dsteele

It sounds to me like the appropriate people from the charter partner and the local council are already involved. They are aware of nuances, etc. that I can't pick up on-line and really can't comment on the specifics of this case without taking the chance that something I saw will hamper the efforts of the people who are handling the issue. If I'm reading the original post correctly, it sounds like the charter rep (some people call them council reps, and a bunch of other things) has said that the pack has to let the boy in, but not his parents. I've seen that done and have no problem with it I've actually worked with units that have done that. They allowed the parents to come to pack meetings, but not much else. Good luck with your situation. Keep working with your chartered partner and district/council leadership. Dave

Cubsrgr8: You're not the first person to be in this situation. The advice you have been given in these threads is sound, but I strongly urge you to go see your district executive and/or field director. They need to be aware of the situation. You are correct in that it is your unit's problem, but they can and should give you the counsel you seek. They also need to be aware of the problem. Especially given your words that this boy really needs Scouting. In order for Scouting to help him fully, your staff needs to know what those needs are. Good luck. You know where to find me, for now, if you need me. Dave

Eamonn: Only because you "weft" your warp behind. Perhaps you should take the shuttle! Shame on us. Someone actually tried to put this thread back on track and we go to weaving 101. DS

I'm going to take a "nap." We'll see if you guys cath that one. DS

This whole thing is coming unravelled. I think I'll bobbin upstairs and see if I can get some pinking shears to stuff in my eye. DS

Yes, it is going on. Many professionals are Wood Badge trained, and not always because it's required . . . many of us want to be Wood Badgers. The first three years of a professional's career it is difficult to squeeze in Wood Badge -- because they have many things to do, including Professional Development Levels I, II, and III. Wood Badge, among other trainings like camp school, etc. are considered very important in professional development both by supervisors and DE's and are attended by professionals. Commandopro is exactly right -- no one tries to be arrogant. Just take some time to get to know your Scout Executive. They're busy, they have the job of facilitating tough decisions, but they are dedicated Scouters and are only trying to better Scouting in the council. Remember that even though someone threw a stone that hit a person and the person doesn't show the pain, that doesn't mean the stone didn't hurt . . . DS

A stitch in time . . . I'll see if I can iron things out . . . I think I'd rather bolt. DS

I promised earlier that I would post more on this topic, and here it is. My overall impression of the Girl Scout program is very good. I think they do a lot of wonderful stuff for girls and my wife is a product of the program. She can do anything and behaves as well or better than I would expect any Eagle Scout to do or behave. However, that's about the only comparison I feel good about making. In the public eye, the Girl Scouts of the USA and the Boy Scouts of America are brother/sister programs and should mirror each other. That is true on the basic philosophical level, but it parts after that. Organizationally, they are very different. A Girl Scout Council is pretty synonomous with a Boy Scout council in that they both have Executive Directors, Executive Boards, etc. Funding is different and the methods are different. At levels below the council level, the terms are similar, but don't match up. For example, if you compare the number of Girl Scout Troops to Boy Scout troops in (GS and BS) councils of similar geography, the Girl Scouts have a lot more troops. However, it seems to me that Girl Scout troops are more akin to Boy Scout patrols than to Boy Scout Troops -- and we don't count the number of patrols. Also, the Girl Scout year ends on September 30th -- at least as far as membership is counted, and the Boy Scout year ends on December 31 -- so the membership figures are really apples and oranges. Comparing the organizations, in my opinion, is comparing apples and oranges. Both are good fruit, but they are different fruit. DS

Secret tip for collectors of BSA stuff: Cozy up to a professional, like myself, who gets inundated with sometimes old, sometimes rare, sometimes unattainable by others, stuff . . . and really doesn't want it. I've met old volunteers who gave me their rare patches because, for some reason, they were impressed by me and wanted to give me a gift. I always accept, because I'm honored by the honor, but the actual do-dad doesn't mean much to me. I've found that I can keep the honor and give away the item to someone who does appreciate it. Anyone looking for a Region 7 patch? Or an Eagle Knot with a dark green background, or a size 42 waist 1960's wool uniform? I think I have those things somewhere. They are not for sale, but if they have meaning for you, I'll try to find them. Lord only knows what else I've got somewhere in the house. To use the Lord of the Rings analogy (this only works if you read them rather than watched the movie) I'm like Tom Bombadil. He was the only character in any of the books (Fellowship of the Ring) who was completely imune from the ring. The reason they didn't leave it with him is that they knew he would forget about it in time and it would be lost again . . . Some professionals hawk their stuff and plan to sell it in their retirement. Some really do hunt for the items and plan to keep them. Some, like me, simply forget . . . DS

