Positive Council Changes during Financial Reorganization

[desertrat77]

The Denver - Atlanta exercise is certainly beneficial.  Let's explore another hypothetical where the tyranny of distance is not so great.  Say you are in Arizona and you are shopping for a council.  Your choices (as per a quick look at wikipedia):

1.  AZ headquartered:

- Grand Canyon Council (Phoenix)

- Catalina Council (Tucson)

2.  If you prefer more choices, consider the following:

- San Diego Imperial Council - HQ'd in CA but also serves part of AZ

- Las Vega Area Council serves units in NV, CA and Mojave County AZ

- Great Southwest Council, operating from the ABQ in NM, includes service to units in NE AZ

As a former scout and later ASM/SM in Arizona, I recall driving a few hours or more is just part of the program.  Especially if you want to see trees and water.

If units had a choice, do you think these councils would strive to provide top notch programming and support?  You bet! 

Edited February 7, 2020 by desertrat77

[HashTagScouts]

Let's all take it a step further, and think back to those earliest days of the BSA.  The first slate of "Council professional"' were hired by the Council's themselves.  National had nothing to do with it.  These people had no longstanding experience as a professional in the BSA (some may have been volunteers at first but as the BSA was still so young, everyone was a novice).  Why can't we go back to those days? Realistically, most everything can be done online.  Some current processes could be modified to make it more effective as online transactions, but the cost is the most likely culprit as to why it isn't changed to do it.  I would much rather the Council E Board interview and hire who they see fit to be the best SE, not have to be forced to chose only from amongst the available options National presents them with.  Personally, I'd like my SE to have received their degree in finance or business and 10 years experience in the private sector so they can be highly effective at running the business end of things, than be hiring an SE with a degree in music history that has had 10 years experience in the BSA professional ranks as their only work experience.

[TAHAWK]

"What that would mean:"

Can't really seeing such a long-distance secession.  Macon seems more likely - just up the freeway.

The Denver CSP will be great trade goods.  No reason not to wear it.

OA is, of course, a national honor society and service organization.  If you meet the membership requirements, the unit elects you, not a lodge or council.  I was inducted by 298, but there is no requirement that any particular lodge operate your Ordeal, merely that you must participate in the Ordeal.    We "tapped out" Scouts from LA Council at a camporee in 1962. Scouts from San Bernardino attended our Ordeal in 1964.  As a non-member of the local lodge  in Columbus while teaching, I attended many OA events and even got to be  a relatively ancient Kitchkinet again after many years, a role I loved.  Membership is freely transferable.  Leadership in Service  - wherever the service may be.

The Scouts and Scouters of the Denver troop located in Atlanta, will attend activities wherever they  elect.  In forty years as a district and/or council scouter I never saw a requirement that a unit could participate in an activity only if affiliated with a particular council.  In 2017, our Summer Camp had two units from Florida - voting with their "feet."  If the Scouts eschew Atlanta camporees, they are surrounded by other neighboring councils.  If Atlanta turns them away, the choice to move is validated, and Atlanta needs new leadership.

If Atlanta tries to bury us, we will not go quietly, having founded multiple Denver packs in Atlanta.  Rocky Mountain, High Colorado!

[David CO]

13 minutes ago, HashTagScouts said:

The first slate of "Council professional"' were hired by the Council's themselves.  National had nothing to do with it.  These people had no longstanding experience as a professional in the BSA (some may have been volunteers at first but as the BSA was still so young, everyone was a novice).  Why can't we go back to those days? 

Many of the first generation of scouting professionals came from the ranks of the YMCA.  YMCA had two colleges that trained coaches, camp counselors, and administrators for YMCA work.  YMCA trained personnel were considered to be highly desirable by Boy Scout councils.  

I agree.  There is absolutely no reason why a council should not be allowed to hire a highly competent, college educated, recreation major instead of a national council approved hack.

