The Boy Scouts In Crisis - A Historian's Perspective

[vol_scouter]

13 minutes ago, HICO_Eagle said:

I would really like a continuation of the OP's essay but IMO Scouting will not get past this latest crisis unless or until it is willing to ditch the top-level leadership that sacrifices membership and resources to political activism and prioritizes PhDs over real concrete field experience in shaping the program.

The leadership of the BSA is largely center with most leaning to the right rather than the left.  They have many volunteers at the national level still working on the unit level.

The realities that the National Executive Committee and National Executive Board must address often dictates decisions.  For example, the BSA had no policy on transgender Scouts prior to a couple of years ago.  At that time, there was a sudden attention paid to transgender youth in the country.  The reality was that at that time 16 states allowed parents to change a child's gender at any time and they were protected by the state constitutions.  If the BSA did not accept transgender youth, then in those 16 states any lawsuits would almost assuredly be successful in forcing the BSA to do so.  Such suits would be costly and the BSA would be negatively portrayed in the media as discriminating against children.  There was only one viable option which was the path taken.  Personally, I believe that it was the correct one for many reasons including doing what was best for the child.

The PhDs that I know in Scouting are all involved or have been involved in the last few years on the unit level.

The leadership of the BSA has been and is sound but the current perfect storm of covid-19 and Chapter 11 is a major challenge.

[skeptic]

1 hour ago, vol_scouter said:

4-H made a big push in STEM programming and grew by a couple of million.  It has been very successful and is meeting a large demand for STEM activities.  Both youth and their parents want more STEM programs.

 

IF that is the case, we may want to consider pushing that a bit more.  I do know the STEM merit badges at summer camp are fairly popular.  Other than the nature related ones that are also Eagle, the most popular one is Space Exploration.  They also have photography regularly and have done Electronics.  

But I wonder how we might integrate the idea of Stem Scouting into the program successfully, as I have not seen it come out of the introductory stage.  Maybe it just needs to be incorporated into the regular options, rather than being separated?

 

[TAHAWK]

25 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

The leadership of the BSA is largely center with most leaning to the right rather than the left.  They have many volunteers at the national level still working on the unit level.

The realities that the National Executive Committee and National Executive Board must address often dictates decisions.  For example, the BSA had no policy on transgender Scouts prior to a couple of years ago.  At that time, there was a sudden attention paid to transgender youth in the country.  The reality was that at that time 16 states allowed parents to change a child's gender at any time and they were protected by the state constitutions.  If the BSA did not accept transgender youth, then in those 16 states any lawsuits would almost assuredly be successful in forcing the BSA to do so.  Such suits would be costly and the BSA would be negatively portrayed in the media as discriminating against children.  There was only one viable option which was the path taken.  Personally, I believe that it was the correct one for many reasons including doing what was best for the child.

The PhDs that I know in Scouting are all involved or have been involved in the last few years on the unit level.

The leadership of the BSA has been and is sound but the current perfect storm of covid-19 and Chapter 11 is a major challenge.

1. "Charter and Bylaws of the Boy Scouts of America

June 2019     © Boy Scouts of America

...

Section 3. That the purpose of this corporation shall be to promote, through organization, and cooperation with other agencies, the ability of boys to do things for themselves and others, to train them in Scoutcraft, and to teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred virtues, using the methods which are now in common use by Boy Scouts [1915 language readopted in 2019]."

So was it "sound" for BSA to pursue increasingly different purposes?

2. BSA fought for years and won the right, good or bad, to assert its  view of "Timeless Values] by excluding gay persons, then relatively quickly abandoned that position for stated reasons that applied equally when they were fighting admission of gays.  Was that "sound."?

3. BSA is driven almost solely by raising money to meet payroll - 97% of the expenditures in my council, making corporate donors more important than almost any number of Scout parents.   Yes an opinion, based on observation, experience, documents, and admissions by "professionals."  My council has turned down $millions because it would have been restricted to supporting program, such as by improving and maintaining camps.  The council laid off it's VERY successful capital program professional because the $millions she raised could not be used for payroll.   Is it "sound" not to make program - product - of highest priority?  

4. BSA consciously allows awards to be given on a massive scale regardless of whether they have been earned or not.  What message does this behavior send to youth?  Is it '"sound" not to be "trustworthy"?  

5.  BSA "professionals" have repeatedly falsified membership numbers, leading to criminal investigations and convictions ("FBI called in as 'ghost' scouts boost numbers - and funds.") My councils first Scout Exectutive was merely fired for doing tthat, as was the Scout Executive I inherited when I rejoined in 1981.  Then there is "In School Scouting, which one of our Scout Executives candidly called a "Scam." "Sound"?

6.  BSA says volunteers run Scouting.  That statement is disingenuous at best. "Sound" ?

7. The BSA position on "Reverent" is claimed to be very important, yet, in practice, BSA acts inconsistently.  Some theists are excluded because they worship the wrong God or gods. 

It is said that one must believe in  God - not "a" higher authority but "the" higher authority, and are to be excluded if you do not so believe;  yet, some atheists, mainly Buddhists, but also non-theist Unitarians,  have been allowed in BSA, the Buddhist continuously for generations, and their religious awards are recognized by BSA.  Other atheists, such as Humanists,  are excluded.   On October 21, 2003, Greg Shields, a national spokesman for the Boy Scouts of America, statement to  Fox News, said:  "The Boy Scouts are not a religious organization. We cannot be described as a religious organization or a religion." Yes, that was wildly inconsistent with BSA's position in court papers in prior law suits. E.g.: "Although Boy Scouts of America is not a religious sect, it is religious, and, while the local council is not a house of worship like a church or a synagogue, it is a religious organization."   E. g.: "Bill, I don't think you or the Boy Scouts have anything to apologize for. The Boy Scouts are proud to be an organization of people who believe in God." ( George Davidson, lead counsel of record, Boy Scouts of America v. Dale.)   

Is it "sound" to "double-talk" an "important" issue?

8. YPT   The first version of on-line training commanded that reports of "incidents" be made solely to your Scout Executive.  I, and I am sure many others, pointed out that the law was otherwise, and the commandment changed.  But how could any "sound" leader require such a indefensible practice in the first instance?

These have been tough times for most volunteer organizations.  That makes sound leadership critical.  

[vol_scouter]

7 hours ago, TAHAWK said:

1. "Charter and Bylaws of the Boy Scouts of America

June 2019     © Boy Scouts of America

...

Section 3. That the purpose of this corporation shall be to promote, through organization, and cooperation with other agencies, the ability of boys to do things for themselves and others, to train them in Scoutcraft, and to teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred virtues, using the methods which are now in common use by Boy Scouts [1915 language readopted in 2019]."

So was it "sound" for BSA to pursue increasingly different purposes?

