It appears that the decision is done; see letter.

[skeptic]

[Jameson76]

Family Troop.  That's a real selling point for the 11 - 17 years olds

[qwazse]

23 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

Family Troop.  That's a real selling point for the 11 - 17 years olds

The delusional thinking regarding increased membership stupefies me. We will be fortunate if we see a turnaround in a decade. Prove me wrong. (Seriously, please prove me wrong.)

This summer, I did meet a couple that said they would not support our troop if it ever went coed. If five girls approach me to start a unit, I’ll help them. But, I have no inclination to hazard community support if SA continues the corporate doublespeak of “family” scouting. I’d rather say our CO fields a unit for boys, and one for girls, and they sometimes join in the same activities.

[Jameson76]

16 minutes ago, qwazse said:

The delusional thinking regarding increased membership stupefies me. We will be fortunate if we see a turnaround in a decade. Prove me wrong. (Seriously, please prove me wrong.)

This summer, I did meet a couple that said they would not support our troop if it ever went coed. If five girls approach me to start a unit, I’ll help them. But, I have no inclination to hazard community support if SA continues the corporate doublespeak of “family” scouting. I’d rather say our CO fields a unit for boys, and one for girls, and they sometimes join in the same activities.

On the hoped for increased membership related to girls join.  First on girls joining troops and cubs, not my cup of tea, but if folks want to pursue it fine, but let's be honest about the background.

BSA (at the time) had Coed options; Explorers and Ventures, neither of which was overly successful and honestly BSA had no idea what to really do with the programs.  The REAL challenge to the BSA was continuing decline in membership in 2016 - 2018.  If you actually list to Surbaugh's town hall interview (as the announcement on adding girls was made) he basically says that adding girls to packs and troops was the only idea they had left.  The brain trust had no other real ideas or had done no real examination of how to grow, so hey, let's add girls.

This was not really to provide diverse opportunities, not to serve an underserved group, not to right some perhaps wrong, no, BSA basically (to quote Animal House) needed the dues.  Now as this has evolved, many reasons have been developed and applied on why BSA (now SA) did this, but the base reason is this is the only way they felt they could stem the drop in membership.

And that is the real deep issue, they (BSA professionals, National Board, regional teams, et al) have never really fully defined the WHY in the drop in membership, they have never truly delved deep and gotten into the reason.  Basically an echo chamber of potential ideas that may work have been bandied about (Scout Me In??).  This has been ongoing from Improved Scouting Program in the 70's (it wasn't) to the current expansion of classroom focused activities.  What did set BSA (now SA) apart is the camping and outdoors, getting youth out of their comfort zones, and really becoming unique in the crowded market place of youth activities.  Sadly SA is not that group and the activities they want to focus on or move towards (safer and less of the messy outdoor stuff) are just like so many other groups provide and a lot of those have waaay less overhead.

Adding girls to the rosters will likely not stem the decline as National and the high level volunteer groups NEVER defined the WHY for the decline.  If one cannot define the problem, they can never solved the problem.