Can the Council require a Unit to be Chartered under the Council?

[pbcheesehead 0]

Can the Council require a Unit to be Chartered under the Council and execute a facility use agreement with the previous CO?

Backstory -

The local Council notified units in July that the Catholic Diocese elected not to continue Chartering Units. Our troop formed a subcommittee, chose another Church (Lutheran) who has a history with Scouting units The Church  previously had a Troop that folded, and currently is the CO for a Troop that moved to them when the Methodist Church elected not to continue as COs. That Troop still meets at the Methodist Church. Our plan was to meet at the new CO facilities. After the CC received the release signature from the previous CO (Catholic Church) and the signature from the new CO (Lutheran), he received a call from the Council Commissioner telling him that the Troop needed to stop moving forward. 

Subsequently, the Troop received an e-mail from the Council Executive listing multiple reasons why the Council would not allow the Troop to go under the new CO and MUST be chartered under the Council and execute a Facility Use Agreement. The reasons listed were based on dialogue the Council had solely with the COR, who has seemingly had an agenda and caused issues for the Troop for the past year.

The issues raised 1) had previously been addressed, 2) categorically false/incorrect, or 3) so vague that no active leader knows what it is referring to (incident reported to National by a parent - not reported at the Troop, District, or Council level). The Council's decision was done without consult with any other member of the Key 3 or anyone else  part of the Troop Adult leadership.

I understand the Council has the ability to not renew, revoke, or otherwise a Charter, but the Lutheran Church has an existing Charter for the other unit, and there were no communications from District or Council prior to this.

 

 

[RememberSchiff 3682]

@pbcheesehead welcome to scouter.com

[mrjohns2 582]

16 minutes ago, pbcheesehead said:

The issues raised 1) had previously been addressed, 2) categorically false/incorrect, or 3) so vague that no active leader knows what it is referring to (incident reported to National by a parent - not reported at the Troop, District, or Council level).

You may not wish to share these, but it is hard to have perspective without these details. 
 

I guess the council can force you as they are the keepers of the form approvals. 

[fred8033 1593]

2 hours ago, pbcheesehead said:

... had solely with the COR, who has seemingly had an agenda and caused issues for the Troop for the past year ...

The council leaders did right.  COR is the head of the unit and should be who the council interacts thru.  IMHO, this is an example of the danger leaving unhealthy situations unresolved.  

The only unit person above the COR is the chartered org leader (pastor, president, etc).   You can ask the CO executive to talk to the council and help, but should you.  Does it matter?  Will the youth know a difference?  The unit needs a place to meet.  It is annoying to have others second guess decisions, but at least your unit can move forward.  Also, this will shed the old COR and give your unit a chance to build a clean reputation.  Plus, you might get special opportunities / benefits thru more communication and more connections with the council.  Look on the positive.

Scouting is local.  Your scouts won't know the difference.  It's paperwork.  Roll your eyes.  Smile.  Laugh.  Move on.

[ToKindle96 19]

Does that COR still have a say at all? He is representing the Charter Org that is no longer going to sponsor a scouting unit. Wouldn't a new COR come with a new charter org?

[pbcheesehead 0]

10 minutes ago, ToKindle96 said:

Does that COR still have a say at all? He is representing the Charter Org that is no longer going to sponsor a scouting unit. Wouldn't a new COR come with a new charter org?

That is a question I have as well since the old CO has signed signed the Unit's release. However, the paperwork was not processed by Council. 

The prevailing thought is that the (old) COR is driving the narrative at Council and Council with appoint the same individual as the rep once the Council Charter paperwork is completed.

[fred8033 1593]

You wrote "with".  Did you mean "will" as the council WILL appoint the same individual?  I'd get that fixed.  This feels like a way for the existing COR to stay involved; essentially self-interest by the COR.

Also, I am confused.  It feels strange for the COR to provide negative feedback to the council when the COR is the person selecting the leaders and then staying at arms length.  The COR should not be complaining about the unit to the council as the COR can replace the unit leadership and the COR should not be seeing day to day execution as the COR does not attend camp outs or weekly meetings.

Edited August 22, 2023 by fred8033

[pbcheesehead 0]

13 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

You wrote "with".  Did you mean "will" as the council WILL appoint the same individual?  I'd get that fixed.  This feels like a way for the existing COR to stay involved; essentially self-interest by the COR.

Also, I am confused.  It feels strange for the COR to provide negative feedback to the council when the COR is the person selecting the leaders and then staying at arms length.  The COR should not be complaining about the unit to the council as the COR can replace the unit leadership and the COR should not be seeing day to day execution as the COR does not attend camp outs or weekly meetings.