2. BSA fought for years and won the right, good or bad, to assert its  view of "Timeless Values] by excluding gay persons, then relatively quickly abandoned that position for stated reasons that applied equally when they were fighting admission of gays.  Was that "sound."?

3. BSA is driven almost solely by raising money to meet payroll - 97% of the expenditures in my council, making corporate donors more important than almost any number of Scout parents.   Yes an opinion, based on observation, experience, documents, and admissions by "professionals."  My council has turned down $millions because it would have been restricted to supporting program, such as by improving and maintaining camps.  The council laid off it's VERY successful capital program professional because the $millions she raised could not be used for payroll.   Is it "sound" not to make program - product - of highest priority?  

4. BSA consciously allows awards to be given on a massive scale regardless of whether they have been earned or not.  What message does this behavior send to youth?  Is it '"sound" not to be "trustworthy"?  

5.  BSA "professionals" have repeatedly falsified membership numbers, leading to criminal investigations and convictions ("FBI called in as 'ghost' scouts boost numbers - and funds.") My councils first Scout Exectutive was merely fired for doing tthat, as was the Scout Executive I inherited when I rejoined in 1981.  Then there is "In School Scouting, which one of our Scout Executives candidly called a "Scam." "Sound"?

6.  BSA says volunteers run Scouting.  That statement is disingenuous at best. "Sound" ?

7. The BSA position on "Reverent" is claimed to be very important, yet, in practice, BSA acts inconsistently.  Some theists are excluded because they worship the wrong God or gods. 

It is said that one must believe in  God - not "a" higher authority but "the" higher authority, and are to be excluded if you do not so believe;  yet, some atheists, mainly Buddhists, but also non-theist Unitarians,  have been allowed in BSA, the Buddhist continuously for generations, and their religious awards are recognized by BSA.  Other atheists, such as Humanists,  are excluded.   On October 21, 2003, Greg Shields, a national spokesman for the Boy Scouts of America, statement to  Fox News, said:  "The Boy Scouts are not a religious organization. We cannot be described as a religious organization or a religion." Yes, that was wildly inconsistent with BSA's position in court papers in prior law suits. E.g.: "Although Boy Scouts of America is not a religious sect, it is religious, and, while the local council is not a house of worship like a church or a synagogue, it is a religious organization."   E. g.: "Bill, I don't think you or the Boy Scouts have anything to apologize for. The Boy Scouts are proud to be an organization of people who believe in God." ( George Davidson, lead counsel of record, Boy Scouts of America v. Dale.)   

Is it "sound" to "double-talk" an "important" issue?

8. YPT   The first version of on-line training commanded that reports of "incidents" be made solely to your Scout Executive.  I, and I am sure many others, pointed out that the law was otherwise, and the commandment changed.  But how could any "sound" leader require such a indefensible practice in the first instance?

These have been tough times for most volunteer organizations.  That makes sound leadership critical.  

Tahawk,

Referring to your numbers:

1.  Scouting has evolved as society has changed.  If it had not and still did the same things with the same uniforms, it would be an anachronism.  So sound.

2.  Until the 1980's, there was no policy on gays.  Ben Love announced a policy (I do not know how that was decided but would imagine that the National Executive Board approved) in the 1980's that aligned with public sentiment at the time.  The decision soon came under attack.  Dale was an important decision and principle.  Retrospectively, the best course would have been to drop prohibitions on gays very soon rather than years after the decision.  Research studies have not shown an increased incidence in child sexual abuse in gays than heterosexuals and society had changed in its acceptance of gays.  Scouting does not adhere to any religious tradition so a quicker change would have been better.  So the appropriate decision though likely delayed more than would have been ideal.

3.  That is not my experience in my local council.  Cannot comment on other councils.

4.  Who determines the recipients of those awards?  It is not the National Council but rather the local councils and usually the volunteers who make those determinations.  Some councils and districts across the country are more likely to be rigorous.

5.  Those problems were decades ago and have been addressed by measures to prevent the fraud.  That is why volunteers in the units must sign off on all members - adult and youth.

6.  Volunteers DO run Scouting.  They chair all national committees, are the only people who can vote, make all policies, make all program changes, determine budgets, etc.  Volunteers run the BSA.  Many or perhaps most are currently volunteering at the local level or did so in the last few years.

7.  This is a very complex and delicate subject that I shall not comment upon at this time.

8.  The BSA felt that the SE should be the reporter of YP issues.  That was shown to be a faulty policy as some states had begun making mandated reporter laws that meant that those who first find an indication are required to report.  The BSA changed the training to reflect that.  This happened as laws were being promulgated so was the appropriate action.

 

The BSA has not always made the best decision when viewed retrospectively, but the actions were taken with the best intentions by successful men and women who carefully considered all the evidence and made the best decision at the time.  They are good people how are intelligent, successful, and very dedicated to Scouting.  They are volunteers who love Scouting just as do we.

[TAHAWK]

1 hour ago, vol_scouter said:

Tahawk,

Referring to your numbers:

1.  Scouting has evolved as society has changed.  If it had not and still did the same things with the same uniforms, it would be an anachronism.  So sound.

CHANGE IS INEVITABLE, BUT NOT ALL CHANGE IS IMPROVEMENT.  ASK POLAND.  CHANGE THAT AMOUNTS TO LESSENING PRODUCT/SERVICE QUALITY SELDOM LEADS TO SUCCESS.   HOW WAS GM SAVED (AT LEAST FOR NOW)? QUALITY, QUALITY, QUALITY, AND THE BIG SHOTS WHO SAID NOTHING COULD BE DONE TO END THE ROT? GONE.  IMMEDIATELY.

Quote

2.  Until the 1980's, there was no policy on gays.  Ben Love announced a policy (I do not know how that was decided but would imagine that the National Executive Board approved) in the 1980's that aligned with public sentiment at the time.  The decision soon came under attack.  Dale was an important decision and principle.  Retrospectively, the best course would have been to drop prohibitions on gays very soon rather than years after the decision.  Research studies have not shown an increased incidence in child sexual abuse in gays than heterosexuals and society had changed in its acceptance of gays.  Scouting does not adhere to any religious tradition so a quicker change would have been better.  So the appropriate decision though likely delayed more than would have been ideal.

THERE WAS A POLICY.  NOT WRITTEN BUT UNDERSTOOD: HOMOSEXUALITY WAS NOT "CLEAN."  THAT WAS THE NEAR UNANIMOUS OPINION OF SOCIETY UNTIL FAR MORE RECENTLY.

3.  That is not my experience in my local council.  Cannot comment on other councils.

4.  Who determines the recipients of those awards?  It is not the National Council but rather the local councils and usually the volunteers who make those determinations.  Some councils and districts across the country are more likely to be rigorous.

