quasi govt sponsors of BSA units

[Scoutfish]

I spent 12 years as a volunteer fire fighter/ ems/ water rescue.

 

I have to ask: Is it the fire dept sponsoring them directly, or a fire dept auxillary?

 

Most auxillaries are chartered groups independant of the actual fire dept, but work towards supposrting the fire dept. Kinda - sorta - almost like Co and troops/packs ( but in reverse). The fire dept would be the pack/troop and the auxillary the CO.

 

Granted, different states, counties and municipalities have different rules and such, but from my experience on 2 different departments.. Who had time to sponsor a pack/ troop?

 

Our auxillary , on the other hand, were mostly retired age workers who used to be fire/ ems people in their previous carrers. They did alot of fund raising, community relations and such. They organized all kinds of fire victim benefits.

 

Pretty much, they let us concentrate on training and being fire fighters.

 

So, it wouldn't surprise me if BSA sponsorship is actually from FD auxillaries instead of the FD itself.

 

(This message has been edited by scoutfish)

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Of course I noticed Ed, I'm one of the people responsible. Did you notice that the BSA is also backsliding a bit, with 1 unit chartered to "Army (Bases, Reserves)" and 1 to "Public Schools"? Even though they promised not to ever do that any more?

[BDPT00]

"Of course I noticed Ed, I'm one of the people responsible."

 

Responsible for what?

[evmori]

Merlyn,

 

It could be possible they charter partner doesn't give a hoot!

 

What groups in that list do you consider to be "illegally" chartering BSA units, Merlyn?

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Responsible for stopping BSA charters to public schools, BDPT00.

 

Ed, I listed some of the groups I considered illegal on page 2 of the "LDS membership declines" thread. And since you quoted and responded what I wrote, you obviously read it, and you obviously still can't learn things, or you'd already know some groups I consider to be illegally chartering units, because you read, quoted, and responded to that only two days ago.

 

And, even if a government charter partner doesn't "give a hoot" if they are breaking the law, other people do, and can force government entities to follow the law.

[Beavah]

And, even if a government charter partner doesn't "give a hoot" if they are breaking the law, other people do, and can force government entities to follow the law.

 

Yah, they can try, eh? They can bring a case, and make an argument, and we have a system to decide such things. Until then, the public body is empowered to represent its local constituents, and should do so faithfully. And even in the face of standing precedent (which isn't the case here), the public body can still choose to charter a unit in order to exercise its right on behalf of the community it represents to challenge the precedent. That's not the same thing as breakin' a law.

 

You're just being dishonest (dare I say "lying" ) when you make such claims about illegality, fraud, and all da rest. It's funny that you criticize evmori for not bein' able to learn. We often see in others the faults that are most present in ourselves, eh?

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Government entities don't have "rights" Beavah, they have powers that they exercise. But there I go, explaining how the law actually works.

 

Go ahead and try to find a government entity of some kind willing to do what you insist is legal. I won't hold my breath.

[Lisabob]

Ahem, could I request that you all continue the argument about legalities either in the LDS thread or here, but not both? I really can't see a point in duplicating that discussion in both threads.

 

(Shoulda known it would devolve to this...so much for asking a simple question)

[Horizon]

I would be interested in seeing the actual charters. Just because the BSA classifies it as parks and recreation, or fire department does not necessarily mean that is who holds the charter. I can see some data entry clerk coding the charters for reporting purposes putting everything into a bucket when it comes from a Fire Dept. location.

 

I am a FD volunteer (part time - only when I am up at my place in the woods do I respond to calls). Ours is a volunteer FD that gets some money from taxes, but the vast majority comes from donations and from invoicing insurance companies when we take care of highway accidents. I could see an Explorer unit at the Fire Department being founded, and I KNOW that none of the volunteers would consider themselves government workers - just guys who show up on call to help out. They would have no problem calling their charter org the "friends of the Volunteer FD" if needed, or something else that qualifies. It would have ZERO impact on the operation, the volunteering, etc.

 

Finally Merlyn - If police departments are signing illegal charters, that is THEIR problem. I have personally NEVER heard a cop tell me that ignorance of the law IS an excuse...

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

If the BSA offers a charter to a police department, that is also the BSA's problem. They can be sued right along with the PD. And you don't seem to have gotten the memo about Explorer Posts -- they haven't excluded gays and atheists since 1998.

[Oak Tree]

I'm with Lisabob. Can we keep this discussion specific to non-governmental entities?

 

Both Merlyn and Gern make this point: any VFD that gets any funding from the government or via taxes would not legally be able to practice religious discrimination.

 

I find this to be uncertain. Many organizations get funding from the government (YMCAs, for example) and still sponsor units. That is, unless there is some specific law dealing with VFDs or something. Can you point to something that supports your claim? Or do you also believe that all YMCAs should not be sponsoring units either? And again, if so - what is the legal basis for such a claim?

 

I easily believe that the government money itself cannot be used for any discriminatory purpose. But as another example, if a church runs a soup kitchen open to all and gets a government grant to help it do so, does it then have to let anyone be a member of the church?

 

I'm actually curious as to the law here, so I'm not looking for more unsupported assertions. Convince me about how it is, not about how you think it should be or how you might hope the current law works.

[evmori]

Ed, I listed some of the groups I considered illegal on page 2 of the "LDS membership declines" thread. And since you quoted and responded what I wrote, you obviously read it, and you obviously still can't learn things, or you'd already know some groups I consider to be illegally chartering units, because you read, quoted, and responded to that only two days ago.

 

Everything after the 1st line was nothing more than a personal attack. And a cheap one at that!

 

Again the bully attacks!

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Ed, you asked me for the same information you had read just two days earlier, and I pointed that out, and my usual observation that you can't learn things, because you do this sort of thing all the time. I don't consider pointing out the obvious to be "bullying." If you can't stand the heat, etc. etc.

[evmori]

Merlyn,

 

You admitted in the past in a similar thread that both parties are culpable yet you refuse to admit it here. I'm not the one with the problem.

[NWScouter]

FD other than city departments out in Washington State are refered as junior taxing districts along with water districts, school districts, diking districts, library districts and park districts. That means they do tax for operating expenses and repayment of bond for capital projects. They can be volunteer, volunteer and paid or fully paid firefighters depending on the population and/or the tax base.

 

If your FD is staffed by volunteers and gets it funding through taxes under state law and the voters vote for the bonds to build stuff and elect fire commissioners I think you are a government entity.(This message has been edited by Nwscouter)