Webelos Transition to Troops

[David CO]

1 hour ago, Cubber said:

The CC/COR and I both agree we are here to support the boys and their families in their scouting experience as our first priority. He is a good person, extremely dedicated to scouting, with a long history in the BSA.  I respect him and his authority. We just currently disagree on the this issue, and I am confident we can reach an understanding that works for everyone.

Thank you everyone. Here's hoping two reasonable adults with the same goal can work out the details. 

That might all depend on whether or not the IH has decided to chime in. 

It would not surprise me if the Chartered Organization has been informed that one of its units is about to lose its charter. This directive may have come from the top.

[Cubber]

1 hour ago, an_old_DC said:

@Cubber when do unit charters expire in your council? This troop, with zero Scouts, is dead and may not receive another charter before your Webelos bridge to a troop. Why visit a dead troop that may be about to be dissolved?

At recharter, due Dec 15, 2017. However, my understanding is that you can work with the council on a later date to amend, if there are extenuating circumstance, which is what he is attempting to do. 

If they do not successfully recharter then all this is a moot point. Until next year. 

[Cubber]

9 minutes ago, David CO said:

That might all depend on whether or not the IH has decided to chime in. 

It would not surprise me if the Chartered Organization has been informed that one of its units is about to lose its charter. This directive may have come from the top.

Interesting. I don't know, but unlikely- our CO is very hands off. The Council does know this troop is about to lose its charter. I was copied on emails to our DR about the CC/CORs plans to make a last effort to recruit and recharter. I am not sure about what other discussions are underway. I will ask that as well.

Edited December 19, 2017 by Cubber

[NJCubScouter]

I suspect (though I have no proof of this) that the IF the council knows that at least 5 new Scouts are joining in the spring, they can keep the charter from lapsing in between.  Or if that doesn't work, they can rush through a new charter based on the 5 (or more) new boys.  So I don't think the technical non-existence of the troop is the biggest issue here. 

On the other hand, to the boys it would seem like a new troop since they are the only members.  Let me ask this, Cubber, have the leaders of the troop (SM, ASM's, committee members) stayed on to work with the new boys if they join?  Or are the parents of the crossing-over Webelos going to be expected to fill those positions?

[David CO]

If the COR had not informed the IH that one of the CO's units failed to recharter on time, then he is not doing his job.

The council would not give a time extension on the recharter unless the Chartered Organization assured them that it intended to revitalize the unit.

Edited December 19, 2017 by David CO

[an_old_DC]

21 minutes ago, Cubber said:

At recharter, due Dec 15, 2017. However, my understanding is that you can work with the council on a later date to amend, if there are extenuating circumstance, which is what he is attempting to do. 

If they do not successfully recharter then all this is a moot point. Until next year. 

The issue centers on if there literally are no Scouts. If many Scouts aged out and the rest quit and are not paying dues, there are no Scouts. Regardless of whether the unit has a recruitment plan and program in place or not, zero Scouts means no charter. On the other hand, if there are some 16 year old Eagles who are inactive but their parents or the CO pay dues just to keep them on the roster, or maybe some other Scouts who are inactive but parents are still paying dues in case the Scouts want to get active again, then that's different.

Either way, it isn't a troop to visit. How can they even have a troop meeting with no Scouts?

 

[David CO]

11 minutes ago, NJCubScouter said:

So I don't think the technical non-existence of the troop is the biggest issue here. 

Are you serious?

If one of our units failed to recharter on time, it would not only be the biggest issue, it would be the only issue. 

[an_old_DC]

18 minutes ago, NJCubScouter said:

 

On the other hand, to the boys it would seem like a new troop since they are the only members.  Let me ask this, Cubber, have the leaders of the troop (SM, ASM's, committee members) stayed on to work with the new boys if they join?  Or are the parents of the crossing-over Webelos going to be expected to fill those positions?

 

That's a key question (for the parents and Webs).

Edited December 19, 2017 by an_old_DC

[Cubber]

1 minute ago, an_old_DC said:

Either way, it isn't a troop to visit. How can they even have a troop meeting with no Scouts?

 

We can't. So in that situation, it will be a moot point until next year, should they successfully recharter. However I think he is being creative in recruiting individual boys to become new scouts right now. I'll see if I can get details on his plan.

[Cubber]

19 minutes ago, NJCubScouter said:

On the other hand, to the boys it would seem like a new troop since they are the only members.  Let me ask this, Cubber, have the leaders of the troop (SM, ASM's, committee members) stayed on to work with the new boys if they join?  Or are the parents of the crossing-over Webelos going to be expected to fill those positions?

None are staying except the CC/COR and a friend that will stepped in as temporary SM. There were two boys only for at least three years, no committee. No one really to stay. Parents of the crossing-over Webelos are going to be expected to fill those positions. So you can imagine this one the expressed parent concerns.

[NJCubScouter]

3 minutes ago, David CO said:

Are you serious?

If one of our units failed to recharter on time, it would not only be the biggest issue, it would be the only issue. 

I didn't mean what I think you think I meant.  Of course the CO does not want the unit to lapse.  I was responding to a couple of people who seemed to think that recruitment was a waste of time because the charter is about to expire or has already expired. What I was saying is that I think the CO can work with the council to keep the charter from lapsing while awaiting at least 5 crossovers, and as the worst-case scenario, the charter could be "revived" quickly enough.  That being the case, the biggest issue remains recruitment.

[Jameson76]

3 minutes ago, Cubber said:

There were two boys only for at least three years, no committee. No one really to stay. Parents of the crossing-over Webelos are going to be expected to fill those positions. So you can imagine this one the expressed parent concerns.

They had to have had some paper scouts, you need to have a minimum of five paid youth

[NJCubScouter]

9 minutes ago, Cubber said:

None are staying except the CC/COR and a friend that will stepped in as temporary SM. There were two boys only for at least three years, no committee. No one really to stay. Parents of the crossing-over Webelos are going to be expected to fill those positions. So you can imagine this one the expressed parent concerns.

Ok, so the issue here is really much bigger than which troop(s) the Webelos den is permitted to visit, as a den.  But as long as parents and Webelos are aware that they (as individuals or groups of individuals) can visit wherever they want, and join wherever they want, the individual choice is preserved and no leader can be accused of being "disloyal" to the CO who appointed them.

Edited December 19, 2017 by NJCubScouter

[NJCubScouter]

4 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

They had to have had some paper scouts, you need to have a minimum of five paid youth

That's a good point.  Games have already been played with this troop's charter.

[Cubber]

12 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

They had to have had some paper scouts, you need to have a minimum of five paid youth

I didn't know that. I wonder how he managed that. Boys can be registered in more than one troop, right? Does that count toward the five?

Edited December 19, 2017 by Cubber
clarification on count toward