Boy Scouts Dual Charter

[CadetProgramGuy]

I am in the process of recruiting for a new squadron, and have been approached about Dual Chartering.

CAPR 52-16 has only a paragraph on this topic.

Anyone alse doing this, and what should I look out for?

Tips and comments are always welcome!!

[Major Lord]

Our Sq dual chartered for many years. A few problems came up, such as Cadets having to be at least 14 yeas of age to join the venturing crew, it costs a few bucks to join ( the Senior members paid the membership fee for all the Cadets the first time around) and Your SM's will (eventually) have to take the Boy Scout version of the Level 1 training. Otherwise, the access you can gain to BSA facilities is awesome and expands the scope of your adventure training, and  is well worth it. Rapelling, shooting, and other similar skills are normal for Boy Scouts, and it does not take an act of Congress.

Major Lord

[cap235629]

The training you speak of is "Fast Start" and "Youth Protection" both of which can be completed online.

[CadetProgramGuy]

Our Sq dual chartered for many years. A few problems came up, such as Cadets having to be at least 14 yeas of age to join the venturing crew, it costs a few bucks to join ( the Senior members paid the membership fee for all the Cadets the first time around) and Your SM's will (eventually) have to take the Boy Scout version of the Level 1 training. Otherwise, the access you can gain to BSA facilities is awesome and expands the scope of your adventure training, and  is well worth it. Rapelling, shooting, and other similar skills are normal for Boy Scouts, and it does not take an act of Congress.

Major Lord

Awesome information!!

Questions though.

I understand the cadets will be both members of Boy scouts and CAP, wearing the CAP uniform.  Is this correct?

Also with the Venturing age being 14, we can still bring in Cadets at age 12, then they can join up into the venturing side?

With the Boy Scouts we can use the rappelling, shooting and such, do we still need the Wing CC permission or are we good according to the Regs by having the requirments met?

[CadetProgramGuy]

The training you speak of is "Fast Start" and "Youth Protection" both of which can be completed online.

Do you have to be a member of the Boy Scouts to get to this training?

[cap235629]

No, just open an account at this site  http://olc.scouting.org/ and when it asks you for a council, leave it as no council.  The only problem you might run into is that if you do become a member, the records may not carry over and you will have to retake the training.

You will find that the Youth Protection Training and the Cadet Protection Training are eerily similar.  I was told that CAP modeled CPPT on the BSA program.

More information on Venturing can be found here:

http://www.scouting.org/Venturing.aspx

Good luck and btw, dues are only $12.00 a year unless your council charges local fees.

[cap235629]

And to make some of you PAWG guys flip, Venturing also has a RANGER award!

[CadetProgramGuy]

And to make some of you PAWG guys flip, Venturing also has a RANGER award!

Lets keep this one on topic.........Sorry PAWG

[tjaxe]

Hate to be a devil's advocate, but here goes nothing...

1. Would female cadets be allowed to participate as full members with all of the rights / privileges in the Boy Scout activities?

2. Would (current or future) self-identified gays/lesbians in the unit be allowed to participate as either cadets or adult members since the Boy Scouts discriminates against this group of citizens (while CAP does not)?

[DC]

Hate to be a devil's advocate, but here goes nothing...

1. Would female cadets be allowed to participate as full members with all of the rights / privileges in the Boy Scout activities?

2. Would (current or future) self-identified gays/lesbians in the unit be allowed to participate as either cadets or adult members since the Boy Scouts discriminates against this group of citizens (while CAP does not)?

For your first question, I believe women are allowed to participate in the BSA Venturing program. I'm not sure about your second question, BSA does tend to be rather conservative, to put it lightly.

[Eclipse]

^ I don't think that's even an issue.

Its not like they would meet together every week.  These are too pretty disparete organizations once you get past the youth membership.  CAP has specific regulations regarding participation, progression, and any unit worth its salt, and worth being a dual-charter with, it going to to be on a regular schdule or testing, PT and instruction that won't jive with a normal BSA schedule.

