Positive Council Changes during Financial Reorganization

[David CO]

1 hour ago, Eagledad said:

OK, so who recruits these people? 

Ideally, It would be the Chartered Organizations.  The CO's should appoint the COR's, and the COR's should select the council officers from within their own ranks.  With all of the talented people that exist inside the various Chartered Organizations in a council, they really shouldn't have to search very far to find good people.  

Edited February 10, 2020 by David CO

[Cburkhardt]

“All Hat and No Cattle”.  There must be a large contingent of commenters on this blog that enjoy reading and talking about the “big council stuff” but not District Scouting closer at the more meaningful, granular level.  Over 3,700 views and 140 great replies in 5 days on how to improve things at the Council level during the bankruptcy.  But, not a single posting on how to upgrade things at the District level.  As a Scoutmaster of a new 30-Scout Troop that receives solid support from our District, I wonder why there is such a difference.  Maybe it has been too long since you helped form a unit, run a district camporee or recruited a new unit commissioner? Perhaps the BSA perfectly operates and provides support to our Districts?

[yknot]

I'm sorry, what? Where was your posting on the district level? I've got plenty to say. 
 

[Cburkhardt]

There is  a separate District posting -- but it just has been silent as crickets.  I have a hard time believing that there aren't a lot of great ideas about how to improve the districts that can be instituted during the time of change.

[ParkMan]

8 hours ago, Eagledad said:

OK, so who recruits these people? Maybe we are looking for the wrong experts.

Barry

Usually a board has a nominating committee who makes recommendations.

In the BSA, I would propose that every COR has a vote.  A COR could choose to proxy that vote to someone.  That's a slight change from now as I believe that existing board members also get a vote in the current BSA rules.

 

[Eagledad]

6 hours ago, ParkMan said:

Usually a board has a nominating committee who makes recommendations.

In the BSA, I would propose that every COR has a vote.  A COR could choose to proxy that vote to someone.  That's a slight change from now as I believe that existing board members also get a vote in the current BSA rules.

 

So, the nominating committee is responsible for the quality of the board. 

Who selects the nominating committee? 

At some point, somebody is responsible for character of the board. 

Barry

[carebear3895]

15 hours ago, David CO said:

Ideally, It would be the Chartered Organizations.  The CO's should appoint the COR's, and the COR's should select the council officers from within their own ranks.  With all of the talented people that exist inside the various Chartered Organizations in a council, they really shouldn't have to search very far to find good people.  

COR's are already on the executive board...they just never go to meeting, but they can. 

I do very much disagree with your assertion that Chartering Organizations should "run" the council being that every CO's are so different for one another. Everyone would want "my guy" as an officer. 

[carebear3895]

8 hours ago, ParkMan said:

In the BSA, I would propose that every COR has a vote.  A COR could choose to proxy that vote to someone.  That's a slight change from now as I believe that existing board members also get a vote in the current BSA rules.

 

Both CO's and Members-at-large are voting members on the executive board. 

[qwazse]

37 minutes ago, carebear3895 said:

COR's are already on the executive board...they just never go to meeting, but they can. 

I do very much disagree with your assertion that Chartering Organizations should "run" the council being that every CO's are so different for one another. Everyone would want "my guy" as an officer. 

I'm not entirely certain that COR's would behave parochially. A well-managed board would encourage partnerships across CO's in the narrow domain of scouting ... even if they otherwise compete with one another in other spheres. A council who successfully engages COR's will likely have them encouraging other organizations to consider fielding troops.

In the failed motion to get my church to sponsor a unit, it the CORs of other churches in the denomination encouraged our board to adopt the motion. Perhaps where I fell short was in not getting a COR to present his/her experience. Building use was the primary concern, and a COR testifying that their scouts left the facility better than when they found it would have gone a long way.

Edited February 11, 2020 by qwazse

[David CO]

21 minutes ago, carebear3895 said:

I do very much disagree with your assertion that Chartering Organizations should "run" the council being that every CO's are so different for one another. Everyone would want "my guy" as an officer. 

No, we just don't want the SE's guy as an officer.  You can't have proper oversight of employees if they get to select at-large members of the board.  Board members should never be beholden to the SE for their office.

I was an IH.  It would have never even occurred to me to push for "my guy" to be a council officer.  My Chartered Organization was simply not that interested in BSA.  

[carebear3895]

1 hour ago, David CO said:

My Chartered Organization was simply not that interested in BSA.  

But yet you are pushing for CO's to be in control of a council? 

[ParkMan]

3 hours ago, Eagledad said:

So, the nominating committee is responsible for the quality of the board. 

Who selects the nominating committee? 

At some point, somebody is responsible for character of the board. 

Barry

Ideally yes - the nominating committee would select people of proper experience to fullfill the responsibilities of the board.

Taking a step back - we have to come to grips with a governing concept for the councils.  Do council board function more like a non-profit board or perhaps something else?  I believe that you treat them like a non-profit board.  My prior recommendations are in that regard. 

If I sat on the national governance committee, my recommendation would be:

• The council board has a clear mandate to fulfill the mission of the council.  That mission needs to be clearly articulated.
• The board can determine it's own structure and self-nominate to fill vacancies.
• The stakeholders in the council (chartered organizations) should vote on the board nominees.  COR cast these votes but can delegate as appropriate.
• A majority of CO's can demand a recall of board members.
• A majority of CO's can overrule decisions of the board.
• Because we are a volunteer driven organization, the board president serves as the "executive" chair of the council.  This is a non-paying role.
• The Scout Executive serves on the board in a non-voting role.
• The Scout Executive's duties and compensation should be determined and reviewed by the board.
• The Scout Executive determines structure of the staff.
• The Scout Executive serves as the executive director of the staff.
• Some staff are assigned to different volunteer "executives" - Council VPs, District Chairs, etc.  Those volunteers provide some duties to the assigned staff members, though they are managed by the Scout Executive.  For example - it is clear that the program staff works at the overall direction of the VP of Program though day to day they report to the Scout Executive.
• A member of the professional staff can be allocated to assist the board.  However, for the purposes of that work, the board sets those responsibilities and determines compensation.

I don't think this is far off from what we do today - but I think it would clarify things quite a bit.

[PACAN]

I support a majority of EB members have "skin in the game" meaning they are currently registered with a unit as a leader, not the COR.  Preferably there is a mix or Cub units, scouts bsa units and venture/lfl units.

Do most councils use a separate executive committee who meet secretly and don't publish any information from their meetings?

Are most EB meetings an "all in favor say aye" affairs? If so that could be a reason why CORs don't attend since they don't see any value to the meetings.

JMHO.

[David CO]

52 minutes ago, carebear3895 said:

But yet you are pushing for CO's to be in control of a council? 

Yes.  Having the executives in charge doesn't work.  

[David CO]

1 minute ago, PACAN said:

Are most EB meetings an "all in favor say aye" affairs? If so that could be a reason why CORs don't attend since they don't see any value to the meetings.

I think it's the main reason.  Nobody likes to waste their time attending meetings to just rubber stamp stuff.