THE BSA SOLELY DETERMINES THE REQUIREMENTS AND KNOWINGLY ALLOWS THE REQUIREMENTS TO BE DISREGARDED. 

SOME COUNCIL PROFESSIONAL ARE MORE RIGOROUS, AS YOU SUGGEST.  BSA IS NOT.

A LARGE MINORITY OF COUNCIL CAMPS STATE ON THEIR WEBSITES THAT "CAMP X IS NOT A MERIT BADGE MILL."  WHY IS THAT NECESSARY?  WHY IS THERE EVEN AN ISSUE?  IF EVERY OTHER BUILDING IN A TOWN HAD A SIGN, "NOT A HOUSE OF PROSTITUTION," WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THE TOWN.?  THE CAMPS THAT WARN AWAY THOSE EXPECTING A MERIT BADGE MILL ARE  YOUR "MORE RIGOROUS."  BUT THEY ARE, AGAIN,  A MINORITY LAST TIME I COUNTED (2016).  THIS SCANDAL IS AN "OPEN SECRET."

 IF VOLUNTEERS ARE NOT INCLINED TO FOLLOW THE RULES REGARDING REQUIREMENTS, THEY ARE IGNORED OR REMOVED.  THIS HAS HAPPENED TO THREE OF OUR COUNCIL ADVANCEMENT CHAIRS OUT OF THE LAST SEVEN.  THE OTHERS WENT ALONG, SOME GRINDING THEIR TEETH.  

EAGLES ARE UP 600-700% ACCORDING TO BSA.   BECAUSE THE YOUTH ARE THAT MUCH BETTER?   ADVANCEMENT BAUBLES ARE THE PARTY FAVORS THAT HELP DRIVE ATTENDANCE.  CAMP ATTENDANCE ($$$) IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN TRUSTWORTHY.

GUIDE TO ADVANCEMENT RULE 7.0.4.7 IS A MONUMENT TO A PROBLEM EASILY SORTED BY BSA AS IT DETERMINES WHO IS ELIGIBLE TO BE A COUNCIL EXECUTIVE.  "ANYONE CAUGHT RUNNING A MERIT BADGE MILL IS HISTORY, AND WE ARE LOOKING FOR THE FIRST EXAMPLES TO MAKE."

BSA COULD ALSO ENFORCE THE RULE THAT NO MB MAY BE OFFERED UNLESS AN ACTUAL REGISTERED MERIT BADGE COUNSELOR- 18 OR OLDER BY RULE -  HAS BEEN RECRUITED FOR EVERY WEEK THAT MERIT BADGE IS OFFERED.  THOSE OF US WHO HAVE GONE TO SUMMER CAMP FIFTY AND MORE SUMMERS KNOW THAT ACTUAL REGISTERED MERIT BADGE COUNSELORS ARE RARE COMPARED TO YOUTH STAFF WHO ACTUALLY "TEACH THE SESSIONS" AND DECIDE WHO GETS (NOT EARNS) THE BADGES.  BUT NOW WE "VISIT" RATHER THAN INSPECT AND THE "A" FLAG IS OFTEN MEANINGLESS.  I WAS AT CAMP ALL SEVEN WEEKS IN 2017, RUNNING SCOUTMASTER TRAINING AND THERE WAS NEVER MORE THAN ONE - 1 - ACTUAL MERIT BADGE COUNSELOR ON THE PROPERTY FOR ALL FIVE DAYS. SOME DAYS THERE WERE TWO.  ONCE THERE WERE THREE.   NEVERTHELESS, OVER NINETY MERIT BADGES WERE "OFFERED."

Quote

5.  Those problems were decades ago and have been addressed by measures to prevent the fraud.  That is why volunteers in the units must sign off on all members - adult and youth. 

THOSE PROBLEMS HAVE LASTED DECADES.  OUR COUNCIL, ONE SE AGO, TOOK A 30% MEMBERSHIP HIT IN ONE YEAR BECAUSE THE NEW SE WAS TRUSTWORTHY ABOUT THAT ISSUE. AND HE WOULD NOT COOK THE BOOKS.  HE IS FONDLY REMEMBERED FOR THAT.

6.  Volunteers DO run Scouting.  They chair all national committees, are the only people who can vote, make all policies, make all program changes, determine budgets, etc.  Volunteers run the BSA.  Many or perhaps most are currently volunteering at the local level or did so in the last few years.

PLEASE.  NONSENSE.  SCOUTERS IN WILKES BARRE WHO OBJECTED OVER CAMPING TRUST FUND MONEY BEING DIVERTED TO MEET PAYROLL CONTRARY TO THE TERMS OF THE TRUST, INCLUDING A FIFTY-YEAR VOLUNTEER, EAGLE SCOUT AND CHAIRMAN OF THE CAMPING COMMITTEE, WERE BANNED FROM SCOUTING AND NATIONAL BACKED THE LOCAL CRIMINALS.  HE LEFT SCOUTING.  