My understanding was that a dual-charter was essentially a good way to share space, get access to BSA facilities, and occasionally have a shared activity - most CAP activities are going to be off-limits to the BSA.

No ES, no encampments, no NCSA, etc.

Also, for clarity - you can't dual-charter with a regular Boy Scout Troop, it has to be a Venture or Varsity unit.  What those units do and how they operate is somewhat different than a standard BSA Troop.

Since CAP is always the host organization by regulation, the BSA can't raise any exclusionary flags for gender, sexual preference, or anything else which is allowed normally by CAP.

6-2. CAP Policy for Dual-Chartering With the Boy Scouts of America. CAP and the Venturing and Varsity divisions of the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) have much in common. CAP encourages dual membership in both CAP and BSA as either a Varsity Scouting Team or Venturing Crew, with CAP being the chartered partner. By being the chartered partner, CAP is the basis for the union; therefore, members first belong to CAP. The existing CAP structure does not change and all members will conform to CAP standards and wear the CAP uniform.

a. Benefits. The benefits for dual chartering are:

(1) The BSA organization includes approximately 4,000 professional staff and over 93,000 adult volunteers who would be available to provide assistance in the following areas:

(a) Identification of potential youth members with an interest in aviation or search and rescue through a school career interest survey (where available);

(b) Additional "working with youth" adult leader training opportunities.

(2) Eligibility to participate in all Venturing activities upon becoming a Venturing crew, such as: scholarships and awards, air rifle competitions, fly-ins, an emergency preparedness program, use of local BSA camps and facilities and more.

b. Procedure. After consultation with the wing commander, the squadron commander should meet with representatives of the local BSA Council to discuss dual chartering. If the decision is made to dual charter, then the BSA representative will complete and submit the required BSA chartering documentation. After a squadron receives its charter, the next command echelon should be notified of the new status.

c. Uniform. Dual chartered members are authorized to wear the Venturing Patch or the Aviation Exploring Patch as appropriate, in place of the organizational emblem on the BDU uniform (see CAPM 39-1).

d. Flying. All CAP flying activities will be accomplished in accordance with CAPR 60-1, CAP Flight Management, and all CAP search and rescue activities will be accomplished in accordance with CAPR 60-3, CAP Emergency Services Training and Operational Missions.

e. Regulatory Compliance. A jointly chartered CAP Venturing Crew or Varsity Team will conduct all operations and activities under CAP regulations or clearly and unmistakably conduct itself under the auspices of the scouting program only. If the unit wishes to conduct any activity outside of, or restricted by CAP regulations, the unit commander will obtain Scout liability insurance protection for CAP and the members of the unit from the Scouting Council or Scouting National Headquarters before proceeding.

[tjaxe]

Eclipse, thanks for the great info!

[cap235629]

Hate to be a devil's advocate, but here goes nothing...

1. Would female cadets be allowed to participate as full members with all of the rights / privileges in the Boy Scout activities?

2. Would (current or future) self-identified gays/lesbians in the unit be allowed to participate as either cadets or adult members since the Boy Scouts discriminates against this group of citizens (while CAP does not)?

BSA policy is that openly gay or avowed homosexuals cannot hold a LEADERSHIP position in Scouting or Venturing programs.  There are other programs called Learning for Life and Exploring that are BSA programs that are specifically designed around this topic.  Ask your local Scout Service Center about these programs if this is an issue.

Now understand LEADERSHIP position means Adult advisors as well as Youth leaders.  If they are gay, they cannot act in a leadership capacity.  So your openly gay squadron members could not hold a position as the crew advisor or crew president (read senior youth leader) nor could they register with the BSA as a leader.  They can however attend functions as guests etc. but would not be covered by BSA insurance/charter.  Parents are never excluded (and I mean NEVER) from being with their children at any event, it's just the legalese of the situation.  More information can be found on the BSA website.

I will NOT get into the discussion of this policy as it is the law of the land upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States. Anyone who has read my previous posts about openly gay members knows that I am not a homophobe, so DON'T start.

I have over 25 years in the Scouting program in both unit level and council level roles so please feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions.

