Path To Save Bsa?

[CalicoPenn]

Where there is uncertainty, maybe some BSA units should consider moving their assets?

 

Maybe because their assets are not owned by the unit but owned by the chartered organizations and moving those assets elsewhere with the intent to deprive the chartered organization of their assets would be considered theft, and would certainly be a violation of the Scout Law??

[Stosh]

I am glad to see this day coming.  Its the only way this is going to get resolved.  Sometimes divorce is the only way.

 

And my mantra has always been, "There's nothing in ones' marriage that divorce can't make it worse."  Everyone I share that with seems to agree with me.

 

Divorce is finally admitting that what you have been doing all along is a total failure.  I'm glad people feel that the 100 year history of BSA has been a failure.

[RememberSchiff]

Maybe because their assets are not owned by the unit but owned by the chartered organizations and moving those assets elsewhere with the intent to deprive the chartered organization of their assets would be considered theft, and would certainly be a violation of the Scout Law??

 

Yeah but consider scouts and their families who have been fundraising for Jambo/Philmont/summer camp, a "Sorry, the money really belongs to CO" might cause a small riot. I would hope that money is in a separate account.

[Stosh]

Yeah but consider scouts and their families who have been fundraising for Jambo/Philmont/summer camp, a "Sorry, the money really belongs to CO" might cause a small riot. I would hope that money is in a separate account.

 

It is still theft regardless of what account it is in.  It would seem that when it comes to money, morality usually takes a back seat even in scouting.

[DenLeader2]

Perdidochas,

 

 

Finally, the new resolution to be passed by the BSA clearly affirms that homosexual acts can be "moral, honorable, committed and respectful."

 

The above statement was part of a Trail Life USA assessment of the impact to religious organizations when BSA votes

to allow gay leaders

Of course we now know that the measure passed.

[qwazse]

Yeah but consider scouts and their families who have been fundraising for Jambo/Philmont/summer camp, a "Sorry, the money really belongs to CO" might cause a small riot. I would hope that money is in a separate account.

What profiteth a boy if he saves his own adventure but loses his soul?

Remember, the exposure to folks with a more sexually permissive ethic at national events is at the center of this hurricane.

The CO has the right to direct those boys to other adventures where the standard under which they contracted could be upheld.

They might even have the right to demand refunds of deposits already made to BSA for reneging on its contracted membership standard.

That could happen, or they could allow the troop to transfer assets to another BSA unit, or anything in between.

[RememberSchiff]

CP. Stosh, qwazse, mostly I am making a prediction about money problems ahead.

 

In the past and on a smaller scale I have seen the problems caused by "scout accounts" when a scout leaves a unit. I have never heard a parent or scout agree that it was morally right for a unit to keep that money. Never. Thank the IRS for getting rid of scout accounts!

 

If a diocese closes all their BSA units (180 scouts in one diocese) and seizes those unit accounts, I am predicting a huge headache.

 

My $0.02

[Stosh]

I'm not disagreeing with you one bit, @@RememberSchiff, but the fact remains, just whose money is it and how does one deal ethically with in in the first place.  In my troop it has always been very clear that the money belongs to the CO and the leadership makes it clear that regardless of how hard a scout works at a fund raiser, he is raising money so that the CO can provide the funds necessary for the success of the troop.  The unit is a team and that team belongs to the CO.

 

Along with "hiding" the money from the CO, it is unethical on the part of the scout leadership to mislead parents in this process and give them a false impression that some of the troop funds belong to them.  It is also unethical to spend all the money when they leave on a big farewell celebration.  

 

I have seen theft, misdirection, pea/shell game with assets, poor stewardship of entrusted funds, etc. in the many years I have been involved with scouting.  Adults who would never think of suggesting something dishonest the boys should do is something they feel no remorse doing themselves.

 

The reason one can "predict money problems ahead" is because of the basic dishonesty of the leadership in the unit.  

 

I can honestly say that after working with church youth groups for 40+ years, NO ONE EVER felt that a penny used for youth ministry belonged to anyone but the congregation.  I cannot say the same for adults affiliated with BSA.  The money problems ahead you are referring to are self-inflicted by the BSA units themselves.  Don't blame the CO's for adjusting their funds towards youth development, or whatever they wish, when they leave the BSA.  The fault lies with the unethical assumptions of the BSA leadership in the unit.

[walk in the woods]

What could happen ...