WANT MORE EXAMPLES?   I WAS  A MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL EXECUTIVE BOARD.  IN MY THIRD YEAR, WITH MY DISTRICT LEADING THE COUNCIL IN EVERY METRIC,MOST DEFINITELY  INCLUDING FOS, I HAD THE TEMERITY TO SUGGEST AT THE ANNUAL BUDGET MEETING THAT WE BUDGET A "NOMINAL AMOUNT" TO IMPROVE DRAINAGE BECAUSE SO MANY OF OUR SITES WERE DISHED OUT AFTER THIRTY YEARS OF USE AND HAD STANDING WATER WHEN IT RAINED.  THINK: TENTS - STANDING WATER.  AND THIS IS OHIO, NOT ARIZONA.   I OPINED THAT WE  NEEDED TO  PROVIDE A BASIS TO SAY WE HAD STARTED ON SOMETHING PROMISED ANNUALLY FOR SEVENTEEN YEARS.  THE "COUNCIL PRESIDENT" THOUGHT THAT WAS A GOOD IDEA AND  CALLED FOR A MOTION  BUDGETING  A PIDDLING $2000 OF CAPITAL FUNDS TO IMPROVE DRAINAGE,.  (WE HAD AMPLE CAPITAL MONEY BUT, IT DEVELOPS WERE RUNNING IN THE RED ON OPERATING EXPENSES, AND CAPITAL MONEY WAS BEING RAIDED -  STILL RUNNING NINE MONTHS IN DEFAULT ON BILLS ON AVERAGE - NOT ALLOWED, BUT THERE IT IS.  I SIGNED THE LETTER WARNING TELEPHONE SERVICE WOULD BE CUT IN TEN DAYS IF "PAYMENT ARRANGEMENTS" WERE NOT MADE.  ELECTRIC AND GAS WERE IN THE SAME SHAPE.)  THE MOTION WAS MADE AND SECONDED BY MANY.  IT PASSED BY A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE.  AT THE END OF THE YEAR, HE AND  I FOUND OURSELVES NO LONGER NEEDED IN ANY CAPACITY ABOVE THE UNIT LEVEL, IN MY CASE FOR THE NEXT FOURTEEN YEARS, DESPITE THE SE's REMOVAL IN ONLY SIX YEARS WHEN THE AUDITORS ARRIVED (THOU SHALT NOT OPERATE IN THE RED AND THE MEMBERSHIP NUMBERS WERE WAY OFF. [LOTS OF TROOPS WITH EXACTLY THREE IMAGINARY ADULTS AND FIVE IMAGINARY SCOUTS.])  (I SAT ON AN EAGLE BOARD FOR A SCOUT WHOSE TROOP HAD NOT MET IN FOUR YEARS AND WAS, FINALLY, OUT OF CHARTER.  YES, "HOW?")  I WAS ONLY CONTACTED DURING THAT PERIOD TO CONTINUE MY GENEROUS FOS CONTRIBUTIONS.  THROUGH VOLUNTEERS,  I  HELPED WITH DISTRICT TRAINING WITH MY NAME OMITTED FROM THE PHONY REPORTS THAT LIST STAFF AS "PARTICIPANTS" TO PAD THE TRAINING NUMBERS.  THEN, HAPPILY, THE SECOND SUCCEEDING SE CALLED ME PERSONALLY TO ASK FOR MONEY, HE ASKED, IN PASSING, WHY I WAS NO LONGER ACTIVE OUTSIDE MY TROOP, GIVEN MY PRIOR SERVICE, DAM AND SB, AND ALL THAT.  THAT CONVERSATION LED TO MY BEING LET BACK IN, UNTIL THE SM OF OUR TROOP, ALERTED BY A PATROL LEADER,  7.0.4.7'D A PIONEERING MB FOR A SCOUT WHO LITERALLY COULD NOT TIE A SQUARE KNOT AND RESPONDED "WHAT PROJECT" WHEN THE SM QUERIED HIM ON A TIP FROM HIS PL.  HE HAD SHOWED UP WITH A SIGNED BLUE CARD AFTER ONLY FOUR DAYS AT CAMP. TURNED OUT THE THE OLDEST "SCOUT CRAFT" STAFFER  WAS SIXTEEN.   THE  PIONEERING "COUNSELOR" WAS FIFTEEN.  AS I HAD ASKED ABOUT MERIT BADGE COUNSELORS  WHEN SHOWING UP TO HELP IN THE "SCOUT CRAFT" AREA, IT WAS ASSUMED I HAD 'RATTED" ON THE COUNSEL ("RATTED" WAS THE WORD FOR MY ASSUMED TELLING MY SM THE TRUTH.), AND I WAS BACK ON THE BLACK LIST.  WHEN THAT SE TRANSFERRED, AND THEN WAS FIRED FOR FAKING MEMBERSHIP ( BEFORE "TALKING" TO BSA AND SOMEHOW BECOMING  THE SE OF A VERY LARGE COUNCIL), I WAS STILL REGARDED AS "RADIOACTIVE" PER PROFESSIONALS WHO WOULD STILL TALK TO ME.   SO I SOLDIER ON WHERE I AM ALLOWED.

 

Quote

7.  This is a very complex and delicate subject that I shall not comment upon at this time.

PERHAPS BSA COULD COHERENTLY COMMENT ONCE.  THAT WOULD BE "SOUND."

8.  The BSA felt that the SE should be the reporter of YP issues.  That was shown to be a faulty policy as some states had begun making mandated reporter laws that meant that those who first find an indication are required to report.  The BSA changed the training to reflect that.  This happened as laws were being promulgated so was the appropriate action.

 

The BSA has not always made the best decision when viewed retrospectively, but the actions were taken with the best intentions by successful men and women who carefully considered all the evidence and made the best decision at the time.  They are good people how are intelligent, successful, and very dedicated to Scouting.  They are volunteers who love Scouting just as do we.

"SUCCESSFUL"?  BSA LEADERSHIP IS "SUCCESSFUL" BY WHAT MEASURABLE STANDARD?  LET'S PRETEND THEY ARE ACTUALLY ACCOUNTABLE" - HAD TO WRITE THE TICKET WE SAY THAT WE REQUIRE OF WOOD BADGE "PARTICIPANTS."   I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A "TICKET" FOR THOSE BIG SHOTS AT NATIONAL WHO HAD A BIG PUSH ON FOR LATINO SCOUTS BUT SENT ONLY ENGLISH-SPEAKERS TO MEET WITH THE ADUTS IN THE BARRIO.  I KNOW WHAT TICO THOUGHT OF THAT, BEFORE HE QUIT IN FRUSTRATION.  HE HAD BEEN A MANAGING PARTNER IN A BIG LAW FIRM, AND WAS STUNNED BY THE INEPTITUDE.  AS A VOLUNTEER, HE WAS ANOTHER OF THE "MERE" CLASS TO MANY "PROFESSIONALS."

WHILE YOUR AT IT COMMENT ON THE "SOUNDNESS" OF HAVING NO EMERGENCY PLAN FOR VIOLENT WEATHER AT THE 1985 JAMBO IN TIDEWATER VIRGINIA IN AUGUST.  NO CHANCE OF VIOLENT WEATHER THERE. 0___0

OR DISH-WASHING METHODS THAT VIOLATED STATE HEALTH LAWS IN ALL FIFTY STATES,  AND THAT STAYED IN PLACE TWENTY-FIVE YEARS AFTER THE VIRGINA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TOLD BSA, IN MY PRESENCE, TO CHANGE ITS TWO-TUB METHOD TO WASH, RINSE, STERILIZE OR GET SHUT DOWN.  THIS WAS A NEEDLESS SCANDAL AS THE "PROFESSIONALS" HAD BEEN WARNED BY A MERE WITH A PHD IN MICROBIOLOGY AND A SECOND PHD IN PUBLIC HEALTH, LATER A DEPARTMENT HEAD AT WHO,  BUT HE WAS A MERE,  SO, HE WAS IGNORED, UNTIL THE FORT HOSPITAL FILLED WITH DYSENTERY CASES, AND THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH  DESCENDED IN NO MOOD TO BE TOLD THEY HAD NO AUTHORITY ("YOU CAN'T TELL US HOW TO WASH DISHED.").  SOME NAVY DOCTORS (WOOL DRESS UNIFORMS IN THAT STEAM BATH!)  OTHER MERES, CONVINCED THOSE IN CHANGE THAT THE EVENT PERMIT COULD BE PULLED VERY QUICKLY; THIRD TUBS WERE DISTRIBUTED (WITH NO INSTRUCTION); AND THE JAMBO LURCHED ON. "SOUND" ?

