Eagle94-A1

This one is extremely tricky. I have in deed taken a Scout to the hospital by myself, with the express approval of the professional running the camp. (emphasis). One of our camp staffers got injured and I had to rush him to the ER. That situation was OK, but a week later an 18 year old staffer had an accident and again I had to take him to the ER. This time there was complications. Scouter went into shock in my car. Having a second person would have been extremely helpful. But I know it can be a challenge. Last time I had to transport a Scout to the ER, I took another Scout with me. I know that can be troublesome, but thankfully it was my son.

Gotcha. Thst is where the no one on one rule kicks in.

I beleive @elitts is refering to adults using the buddy system at summer camp, not the issue of having 2 adults in camp. Since the 72 hours rule has been in place, I know of NO camp that has violated it. And prior to that, when 2 adults needed to be at camp one being registered and over 21, I know of only 1 camp that allowed a troop to attend with only 1 adult. Some emegency happened to the second adult a few days before they arrived, and teh camp assigned an adult Staffer to be the 2nd Scouter. He stayed with them in their campsite, ate with them with meals, and was essentially an ASM to them that week.

I know families who are in the exact predicament. Glad oldest has aged out as I do not think I would be able to afford his registration, even at the reduced adult rate, this year. This will kill Cub Scouts and trickle down to Scouts.

Also fewer and fewer HS promote the trades. If anything, the HSs team up with local community colleges to have classes on welding, auto mechanics, etc.

Have them check their library to see if anyone on staff is a notary. They usually will notorize for free.

My concern with mergers is that council customer service will be worse than it is. And right now it is 99% non existant. And .5% of the involvement is telling volunteers we can't do things, i.e. have a clean up day to get camp ready, doing our own roundups, etc.

From what i am seeing, most units are not concerned with the bankruptcy. They are focused on their units.

Is that @emb021 website?

In one case i am familiar with, the accused was found innocent by the law enforcement investigators, but still remained in the IVF. So even if innocent, your nsme can still be in it.

I got essentially the same message last nite as @5thGenTexan did, except with my council specific info. BUT from keeping up here, I know that we are no where close to the end. Winston Churchill said it best. "Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."

At the moment, NO I am not struggling with it. Ticked off and want heads to roll, YES, but not struggling with my decision to continue on. NOW, I will be withdrawing from all district committees, activities, etc and focusing on my Scouts. My Scouts need me, now more than ever. We are an extremely small troop, with no feeder pack. While we are not struggling now, we will in the future as our Scouts age out. Our committee and ASM corps are the bare minimums. In fact two ASMs became MCs to get the required numbers. And we will lose Scouters as their Scouts age out. Again my focus is my Scouts. As far as council as the council goes, my district has been neglected for so long many could care less about the council. When the word gets out on the camps to be sold, I have been told several units will have absolutely nothing to do with the council ever again: no attendance at district or council events, no FOS, no sales, no going to the remaining council camps, nothing. Just use them to process the charter and Eagle Applications. They will even go tot out of council stores to buy awards. It just so happens that your friend here is only MOSTLY dead. There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive. 🤣

Mods, if this is the wrong place for this, please feel free to move it to the appropriate thread. @CynicalScouter, @Eagle1993and everyone else posting updated information and commentary on the bankruptcy: THANK YOU! I just got back from a meeting where the bankruptcy, selling of camps, and membership was the topic of conversation. Not only was I not surprised by anything that was said because It has been said here, I ended up telling them a few things they did not know, specifically the presser today. It's sad when I get accurate and reliable information faster here than from my own council.

Yes it can destroy the innocent. I know someone who was cleared of any wrongdoing, but is still in the IVF. And it did affect her reputation in the community. Yep know another individual in the IVF because he questioned the SE on some issues. So yes, not everyone in the IVF is in it for CSA, nor guilty if accused of CSA.

Is this being recorded for those of us at work and cannot watch? And if you can provide a link, I'd appreciate it. Not that I do not trust the commentary you folks provide, but I'd rather hear it from the horse's mouth. Plus add my own. One thing I am getting from the commentary is utter disbelief.

@CynicalScouter, I think my comment went over your head, so I will clarify. You stated there were 3 options specifically: And you would be : My comment is that the Patrol Method circa 1910 to 2012 is already dead. Option 1 is not acceptable. Option 2, Modifying the Patrol Method occurred from 2012 to 2018, and scout on Scout abuse occurred. Patrols camping on their own ended in 2012 and were only allowed day activities up until 2018. IMHO modification does not necessarily mean splitting the program, as that was tried once in the 1950s and did not work (Explorer Scouts anyone?) Option 3, End the Patrol Method did occur in 2018 as BSA now requires 2 registered adults over 21 at all activities. So my comment reflected that Option 3 is the current status, yet apparently problems are still occurring. The only possible optionis the complete dissolution of the BSA. Is that what you are advocating for? On a different note, with the rise of female adults abusing youth, specifically the two recent cases of teachers abusing students in the news, among others, has anyone at National thought about revising the TP policy requiring 1 male over 21 years whenever boys are present?