Bob -- glad you got over that flu! While the liberals are condensing and the conservatives are aromatizing, I have a question. Why is it that (it seems to me at least) the very people who shouted that the government didn't do enough to prevent the 9/11 attacks are the same people grousing about losing their civil liberties? DS

Put a sock in it boys! Eamonn, you might need Manyirons to explain that one. Hee-hee-hee. DS

I recall reading a box in my 1972 Boy Scout Handbook about BP thinking about putting "A Scout is not a fool" into the Scout Law and then deciding against it. It was interesting reading the little box, but then I moved on and, although I remember the phrase, the reason he did not include it is no longer important to me. However, I sense that we're about to see a debate and can only hope that it remains backed up by data. Ed, you didn't provide any data, but I can see your point and think it provides interesting insight. However, I do ask that you don't go poking anything Like I said, I'm not sure why BP didn't include "A Scout is not a fool" in the law, but I'm glad he didn't. Everything else is written as what a Scout IS -- not what he is NOT. I'm not putting words in BP's mouth -- just a personal observation. DS

Bsabrit: I'm guessing that your crew has not run this question past your council -- by calling the district executive or whoever processes Tour Permits. You must have a female leader if there is a female on the trip. What was quoted from the Guide to Safe Scouting is the policy. NJCubscouter is questioning the wording, but he isn't denying that the policy applies. That's my official answer as a professional scouter . . . but you should still check with your council for local interpretation. There are reasons behind the policy of having female leaders on outings with female members and many of those reasons are things the female venturer will probably not want to discuss or have seen by her father. The answer to your question is no. DS

We know you're a district chairman, but if we didn't know that and it wasn't mentioned in your thread, we would have assumed that you were a parent dedicated to his son who is acting as we all hope parents would when their help is needed to assist a unit. In other words, you're doing the things good Scouting parents do. You're not a district chairman in this manner . . . you're Father. Keep it up. Now put your district chairman hat on (and pretend you don't have a son in the Crew.) Is the District Commissioner's staff on top of the situation, or are they just hoping that this Father saves the Crew? Is the District Executive aware that the Advisor is struggling with personal issues? If so, you've done your job as district chairman in this instance and can now go back to being Father and helping your son's Crew. Dave

Outdoorthinker: Your presence has been missed. I don't particularly care who you're working for (I do have to admit, he said with his gaze averted, that I am a Republican and I don't think you're working for that party) mostly because I'm just glad that you care enough at your age to participate in the political process of the United States of America. We may disagree on politics -- I don't know and it really doesn't matter -- but I'm glad you have the passion and devotion and dedication to travel from your home to another place to participate in whatever way you are in the process. What you are doing is idealism at its finest. Keep it up. We're not talking about you behind your back. What we say will be here when you get back. A simple search on your own username will bring up all about you that has transpired. Take heart in the fact that you are missed and that we seem to be universally proud of you. In the interim, I'm going to bed. Staff meeting tomorrow. Dave