OR COERCING MILITARY PERSONNEL TO BRUSH-HOG FIELDS OF POISON SUMAC FOR TENT CAMP SITES.  OH, THAT WORKED WELL. 0___0   AND THE FOOD DISTRIBUTION WAS NOT ADJUSTED FOR THREE DAYS, LEADING TO WILD NIGHTS AT THE COMMISSARY  IN OUR SUBCAMP WITH 800 EXTRA MOUTHS TO FEED.  GOOD THING THE TRUCK OF WATERMELONS FOR NATIONAL STAFF ENDED UP AT OUR "DOOR" AT 3AM, WITH THE DRIVER JUST BEGGING FOR SOMEONE, ANYONE, TO TAKE DELIVERY.  WE TRADING WATERMELON FOR OTHER FOOD TO FEED THE KIDS. BIG INVESTIGATION WAS GRIST FOR THE LAUGH MACHINE.  STAFF LOST THEIR WATERMELON; KIDS GOT FED., THANKS TO THE MERES.

SOME OF THE FINEST PEOPLE AND  SCOUTERS I HAVE KNOWN WERE SCOUTING  EMPLOYEES, EVEN A DEPARTMENT HEAD AT NATIONAL.  SOME HAD MORE HORROR STORIES THAN I HAD EVER IMAGINED, SOME OF WHICH I HEARD ONLY AFTER THEY RETIRED OR QUIT.  I NEVER ASKED, AS SUCH.  THE RECOLLECTIONS JUST CAME OUT IN CONVERSATIONS. "YOU WERE AT A.P. HILL IN '85?"

EVER HEAR ABOUT "PROFESSIONALS" SITING A JAMBO IN THE BOTTOM OF A BOWL WITH NO DRAINAGE, EVEN WHEN PARK EMPLOYEES TOLD THEM IT WAS A BAD IDEA?  IN PA.  IN SUMMER.  ASK ABOUT MORE-RAIN.  "SOUND."  HA!

Edited November 27, 2020 by TAHAWK

[Eagle94-A1]

13 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

Tahawk,

Referring to your numbers:

1.  Scouting has evolved as society has changed.  If it had not and still did the same things with the same uniforms, it would be an anachronism.  So sound.

Sadly I do not see the BSA fulfilling "the ability of boys to do things for themselves and others, to train them in Scoutcraft, and to teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred virtues, using the methods which are now in common use by Boy Scouts ." The Patrol Method died on October 1, 2018 when patrols could no longer do day activities, i.e. patrol meetings, patrol hikes, patrol shopping etc. And as noted the Advancement Methods has been destroyed by the "One and Done" mentality prevalent in Scouting today. Scouts no longer have to "Master the skills," like my generation and older did. The badge no longer represents "what the Scout can do, not what the Scout has done." Summer Camps, MBUs, and now the online MBUs are a joke.

 

13 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

2.  Until the 1980's, there was no policy on gays.  Ben Love announced a policy (I do not know how that was decided but would imagine that the National Executive Board approved) in the 1980's that aligned with public sentiment at the time.  The decision soon came under attack.  Dale was an important decision and principle.  Retrospectively, the best course would have been to drop prohibitions on gays very soon rather than years after the decision.  Research studies have not shown an increased incidence in child sexual abuse in gays than heterosexuals and society had changed in its acceptance of gays.  Scouting does not adhere to any religious tradition so a quicker change would have been better.  So the appropriate decision though likely delayed more than would have been ideal.

 

The problem is that we did lose over 20% of our membership as a result of this decision. Some of those longtime , experienced Scouters that left still have not been replaced, and it left a vacuum. Others who disagreed with this decision have slowly backed away from non-unit positions, focusing on their units. And again this leaves a void.

 

13 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

3.  That is not my experience in my local council.  Cannot comment on other councils.

 

I have seen this happen. Do not know the stats, by they do not call FOS 'Fund Our Salary" for nothing.  When My district could no longer raise enough money to pay for a DE, we lost them I know a DE who was trying to start a SCOUTREACH program in his district. When one company found out, they were willing to make a donation to help equip the the units started in the program. When the DE attempted to find out the process for this with his DFS, he was chewed out for attempting to start these SCOUTREACH units and was told they cost more money than they bring in. Several other DEs told me similar stories, the focus is on payroll.

 

13 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

4.  Who determines the recipients of those awards?  It is not the National Council but rather the local councils and usually the volunteers who make those determinations.  Some councils and districts across the country are more likely to be rigorous.

National encourages the awarding of advancement, and turns a blind eye to its problems. In one recent video, National was bragging on the number of belt loops and merit badges being earned virtually, to the point of publically praising the council that had the most awards "earned." Worst case was the "Eagle" whose district BOR found some major problems, and followed procedure to come up with a plan to rectify the situation. The council advancement committee upheld the decision when it was appealed to them. BUT when National got the appeal, they overruled both the council and district decisions, and gave the Scout Eagle. Their rationale was " You do not penalize the Scout for the mistakes of the adults." 

 

13 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

5.  Those problems were decades ago and have been addressed by measures to prevent the fraud.  That is why volunteers in the units must sign off on all members - adult and youth.

Sadly I wish this was true. I have found some challenges. I have found names of youth still on the charter after I had removed them twice on previous recharter documents.

 

13 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

6.  Volunteers DO run Scouting.  They chair all national committees, are the only people who can vote, make all policies, make all program changes, determine budgets, etc.  Volunteers run the BSA.  Many or perhaps most are currently volunteering at the local level or did so in the last few years.

 

Sadly that is also not true, not only on the local level, but national level as well. You can read about some of the experiences I have had regarding local level. The 411 Commitee and the Philmont Committee are the best examples of professionals not informing key volunteers what they are doing. My personal beef is Instapalms. 94% of those polled were either Against (16%) or Strongly Against (78%), yet they did it anyway. 

 

 

 

13 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

7.  This is a very complex and delicate subject that I shall not comment upon at this time.

Agree

 

13 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

8.  The BSA felt that the SE should be the reporter of YP issues.  That was shown to be a faulty policy as some states had begun making mandated reporter laws that meant that those who first find an indication are required to report.  The BSA changed the training to reflect that.  This happened as laws were being promulgated so was the appropriate action.

 

Agree with you. Some states did have Mandatory Report Laws that affected Scouters and others did not, prior to and during that phase of YPT. One of the challenges of a national organization is having multiple jurisdictions to deal with. 

 

 

13 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

The BSA has not always made the best decision when viewed retrospectively, but the actions were taken with the best intentions by successful men and women who carefully considered all the evidence and made the best decision at the time.  They are good people how are intelligent, successful, and very dedicated to Scouting.  They are volunteers who love Scouting just as do we.

