David CO

I disagree. I don't think this change in registration policy will be limited to the transgender issue. There will be girls who will register as boys simply because they disagree with BSA's boys-only policy. There will be coed units. I can't accurately predict how many girls will join, but I'm certain it will be more than 0.03%. I think it is going to be a problem.

The YPT question is this. If a girl registers as a boy (for whatever reason), must the scout unit have a female scout leader at the activities? My guess is the answer is yes. BSA will see this as a potential liability. A female scout leader will be required. Since BSA will have no way of knowing if any registered scout is actually a boy or a girl, they will have to require that all Boy Scout activities have a female unit leader.

No, you make it sound like a bad thing. A very bad thing. If the "adult community" you are talking about happens to be the Chartered Organization and their properly appointed representatives, then I would say that you are dead wrong. Otherwise, I have no idea who you might be talking about. You say that boys deserve the very best program delivered according to the way that BSA wants it done. Well, BSA set up this structure with CO's and committees and adult leaders. This is the way BSA wants it done. BSA wants the CO's to own the units and appoint the leaders. BSA doesn't want the units to be run by self-appointed people who hope to control the units with behind-the-scenes politicking and clandestine mechanations. BSA want the units run by people who are properly appointed by the CO's and registered in their positions. Boy scout units should be transparently run in the clear light of day. There should be no unseen powers manipulating from the shadows.

Good scouters don't normally need "leverage" to legitimize their presence. They get invited to participate. Good scouters don't normally need to engage in "clandestine mechanations." CO's will seek out their opinions and hold a high regard for their judgement.

You said it. You are a meddling cub scout leader and a trouble maker. I couldn't have said it better myself.

Haribo and sherbert are definitely not iconic ingredients of American cuisine. Is it a recognized American dish? No. However, if the scouts meant to emphasize the point that the USA is a melting pot of various cultures from all over the world, I would have to give them points for creativity.

More importantly, we don't want to lose good scouts, scouters, and CO's due to this sort of thing. There are problems and controversies in scouting that seem nearly impossible to resolve. This one has an easy fix. We shouldn't be losing scouters over it. I wish Shift's CO had just bought an insurance policy, rechartered the units, and moved on. Lesson learned.

My CO is the athletic department of a school. We handle a lot of cash from admissions and concessions, and about a quarter million $ worth of equipment and supplies. So, we insure everything. We limit the number of people who handle/control cash, accounts, and supplies. These people are specifically bonded, and they must sign a form. I am specifically bonded. We also have a blanket policy to cover other volunteers. We don't have a separate insurance policy for the scout unit. The scouts are included in the school's blanket policy. The SM, CC, and treasurer sign an insurance company form, since they handle/control troop funds and equipment. It saddens me when I hear of situations like the one Shift has described, knowing that it could have been prevented with an insurance policy. Robert Frost said that good fences make good neighbors. Perhaps good insurance policies make good scouters.

I know that a council is a actually a franchisee, but BSA exercises so much active control over the councils that I too tend to label them as BSA. Also, with modern councils covering such a wide territory, it is hard to think of them as local. I am interested in Shift's remark that the council told the Chartered Organization that it, the CO, was responsible for the debt to the vendor. I am wondering if this was true, or if the council (BSA) was just acting to protect itself. I can see his point. The council chose to insert itself into the matter of the vendor's bill, but took a hands off approach in the matter of the fundraising proceeds. There does seem to be some inconsistency there, perhaps guided by the council's self-interest. Of course, the question of financial liability to the vendor is now a moot point since the CO chose to pay the bill. But that doesn't alter the reasonableness of Shift's animosity toward BSA or his decision to end his participation in the organization. As I said before, I will not criticize his decision.

Hi TRON, Welcome to the forum. We do not have a "Scout Representative" at committee meetings. Most of our committee meetings take place at the same time as the scout meetings, in another room. We would rather have all the scouts attend the scout meeting. As a scout, you are much more important to the unit than a committee member. Your participation at scout meetings is much more interesting and much more important to the unit than any of the boring grunt work we do in the room next door.

Thanks for the correction. As I said, I am not an expert on insurance matters. Maybe someone who works in the insurance business will start another thread about bonding. I'm glad that my CO has our key people bonded. I am not at all offended that my CO has me bonded. I think it is a good idea. Very professional.

RememberSchiff, A surety bond is a type of insurance policy. Many insurance companies offer surety bonds as one of their insurance products. I am not an expert on insurance matters, but I do regularly purchase surety bonds as a part of my job duties, so I can explain it from my point of view. It is very easy to buy a surety bond. My insurance agent does all the paper work, and it is not very expensive. The cost will vary depending on who is being bonded and how much money/equipment is being handled. I am bonded because I have the keys to everything at my CO. Everyone with keys to the building gets bonded. Other people are bonded because they handle cash, accounts, or supplies. Having people bonded has two major advantages. In the very unlikely event of someone betraying the trust of the Chartered Organization, the CO is insured against loss. The other advantage of bonding is that it tends to make people take their responsibilities more seriously. Someone who is bonded is unlikely to be confused over who owns the property.