[cap235629]

Since CAP is always the host organization by regulation, the BSA can't raise any exclusionary flags for gender, sexual preference, or anything else which is allowed normally by CAP.

Not exactly true, BSA can refuse to issue or revoke a Venture Crews charter if there is a violation of it's standards with regard to sexual orientation or religious principles.

[cap235629]

Hate to be a devil's advocate, but here goes nothing...

1. Would female cadets be allowed to participate as full members with all of the rights / privileges in the Boy Scout activities?

Venturing is a coed program across the board for both youth and adults.

The only exclusion for females is in the Boy Scout and Cub Scout programs,  In these 2 programs there is no female YOUTH participation but adults female membership is in NO WAY restricted.  There are MANY women Scoutmasters and Cubmasters.

[tjaxe]

Like I said... I was playing devil's advocate -- just wanted to get some possible questions answered.  I'm tired of hearing of female cadets being excluded from things (because of lack of female seniors) and I'm glad this isn't the same thing. 

[cap235629]

Like I said... I was playing devil's advocate -- just wanted to get some possible questions answered.  I'm tired of hearing of female cadets being excluded from things (because of lack of female seniors) and I'm glad this isn't the same thing. 

Hope I answered your questions, please feel free to contact me if any more come up, the worst that can happen is I may say, "I'm not sure and I will get that answer for you" 

[cap235629]

An easy solution to this problem would be to charter the squadron as an Aviation Explorer post as opposed to a Venture crew but this would somewhat limit the "extras" you can do as a Venture crew.

[Eclipse]

Since CAP is always the host organization by regulation, the BSA can't raise any exclusionary flags for gender, sexual preference, or anything else which is allowed normally by CAP.

Not exactly true, BSA can refuse to issue or revoke a Venture Crews charter if there is a violation of it's standards with regard to sexual orientation or religious principles.

Right, of course, I meant in the spirit of maintaining the relationship.  Also, as pointed out the Ventures are coed as it is.

[CadetProgramGuy]

Citing 52-16:

6-2. CAP Policy for Dual-Chartering With the Boy Scouts of America. CAP and the Venturing and Varsity divisions of the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) have much in common. CAP encourages dual membership in both CAP and BSA as either a Varsity Scouting Team or Venturing Crew, with CAP being the chartered partner. By being the chartered partner, CAP is the basis for the union; therefore, members first belong to CAP. The existing CAP structure does not change and all members will conform to CAP standards and wear the CAP uniform.

Then quoting Eclipse:

My understanding was that a dual-charter was essentially a good way to share space, get access to BSA facilities, and occasionally have a shared activity - most CAP activities are going to be off-limits to the BSA.

No ES, no encampments, no NCSA, etc.

With CAP holding the union of the charter, how could the BSA not attend the emcampments?  If they are in the dual charter, then shouldn't they be allowed?

[CadetProgramGuy]

Like I said... I was playing devil's advocate -- just wanted to get some possible questions answered.  I'm tired of hearing of female cadets being excluded from things (because of lack of female seniors) and I'm glad this isn't the same thing. 

Hope I answered your questions, please feel free to contact me if any more come up, the worst that can happen is I may say, "I'm not sure and I will get that answer for you" 

Are you indicating that the Venture Crew meet on a different night than CAP does if they are in the same unit?

[Major Lord]

I think you will find that being dual chartered as a Venturing Crew is is pretty much transparent to your normal operations. They don't go on a witch hunt. If a member believes that the BSA is an evil institution, they are not obligated to join as an adult leader, or let their children join. Its more of a case of what the affliation with the BSA allows you to do, which expands the Cadet's scope of participation to include the "High adventure " activities that are open to Scouts. Not all of these activities are appropriate for 12 year olds. Venturing Crews are color and gender blind.

Also, unlike CAP cadet activities, activities carried out as a Venturing Crew are covered by BSA liability insurance. We have never had a problem with non-BSA affiliated Cadets being kept from BSA sponsored activities as guests.