Yes, the volunteers love Scouting. But the professionals as I have shown actually run things. And for some, it is just a job.

[vol_scouter]

To Tahawk,

Sorry to get you so upset that you used all capital letters that is said to mean yelling.  Was not trying to argue.  See below.

 

To Tahawk and Eagle94-A1,

Perhaps some of the issue between us that to me in these times, BSA means the National Council.  Local councils are independent 501c3 corporations with their own boards that operate largely independently.  The contract between the National Council and local councils authorizes the local councils to operate the program.  The only actual recourse that the National Council has over the local councils is two things.  One is that the National Council can decommission the Scout Executive that means that they are no longer qualified for the position.  It is not clear what would happen if the local council Executive Board refused to allow the SE to leave.  Probably would be decided by the local councils state laws.  The other option is to revoke the council charter that would mean that a new council would have to be formed.  Both of those are extreme measures and would never be used because a council is not being rigorous enough in youth fulfilling requirements.  

So many of the issues between us appear to be that I am exclusively referring to the National Council unless it is specifically called out to be the local council.  There is much variability in councils and how they are managed.  The BSA has little input into those councils.  How they are run depends upon the local Executive Committee and Executive Board.  All members of the EC and EB are by definition volunteers.

On the national level, all National Executive Committee (NEC) and National Executive Board (NEB) are volunteers by definition.  For nearly a decade, I have served on various national committees.  All are chaired by volunteers (usually a NEB member), have a single national professional who serves as staff, and only volunteers can vote.  All decisions about all policies, program changes, financial issues, human resources, benefit packages, etc (in other words, everything) is made by those volunteers.  During the past decade, I have been involved with a Venturing Crew, a Troop, and a Pack.  Most national committee members whom I know are still active with units in their councils or have been so within the last few years.  Like local council executive boards, the National Executive Board has some members who are not active at the unit level, some may have been Scouts as a youth, but all are very successful in business.  All are volunteers - it is required just as it is for local boards.

The National Staff carries out decisions of the committees of the NEB.  They do not make any significant decisions themselves.  Their job is to carry out what the volunteers have decided.  The National Professional Staff strictly adheres to Volunteer Led and Professionally Guided, that is the professionals provide input but the volunteers make all of the policy and other decisions.

The NEC and NEB volunteers are very dedicated, loyal, sensitive to all points of view, and always want to know how potential decisions affect the youth members.

Local councils boards are similar in make up.  So the volunteers who are working in the units need to be pro-active.

There are 253 local councils and it makes no sense for me to try to defend the actions of which I only know about one - my local council.  

 

[TAHAWK]

2 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

To Tahawk,

Sorry to get you so upset that you used all capital letters that is said to mean yelling.  Was not trying to argue.  See below.

 

To Tahawk and Eagle94-A1,

Perhaps some of the issue between us that to me in these times, BSA means the National Council.  Local councils are independent 501c3 corporations with their own boards that operate largely independently.  The contract between the National Council and local councils authorizes the local councils to operate the program.  The only actual recourse that the National Council has over the local councils is two things.  One is that the National Council can decommission the Scout Executive that means that they are no longer qualified for the position.  It is not clear what would happen if the local council Executive Board refused to allow the SE to leave.  Probably would be decided by the local councils state laws.  The other option is to revoke the council charter that would mean that a new council would have to be formed.  Both of those are extreme measures and would never be used because a council is not being rigorous enough in youth fulfilling requirements.  

So many of the issues between us appear to be that I am exclusively referring to the National Council unless it is specifically called out to be the local council.  There is much variability in councils and how they are managed.  The BSA has little input into those councils.  How they are run depends upon the local Executive Committee and Executive Board.  All members of the EC and EB are by definition volunteers.

On the national level, all National Executive Committee (NEC) and National Executive Board (NEB) are volunteers by definition.  For nearly a decade, I have served on various national committees.  All are chaired by volunteers (usually a NEB member), have a single national professional who serves as staff, and only volunteers can vote.  All decisions about all policies, program changes, financial issues, human resources, benefit packages, etc (in other words, everything) is made by those volunteers.  During the past decade, I have been involved with a Venturing Crew, a Troop, and a Pack.  Most national committee members whom I know are still active with units in their councils or have been so within the last few years.  Like local council executive boards, the National Executive Board has some members who are not active at the unit level, some may have been Scouts as a youth, but all are very successful in business.  All are volunteers - it is required just as it is for local boards.

The National Staff carries out decisions of the committees of the NEB.  They do not make any significant decisions themselves.  Their job is to carry out what the volunteers have decided.  The National Professional Staff strictly adheres to Volunteer Led and Professionally Guided, that is the professionals provide input but the volunteers make all of the policy and other decisions.

The NEC and NEB volunteers are very dedicated, loyal, sensitive to all points of view, and always want to know how potential decisions affect the youth members.

Local councils boards are similar in make up.  So the volunteers who are working in the units need to be pro-active.

There are 253 local councils and it makes no sense for me to try to defend the actions of which I only know about one - my local council.  

 

I merely wanted my responses to be distinct from your statements.  In the spirit of Scouting, your apology is accepted, though your capacity to get me "upset' is so nearly zero as to be immaterial.   i went through Nazis threatening my wife for my representation of "Mud People'" in court.  THAT was upsetting.

I have spoken to dozens of "national" volunteers and not a one imagined that volunteers have actual power over, or even much influence on,  BSA decisions.  This is one key reason Tico resigned as National Commissioner.

Further, your admission that BSA will not enforce its rules against dishonest behaviors - and the fact that it indeed upholds the dishonestly - speaks volumes about BSA  responsibility. for that dishonesty.  And here we are.

It happens  in discussions that  something other than the "official" opinion may  be held by some - even most - participants despite the repetition of the official position.

 

 

Edited November 28, 2020 by TAHAWK

[Eagle94-A1]

My Responses will be in red

13 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

To Tahawk,

Sorry to get you so upset that you used all capital letters that is said to mean yelling.  Was not trying to argue.  See below.

 

To Tahawk and Eagle94-A1,

Perhaps some of the issue between us that to me in these times, BSA means the National Council.  Local councils are independent 501c3 corporations with their own boards that operate largely independently.  The contract between the National Council and local councils authorizes the local councils to operate the program.  The only actual recourse that the National Council has over the local councils is two things.  One is that the National Council can decommission the Scout Executive that means that they are no longer qualified for the position.  It is not clear what would happen if the local council Executive Board refused to allow the SE to leave.  Probably would be decided by the local councils state laws.  The other option is to revoke the council charter that would mean that a new council would have to be formed.  Both of those are extreme measures and would never be used because a council is not being rigorous enough in youth fulfilling requirements.  