Edited February 7, 2020 by David CO

[ParkMan]

1 minute ago, TAHAWK said:

The Scouts and Scouters of the Denver troop located in Atlanta, will attend activities wherever they  elect.  In forty years as a district and/or council scouter I never saw a requirement that a unit could participate in an activity only if affiliated with a particular council.  In 2017, our Summer Camp had two units from Florida - voting with their "feet."  If the Scouts eschew Atlanta camporees, they are surrounded by other neighboring councils.  If Atlanta turns them away, the choice to move is validated, and Atlanta needs new leadership.

So, when I was thinking about this, that was my first thought too.  No-one really cares where you attend programming.  But, the more I thought about it I realized that this is really just the case because of our monopoly system. 

Say that Atlanta charges the $60 a year per scout national allows.  Denver charges $5.  Atlanta may be using some of those funds to really fund program.  Is it then really equitable to partake in Atlanta's programming?  Today, joining that other council isn't a choice and so the odd unit out of council the attends is just a bonus for headcount.  But, if that became the norm - I think people would start looking at it differently.

[HashTagScouts]

4 minutes ago, David CO said:

Many of the first generation of scouting professionals came from the ranks of the YMCA.  YMCA had two colleges that trained coaches, counselors, and administrators for YMCA work.  YMCA trained personnel were considered to be highly desirable by Boy Scout councils.  

 

For the now long gone council in my area that got merged up in the 60s, the first Council Executives (as apparently many were called in those days) was a retired school principal.  That is life experiences that would make them a good choice in my opinion.  Considering that you could retire from such a profession before the age of 55, I'd give serious thought to hire anyone in that position than several of the SE's I have met.    

[fred8033]

On 2/4/2020 at 10:54 AM, Cburkhardt said:

How can the coming Financial Reorganization Bankruptcy improve things at the council level?     

Councils will need to shed assets.  Ideally, shed office buildings to save money

• Ideas
  • If offices are needed, put those offices on "camp" properties.  
  • Move as much of operations "on-line" as possible.  Most is already there.  
  • Re-partner with "Walgreens" or another vendor to sell scout shirts again.  ... I really think scout shirts and stuff in neighborhood stores was a big-time marketing tool.  My first exporsure to scouts was at the local five & dime with their four/five feet of scout stuff.  
• Pros
  • Save money on facility, staff, etc
  • Pro - moves money from offices buildings to "camp" properties.  
  • Promotes using the camps.  
  • Re-emphasizes BSA is an outdoor program.  
• Cons
  • More distinace for some people.
  • Fewer meeting locations.
  • Negatively affect perceptions of "careers" as BSA staff.  But this could be good too.
• Reasoning
  • Councils are now losing revenue from national for renting scout store space and paying national employees
  • Vast majority of scout parents never use the council "office" buildings
    • Most advancement is almost fully online
    • Eagle paperwork is almost ready to be fully online.  Or, could be fully done at district level.
    • Shopping is now mostly online.  Most importantly, shopping now does not contribute rent to council offices
    • Rechartering could be fully done online.  
  • Too much time is spent in-city office areas.  
  • BSA is program is structured around the outdoors.  Let's re-emphasize it.  

Edited February 7, 2020 by fred8033

[David CO]

1 minute ago, HashTagScouts said:

For the now long gone council in my area that got merged up in the 60s, the first Council Executives (as apparently many were called in those days) was a retired school principal.  That is life experiences that would make them a good choice in my opinion.  Considering that you could retire from such a profession before the age of 55, I'd give serious thought to hire anyone in that position than several of the SE's I have met.    

I'm glad you didn't say a retired school Athletic Director.  I might have thought you were trying to flatter me. 

