David CO

BSA has always been a "for-profit-company" in the eyes of many of the volunteers. I remember Scouters talking the same way about it 40 years ago. The execs always had high salaries. Nothing new here. Scout execs used to remind us that all the stuff we paid for, with the exception of a very minimal registration fee, was completely voluntary. BSA did not require units to buy uniforms, badges, etc.. BSA councils did not require units to use their camp grounds or participate in their fundraisers. They made a good point. Has this changed? I think it has. BSA is becoming much more coercive than they used to be.

Does anybody know where I could find something about Scouting in Cuba before Castro took over?

I have read many posts on other threads bemoaning the lack of involvement and/or support from the units' Chartered Organization. I would like to think that your example is more representative of the typical IH. Thank you for all your hard work in supporting Scouting.

I don't know if your Chartered Organization is a church, school, or service club. How would you feel if the head of your Chartered Organization volunteered or signed his kids up in a unit from some other church, school, or service club?

Two people, the head of a Chartered Organization and the COR, are allowed to register in one additional adult leadership position in a Troop. Several people very politely advised me not do it. Having the IH or COR in another position really throws off the dynamics of the Troop leadership. I didn't listen. They were right. Live and learn.

KC9DDI, Nope. I have no grudge against OA. No bad experiences. No incidents. No personality conflicts. Nothing like that. Cultural appropriation really and truly is the issue.

KC9DDI, Hi. No, I don't think we want to revisit the issue. OA membership has become one of the things that some Scouts consider when choosing a unit in our community. We don't do OA, but others do. We don't feel that we are denying our Scouts access to OA. We are denying agressive OA recruiters access to our Scouts.

DLister, Thanks for the reply. Our decision to not participate in OA goes back to around 1987. At that time, we owned and used a campground next to a reservation. Because we had the only sandy beach on the lake, local boys would often drop by and join us in our waterfront activities. Being good neighbors, they would often reciprocate by inviting us to some of their activities on the reservation. After having observed and experienced some of the everyday modern life as well as the authentic traditional life of tribal culture, our boys quickly lost interest in the cartoonish stuff at Scout camps and OA.

We don't do OA. We do not invite OA to "educate" us. We know what OA is and we choose to not participate. When I am asked about OA, I simply say, "We don't do OA." I have learned from experience that there is no point in arguing with or about the OA. The issue is cultural appropriation.

Skeptic, I am a baby boomer. My dad and my uncles served in the military during WW2. My Scout leader, who was a little bit younger, was in Korea. Pretty much every responsible, adult man I knew and looked up to had at some time done military service, and since there was a draft, my fellow classmates, Scouts, and I had the very reasonable expectation that we would someday be doing our military service too. I wasn't embarrassed to take group showers. In fact, I remember feeling a bit proud in that it was acting like one of the big boys in high school or adults in the military. Also, I had heard stories and seen movies about the sacrifices our fathers had made for us while they were in the war. Knowing what they went through, we couldn't whine to them about petty stuff. We took our scrapes and bug bites without complaint. Please don't get me wrong. I am not advocating a return to the draft. I'm not advocation war. I'm not advocating a militaristic style of Scouting. I'm just saying that I am a product of my times. I may even be a product of my father's times. I am glad that todays kids have more and better options than my father and I had. I just wish they had some of that toughness too.

There are unintended consequences in every decision we make. We stopped having junior high kids take showers after physical education and sports at my school about 10 years ago. A couple of years after that, we dropped the Presidential Physical Fitness Award Program because of complaints that the classrooms were smelling too bad on days we ran the mile. Today, physical education classes are just a shadow of the programs we used to have...and obesity has become our number one health problem.

I would like to address the suggestion that the local units and their CO handle this issue on a unit by unit basic. I think this is unrealistic. Illinois children are currently being removed from foster homes and adoption programs run by Cathilic Charities. When it comes to this issue, the state is no respecter of religion. How long do you think Illinois would allow Scout units to exercise their local option?

Thanks. I just searched and read the three existing old threads on Scout accounts. Interesting. Regardless of what the unit does with it, looks like I'll need to report it as CO income.

Loosely owned, hmmm. Let me ask. If the Scout leaves the unit, does he take this money with him?

April 14. Tax time. I have my mind on financial statements and inventories. Have I got this right? "Scout accounts" are not accounts, in an ownership sense. They are budget items. They are allocated for a specific use, but are reported the same as other funds.

CalicoPenn, I may have misunderstood what you said. I have heard leaders refer to "Scout accounts" before and assumed that this is some sort of prepayment made by Scouts/parents, like a lunch account at the school cafeteria. Am I wrong?