Some churches leave, and without their support, the BSA gets MUCH smaller, but not to the point of disappearing.  More council mergers, less national staff, districts might even disapper entirely for smaller councils.  Lots of summer camp sales and closures - forcing the Troops to provide more of their own advancement programs.  But I do not think that the size gets so small that a critical mass necessary to produce Scouts books, uniforms, and awards does not exist. Self Insuring may no longer be possible, and the cost per scout also goes up, further reducing membership.

 

I'd be curious to hear what membership level you believe is the critical mass point.  I've only done a cursory review of the financial reports that were posted here somewhere so I haven't formed an opinion yet.

 

One possibility of some recovery is that the National Organization takes the Franchise model one step further and allows the Churches take full posession of their Scouting program, paying a single license fee for use of Books, awards, uniforms; but where the BSA is otherwise totally hands off on their operations.  Maybe, like we briefly did with AHG, the leader training and/or camps are opened up and available for the new groups' use.

 

Another is moving to the GSUSA model where the units belong to the council.  Although it seems like it would change the liability model greatly (would the council 501c3's now be liable for primary insurance on everything?) I think that model would be easier to manage for the National Council.

[perdidochas]

BSA took the only path it could.  And by doing so (poor grammar, forgive me) ... And by doing so, BSA corrected the assertion of sins that some charter partners (churches) do not believe are sins.  BSA had to either avoid those charter partners or allow the charter partners to use their own membership and their own values.

 

As with all change, current society battles will destroy the good to make change.  BSA needs to get out of the way and focus on it's core.  Scout oath and law.  Outdoors.  Citizenship.  Faith.  

 

I agree.  BSA is in a no-win situation. They did a compromise that almost nobody is happy with. To me, that indicates a good compromise. 

[perdidochas]

Perdidochas,

 

 

Finally, the new resolution to be passed by the BSA clearly affirms that homosexual acts can be "moral, honorable, committed and respectful."

 

The above statement was part of a Trail Life USA assessment of the impact to religious organizations when BSA votes

to allow gay leaders

Of course we now know that the measure passed.

 

While I don't agree with that assessment of homosexuality, there are religious groups and people that do.  There are other things that I think are immoral that other religious groups think are perfectly fine.  For example, I think it's immoral to not go to church on Sunday (it's a mortal sin in the Catholic Faith).  I know there are a lot of other Christian faiths that think otherwise. 

 

That said, the resolution did not say that homosexual acts are moral.  That is a conjecture by Trail Life, and I have personally found that they can't be trusted.  They twist things for their own agenda. 

 

Here is a link to the resolution:

http://files.ctctcdn.com/ac05d2b4101/d9c56f85-a049-41d5-9e5c-72a0c44f984f.pdf

[Stosh]

I agree.  BSA is in a no-win situation. They did a compromise that almost nobody is happy with. To me, that indicates a good compromise. 

 

Win-Win is ideal.

 

Win-Lose at least some will support the decision.

 

Lose-Lose means the situation was botched so badly that no one feels good about any of it.

 

The most dangerous for any organization is the Lose-Lose because then members from both sides of the issue will leave.

 

This decision is not a Lose-Lose, but a Win-Lose and at least a remnant of the organization will possibly survive.  The Lose side is still deciding their decision so much of what will result of BSA's decision is still yet to be decided.

[Gone]

Win-Win is ideal.

 

Win-Lose at least some will support the decision.

 

Lose-Lose means the situation was botched so badly that no one feels good about any of it.

 

 

Figured this was an appropriate point for an on-topic comedic break...

 

http://economicsoftheoffice.com/all/?id=18

Edited August 6, 2015 by Bad Wolf

[CalicoPenn]

Remember, the exposure to folks with a more sexually permissive ethic at national events is at the center of this hurricane.

 

 

Qwazse, I would say the fear of exposure to folks with a more sexually permissive ethic is at the center of this hurricane - and I would further suggest that it's a speculative fear.  We've seen folks on this forum trying to use pride parade participants, and a minority of pride parade participants at that (you know, the mediagenic ones that they see in pictures since few have been to an actual pride parade) to suggest tht the entire gay community is some kind of monolithic group where everyone thinks and acts the same.

 

The far more likely scenario is you're going to get parents in monogamous relations (albeit same sex relations) and former Scouts who want to give back and have already been instilled with the Scout Oath and Law volunteering.  I doubt the BSA is going to be inundated by volunteers who are going to be more sexually permissive - there are a lot of straight folks with a more sexually permissive ethic too, and I don't see them being discussed as an issue in Scouting, mostly because, I suspect, they just aren't involved in Scouting, or if they are, they're very secretive about it.

[Stosh]

One must also realize at what level of conflict we currently are and once that is identified, everything begins to make sense.