[HashTagScouts]

14 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Councils will need to shed assets.  Ideally, shed office buildings to save money

• Ideas
  • If offices are needed, put those offices on "camp" properties.  
  • Move as much of operations "on-line" as possible.  Most is already there.  
  • Re-partner with "Walgreens" or another vendor to sell scout shirts again.  
• Pros
  • Save money on facility, staff, etc
  • Pro - moves money from offices buildings to "camp" properties.  
  • Promotes using the camps.  
  • Re-emphasizes BSA is an outdoor program.  
• Cons
  • More distinace for some people.
  • Fewer meeting locations.
  • Negatively affect perceptions of "careers" as BSA staff.  But this could be good too.
• Reasoning
  • Councils are now losing revenue from national for renting scout store space and paying national employees
  • Vast majority of scout parents never use the council "office" buildings
    • Most advancement is almost fully online
    • Eagle paperwork is almost ready to be fully online.  Or, could be fully done at district level.
    • Shopping is now mostly online.  Most importantly, shopping now does not contribute rent to council offices
    • Rechartering could be fully done online.  
  • Too much time is spent in-city office areas.  
  • BSA is program is structured around the outdoors.  Let's re-emphasize it.  

It amazes me how many people I encounter that love to gripe at how far it is to drive to our council office .  In 6 years, I have had to go the council office on only two occasions: 1) for a training that my son was attending to maintain our Lodge website, and 2) to drive my son to drop off his Eagle application and workbook.  Anything else, I mail or wait until Rt to hand off to my DE.  What all these other people I hear griping are doing in all that time driving back and forth is beyond me.  Spending a $1 on postage is far more reasonable to me than wasting that $1 on the drive it takes to get there.

 

As to uniforms- the BSA has frankly become too reliant on the revenue of uniform pieces.  $4.50 for a pair of shoulder loops equals $4.25 in profit.  However, they also must spend an obscene amount of money on items that end up being canned.  How much Varsity Scouts merch do you think ended up in a landfill?  I say take a page out of the BPSAs book, and use third party shirts/pants/shorts and just sell your own patches and trinkets. https://baden-powell-service-assoc-quartermasters.myshopify.com

 

Edited February 7, 2020 by HashTagScouts

[Sentinel947]

24 minutes ago, HashTagScouts said:

It amazes me how many people I encounter that love to gripe at how far it is to drive to our council office .

It depends. I'm at my councils office every month. It's between my house and work so it's not too bad to get to. There are a few volunteer roles I am in that require going there, as it's nicely centered in the population center of the council. However, it is not at all geographically centered. The furthest corner of my Council is 82 miles away from the Council office. From furthest points my council about 100 miles across. If I lived out in the edges of the council, there is no way I would accept volunteers roles that would make me drive to the council office as much as I do currently if it was 80 miles one way. 

That being said, council owned meeting space is overrated. If Councils, Districts and Troops are engaged with their Charter Organization partners, getting places to meet for meetings should be a piece of cake. Our next NYLT 10 day out meeting is at a church/CO out towards the further edge of the council, gives those folks a break from having to drive the hour or so to the council office after work. 

[ParkMan]

Our council camp is 90 minutes from here and in the middle of nowhere.  Our council service center is 5 minutes off the highway and within a 30 minute drive of over a million people.  I don't go that often - maybe once a quarter.  But, it's nice that it's not at camp.

I rarely talk to the office staff - doubt they even would know who I am if I was there anyways.  But, I do like to stop by the Scout Shop when I need something.  I'd hate if I had to do it all online.  I hate online shopping.

[David CO]

8 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

I hate online shopping.

Me too.  I have the kids do it.  They love online shopping.

[yknot]

Whatever we do, we have to make sure it makes the program more accessible and value added for Millennial and Gen Z scouts and their families, because they are our future. We can  grump here all we want about what sacred cows we don't want to give up, but the reality is that if we are to maintain membership, we have to become more user friendly and of interest to the emerging target market.

Some things I've read that seem good:

- Place a premium on retaining and better managing local council camp grounds.  The closer camping and outdoor opportunities are, the closer we stay to our mission and the better chance we have of retaining kids with a fun outdoor program. 

