Edited by 1980Scouter
Clarify sentence.
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 1980Scouter said:

The LC that made the video had a link to the agreement form. It said it is mandatory to do FOS, popcorn, flowers and any other fundraiser at the council level. Camping is allowed at other council camps though. including for summer camp.

An unenforceable edict??

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...