I thought BSA killed the Patrol Method back in 2018 when EVERYTHING, including patrol meetings and activities needed 2 registered adults over 21?

Unit Scouter Reserve, and Unit College Scouter Reserve, actually split from Scouter Reserve, which is a district level POR like College Scouter Reserve. On a different note, getting rid of the 72 hour rule gets rid of "family Scouting."

There will be a lot of Cub families that will walk away. Not because they have something to hide, but rather they cannot afford the fees that BSA will be charging in order to do the CBC. I see the 72 Hour rule as a result of Cub Scouts, not Scouts BSA, Sea Scouts, and Venturing. And BSA will definitely need top change the parent policy, which will make it seem like we are hiding something. As for my troop, the only time non-registered adults camp with us is A. Webelos visiting with their parents and B. Parent who has submitted Application (which includes CBC authorization), has completed YPT, and approved by COR ( or IH as he is more accessible at times), and the application and fee is sitting in the council office. sadly the council has not gone to online adult applications yet. EDITED Forgot to add also the the 18 y.o. Eagle whose paperwork is at council office as well.

Mike Johnson was very briefly my SE. From what others told me who worked with him more, he is a "straight shooter" who cleaned up a lot of messes his predecessor created. On the face of it, it does not look good. But as others have mentioned, if he was fired and "screwed out of his pension" that will hurt his testimony as it will appear vindictive.

At least in my neck of the woods, because of COVID folks are getting OUSTIDE! Demand for camping has skyrocketed. One annual event done at a nearby state park had to be moved to to the local Scout Camp because they were all booked up. After talking to parents, we limited activities to a 1 hour drive one way. For camping purposes only 3 camps are in that circle. 2 of them are state parks and booked solid. The other is the local Scout Camp. That scout camp has been well used by us, including 2020 summer camp. Since June, we have gone back to normal trips, but finding camps is tough. August did not happen as the Scouts did not want to go to the local camp for the 6th time and all camps were booked up. We had to drive 4 hours to the September camp out because none closer had openings. And apparently we are not the only ones having camping issues. The district camporee this month has 5 units from outside the district coming, which is unheard of. We had one unit contact us about tagging along because they could not find anyplace to camp. We opened it up to any troop. Now we have concerns on where we are going to put everyone. I wonder where they are going to get the stats for that? I know the local camp, which is normally the most used, took a major hit in 2019 due to the road being washed out and the camp being closed for 9 months while it was repaired. And 2020 hurt as well due to COVID. Heck asking a parent do drive a kid 45 minutes round trip to a day camp can not be feasible for some parents. We had to encourage packs to carpool to drop off Cubs.

Stupid question but here it goes. Who would be responsible legally for future abuse if BSA does adopt the outside group's YP policies?

Correct, Meant DO NOT....

First and foremost, CONTACT YOUR DE ASAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They have all the tools and resources needed to start a new units. Second, DO LET THE DE TAKE ANY SHORTCUTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There is a 12 step process to starting a new unit. It is extremely time consuming, and DEs are under pressure to get it going ASAP. I took me 6 months one time to get a unit started, and I was under constant pressure by my bosses to hurry it up. Supposedly it takes a minimum of 2 months, but iof you want the unit to last, TAKE YOUR TIME. Third, You can guide and mentor, BUT DO NOT TAKE ANY ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES!!!!!!! Being in charge in one unit is hard. Being in 2 different units with 2 different COs is a major PITA and can lead to a FUBAR experience. Been there, done that, got the patches and loops, and had one unit's t-shirt.. Good luck

I think it depends upon the camp. I know one council has fudged attendance numbers and costs to make the most used camp in the council seem to be the least used and most costly. When questioned where they got the stats from, we discovered that A) They included an emergency capital expense in their maintenance expenses which they later admitted they should not have included. B) they included only those folks who paid to use the camp (our council has a program where if you do a variety of things, you can use council camps for free for unit events, which many units take advantage), so the actual usage was significantly lower according to the camp ranger and still not known to the rank and file, and C) used the abridged attendance numbers above for the year that the camp was closed for over 9 months for the emergency capital expense repair. When volunteers protesting the number on the teleconference did their own calculations using the prior year's abridged numbers and maintenance costs (the year without the emergency repairs and the camp open the full year, but still without the actual full attendance numbers) the costs to operate the camp was approx. $11/person. There is speculation that if the actual attendance numbers were used, the camp is actually supporting the other camps in the council. Yet no major work has been done at the camp in years. Local OA chapters have done all the repairs and maintenance, including some major work like shelter building. The council has made all kinds of excuses to do needed construction work at this camp. Speculation is that they have been trying to sell the camp for years, but one major donor to the council made the camp a condition of his donations. Not that he passed away, no telling what will happen.