I find this thread to be very interesting from many points of view. I have found nothing to disagree with and even found that my own preferences, both in usage with others and other's usage toward me may be unusual. (Pssst -- this is your opportunity to call me weird without fear if you'd like.) When I was younger, I saw Mr. as a sign of respect and feared to not use it. When I became 18, I expected others to call me Mr. just because I was an adult. There was a long period of time as a kid when I thought being called David good and hated being called Dave. David was the little guy who slew Goliath and there's no way a Dave could have done that, right? When I became a DE at the ripe age of 22, I imagined I would be called Mr. Steele and all would be good. Didn't happen. In fact, others expected me to call them Mr. or Mrs. because they were older. That didn't happen either -- by then I learned that respect only works when it is reciprical . . . otherwise it's just false cheer. Gradually, I learned that Steele is a pretty hard sounding name (the e on the end is silent ) and that some people are actually intimidated by professional scouters -- honest to God, that is a hard one for many professionals to learn, myself included. Once I hit a level where I began to have an effect on council policies and supervise district executives, something very strange happened. People began to call me Sir, Mr. Steele, etc. as if I were some sort of policing, hard-smashing, volunteer eating machine. It seemed to help when I went from David J. Steele, Mr. Steele, etc. to just Dave. I guess it's an image thing, both internal and external. As to what I prefer children to call me . . . that's an interesting question. I am comfortable, as far as the sons and daughters of friends, calling me by whatever their parents want them to call me. Uncle Dave is a very high compliment, Dave is fine by me, Mr. Dave is okay, and Mr. Steele is a bit dis-tasteful, but who am I to tell the parents how to raise their children when it comes to ettiquette? While I'm on a roll here, I wish to second what Bob White and others have said about being called what one is preferred to be called as the polite thing to do. Please refer to the below examples: (I'm exposing some personal intelligence here on the way I operate it, so please don't exploit it.) 1) Having said what I said about preferring Dave, my support staff is trained to call me Mr. Steele in the presence of others who I don't know when there is possible trouble. They are, by using the honorific, telling me to watch out. 2) If someone who has called me David once and been corrected -- which I do, I really prefer Dave -- calls me David again, they are marked in my brain as someone who is trying to insult me deliberately. If they call me David after the second request, my hearing seems to fail on the third call, unless they happen to be the guy who signs my paycheck. 3) Perhaps I'm jaded, but in my brain, the only people who have the right to be referred to by title and surname are full-time members of the United States armed forces or reservists, National Guard, etc. who are on duty at the time I call them. Otherwise, I will call the pastor, general manager, CEO, etc. and ask for them by first name -- but I'll make sure I have the correct first name (like Twocubdad, many people prefer to call themselves by something other than the name their parents laid on them) before I do so. We call that doing your homework. 4) When it comes to Scouts, I have to admit that I'm surprised, but not offended, when one of them calls me Dave. That's only because I think most parents raise their children to use Mr. or Mrs. when referring to adults. On rare occasions, I have over-ridden whatever the parents have taught and given the young Scout permission (actually more like a command) to call me Dave. I fully expect the young Scout (and I wouldn't give permission for the use of Dave if I didn't think it would happen) to go to his parents and say, "Mr. Steele said to call him Dave. Can I." That's exactly what happened when my DE as a Scout told me to call him by his first name. Hops -- what did I tell you to call me? Would I be offended if you called me Mr. Steele? Sorry for the long answer to the short question. DS

Laurie: I think I know what you mean. When I was a kid, we had a real fireplace in the house. My father seemed to always build a good fire that started the first time and I learned the skill as well. Now Dad (the real Mr. Steele, I'm just Dave) lives in an apartment in Downtown Kalamazoo and has a gas fireplace. I don't much care for it. It's not a real fire with wood popping, the smells, the work, etc. It's nice, but it's not the same. Flipping a switch to "off" shouldn't end a home hearth fire. I do, however, have to admit that I liked the fireplace in our (meaning my wife and my) previous house. In that home, we had a "gas assist" fireplace. You threw a couple of logs on the grate, turned on the gas, and waited for the logs to burn to self-sufficiency, then turned the gas off. That way, we had the real fire without the work of lighting it and didn't have to save newspaper or worry about kindling. This house has a "real" fireplace and the local merchants have a penchant of seasoning wood for about 30 minutes prior to delivery. I sure miss the gas assist . . . Dave