As a former Boy Scout and Leader, I am immensely proud of BSA. You may not like their political views, but do you think that CAP would take a public stand over an ethical, civil rights ( The right to free association)  or moral issue like the Scouts have? Character is doing the right thing even when you know its going to cost you, and the Scouts are treated like lepers by places like Berkeley, and organizations like the United Way.

Besides, Cadets get one more piece of flair for their uniforms.....

Major Lord

[PlaneFlyr]

When participating in activities, it is usually important to do it under the guise of one group or the other, since each has differing rules.  Here is my take on it:

Example: when unit is participating on "CAP activity" and wearing CAP uniforms, they cannot rappel or do firearms training. 

Opposite example: when participating on "BSA activity" in BSA attire, they cannot fly in CAP planes (at least I don't think they can, since CAP requires cadets to be in CAP uniform).

A lot of this is legal requirements to help differentiate which organization is covering the insurance.  It also clarifies which set of rules you must follow for the activity.  This avoids someone saying "we don't have to follow (CAP or BSA) rules because we're dual chartered". 

CAP requires units to get a "mission number" for training activities (even unfunded) to grant insurance coverage.  Does BSA have something similar that they require before an activity? 

I would suspect that you could bring both uniforms to an overnight activity and have everyone change according to what you're doing.  Anyone dealt with that before?  If so, how do you officially change hats in mid-activity to ensure insurance coverage?

You still have to follow rules, but you have more "rules" available to operate under. 
If done honestly and correctly, dual charter is a great way to increase the amount of things your people can do, and increases the resources available to them.

[cap235629]

CAP requires units to get a "mission number" for training activities (even unfunded) to grant insurance coverage.  Does BSA have something similar that they require before an activity? 

I would suspect that you could bring both uniforms to an overnight activity and have everyone change according to what you're doing.  Anyone dealt with that before?  If so, how do you officially change hats in mid-activity to ensure insurance coverage?

You still have to follow rules, but you have more "rules" available to operate under. 
If done honestly and correctly, dual charter is a great way to increase the amount of things your people can do, and increases the resources available to them.

The BSA requires a "tour permit" for insurance coverage.  The "uniform" of the venture crew is whatever the crew voted on (on the BSA side)

Also by regulation the CAP uniform is worn and the regulation specifically states that the dual charter allows other activities prohibited by regulation so the issue of uniforms during "prohibited" activities  is non-existent.

[PlaneFlyr]

CAP requires units to get a "mission number" for training activities (even unfunded) to grant insurance coverage.  Does BSA have something similar that they require before an activity? 

I would suspect that you could bring both uniforms to an overnight activity and have everyone change according to what you're doing.  Anyone dealt with that before?  If so, how do you officially change hats in mid-activity to ensure insurance coverage?

You still have to follow rules, but you have more "rules" available to operate under. 
If done honestly and correctly, dual charter is a great way to increase the amount of things your people can do, and increases the resources available to them.

The BSA requires a "tour permit" for insurance coverage.  The "uniform" of the venture crew is whatever the crew voted on (I have yet to see anything but CAP uniforms being worn)

The type of clothes you are wearing does not affect what you can do, it is the authorization you are operating under.  If the cadets are participating in in venturing activities they can wear their CAP uniforms, or not, it's up to them.

I was thinking along the lines of Reserve Assistance Officers, who also are CAP members.  They are required to wear one uniform or the other, and only may act in that capacity at a given time.  This prevents (hopefully) conflict of interest.  Of course, for RAO's, they earn points toward retirement (i.e. - extra $) during RAO duties, but not on CAP duty.  Failure for them to differentiate could result in fraud.

For CAP/BSA, there's no pay involved.  But insurance coverage and ensuring they are within the regs is still important.  How do most dual units differentiate?  Do you need a CAP mission number and BSA tour permit if a weekend training will cross into both areas.  I'd be afraid of having a CAP bivuac where the unit decided to go rappeling, and having someone get injured.  USAF and BSA might both decline responsiblity for the coverage.  USAF would say "rappeling isn't an approved CAP activity", and BSA would say "it was a CAP event". 

Is there any good regulatory guidance out there to clarify these issues for people?  If so, I've never seen it. 