CO shopping is the final act in the erosion of the CO/unit relationship. It devalues the relationship and, like an infection, spreads to other units. CO shopping is the final act. Unit autonony is the first act. It doesn't matter if this sense of autonomy was first initiated or later perpetuated by the CO or the unit, the result is the same. A unit is not an entity. It is a program of the CO. When either the unit or the CO start to think of themselves as two autonomous entities, a unit and a sponsor, the CO/unit relationship erodes. So what distinguishes CO shopping from a proper transfer? In a proper transfer, it is understood that the unit was a program of the old CO and is becoming a program of the new CO. Ownership transfers. At no time does the unit pretend to be autonomous entity. CO shopping involves a unit pretending to be an autonomous entity, looking for a sponsor who will allow it to continue to operate as if it were an autonomous entity.

Eagle92, I don't want to make this discussion about myself, but I guess I'll answer your question, just to be polite. Yes, I was involved in starting a new unit "from scratch". I was the Scoutmaster. Yes, it is very difficult, much more difficult than it ought to be. That's a topic for another thread. My unit was an "in-school" troop. BSA experimented with the concept of in-school Scouting for a few years in the 80's, and then gave it up. I was a very eager young Scoutmaster and very invested into the whole in-school concept. I was heartbroken when BSA dropped the concept and my troop was disbanded. I haven't taken a unit leader position since. Admittedly, my situation, being dumped by BSA, isn't the same as being dumped by a CO. I'm not saying it is. I don't expect it to alter your views. But you asked, so I told you.

Eagle92, When did I say that anyone should quit Scouting entirely? No, that is not correct. No, you do not understand me correctly. But thank you for trying. If you can't get the position you want, take a different position. If you can't get the unit you want, get another unit. If you can't get another unit, get in Lone Scouting. If you can't get in Lone Scouting, adopt and support the aims of the Scouting Movement in your everyday life. Never, never, never, give up on Scouting.

Eagle92, That is a very good question. I don't think you are going to like my answer. I suggest sacrifice. Sacrifice for the Scouting Movement. Sacrifice your unit number. Sacrifice all your hard work. Sacrifice it all. Then pray that your sacrifice will count for something. Regardless of the cause of a nonrenewal, no matter who was right or wrong, it does not further the aims of the Scouting Movement to attack the CO.

Eagle 92, Yes, I've seen this too. One IH drops the unit. The next IH brings it back. I've seen it happen with the same IH. Sometimes an IH will uncharter a unit, wait a year or two, and recharter again. It's a way of cleaning house without having to confront specific individuals. It's not only Scouting, it's done with other programs as well. Some IH's will do this a casually as re-booting their computer. Scout leaders don't always understand CO behavior. Don't burn bridges. Don't go CO shopping.

What does the CO own? I once asked this question and got an answer, "You own the liability, BSA owns the rest". I think he was joking.

ScoutNut, Please understand this. None of my comments are about you. I would like to have a discussion with you, but not about you. Likewise, it's not about me. I would like you to have a discussion with me, but not about me. We all, from time to time, use our personal observations and experiences to illustrate a point. I have enjoyed the stories others have related, and I hope they contiue to do so. They are both fun and informative. While personal stories can illustrate a point, they cannot prove it. Nor can attacking a story disprove the point it illustrates. In either case, the point is about Scouting. It isn't about you, and it isn't about me.

I have noticed a general trend in the behavior of institutions in regard to their ownership/sponsorship of youth programs. This trend is broad-based and does not apply only to Scouting. One example of this trend involves schools and PTA's. Many schools are dropping their PTA's (an independent group) and replacing them with PTO's that are owned and controlled by the schools. Likewise, many Park Districts seem to be dropping Little League Baseball (an independent group) in favor of in-house leagues. SSScout posted a very good example of this with a Church based CO. Some in my own CO, Knights of Columbus, which has always supported Scouting, feel that we should be using our resourses to promote our own in-house youth group. If my experiences and observations are merely isolated occurances, you can ignore them, but I don't think they are. I think they're a trend. I think unit leaders are clammering for greater autonomy from the CO's at the same time as CO's are demanding greater control and ownership of ALL their auxilliary programs. Nowhere is this better demonstrated than in the practice of CO shopping. Keep this in mind. IH's talk to each other. Some may even read this message board. Some may even copy and forward your posts.

Question to forum moderators. Are you aware of any other CO/IH's or former CO/IH's on the forum?