Schools & Scouting

[SeattlePioneer]

The long-standing relationship between Boy Scouts and public schools is under stress across the St. Louis region, as parent associations are scrutinizing and in some cases even severing ties with the organization.

 

Parent groups in Rockwood, Webster Groves and the Fort Zumwalt districts have tackled the issue, which is as much about concerns over legal liability as it is over the Boy Scouts' convictions about gays and atheists.

 

Last month, the Missouri PTA issued a statement advising all of its 420 member units to cease hosting charters with the Boy Scouts because the agreements put them in legal jeopardy.

 

"We're not telling them, you absolutely can't. We're saying, it's not in your best interest to do that," said Wendy Jackson, the state PTA's president, who stressed that the move was not a criticism of the Scouts but rather a protective business decision.

 

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/article_9c18d5ea-2557-5733-8262-efc6dc14fd91.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

An article worth reading. (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

[acco40]

The article states that, "Most PTAs don't know they hold the charter or understand they have to make a committee and select Scout leaders under Boy Scout standards, said Jackson. In one case, a PTA had no idea it held a bank account for Scouting business, which could have led them to file incorrect taxes, she said.

 

Jackson said the situation put PTAs at increased liability if an accident or an ethical incident with a Scout leader were to occur. Less explicit in the state PTA position is the liability regarding potential civil rights violations because the Boy Scouts is grounded in religion and bars gays from membership.

 

Under the charter, sponsors are supposed to approve the moral character of Boy Scout leaders.

 

Mueller said insurance coverage by the Boy Scouts would preclude any financial or legal damage to the sponsoring group.

 

But Jackson said the insurance issue wasn't as simple as the Boy Scouts made it sound. Mueller said the Boy Scouts hadn't done a good job communicating how the liability issue worked.

 

[Abel Magwitch]

Everything written points to a phony phantom operation used to boost membership numbers.

 

Quite frankly, i am suprized that the BSA is still alloud in public schools at most public schools that I am aware of have their own policies against discrimination.

 

Insurance - I have brought this up before. Just try and find out what the insurance actually covers. Ask the council for information on the company they use and ask to see an actual policy. Good Luck.

 

My council supposedly has all kinds of school units. You never see them at any council or district activities. They are sometimes part of a district, sometimes listed as special programs.

[SeattlePioneer]

There are special programs...

 

Soccer and Scouting, Scoutreach and such.

 

A way to look for phantom unit would be to use BEASCOUT.ORG for your own home address and look for units that pop up in your area that you know nothing about.

 

You could even e-mail those units for more information and see what happens.

[Abel Magwitch]

I know special programs Seattle. I have already done what you have suggested months ago. All the "troops" "packs" "crews" chartered by the "parents of" so and so school, the email is the council email.

 

There are quite a few units I have never heard of. And these are listed as tradional units.

 

Some of the sponsoring institutions are listed as a private person's home address.

 

I got a copy of a council printout showing the units of the council. Plenty of school units with 300 kids and no leaders. There is also a bunch of 5 kid units also with only 1 leader listed.

 

 

 

 

[Eagle92]

not necessarily true. I know of 2 COs with a pack and a troop that do their own thing. Only time you see them is at the 2 camporees and district awards banquet ( only if their Eagles show up) or the district PWD. Never see them at training, never see them at RT, never see them otherwise.

 

[Eagle92]

Sounds like some of the units in my council about 12 years back. In-school-Scouting units should have been replaced with Learning For Life units a very long time ago. It should have been done prior to me being a DE, and I know I had some "challenges" converting ISS units to L4L groups.

[NJCubScouter]

Sounds like the Missouri PTA and it's local units have actually been a little slow to get with the program. This is old news nationwide. The national PTA recommended more than 10 years ago that local PTAs stop being chartered organizations for BSA units due to liability concerns.

[Lisabob]

PTA and PTO are not the same as public schools (gov't organizations). Public schools (gov't organizations) by and large no longer charter traditional BSA units. PTA/PTO are not gov't organizations and so they have mor latitude.

 

As for whether these units are real, or on-paper only, all I can say is that in my experience, these are real units. The pack my son belonged to for 3 years was sponsored by a PTO. True, they were minimally involved and didn't fully understand (or seem to want to understand) their role. But they did sign the charter agreement and follow through on other responsibilities. There aren't many other such units in our district, but again, I know all of them and they are real. If the PTA and PTO drop scout units, those units will likely migrate to other groups like the American Legion. It isn't too likely that the units will shut down.