[Nathan]

Now understand LEADERSHIP position means Adult advisors as well as Youth leaders.  If they are gay, they cannot act in a leadership capacity.  So your openly gay squadron members could not hold a position as the crew advisor or crew president (read senior youth leader) nor could they register with the BSA as a leader.

You sure about that? According to the section of CAPR 52-16 that Eclipse kindly introduced to the discussion...

6-2. CAP Policy for Dual-Chartering With the Boy Scouts of America. CAP and the Venturing and Varsity divisions of the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) have much in common. CAP encourages dual membership in both CAP and BSA as either a Varsity Scouting Team or Venturing Crew, with CAP being the chartered partner. By being the chartered partner, CAP is the basis for the union; therefore, members first belong to CAP. The existing CAP structure does not change and all members will conform to CAP standards and wear the CAP uniform.

and...

e. Regulatory Compliance. A jointly chartered CAP Venturing Crew or Varsity Team will conduct all operations and activities under CAP regulations or clearly and unmistakably conduct itself under the auspices of the scouting program only. If the unit wishes to conduct any activity outside of, or restricted by CAP regulations, the unit commander will obtain Scout liability insurance protection for CAP and the members of the unit from the Scouting Council or Scouting National Headquarters before proceeding.

CAP is the hosting organization, so ALL members, whether gay or not, are considered CAP members BEFORE Boy Scout members. So long as the activity is being hosted and regulated as a CAP activity (which will likely be most of the time for most squadron members), we run with CAP regulations.

CAP regulations do not prohibit gay members from holding leadership positions. So, if we are at a Venture activity and we are CAP members first, then CAP members are certainly allowed to hold leadership positions if they are gay. The idea that gay members can only show up as guests is simply not dictated by CAP regulations.

I can think of at least one gay CAP venture crew leader I've had the pleasure of working with from time to time. Small world, huh?

[RogueLeader]

^^ You miss the point of what he was saying.  While it is okay for that leader to be gay in CAP as a leader, he can not register as a leader in Boy Scouts or Venture Crew.  CAP Regulations are not binding on BSA.

The member is allowed to be gay under the dual charter, but not as a Stand-Alone BSA/VC activity.  While you may disagree with the Supreme Court ruling that allows them to do that, you still have to abide my it.

[Nathan]

I don't think I missed the point at all.

He said that gay squadron members would not be permitted to hold a leadership position. Any activity that a squadron member (implying affiliation with CAP) is participating in would be DUAL CHARTER, not stand-alone. Since CAP is always the hosting organization for the dual-charter, they are CAP members first.

CAP regulations do not prevent gay members from holding leadership positions. What the Boy Scouts say for their program is irrelevant to ours, and since our members participating in dual charter activities are still OUR MEMBERS before Venture Crew members, then our regulations permitting them to act in leadership positions take precedence. The Boy Scout ruling against gay leaders conflicts with our membership allowances. According to the regulations, we win.

My feelings on the Supreme Court ruling have nothing to do with it.

[RiverAux]

I'm not a big fan of the dual charter concept in the first place.  If there are activities that we want our cadets to do, we should be able to work it so that they can do them as CAP cadets, not try to come up with some scheme to game the system such as this. 

[cap235629]

If it were to become known to the BSA that a known or avowed gay squadron member was in a leadership position as a registered leader in a Venture crew, the first step would be to revoke that members BSA membership and send them a letter advising them that they are no longer a member of the BSA and can no longer participate in any Venture Crew activities.  If this does not work, then the BSA will most likely revoke the Venture Crew Charter of the Squadron thus ending the affiliation and dual charter benefits.

If your squadron wants to reap the benefits of having a dual charter then the rules and regulations of BOTH organizations must be followed.  If this is a problem then I suggest that you look at other options. 

Like I said before, this is not a discussion about the merits of the policy.  I am simply stating what the realities of the dual charter concept entails.

[Nathan]

If your squadron wants to reap the benefits of having a dual charter then the rules and regulations of BOTH organizations must be followed.  If this is a problem then I suggest that you look at other options. 