- De-emphasize the merchandising. Close council stores rather than camps. This can easily be morphed online, or as someone said, try to return to the counter in a local retail establishment. Scouting won't fail if scouts can't festoon themselves with a million badges, but it will fail if we can't easily get them out of doors. I'm dismayed by seeming cavalier comments about closing down yet more local camps.  

- De-emphasize popcorn fundraising, awards, internally focused banquets, etc. 

- Focus on supporting local units and streamlining tasks for unit volunteers. I would pay $30 a year if a Council could cut my admin/paperwork duties in half. We also know that Millennial and Gen Z folks don't volunteer as much -- or volunteer differently -- as their parents. We won't survive with our current, volunteer heavy model. We have to streamline. 

- Scouting needs to be more portable and fluid the way other youth organizations are. It's silly to talk about a troop in Michigan joining a council in Nevada. However, it's not crazy to maybe try and develop a digital Scouting passport that allows scouts to move more easily among Troops and Councils in search of specific experiences.

 

 

 

[MattR]

Before everyone breaks up the phone company, what services do the councils provide? Or is this just a way to find the council with the lowest fees?

As much as I'd like to get away from my council the advantage of having a local council is meeting people face to face. The Atlanta Denver example just doesn't make sense to me. Remote training has already been torn apart. Remote camporees? I don't see it. As much as people talk about working remotely it just doesn't work as well as talking to people in person.

I'd rather see each unit have more say in how their council operates. How that happens is up for debate but the idea is make it two way, not just top down.

As long as we're changing everything, how about simplifying the program? I look at the BSA program and it's just complicated and expensive. Everyone keeps comparing the cost to an elite sport team. It should be available to everyone - without having to sell $5000 of popcorn every year. Find the poorest neighborhood you know of and make a program the parents of those kids will like without needing lots of donations. A good place to start is tossing out just about everything you can buy at the scout store. The uniform is a t-shirt and a neckerchief. No patches. A POR is an arm band, just like soccer captains. Or maybe a different necker. We need skills to learn, not ranks to do. We need 18-25 year old mentors rather than epaulets, retired old guys for commissioners and knots. We need more freedom in making the program fun rather than announcement laden meetings. So much of the program is wrapped up in defining, supporting, litigating, and promoting advancement that all the fun has been pushed aside. Elite soccer might cost a fortune but all you really need is something that looks kind of like a ball, a dirt field, a bunch of kids, and a few rocks for goals. Anyone can play soccer. What do you really need to enjoy the outdoors? Your friends? A water bottle? A sack? A map? Make it $5 worth of stuff. Put lists of ideas of fun things to do with that stuff on a website and everything else is mostly having fun with your friends. If you really want to go to Philmont and you can pay for it, fine, do it. However, nobody needs camporees that cost $20/scout so the council can raise money. Nobody needs fancy camps, rustic is fine, as is a national forest. We certainly don't need "program development" or "marketing" people at councils. Get rid of advancement and money sucking and councils will get much simpler. So will national.

This program, at its core, is about people. Focus on that. Focus on scouts working together to solve their problems and have the fun they want to have. Teach them how to accomplish their dreams.

[Cburkhardt]

On Friday let’s talk about Council Executive Boards.  I have been on three, including 3 years as president of one of the 20 largest councils and VP for several years of a very small council.  My view is that we should have smaller Executive boards of truly national or state class distinguished personalities who focus on fundraising and relationships — and leave program and operations to a larger Operating board.  The chair of the Operating board would report to the Executive board on the big issues only for policy guidance.  The operating board would include the district chairs and most of the chairs of council committees, plus a smattering of others.  We have too many program people on the Executive boards now, and that prevents progress.  I am also thinking that the boards should be accountable to the unit key three members and not just the CORs, giving the units 2/3 of the formal influence.  That way things will become more unit and district focused.