 

And finally, I think the guy quoted in the article is very short-sighted. If he and his scouts refuse to support the PTA (or PTO) then they are basically refusing to support groups that help their public schools. That's cutting off a nose to spite the face.

[OldGreyEagle]

So, if a group signs a contract that is doesnt understand, and commits itself to things did not realize it did, the best defense it can give others is to never sign a contract again. Would it not be prudent to know what you are signing and what it commits you to before you sign it? Indeed, the BSA would be better served to explain what a charter organization is responsible for and what their duties are.

 

[Eamonn]

The news about PTA their relationship with the BSA is not new.

Some local PTA's have opted to ignore the advise they are receiving from their national, while others are taking it very much to heart.

 

Much as many Scouter's don't like to hear it, we do belong to an organization that does discriminate.

Some of us, like myself have looked at the pros and cons of the organization and found ways that allows us to belong.

This doesn't alter the fact that the discrimination is there and that others might be upset by it.

Sure we can stand up and say that we are a private organization and because of this are able to do what we want and accept or not accept people, groups who either meet or don't meet the standards that we set.

The down side of this is that we should not accept public funding.

This would include the use of schools that are funded with tax payers money.

All the PTA's that I know of, don't own very much, they meet in the school that they are associated with. So it they were to charter a BSA traditional unit, the unit would more than lightly meet in the school which is paid for and maintained with funding from tax payers.

I can and do see that if I were the parent of a Lad who wasn't allowed to belong to the organization because he was gay or brought up as an atheist. Or maybe his parents were gay and not allowed to fully participate and I seen my tax dollars being used to fund this private organization, I'd be upset.

Eamonn

 

[SeattlePioneer]

Hello Eamonn,

 

 

You know it's a diverse world out there. You are probably going to encounter a variety of groups with which you have disagreements on various issues.

 

It's wrong for government to discriminate willie nilly based on such diversity. The Supreme Court and Congress has recognized that using government to discriminate against groups like BSA is wrong, and made it illegal to do so.

 

Can't we all get along?

[OldGreyEagle]

"Can't we all get along?"

 

Here here, truer words were never spoken, and better yet, refraining from critiquing another Scouters posts as "bitter contempt and ridicule dripped on anything with which he doesn't personally agree" would go a long way to getting along

 

n'cest pas?

[Eamonn]

Hello SeattlePioneer

I'm a little bit puzzled when you post:

"You know it's a diverse world out there. You are probably going to encounter a variety of groups with which you have disagreements on various issues."

I personally don't think I have any problem with diversity.

If I do have a problem?

I think it lies with those who are unwilling to accept that the BSA does discriminate.

As I posted, I have weighed the pros and cons of this based on my own personal beliefs and values and am willing to remain a member and in most areas a supporter.

 

As for "Can't we all get along?"

This is truly a wonderful idea, but in the light of any form or type of discrimination the hard truth is that someone or some group is not seeing things this way. If they did they wouldn't be discriminating in the first place.

I think the BSA has a long and great history of doing good and serving the youth of America. I like to think it will continue to do so in the future. Still, just because the BSA is the BSA, doesn't mean it can do no wrong or isn't doing things that doesn't sit well with others. Doing so as a private organization has been given the green light by the courts, but using public funding to do so? Just isn't right.

Ea.

 

 

 

 

[SeattlePioneer]

Hello Eamonn,

 

 

I didn't say BSA doesn't make mistakes or do wrong.

 

But BSA has some ideas about right and wrong that conflict in some ways with the currently fashionable ideas that government seeks to enforce on people and institutions. That doesn't necessarily make those ideas the right ones either, or the right ones in all situations.

 

 

Take atheism as an example. Government prevents schools from having a role in religion and prayer. In effect government enforces a religion free zone in schools.

 

Perhaps there is an argument for that in government. But then government is tempted to go the next step and attempt to enforce that bias in every part of public life in the United States.

 

Should government be able to adopt a policy that says that groups using public school facilities must adopt government's values of being religion free? I don't think so.

 

I favor a policy where government must accept that there are a wide variety of cultural viewpoints on religion, and must accept that diversity rather than opposing and restricting it.

 

Same for homosexuality. Government is not entitled to use it's power to restrict the use of government facilities by organizations that may take issue with some aspect of government's political agenda.

 

In Seattle, the city's Civil Rights Department is currently proposing that private landlords be prohibited from discriminating in tenancy by those who have criminal convictions.

 

Should government be able to restrict BSA from discriminating against those with criminal histories as adult leaders?

 

When government gives itself monopolies over things like public schools, it becomes a monopolist and ought to lose it's ability to use its monopoly power to enforce political values in unnecessary and gratuitous ways.