This would only be true if the regulations were not contradictory in nature. However, the membership qualifications ARE contradictory. CAP does not discriminate against gays, and the Boy Scouts do. According to CAP regulations, CAP is ALWAYS the hosting organization. The Boy Scouts organization that charters with CAP understands this when they enter into the charter.

If they want to kick up dust for a gay member being in a leadership position, that's fine. But the fact remains that CAP members in dual charters are CAP members first, and Boy Scout membership regulations do not override CAP's so long as CAP is still the hosting organization in the charter. Because that happens by regulations, the choice of the Boy Scouts to back out of a charter would be based upon terms that were ALREADY agreed to when they signed the charter.

[cap235629]

Nathan you are wrong.  All the barracks lawyering in the world won't change this.  The Boy Scouts of America is an independent private organization with an ABSOLUTE right to exclude anyone it desires to.  If you don't like it, then don't dual charter.

[RiverAux]

I think he is pointing out that if BSA had a problem with this issue, they wouldn't or shouldn't do a dual charter in the first place.  CAP has a right to its own rules and if BSA can't live with them, they need to scrap the whole concept. 

[Nathan]

Nathan you are wrong.  All the barracks lawyering in the world won't change this.  The Boy Scouts of America is an independent private organization with an ABSOLUTE right to exclude anyone it desires to.  If you don't like it, then don't dual charter.

Stating I am wrong means nothing without evidence.

So far, I've quoted the regulations. I've found that when someone accuses another of "barracks lawyering", it's because the regulations aren't on their side.

The Boy Scouts can certainly exclude anyone they want to in THEIR organization. But to dual charter means that the members joining aren't completely Boy Scout members. They are 49% Boy Scouts, 51% CAP. That's the way the charter works. CAP is the hosting organization, and I've provided the regulations that say CAP members during charter activities are CAP members first. Our regulations apply at ALL times. Boy Scout regulations come second unless we are agreeing for a particular activity to abide 100% by Boy Scout rules, which means no CAP uniforms, no real CAP affiliation at all. That is the ONLY time that the Boy Scouts would have any real ability to force out ANY member based purely on sexual orientation.

These are the rules as written by CAP and as I am assuming the Boy Scout Venturing program has already agreed to (which is why we have it in our regulations). I honestly don't have to go look elsewhere for a program. The program is already set in place. If you don't like it, well, tough noogies. If the Venture program doesn't like it, they have yet to change the wording.

Until the regulation is changed, gay CAP members are allowed leadership positions in any dual charter activity with the Venturing program so long as it wasn't agreed to by BOTH parties that CAP would forfeit hosting privileges, including regulatory jurisdiction, for that particular activity. Until you are able to cite a regulation that beats the already established authority of CAP regulations, the case is simply closed.

[cap235629]

The charter agreement that the squadron signs when it joins the BSA expressly states that the chartering organization (the squadron) agrees to abide by the standards for leaders set by the BSA as a condition for granting the charter.

The burden of whether or not to enter into the agreement lies upon the requestor, not the grantee.  CAP knows where the BSA stands.  It is no secret.  Once the squadron signs the charter agreement the BSA assumes that the squadron will meet the standards.  If it does not the BSA revokes the charter.

CAP agrees with the rules or not, it's NOT the other way around.

[Nathan]

The charter agreement that the squadron signs when it joins the BSA expressly states that the chartering organization (the squadron) agrees to abide by the standards for leaders set by the BSA as a condition for granting the charter.

The burden of whether or not to enter into the agreement lies upon the requestor, not the grantee.  CAP knows where the BSA stands.  It is no secret.  Once the squadron signs the charter agreement the BSA assumes that the squadron will meet the standards.  If it does not the BSA revokes the charter.

CAP agrees with the rules or not, it's NOT the other way around.

I think you're seriously getting the concept of "host organization" confused...

