Eagle94-A1

I think it varies from council to council. The only folks given a seat without a donation is the OA Lodge Chief, and when we have one, the VOA president. And of course the CORs, if they even know they have a seat, which in my neck of the woods they tend not to know. Grant you some of the folks are "worker bees," but there is a minimum $ donation.

Former Pro here. Do you want theory or reality? In theory The national office will select several professionals that will be interviewed and selected by a volunteer committee of the council executive board members. The selected SE is then responsible to the council executive committee, and they can get rid of of the SE if they don't perform. In actuality, once an SE is selected, they are in until they retire or move, unless they really screw up, i.e getting caught doing something illegal. The SE has ways to manipulate who is a member of the council executive board, and stay in his position. As for DE's, @InquisitiveScouter is correct, anyone with a pulse and college degree can get the job that is ultimately up to the SE. I interviewed in 3 councils. First council had me meet with several volunteers in addition to the SE and council staff. I liked that council, and at the time wished I went there. Second council had me meet with the DFS only. Third council, the one I ended up at, brought me in to their Winter Planning Conference for the interview. I thought it was unusual and talked to one of my friends who was a pro. He stated that if they were bringing me in for a 4 day interview at their planning conference I had the job in the bag.

Respectfully disagree. If they didn't learn when FOS donations started dwindling because of lack of service, what makes you think they will do any better when a mandatory fee is added? That is guaranteed money. My council has had problems for over 20 years. They have lost all kinds of stuff: day camp registration forms and check, youth and adult applications, Popcorn checks and paperwork, advancement reports, eagle applications, ad nauseum. They have tried to blame the local post office, but even when things were hand delivered, the items at the office got lost. Long story short, because of my council's issues, FOS started dropping, and units no longer participate in popcorn sales. We had two units at the same CO that paid for popcorn, and turned in unsold popcorn with the requisite paperwork, only to have the paperwork lost, although the checks were cashed. That CO had to pay to prove they paid for popcorn sold, and also had to pay for the popcorn they turned in. They have never touched another kernal. The Troop in the matter also had an Eagle Scouts paperwork, which was hand-delivered tot he office lost. Thankfully the district advancement chair give the Eagle a copy of the signed application, and we had to email that copy to the office. And this didn't happen just to units I was in. Every unit in my district has had issues. And some of the units I have talked to outside of my district have had the same issues as well. When asked why units do not want to do sales or allow FOS presentations, the council told exactly why, and nothing has been done. So I do not think this will hold the council more accountable. You put much more succinctly my thoughts.

I was told that info was not supposed to be made public until closer to those dates. But I guess enough people found out, and that council decided o take the bull by the horns. Glad oldest turns 18 next year and will be an adult, so I get break in fees. That is if he continues past 18.

But to many $15-$20/ month for dues alone IS a lot of money. Only thing that helped me out was camps being cancelled. Between summer camp deposits and budgeted food saved, I got enough to pay for 2020 recharter.

Friend of mine has an Ursack. He even had it tested by a bear. He recommends the aluminum insert. Food was still edible, but it was mashed up. https://ursack.com/

I wonder if the BSA can now file a counter-suit against GSUSA?

I had to deal with a similar situation. Long story short, if a volunteer, or applicant in the case I dealt with, is denied, the council is suppose to send a letter to the COR or IH ( sorry forgot which) who then informs the ineligible volunteer. Sometimes The IH or COR does not inform the ineligible volunteer, and leaves them hanging. If another volunteer inquires, the council will just tell them Approved or Not Approved.

Going from Memory here, COR can sign off in CC's place. They can do that since A) they appoint the CC and B) they represent the owners of the troop. Also they have a vote ont he district and council committees.

It was the District Commissioner asking folks, not council level folks. And in all honesty the current District Chairman was pretty much appointed by the 2 registered AND active members of the committee, myself and the commissioner. He is an experienced ASM, and had some ties to the local business community before announcing he was leaving. I second this. A longtime outstanding Sulver Beaver recipient volunteer was removed because he ticked of the DFS and SE. 20+ years later, I still do not know the entire story as to why he was removed. Rumor has it he found some financial irregularities he uncovered. I was the DE right after he was removed, and he sued the BSA and was temporarily reinstated. My SE didn't even give me tell me he was reinstated until I called him to confirm that I needed to call the cops on him for trespassing at an event. Glad I made that call.

I found out the local camp is no longer in a trust, but outright owned by the council. Ditto two other camps. The one camp that is not owned by the council is the one least used. All infrastructure, waterlines, shelters, building, etc, were done by individual units and volunteers. Troops are very protective of their campsites there because the unit dug the ditches, laid the waterlines, and paid for connection to the water main. I know of 2 troops that had a long time arguement over a campsite. The original unit disbanded for a few years, and a new unit took over the campsite. When the original unit was restarted, with several of of the folks who dug those ditches, laid the pipes, etc came back, they wanted their campsite back It was a mess.