Andrewcanoe: Thanks for the softball. Yes, the red wool jak-shirt is well worth the money, even at your advanced age of nearly 40 the same age as I am -- nearly. I bought my first red wool jacket at Philmont when I was 13 years old. Gave it to my little brother (in Big Brothers Big Sisters) when I had outgrown it at the age of 30. I bought another one -- I forget the price -- but it was a bit too small. My non-scout-father-in-law admired it and he was a bit smaller than me, so I gave it to him for Christmas. He wore it until his death some ten years laster. I bought my third one ten years ago (my father-in-law died last year) a year ago and still wear it on days when the temperature is between 35 and 55 degrees with my uniform. I've used them as pillows, towels, blankets, etc. They are good jackets. I also know of a couple of well rounded, long-term volunteers who were told to buy one when they were recuited . . . and told that they couldn't quit until it wore out. They're still involved in the program. What's wrong with me after wearing out two and still going, I don't konw. But I suggest that you buy one and can't quit until it wears out. Outgrowing it doesn't count. DS

We miss you, too, Outdoorthinker. We look forward to your return. I know it's not my role to speak for the members . . . but I feel pretty safe on this one. Dave

Twocubdad: Do not eat the happy meal toys! Sage advice from one who has been there, done that Dave

I don't know Joe Glasscock personally, but I do know Doug Smith -- National Director of Program -- who supervises Joe in some way. Both are good, realistic, personable men who understand the program in ways that you and I can not fathom. (Not directed at anyone in particular, but to everyone. These guys are good.) Mandatory training is not a national initiative. However, if the volunteers in your council (Executive Board and officers) have decided to make training mandatory -- that's a local issue. I'll echo Bob in saying that it is not a national initiative. The only things I've seen from national that even come close to the recommendation are that districts and councils should make training as available as possible to all volunteers. They've come up with some great stuff. It's up to us to get people to attend. Dave

Every once in a while, I used to get thrown a soft ball -- meaning an easy question to answer. This one, from twocubdad and associate, isn't one of them: "Is it necessary to have one person registered just to be treasurer? Or, if the committee chairman were willing to keep the books, have another registered adult member sign checks in addition to himself, and then bring copies of the bank statements and register to each monthly meeting, would that provide enough accountability? The reason this is asked is that the treasurer was not providing any records at all, and after several attempts to get information, the committee chairman with backing of the other leaders in the pack felt it necessary to start fresh with the accounting (new account, new signers, but not a new treasurer as treasurer only)." The answer to the first question is that there is no BSA registered position for an individual called treasurer. Scoutnet, in 1999, introduced the ability for units to earmark a person within the BSA system as the treasurer. If you did into the policies, you'll only find committee member (who's job may be treasurer.) Everything after the first question makes good sense to me and to most BSA recommendations when it comes to handling money. Having two check signers makes sense for units as well as councils. In fact, councils are supposed to have at least one volunteer sign every check and have a two-signer requirement. Often it is the Scout Executive and a key volunteer. Sometimes it is two volunteers and no professionals can sign a check. Depends on the council. I think the books in a unti need to be open -- for the protection of the check signers as well as the unit. Theft does happen, but it is very rare. Accusations of theft are more common -- but when two people of different households, who make regular financial reports to the unit committee are accused, the accusations are quickly dismissed by the parents. I'll give you an example: Quite a few years ago, I had worked my way fairly closely to a cubmaster in a small town who had no use for "council." I went from "council" to being his "good guy," but not without a few bumps between him and I. In fact, the first time I showed up at his sign-up night, he tried to throw me out. I stayed. Three years later, he had decided that giving me the applications and money the night of the sign up was a good thing -- saved him a trip to the office. He was very much a one-man show. I told him the dollar amount his unit needed to pay. He wrote a check from the pack account, signed it, and gave it to his wife (the treasurer) for a second signature. She signed it. Outside in the parking lot, I asked the Cubmaster, "Are you and your wife the only check signers for the pack?" He said yes and started to get defensive. I pointed out that this was a bad idea and he had my shirt by the throat before I could finish. He was bigger than me and I thought I had another one coming. (When you're 5'6" and Scotch, Irish, English and Erudite it's pretty common ) He said, "I'm getting tired of people accusing me of stealing." I knew he wasn't stealing from the unit any more than I would -- which is to say not at all. I told him that it's okay for his wife to be treasurer, but the accusations would stop if he got off the checking account and have someone else sign on as the second-signer. It would also help if they actually had committee meetings and they (not him) made financial reports. Fortunately, he took the advice, but not the swing at me. He got quiet and I told him I'd meet him at his house the next morning to pick up the applications. The guy actually cooked me pancakes when I got there. I kind of miss him. DS