[cap235629]

Nathan please don't take this personally but I have been affiliated with the BSA longer than you have been alive (at least according to your profile).  I have been the Chartered Organization Representative for a BSA unit (the one who signs the charter on behalf of the host unit), as well as on the local council board and staff.  Cite all the CAP regulations you want, but the BSA is not required to follow them.  To be granted a charter in the Venturing program the CAP squadron agrees to follow BSA rules.

And as far as my evidence, here you go:

● Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S.640(2000)
An Assistant Scoutmaster who was an avowed homosexual and gay rights activist sued after his leadership was revoked, alleging that Boy Scouts violated the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in places of public accommodation. The New Jersey Superior Court, Chancery Division granted summary judgment in favor of Boy Scouts, but the Appellate Division and thereafter the New Jersey Supreme Court held that Boy Scouts had acted in violation of the State's public accommodations law. The United States Supreme Court reversed the New Jersey Supreme Court and held that a state may not, through its nondiscrimination statutes, prohibit the Boy Scouts from adhering to a moral viewpoint and expressing that viewpoint in internal leadership policy and that the New Jersey Supreme Court's decision violated Boy Scouts' First Amendment right of freedom of association. Briefs of the Parties . Briefs of Boy Scouts' Amici Curiae

● Curran v. Mount Diablo Council of Boy Scouts of America, 952 P.2d 218 (Cal. 1998)
An open homosexual sued Mount Diablo Council under California's Unruh Civil Rights Act, challenging the council's refusal to approve him as an adult leader. After trial, the Los Angeles County Superior Court ruled in favor of the Boy Scout council. On appeal, the California Supreme Court granted review and held in a unanimous opinion that Boy Scouts is not a "business establishment" for purposes of the Unruh Civil Rights Act's requirement of equal rights to public accommodations.

● Boy Scouts of America v. District of Columbia Commission on Human Rights, 809 A.2d 1192 (D.C. 2002)
Open homosexuals filed complaints in the D.C. Commission alleging that they were denied privileges of a place of public accommodation when they were rejected as volunteer Boy Scout leaders. On June 20, 2001, a year after the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Dale, the District of Columbia Commission on Human Rights refused to apply Dale and instead held that Boy Scouts of America and the National Capital Area Council violated the District of Columbia Human Rights Act of 1977. The District of Columbia Court of Appeals reversed, holding that to force Boy Scouts to appoint open homosexuals as Scout leaders would violate the Boy Scouts' First Amendment freedom of expressive association.

● Chicago Area Council of Boy Scouts of America v. City of Chicago Commission on Human Relations, 748 N.E. 2d 759 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001)
An open homosexual filed a claim under Chicago's human rights ordinance alleging that he was denied employment with the local Boy Scouts council because of his open homosexuality. Ultimately, an Illinois appellate court held that the Boy Scouts were allowed to require job applicants to observe the Scout Oath and Law when they were seeking to serve as professionals acting in representative capacities for Scouting. The court remanded for a determination as to whether the employment tester was seeking a nonrepresentative position from which he was improperly excluded, and the Commission determined that he had not been seeking such a position.

CAP regulations have no standing outside of CAP whereas State and Local Law does.  However, as the courts have upheld, the BSA has an absolute right to exclude anyone it wants to, local law or regulation to the contrary.

I hope you take the time to read these cases, it will prove educational.

[RiverAux]

I find it odd that CAP doesn't have a national level MOU with the Boy Scouts on this issue.  At least we don't have one posted on the NHQ web page.

Not sure why court cases that have absouletely nothing to do with the relationship between CAP and the Boy Scouts are being brought up.  Irrelevant to the topic at hand. 

Another thing to consider is that in many places CAP units get funded directly by various governments, some of which may bar such discrimination by any organization that they fund.  If that government won't fund BSA directly then they might not want to fund a dual CAP-BSA unit.  Just a thought.

[Nathan]

Nathan please don't take this personally but I have been affiliated with the BSA longer than you have been alive (at least according to your profile).  I have been the Chartered Organization Representative for a BSA unit (the one who signs the charter on behalf of the host unit), as well as on the local council board and staff.  Cite all the CAP regulations you want, but the BSA is not required to follow them.  To be granted a charter in the Venturing program the CAP squadron agrees to follow BSA rules.