So many of the issues between us appear to be that I am exclusively referring to the National Council unless it is specifically called out to be the local council.  There is much variability in councils and how they are managed.  The BSA has little input into those councils.  How they are run depends upon the local Executive Committee and Executive Board.  All members of the EC and EB are by definition volunteers.

Do you really believe that national has little input into the councils? National narrows down the choices a council has for SE and DFS that a Council Executive Board (CEB) chooses. National provides the growth opportunities for the professionals. National provides the training that professionals take. National sets the goals professionals need to meet. National [provides the recognition professionals get. As for executive boards and committees, why is it that SE's push "yes men" into those postions, and encourage DE's to push "yes men" into district roles instead of the best qualified? Why is it that when things do not go the way the council professionals want because the volunteers oppose the decision, national intervenes by threatening to revoke the council charter unless the pros get their way, i.e. Chicago and the camp sale a number of years ago?

 

13 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

On the national level, all National Executive Committee (NEC) and National Executive Board (NEB) are volunteers by definition.  For nearly a decade, I have served on various national committees.  All are chaired by volunteers (usually a NEB member), have a single national professional who serves as staff, and only volunteers can vote.  All decisions about all policies, program changes, financial issues, human resources, benefit packages, etc (in other words, everything) is made by those volunteers.  During the past decade, I have been involved with a Venturing Crew, a Troop, and a Pack.  Most national committee members whom I know are still active with units in their councils or have been so within the last few years.  Like local council executive boards, the National Executive Board has some members who are not active at the unit level, some may have been Scouts as a youth, but all are very successful in business.  All are volunteers - it is required just as it is for local boards.

If that is the case, why wasn't the National Philmont Committee informed of the Philmont mortgage until several months after the fact? Why did members resign in protest? Why was the Trust not informed of the mortage and is now involved in the lbankruptcy? Why was the 411 Committee on Cub Scouts, the ones whos pent years working on the June 2015 program, not advised about the December 2016 Program changes? If policies and decisions are made by volunteers, why are the volutneers not being informed?

 

13 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

The National Staff carries out decisions of the committees of the NEB.  They do not make any significant decisions themselves.  Their job is to carry out what the volunteers have decided.  The National Professional Staff strictly adheres to Volunteer Led and Professionally Guided, that is the professionals provide input but the volunteers make all of the policy and other decisions.

From some of the decision national has made, this does not seem to be true. Unless the NEB is hiding things?

 

13 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

The NEC and NEB volunteers are very dedicated, loyal, sensitive to all points of view, and always want to know how potential decisions affect the youth members.

Local councils boards are similar in make up.  So the volunteers who are working in the units need to be pro-active.

There are 253 local councils and it makes no sense for me to try to defend the actions of which I only know about one - my local council.  

 

There is no doubt that volunteers care at both the local and national levels. But I have seen volunteers manipulated on the local level, and that example must be coming from somewhere?. I have also seen volunteers forced out of positions at the local level because there have disagreements with professionals. That too has to come from somewhere? I have seen at both the local and national levels professionals overrule the decisions of volunteers,. And I have seen local and national volunteers resign in disgust over decisions of the local and national council. Instapalms, 411, and Churchill Plan, are some of the examples I can give of professionals ignoring the volunteers. 

Sadly this is not just a local issue. You may not be seeing it at this time in your council, but that can change with the next SE.

[vol_scouter]

17 hours ago, TAHAWK said:

I merely wanted my responses to be distinct from your statements.  In the spirit of Scouting, your apology is accepted, though your capacity to get me "upset' is so nearly zero as to be immaterial.   i went through Nazis threatening my wife for my representation of "Mud People'" in court.  THAT was upsetting.

I have spoken to dozens of "national" volunteers and not a one imagined that volunteers have actual power over, or even much influence on,  BSA decisions.  This is one key reason Tico resigned as National Commissioner.

Further, your admission that BSA will not enforce its rules against dishonest behaviors - and the fact that it indeed upholds the dishonestly - speaks volumes about BSA  responsibility. for that dishonesty.  And here we are.

It happens  in discussions that  something other than the "official" opinion may  be held by some - even most - participants despite the repetition of the official position.

 

 

Tahawk,

I have been a national level volunteer and have many national staff friends too.  Tico served longer as the National Commissioner than anyone else and has significantly impacted many key decisions.  Most of the time, he was successful but occasionally Tico's view was in the minority.  Tico is a very dedicated national volunteer who has done much for Scouting and has been and is very influential.

I did not say that the National Council will not enforce its rules and policies but rather that it has little power to do so.  It has to rely on local councils to enforce the rules and policies correctly as it has no ability to compel compliance.  There can be interpretive issues.  Ultimately, local councils, districts, and units make the determinations.  Whenever asked, the National Council tries very hard to be absolutely consistent.  

The national staff carries out the decisions made by the volunteers on the committees.  Local councils should be led by volunteers who are responsible for following national policies and rules.

[vol_scouter]

Eagle94-A1,

Many of my National Staff friends have many examples of how clear policies and rules that local councils do not follow correctly and that there is no way to compel them to do so except by the means that I noted.  National can ask but not compel compliance.  I have been on committees that voted in a policy or rule change and have seen some councils not comply.

The NEC and NEB make the policies and rules - it is true.  They are all volunteers.  You do hit upon something that is absolutely true, the NEC and NEB sometimes has additional information that may be sensitive for one reason or another.  That is not shared outside the committees because of the sensitivity.  There is essentially a need to know standard.  So if we had the same data that the committees have, we may have made the same decisions as the committees.

There are politics in all organizations.  Local councils and the national council are no exception.  No doubt that volunteers at all levels feel that they have not been treated well and that might be true.  They are all people.

Over the years, decisions have been made that the field has not liked.  The field takes the attitude that volunteers would not have made that decision so it must be the national staff.  That is not the case.  Volunteers make the decisions and if one of us had been on the committees and had all the same information that they had, we may have done the same thing.

One way or the other, volunteers in Scouting and Scouting professionals are dedicated to the youth whom the program serves.  They are always striving to make things better.  Most of the time, they are achieving their goal.  Occasionally as in all human endeavors, they fall short.

In this time of great stress for all of Scouting, it is good to pull together. The National K3, Roger Mosby, Dan Ownby, and Scott Sorrels, along with the NEC and NEB are doing their very best to lead the BSA through this morass.  All are giving more time than their predecessors by a large factor.  Let us support their sincere efforts even if it might not always be what we personally think is best.

For the BSA to survive and lead Scouting back into a leadership position for America's youth, we must all work together and support our leadership.