A lot has been said about the "transfer of ownership" of the unit. Yes, there are forms that must be signed in order for a unit to be transferred from one Chartered Organization to another. This doesn't appear to be what happened in this case. It sounds like a new unit was formed with a new charter and a new unit number. You say that the main question in your post is, Who owns the unit? The Chartered Organization owns the unit. The CO owns both the assets and the liabilities. The CO also owns the responsibility to secure their assets. This may include providing a secure storage space, insuring the assets from accidental loss, and bonding the people who have physical control over the assets. My CO does all of these things. I think the lesson to be learned here is that a CO needs to put a little more thought and effort into it before problems like this arise. After all, our motto is BE Prepared.

OK. I was getting a little confused. Let's see if I've got this right, and feel free to correct me if I'm still misunderstanding something. A group of scouters and scouts from your CO's 3 units were unhappy (about some reasonable restrictions and requirements placed on them by your CO), so they went to another CO and formed a new unit (with a new unit number). They took some of your CO's assets with them, including the money from a recent fundraiser and the scout equipment. This left your CO holding the bag for money still owed to the vendor. Your CO asked for the property back, and was refused. Because of a threat of lawsuits, your CO decided to not press charges or take any legal action. At your request, the CO gave you 6 months to pull the scouting program back together, which you were unable to do, and the CO chose to not recharter the 3 units. You feel that the council should have taken direct action to get the funds and equipment back to the rightful owner. If this didn't work, you feel that the council/district/BSA should have dropped the membership of the scouters responsible for taking the equipment and funds. You are also upset with the CO. You feel that they had an ethical obligation to act against their former scouters, both for the good of your 3 units and to prevent the scouters from doing this again in the future to some other unsuspecting unit. Consequently, you have decided to not participate anymore in either BSA or the Chartered Organization. Have I got this right so far? I still have a couple of questions. Was the fundraiser a unit or council organized fundraiser (popcorn?), and were the funds taken part of any scout accounts, which might be seen (by some people) as the property of the individual scouts?

Shift, Were the scout leaders who left allowed to take the unit number, or were they given a new unit number? Under normal circumstances, the unit number stays with the original Chartered Organization unless it voluntarily agrees to turn it over to a new CO.

The Barenaked Ladles. They actually found a patch with a ladle. They can sing the theme to The Big Bang Theory. Their patrol yell is BANG!

They got it from The Davinci Code.

BSA can remove a scouter for cause. A Chartered Organization can remove a scouter (from the unit) at will.

I will not criticize your decision to end your active participation in BSA. Many of the scouters who have participated on this site have made a similar decision.

That may be what you're hearing, but it is not what I'm saying. Of course BSA can ban a convicted felon from being a scout leader. But these guys haven't been charged with or convicted of a crime. Your CO didn't press charges. Like it or not, you're stuck with that decision.

Scouts always have another place to go in scouting, and I wouldn't have it any other way. You cannot stop scouts from going to another unit. The Chartered Organization owns the unit, but it does not own the scouts. The scouts are free to go where they please. Likewise, you cannot stop other organizations from chartering a unit. I would not like to see the council and district scouters take a greater role in regulating the behavior of the unit scouters. I think they do too much of that already. The Chartered Organization owns the unit, and they should have the primary duty to regulate the unit and provide oversight of the unit scouters.

I very much doubt that a scout council is claiming ownership of a unit. They don't do that. You are exactly right. I am going to tell you that it is up to the Chartered Organization to get back the assets. Nobody else can do it. If the Chartered Organization doesn't want to do it, then it can't be done. I do understand why many Chartered Organizations will not want to press charges or file lawsuits. It is not a pleasant business. My CO would prefer to not get involved in that sort of thing. It would rather just collect the insurance money and let the insurance company deal with all the unpleasantness. Many Chartered Organizations are insured against theft. I wonder why your CO didn't file an insurance claim.

The Chartered Organization owns the unit. On the question of liabilities, the person who signs a contract is usually liable for the debt. If a volunteer leader signs a contract without the knowledge and approval of the Chartered Organization, the volunteer leader may be personally liable for the debt. A scout unit is not a legal entity. A scout unit cannot incur a debt. Most vendors will insist on having contracts signed by an authorized officer the CO. If an authorized officer of the CO signs a contract, the CO is usually liable for the debt. My CO insists that all officers be bonded. In the very unlikely event that someone absconds with the unit's equipment or funds, the insurance policy would cover the loss. The insurance company would then go after the culprit. Be Prepared.

Of course, my biggest challenge was not having scouter.com to go to for wisdom and advice. Many of my greatest challenges, then and now, has been in balancing my duties as a scout leader with the obligations of my religious faith.

Manned lunar space flights have become obsolete. We have robots to do that job. If modern computer chips were available 50 years ago, Gene Cernan would have never walked on the moon. There would have been no need for him to do so. Yes, it is getting much harder to impress young people. That is why the Barnum & Bailey Circus is shutting down.