scouts-l Mail Archive for November of 1999: Re: Consistant "rules" of Scouting (2/2) - part 2
MAJ) Mike Walton (settummanque, the blackeagle (blackeagle@SCOUTER.NET
Thu Nov 25 1999 - 15:39:39 CST
This is the second part of my response to Mike Montalvo, responding to items
I posted earlier here:
Mike Montalvo wrote and asked:
>When councils consciously disregard established by-laws and rules of
participation >to squelch unwanted thoughts (See Bill MacLeay/former Green
>Council President) is this being "professional"? (From my understanding,
national >professionals were heavily involved in this...)
When a Council President expresses an opinion or thought in his or her role
as that Council's President, he or she SHOULD be held "accountable" to the
BSA. Remember, Mike, that the volunteers of that Council elected (or should
have been involved in the election process!) him President and therefore his
words and feelings express those of the people he represents. If his
statements and feelings were NOT that of his Council but merely his own, and
if he presented them as such to the press and public as such, then the BSA
would not have any right whatsoever to do anything except what Gregg Shields
expressed in his statement that "within the BSA there is room for
disagreement and dissatisfaction within our membership and leadership."
I don't have any information available to me which proves either that the
National or Regional professional staff were involved -- or not -- in the
"shussing" of Mr. MacLeay.
>Should BSA professionals be exempt from being Trustworthy, Honest and
Yes, in favor of the following; this is the Scout Executive's Code which
each professional subscribes to prior to receiving a commission as a member
of the BSA's professional cadre; and to which many hundreds of present and
former professionals still hold in very high regard. I do, or else I
wouldn't be here in this forum over the many years:
"As a member of the professional service of the Boy Scouts of America, I
will on my honor....
�Serve youth by working through the best volunteer leadership available,
recognizing that I serve best when losing myself through the service of
�Recognize that my personal example is paramount and must be acceptable
to any young person or leader of youth as I try to live in accordance
with the priniciples of Scouting.
�Build confidence in my leadership through high enthusiam and sound
administration, working with my staff associates so that they and I may
grow in capacity and effectiveness.
�Respect and enforce all national and local council policies and
procedures which are my responsibility.
�Meet my community, religious and home obligations squarely,
participating in worthly community projects, respecting our declaration
of religious principle, and building a sound spiritual foundation for
myself and my family through active participating in my church or
synagogue; maintaining a considerate, satisfying, and happy home life."
(Dan, Judy, Tim or Mark -- or any other professional out there sitting in
can you folks please price me one of those "Scout Executive Code" plaques so
that I can place it here in my office? Thanks!)
Mike, bullet points two and four speak to what I think you're saying. While
all professionals are expected to "adhear to and agree to be governed by the
Scout Oath and Law," the above set of words better express what
professionals have been working toward....and no, this is NOT a "recent
thing." I raised my right hand in the Scout Sign and pledged those same
words along with others in my "class" in 1978; and even as early as 1970
I've seen those words sitting framed or on a plaque in easy eyeshot of those
professionals I came in contact with. And *most do heed by and try to live
up to these ideals and words*. Those words are *goals* and unlike the Scout
Laws which state "fact:" (A Scout IS Trustworthy, Loyal...."), there's a lot
of space here for "doing the best one can" in their role as a professional
member of the BSA.
>Even if they are, wouldn't being a "professional" overlap somewhere and
prevent >many of these actions from occuring?
Maybe. Who said something like "you can be professional and not be a
professional" or something like that??
I also stated the following earlier, to which you took exception to:
" "Two standards?? Yep. That's how *I* see it. We -- the volunteers of the
BSA wanted it that way, through our inaction and action. So as my mother
would say, "now we stew in it." "
To which you responded:
>... and this hurts Scouting and it's credibility.
>The public microscope is on the BSA right now, it can't just be "business
Why *not*, Mike?? The vast majority of volunteers in our Councils *don't care*.
We've all raised our hands and arms high and turned to our professional
counterparts YEARS ago and told them "I can't -- no, I don't WANT to do
this. YOU do it. You get paid to do this -- to deal with stupid people who
won't listen to reason; to answer the same eighteen questions over and over
and over; to have to deal with parental squabbles and "I WILL have my child
in front, in charge, with all of the awards" mentalities; and to deal with
other volunteers whom don't want to do their job, just be around for the
handing out of the pats on the back! YOU get paid to deal with all of this,
and more. You do it! You make the decisions and I'll back you as long as it
doesn't impact ME. Just give me the papers and I'll sign. But LEAVE ME ALONE
with having to make decisions or having to talk about this all...I don't
want to put in the REAL TIME it'll take to accomphish this." Which is
"Of course, I DO want to be a volunteer! I like to work with kids. It looks
good to my peers in my community, church, and workplace. Can't you do the
work and I'll help as long as I don't get involved in the decision making or
And you know what, Mike? Our professionals didn't complain, didn't mumble
about "you stupid people...dontcha know this is YOUR program and that I come
along with the uniforms and badges and nice books?" They didn't even bat an
eyelid when we all collectively said this to their Regional and National
They just went ahead and ran the program the way THEY chose to with the
implementation of rules and policies and procedure that THEY wanted to see
the program utilize. There was little complaining...and those that did
complain (some of those REAL professionals, the ones that concentrated on
programming and resourcing the program and coaching and mentoring all of us
volunteers) left or retired or (and I hate to say this at this point, but it
bears saying that Edward Dunn was among those that were) put out to pasture.
So, if you and others out there are REALLY upset about the way things are
going, as Michael Jackson sang once, take a good look at the man (or woman)
in the mirror.
Because it is NOT the professionals at National's fault, nor is it the
professionals managing our Councils' fault. They only do what WE, the
volunteer, tells them to do and in the absence of us uttering a single word,
they do what they feel is in the "best interest of the program and the youth
Good or bad. Thanks for your comments, Mike!
(MAJ) Mike L. Walton (settummanque, the blackeagle)
personal inquiries via firstname.lastname@example.org,
blackeagle@SCOUTER.net or email@example.com
professional inquiries via firstname.lastname@example.org
-----FORWARD in service to youth and the nation-----