mrjohns2

Maybe not directly, but via policies, guidelines, and other required rules makes me feel pretty managed.

Wow. Maybe with doubling of the lifetime fee, NESA could hire someone to process.

In a case like this, does the judge have clerks to help with all of the research and writing? It just seems massive.

It doesn’t “want everyone”, but gives a unit the option to vote all who meet the requirements in.

This is really it. Since you said you’ll have an org, the rest of the effort is in forming that org and apply for tax empt / non profit status. You don’t necessarily need full ruling on non-profit status, but an incorporated org would be helpful.

The y axis isn't at zero. So, it is going from 667k to 1011k. More like 52% growth. Huge, none the less.

We did a preliminary run of the numbers last night. To cover advancement, Scout Life, adult registration, 2 adults at camp, and equipment replacement we will charge $175 (up from $172). $100 “dues” and $75 to national. Campouts are separate at $30. All fundraising dollars goes directly to the Scouts to offset their dues and campout costs.

It was clear that in the past, common sense and proper discretion were not in abundance. One has to draw the line somewhere. So, in your friend situation, what if she turns 18 the day before the trip, etc. Making clear cut rules are better than "well, you decide" since people already push the edges of the current rules.

My perspective says all do, at least in my section. Maybe I don’t have a good national view.

I assume it is to track bad publicity, but in reading the files it was very clear policy to collect and add any and all newspaper clippings. So, if a council turned in a report without them, I can see national wanting to know why.

In all of the documentation shared, this is not one of them. Not in the flow chart, not in the letters, or webpage. I don't think this is an option.

It seems as though, one of the options has been taken off of the table. It seems clear that congregations cannot continue to be CO's, no?

What portion of the $33 and $146 are the national fee? Your council popcorn and FOS have stayed steady even though membership is down significantly?

I’ve read about 50 IV files from the LA newspaper (?) website. They include a decent amount of correspondence between the local council and regional/ nations bsa. None say to destroy records. Most / all say to “forward on” any additional information.

They have to pay salaries somehow. How are your council FOS and popcorn efforts? How else do they raise money?

It is. It is hard for parents who don’t know the program to know if it is worth the investment. That is why the $25 fee hurts. Since the main fee is prorated, I see why they have the $25. But unlike sports, many families don’t know what they are getting into and have to take a risk. Now the cost for that risk continues to grow.

Should? Can’t right now since it is UMC specific.

What a bureaucratic nightmare. This is a UMC specific Facilities Use Agreement and not the standard BSA one. Too bad they could negotiate updating the standard one that came out a couple of years ago.

@Tron It is great to hear someone who knows how the role works. Many confuse it for the SM's role in advancement.

What new exception? What is the exact wording from the pamphlet?

That is something really easy to answer. It is your council who carries the liability insurance for the unit no matter the underlying CO. Just ask your DE for a copy naming the building owner as a named party. It is very easy and they do it all the time.

Hasn’t it only been public for a week or 2?

Very normal for my 2 years of SM. I would never sleep the first night. I was wide awake.

He may be too old, but I’d vote for Jocko Willink. Author, navy seal, etc.

Sorry, it was in the updated faq released with the most recent update…