Yes, we have had a conditional charter for several years now (no one seems to know how many) and Dec. 31st is the deadline to fix all issues or merger talks begin with several councils. Council is large geographically, but has a small population .

Some good news from my neck of the woods, son's Eagle Court of Honor was today. Weather held up and we had more people attending than anticipated. I think this COVID mess had a ltoto do with it because it gave an excuse to see friends, even if wearing masks and being socially distant. Ceremony went well, and lots of stories shared about him after the ceremony. He plans to stick around until he hopefully moves to college next fall, or turns 18 and becomes an ASM. Life is good.

Update on both council and district. I attended a council program committee meeting last week. Out of at least 3 dozen invitees, only a handful attended. Program is not looking good. Events are being cancelled or turning virtual. As was noted, a lot of Scouts are getting tired of the virtual, they want the outing. Also they were asking for folks to run these events. What concernd me is that some of these events should already have people in charge and do not. As for the district WOW! Found out the DE quit. They are not replacing him with a DE, but are trying to hire a a parapro to work 29 hours/week. For the moment 3 DEs are covering 9 districts. Mergers will probably happen after December 31st. Also found out our current District Chairman is stepping down due to job move. So once again we are without a chairman. Two people have been asked to take the position and said no. One because she would not take any crap from the council and has had dealing with pros in the past. The other does not see how he can influence the changes he views need to be made to be successful. He tried it once and was pushed out. I think he was asked out of desperation to have the position filled until the merger

Definitely Older, but do not know how wiser Seriously though, I can tell you from experience and observation over the years, ScoutReach programs are extremely hard to do. As a DE, I tried to start ScoutReach units. I cannot remember how many visits and meetings I went to to try and start ScoutReach units. I do remember the one meeting that NO ONE showed up to, despite repeated calls and visits and being told they were coming. I also remember the one meeting where one young energetic Adult attended, and started off as an ASM with the one ScoutReach unit I was able to start. I left the area and when I came back that same guy was the SM for 3 ScoutReach Troops. But he burned himself out, and there was no one to replace him. All three troops folded when he stepped down. Here are my thoughts. 1) PRAY! It works. 2) How much influence do you have with the SM and the CO? It sounds like you have a vision of what you want, but can you get support to implement it. Especially since you are the ASM? 3) How emphatic are you with the Scouts? You got to have the ability to relate to your Scouts. More later.

My strategy is to identify the current problems at the top of my voice and hope that enough people realize what is going on that it gets fixed. Kinda like what happened with the Churchill Plan. It got leaked, and there was enough outrage that several issues are "paused for consideration" and "are not moving forward with these recommendations," but " we will continue the dialog that prompted the recommendations." Although with National's history of ignoring the rank and file, how long those ideas will not move forward remains to be seen. Making the National LFL director also in charge of Sea Scouts and Venturing looks like it is a matter of time.

That's what I am worried about.

It may get contentious, and folks have strong disagreements on this site. But I do see a great deal of respect from those here. Unfortunately that is not always the case elsewhere.

I admit I am one of the "Negative Nellies" of late. I am not trying to be the "silent majority" that @The Latin Scot talks about above, but rather shout at the top of my lungs the BSA is headed in the wrong direction. A lot of concerns folks here and elsewhere had are coming to be because the experienced Scouters are being ignored. And it's not only on the local council level, where I am experiencing it, but also at the national level. There were concerns about the membership policy changes causing us to lose Scouts, and the boys would suffer. We lost over 20% of our membership, and I am seeing boys being forced to take a back seat to the girls locally with two "linked" troops. I mention how Pros at the council are ignoring and overruling volunteers, and I am seeing this at the national levels. I've posted how locally the DE will contradict and take over activities from volunteers, and how it caused many Scouters to back away. It is now so bad that I attended a meeting where the council was begging for folks to take over different long-standing council activities. At the national level, we have key volunteers who are not being kept informed. Look at the National Philmont Committee and how they were informed about the mortgage on Philmont months AFTER it occurred. Even the Phillips Trust was not informed about the mortgage, and it appears they have a significant interest in the matter. Another example was the National Sea Scout Commodore finding out about the potential merger of Sea Scouting back into Exploring through a leak! An then there was the Churchill Leak. Does anyone here really think national would have publicly posted the Churchill recommendations and allowed commentary on them if they were not leaked? While some things are off the table, others have for the moment been placed on hold but ":dialogue " will continue. I hope and pray that Mosby and some of the remaining pros at nation can see the issues and fix them. But having been a pro at the council and working in national supply, I do not have a lot of hope. So why am I still around? 1. My sons. 2. My Scouts. 3. I am not giving up on Scouting and will fight for it. EDITED: Just read where the National Director of Learning for Life and Exploring will now have oversight over Sea Scouts and Venturing. But National is not moving Sea Scouts to Exploring "at this time." I guess they are continuing "the dialog that prompted the recommendations."