Twocubdad can usually be counted on to ask interesting and tough questions. I like them because they make me think . . . but I don't know the answer to this one: "I understand criminal theft is one thing, but how about this as a hypothetical: Our unit is selling coupon books from a local car wash. We've gone through all the proper approvals for the unit fundraiser. Unfortunately I loose an entire case of the books with a value of several thousand dollars. The car wash sues me, the unit and the CO for the money. Does my BSA registration provide any insurance for the loss or legal counsel? " I don't know and have no way to answer. In the event something like that happens, my best advice is to first contact your insurance agent, attorney, and your Scout Executive or designee -- and not necessisarily in that order. Give them a chance to make some phone calls of their own after you ask your questions -- they'll have to check with the experts in the BSA. I can give you a of real life example I've seen in this area -- although different than the example twocubdad gave, it does have to do with insurance: A unit leader took some popcorn for a show and sell, loaded it in his van and went to the sale. On the way, his van was rear-ended and much of the popcorn was destroyed. His auto insurance paid the retail price of the popcorn. He paid the council cost and kept the unit portion. I don't know who paid his deductible. However, no law suits by anyone were filed in the case. BSA insurance had nothing to do with it -- it was outside the realm. The answer to the question also depends on what council you're involved with. The normal registration fee includes secondary liability insurance for registered leaders. Secondary insurance kicks in when your homeowners general liability wears out (or auto as the case may be) and provides coverage after that. Liability insurance is generally pretty inexpensive compared to medical because it has to do with law suits rather than medical expenses. Councils, at their option, may provide (for an additional fee) primary liability insurance for leaders which kicks in before any insurance they may have and generally covers more dollars than secondary. I have no way of knowing which level your council provides. They have to pay for it one way or another -- whether they charge you or take it out of FOS or find a sponsor. The only way to find out which you have is to call your local council and ask. DS

Floridascout: I have no right to say what I'm about to say to you. I thought about sending this as a private message, but I'll say it publicly. I have never served in Florida, nor served anyone that I know of who has. I have no right to say that I'm proud of you. But I am very proud of you . . . as a fellow Eagle Scout. Your most recent post has convinced me (although I didn't need convincing) that you are exactly the kind of Eagle Scout we need to carry the banner and responsibilities of Eagle Scout into the future. Do so with integrity as you have done so far, and all will be well. Congrats again, young man! DS

Bob White is correct. There are registration minimums to charter or re-charter a troop. Going back to Glenn's questions in the original post: Registration with the BSA is required for membership in the BSA. If an adult wants to count themselves as a member of the Boy Scouts of America, they must fill out the application, secure proper signatures for approval, and since April 1, 2003, must undergo a criminal background check. To be considered a committee member, they must register with the BSA. The new secretary and treasurer are not registered in Glenn's post. Is this a problem? On one level, no. Bob White is correct that the charter can go through with 2 registered committee members (troop position such as treasurer does not need to be indicated.) However, would you want to hand the books and finances of the troop over to someone who was not willing to become a member of the Boy Scouts of America? That question assumes that the individual was asked to become a member of the BSA and refused -- if they haven't been asked, someone should ask them. I'm sure they'll enjoy the magazine and being a member of the BSA. If they're not registered with the BSA, they're more like a parent-book-keeper for the unit and not a treasurer. Same goes for the secretary. If they're willign to do the job on a regular basis, why not give them the rights and priviledges of membership in the BSA? I agree with the others who point out that the parent who helps out here and there does not need to register. My personal measuring stick is how the individual would identify himself/herself. Are they, in public circles (potentially) saying, "I'm the treasurer for Pack XXX?" If so, they should be registered. If they say, "My son is a Cub Scout in Pack XXX," then by all means encourage them to register. Don't worry about inflating your adult numbers, regardless of who (the unit or the individual) pays their registration fee. The number of registered adults (other than meeting charter minimums) is only loosely counted by the BSA as a guage to program health and interpretations vary. It is not a measure by which program effectiveness is determined. WOW! I just noticed the time. I've got to get to bed now. Late meeting = late night, I guess. Dave