I did mean "will".

Also, the COR has a Scout in the Troop - his 3rd. in-fact. He was only sporadically involved previously (MBC, pull trailer), but has served as COR for 4 years, although he did not voice any concerns the first 3 years as COR. I've been involved for 6 years, the first 5 of which I really enjoyed. It is frustrating that Council seems to accept his narrative without question or follow-up. The Scouting community is small, and we are worried that the "chatter" at district and council level will hurt us in recruitment, especially over the next few years while dealing with the COVID effect on the # of Cubs crossing over.

[mrjohns2 582]

1 hour ago, pbcheesehead said:

It is frustrating that Council seems to accept his narrative without question or follow-up.

Maybe the unit should start to meet with him to start to clear if any issues proactively (1/quarter?). Drive the narrative vs being hit by it. 

[Eagle94-A1 2687]

1 hour ago, pbcheesehead said:

It is frustrating that Council seems to accept his narrative without question or follow-up.

Because the COR not only represents the CO at the district and council levels, they are voting members of both, and will be listened to more as a result.

Only person who could possibly change that is the Catholic Church's IH, and that is if the charter is still in effect since the transfer paperwork has been filled out and signed. More on that below.

15 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

Maybe the unit should start to meet with him to start to clear if any issues proactively (1/quarter?). Drive the narrative vs being hit by it. 

This is one way to do it. It is probably the best

Another way is the following, but it is drastic. Since the Lutheran Church already has a troop, they have a COR. I would have the SM, CC and the Lutheran Church's COR meet with the SE with all the transfer paperwork and signatures and have the SE explain why you cannot charter with the Lutheran Church, especially since they want a unit.. My understanding is that once the release paperwork is signed, the Catholic Church is no longer a CO, and the COR no longer has any authority unless the Lutheran Church appoints him COR. But tthe catholic Church keeps the money and property, unless they agree to transfer that as well.

 

Good Luck

Edited August 22, 2023 by Eagle94-A1

[SNEScouter 60]

On 8/21/2023 at 9:17 AM, pbcheesehead said:

Our troop formed a subcommittee, chose another Church (Lutheran) who has a history with Scouting units

This was your first problem.  It is the Council's prerogative to enter into agreements with outside organizations to become Charter Orgs.  The troop's unit committee should not have done this without consulting with the Council first and obtaining the Council's blessing.  I also question whether the Lutheran Church leadership fully understands the responsibilities associated with being a Charter Org, since (per your description) it is seemingly handing out signatures on paperwork to multiple units.

On 8/21/2023 at 9:17 AM, pbcheesehead said:

Lutheran Church has an existing Charter for the other unit, and there were no communications from District or Council prior to this.

If I'm reading this correctly (and the facts as presented are not entirely clear), this proposed solution would have the Lutheran Church being the Charter Org for two troops, one of which would be meeting at the Methodist Church that no longer wishes to be a Charter Org?  I can see why the Council would not be thrilled about the Lutheran Church having responsibility for two apparently unrelated troops (this apparently isn't just a boy troop / girl troop pairing, which would likely be fine).

There clearly are issues here and it seems that a meeting with the Council leadership is long overdue.  At that meeting, you all need to agree on the unit's future either as a Council-chartered unit or with a Charter Org that is acceptable to the Council.

[Wëlënakwsu 57]

I’m confused…  Is following what transpired? 

• Catholic Diocese will not charter BSA Units and thus the Troop is defunct or about to be.

• Catholic Parish agreed to transfer of equipment, materials, funds, Unit number, etc to a new CO.

• Catholic Troop "lame duck" Committee members obtained agreement from a Lutheran Church to charter a new additional Scouts BSA unit.

• Catholic Parish "lame duck" COR pursued a Council Charter for a new Troop meeting on the basis of a Facility Use Agreement (FUA). (To clarify, would the Council chartered Troop meet at the Catholic or Lutheran Church?)

It seems the Catholic Executive Officer (EO) has to decide if a Council Charted Troop can meet at their Facility.  If so, I assume Troop assets are then transferred to the Council. If not, then the option of a Lutheran Parish chartering an additional Scouts BSA unit is now between the Council and Lutheran EO. 

If the Troop Committee disagrees with the "lame duck" Catholic COR, the "lame duck" Troop Committee Chair could meet with the Catholic EO and discuss the options. 

PS:  Whether the Catholic or Lutheran Parish being a better meeting place depends on location, space availability, meeting time, preference of SM & Assistants, etcetera of which Forum readers know nothing.