THIS! Further, it got quite nasty. Getting called a "Conditional Scouter" was mild compared to what people had been called who had concerns and questions about the changes. You had folks with years of experience who not only had their experience called irrelevant and outdated, but also were cursed out, told to leave, etc. Check out some of the facebook discussions of the time. Locally We lost several longtime volunteers with decades of experience because of treatment by other volunteers, and the council pros. And no one has replaced them still. And nationally we lost a bunch. What are the volunteer stats now?

From the research I did a long time ago, I would disagree with the bulk of the cases. The time period the bulk of the current lawsuit abuse claims occurred, the mandatory reporting laws were extremely limited, basically health care professionals and teachers,. And that is the laws existed at all. Remember the first mandatory laws came out in the late 1960s, and some of the current cases go into the 1950s. Those laws expanded who was a mandatory report was over time. And one thing those laws do is protect the person making the accusation. Without the mandatory reporting laws, you make an accusation, and could be hit with libel suit. What was policy was the SE was suppose to counsel the family to press charges. If the family would not press charges, the BSA could not do anything legally. What the policy stated was that the accused was to have their membership revoked, and paperwork and documentation sent to the national office to be placed in the IVF, and Scouter applications were checked against it. Was the policy followed all the time? Sadly no. Some councils would keep the individual registered. Usually these were well known and respected community leaders with a lot of influence and affluence. Did people slip through the cracks and get reregistered? Sadly yes a few did slip through. But they are also cases where folks with similar names were rejected and had to prove they were not the individual in the IVF. And did units not tell the SE of suspected abusers? Sadly yes. I read of a case where the Troop committee had a credible accusation, but the victim's family did not want to put him through a trial, especially against a well known and respected community leader. Instead of telling the council and getting him removed, they put him on probation, without telling parents or the council. If memory serves when he attacked another Scout, and that family pressed charges, the first family then came forward. Please do not think I condone this behavior. In retrospect I realize I was being groomed by my CM, and when he became SM, my gut told me it was time to switch troop. I know 2 of his victims. While working at Scout camp, I was involved in a situation that was happening at the camp. Thankfully we had a LEO on staff to handle the perp, but the 3 kids were in terrible shape.

Sadly there are more parents and Scouters who believe in doing more and filling every minute of a camp out with advancement than there are of us old fogeys who believe in letting the Scouts enjoy themselves. I had a Scout take a MB he already had because he enjoyed the activity, and there was no other way for him to do it at camp. When I mentioned this to other Scouters in the class I was taking, One Scouter said my Scout was wasting his time. When my troop held their own summer camp this summer, yes almost every minute was planned out. BUT the intention was to have make sure the Scouts had enough to do and were having fun, not become school. When certain activities went over their allotted time, Wilderness Survival and Cycling come to mind, everyone went with the flow and had fun. When the Scouts were exhausted and needed some down time, they got their down time and had fun. Everyone, Scouts and adults alike, said this was the best summer camp ever, barring no showers ( they had to use faucets to get clean). The only thing set in stone at summer camp was the Board of Reviews. The troop committee visited us at camp the last night, had dinner with the rest of the adults, andthen BORs commenced. We had to be courteous of the committee's time. And no one had problems with that.

I see the BSA is still lying about Dodgeball stating it "has never been an authorized activity in Scouting" despite showing showing a national representative proof it has been an authorized activity and requesting they change the wording multiple times. In case you don't believe the BSA is lying about this, here is an image from page 30 of the 2010 printing of the 1998 edition of the Scoutmaster Handbook.

I would add high school kids being treated as elementary school kids. And college kids, and some college grads, being treated like the are in middle school kids. I cannot tell you how many high school and college students' parents contacted me about the hospital's job shadowing program. I'm now at a college, and I saw many parents attend advising and registration sessions with their child. I too, don't like it.

Why am I not surprised. And with the large number of layoffs, I bet it won't be considered retaliation. Like I said the good pros either leave, get sidelined to obscure positions, or they get fired. It would have been much, much, much worse. There would have been no input from the membership and volunteers. National would have done whatever they wanted, and there would be nothing we could do because it would be a done deal. IMHO that former professional helped Scouting , and not hurt it, by leaking the info.