Inter-Unit Activities

[FScouter 24]

In the olden days fees were set to cover the direct costs of the event. These days, our council looks to all events as revenue events. All event budgets including training must generate a 15% surplus. The problem is that neither the SE nor the top council volunteers will openly explain the purpose of the mandated surplus. Explanations like "insurance" or "overhead" or "contingency" don't fool anybody. Volunteers are not stupid, and those kind of explanations generate suspicion and distrust.

 

There would be much less resistance to increased fees if the leadership would simply say that additional revenues are needed, and that event fees must be increased to make up revenue shortfalls in other areas such as FOS and United Way. Honest, forthright, and believable explanations would get better response.

[Backpacker 11]

F-Scouter is right in his assessment of these extra charges. When I was a DE we were all told that every event we organized, inter unit, district or council had to make a profit. How was this determined? After adding all your expenses we were required to add an additional 15-20% on top and come up with the per head fee. This is a very common practice in most councils and I wish they were more honest about it rather than hiding it behind extra insurance charges, etc. In regards to the ship regatta I think that the SE looks at it as getting his piece of the pie for the council.

[SMT376Richmond KY 10]

The insurance question has been raised many times at round table. Here is the explanation we've been given. The $1.00 we pay at registration covers us by national. The $1.00 per head at events (even charging it for our tour permits now) is for additional liability insurance the council supposedly takes out (haven't received any paperwork with coverage etc). Now having experience with insurance companines in the medical world the insurance paid at registration is secondary to your health plan and the additional (if it exists) would be tiertary to our insurance. I know they made a little money on the Spring camporee as the Troops were able to get canoes donated so they rental fees budgeted were not used. Like I said this all left a very sour taste in several SM's at the last RT prior to camporee. Talking in the hall there were several that said they were opting out of further district or council activities due to the practice. Guess that's why council said it was going to add the $1.00 insurance fee to tour permits as well.

[nldscout 18]

If someone is telling you the $1.00 is for additional liability insurance then someone is outright LYING to you. There is no such thing. Liability insurance is national provided and national run, there is no fee, its what registration pays for.

 

Our council atleast is honest in that when we recharter this year there is a council fee or $10.00 per person being charged to support programs. I wish they would raise Council fee to $25-30 and get rid of Family FOS. Atleast then everyone would be paying same fee.

 

[Kahuna 172]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm. I conclude from this discussion that most councils are having bigger financial problems than they care to admit. Back when I was a DE, we always tried to build in a little "profit" margin on our district and council activities, but nobody thought of trying to "catch" units camping together and having joint activities or charge for tour permits to gouge out a few more bucks.

 

This sort of goes along with my thinking when I learned South Florida Council had sold off their only summer camp. Their problem is UW cuts.