[skeptic]

44 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

Tahawk,

I have been a national level volunteer and have many national staff friends too.  Tico served longer as the National Commissioner than anyone else and has significantly impacted many key decisions.  Most of the time, he was successful but occasionally Tico's view was in the minority.  Tico is a very dedicated national volunteer who has done much for Scouting and has been and is very influential.

I did not say that the National Council will not enforce its rules and policies but rather that it has little power to do so.  It has to rely on local councils to enforce the rules and policies correctly as it has no ability to compel compliance.  There can be interpretive issues.  Ultimately, local councils, districts, and units make the determinations.  Whenever asked, the National Council tries very hard to be absolutely consistent.  

The national staff carries out the decisions made by the volunteers on the committees.  Local councils should be led by volunteers who are responsible for following national policies and rules.

I have only served in three councils, and time in TAC was not really more than on base troop level, and it was limited.  A transfer took me away, and did not return until 1976.  Since GWC?WLC and VCC.  The biggest issue with local volunteers and professionals is disconnect in many cases, or poor communication.  There is no consistent method of getting basic info out anymore, especially now. But the council web site is pretty much useless as there is not consistent updating.  Calendars are not dependable, and staff now consists of two pro's, and two or three office people.  Our district is covered by the council exec as well.  

Over the years, I have observed the ignoring of volunteers by a number of pro's, twice the head one, and often the district, though much of the time it was more him not getting updated by his bosses, or simply overwhelmed.  The COR's seldom are made aware of meetings, and often they are made into executive modes that does not include all.  The current exec seems like he is trying to reach out to them, as he has to try with the lack of staff.  Scary time, but are some positives just the same.  We have seen some really novel service the past few months, and some units are doing okay.  Ours are not, however, and I am concerned with recharter, especially since next year is the troop's centennial.  Not sure we will get very far beyond the beginning of the second hundred year.  But will not throw in the proverbial towel.  

 

[TAHAWK]

59 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

Tahawk,

I have been a national level volunteer and have many national staff friends too.  Tico served longer as the National Commissioner than anyone else and has significantly impacted many key decisions.  Most of the time, he was successful but occasionally Tico's view was in the minority.  Tico is a very dedicated national volunteer who has done much for Scouting and has been and is very influential.

I did not say that the National Council will not enforce its rules and policies but rather that it has little power to do so.  It has to rely on local councils to enforce the rules and policies correctly as it has no ability to compel compliance.  There can be interpretive issues.  Ultimately, local councils, districts, and units make the determinations.  Whenever asked, the National Council tries very hard to be absolutely consistent.  

The national staff carries out the decisions made by the volunteers on the committees.  Local councils should be led by volunteers who are responsible for following national policies and rules.

Your testimony is contrary to my experience and the experience of others.   I believe it is contrary to reality, but that is just the experience of others than yourself.  Whatever influence Tico had, he could not get Spanish-speakers to represent Scouting to parent meetings in the LA barrio. 

 I have explained above how BSA COULD stop summer camp merit badge mills but elects not to do so.  Oh, that might offend the wrong-doers.  How tragic.  

No power.  Ha!

The Associated Press   - Oct 30, 2000 Updated Jul 13, 2017 

"SANTA BARBARA -- A Boy Scout executive was stripped of his Eagle Scout status and fired by the Boy Scouts of America National Council 10 days after he publicly admitted he was a homosexual, his attorney said.

Len Lanzi, Boy Scouts Los Padres Council executive director, worked for the scouting organization 14 years before he was terminated by mail Thursday."

"But they didn’t fire him because he’s gay. They fired him because national had decommissioned him!”  Local Boy Scout Council, Board Member Karl Eberhard

“We could contradict the national Boy Scout policy, and possibly risk the whole council being decommissioned, or we can go along with firing him." Id.

 

BSA instructing a council that a volunteer is not allowed to participate in Scouting in that council:https://boyscoutssexualabuse.com/wp-content/uploads/iv_files/bsa_rodney-f-stark.pdf

 

 

 

Edited November 28, 2020 by TAHAWK

[yknot]

17 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

Eagle94-A1,

Many of my National Staff friends have many examples of how clear policies and rules that local councils do not follow correctly and that there is no way to compel them to do so except by the means that I noted.  National can ask but not compel compliance.  I have been on committees that voted in a policy or rule change and have seen some councils not comply.

The NEC and NEB make the policies and rules - it is true.  They are all volunteers.  You do hit upon something that is absolutely true, the NEC and NEB sometimes has additional information that may be sensitive for one reason or another.  That is not shared outside the committees because of the sensitivity.  There is essentially a need to know standard.  So if we had the same data that the committees have, we may have made the same decisions as the committees.

There are politics in all organizations.  Local councils and the national council are no exception.  No doubt that volunteers at all levels feel that they have not been treated well and that might be true.  They are all people.

Over the years, decisions have been made that the field has not liked.  The field takes the attitude that volunteers would not have made that decision so it must be the national staff.  That is not the case.  Volunteers make the decisions and if one of us had been on the committees and had all the same information that they had, we may have done the same thing.

One way or the other, volunteers in Scouting and Scouting professionals are dedicated to the youth whom the program serves.  They are always striving to make things better.  Most of the time, they are achieving their goal.  Occasionally as in all human endeavors, they fall short.

In this time of great stress for all of Scouting, it is good to pull together. The National K3, Roger Mosby, Dan Ownby, and Scott Sorrels, along with the NEC and NEB are doing their very best to lead the BSA through this morass.  All are giving more time than their predecessors by a large factor.  Let us support their sincere efforts even if it might not always be what we personally think is best.

For the BSA to survive and lead Scouting back into a leadership position for America's youth, we must all work together and support our leadership.

National can enforce. It can revoke charters. National is management. If management finds it has no way to compel councils to follow its rules, it can legislate new ones. National has relied on a hands off philosophy when convenient when confronted with something it doesn't want to or doesn't know how to deal with. It has confused volunteers by not being honest  or transparent about why it is making program changes. 

There has been almost no communication from the Key 3 to the corps of the organization throughout this latest crisis. That is not good leadership. Perhaps the leaders would be spending less hours dealing with the morass if they were more communicative about their challenges. The thing I fear most is a triumvirate of not very effective leaders in over their heads attempting to navigate this morass in complete opacity. Blindly supporting a national organization that has an extensive history of not getting much right is not the way BSA will survive. 

 

[RememberSchiff]

In my experience, National exerts control by merging Councils and controling the SE selection. When a local council board here voted down a merge, National was stunned and redoubled pressure. The merge occurred the following year.

The statement had been made that the NEC and NEB are all volunteers, let's confirm that. Who are they? I could not find a listing on scouting.org nor in the last two Annual Reports.

If we don't see or hear from leaders, it is hard to follow them. If they don't provide fact-based, rational explanations for their decisions, it is hard to support them.

My $0.02