First off, all the Supreme Court cases you are throwing at me mean nothing to this argument. I am not arguing as to whether or not the Boy Scouts is allowed to toss out gay leaders. That is not my business, and I could not care less what the Boy Scouts does with their own people, since I am not a member of the Boy Scouts.

However, a DUAL CHARTER is different than what the Boy Scouts does in their own organization. A dual charter is an AGREEMENT between two organizations to follow by a certain set of rules. Is the Boy Scouts required to follow CAP rules? No. Not even CAP members are REQUIRED to follow CAP rules. But in either case, if the member doesn't want to play by the agreed rules, the member can leave.

In this case, CAP is REQUIRING any CAP unit desiring to dual charter to be IN CONTROL of the situation by hosting the charter. If CAP cannot do that, they are NOT PERMITTED to be part of the charter. So IF the Boy Scouts decided not to give up their hosting rights, then any union between a CAP unit and the Boy Scouts would be ILLEGAL per CAP regulations. No CAP unit can enter into a dual charter without maintaining regulatory authority.

Because of this, we by definition hold all jurisdiction when it comes to membership application. The Boy Scout rules come second. If they don't like that, and decide to attempt to enforce their regulations, then they are violating the agreement they HAD to accept before chartering with the CAP unit. If that is the case, they can choose to leave.

So regardless of what laws protect the Boy Scouts within their own organization, those laws do not apply when the Boy Scouts agree to turn over regulatory jurisdiction to CAP when dual-chartering. That's the key. For ANY CAP unit to be allowed to dual charter, the Boy Scouts HAD to have given up that authority. If they do not, the charter does not happen.

Can you see where this is going?

Without that regulatory authority, the Boy Scout rules on who can and cannot be a leader come second to CAP's rules. CAP allows gay members to be leaders. CAP has jurisdiction. Therefore, gay CAP members can hold leadership positions in dual charter activities unless, as I have said, it was previously agreed to by both parties for CAP to forfeit 100% of jurisdiction to the Boy Scouts for a PARTICULAR ACTIVITY.

It really is easy as pie. Stop thinking about this as a purely Boy Scout issue. While I understand that is where your experience lies, a dual-charter program is a different animal, and you have to start treating it as such.

EDIT: I realize that I used "Boy Scouts" in the singular form here for most of the post. I'm not going to change it, since I'm referring to the singular program, so I hope you can follow along.

[CadetProgramGuy]

When I read 52-16, it tells me that CAP is the host unit.  Therefore CAP rules run the roost 'so to speak'.

That one paragraph in 52-16 tells me that there is no discrimination for anyone.  When you dual charter, boy scouts age in at 14 for the venturing crew.  What about the 12-13 year olds?  They are CAP.....What about those that choose not to be in the BSA?  They are CAP.

IOW, I don't care about the gay issue in this thread.  I don't care that BSA has a very open stance on their thoughts  on gays.

I just want to provide the youth in my area a better chance in life, and if CAP is that answer, then so be it.

and if you are gay (your life choice BTW) I will welcome you into my squadron.

Last thought everyone.......

I appreciate a really good debate and arguement, but lets get back to work.....

[cap235629]

The cases stated above go to the rights of the BSA to exclude membership from a person or group of people.  It is the basis for the whole argument about who follows whose rules.  Read through the actual cases rather than the brief synopsis I have given and you will see more in depth argument and ruling.  The membership requirements and leadership requirements are the same for a Boy Scout Troop, Cub Scout Pack and Venturing crew as I previously posted.

See the attached charter agreement that is the LEGALLY BINDING agreement between the "host" organization and the BSA.  Pay particular attention to what each group is agreeing to.  Specifically the part about selecting leaders according to BSA policy.  No where does it state that the BSA will abide by any group who is requesting a charter's rules, only that they will respect them.  It is up to the requesting party to adhere to the BSA regulations, not the other way around as I have previously stated.

Our squadron is in the process of dual chartering and I made it perfectly clear what we are agreeing to.  The squadron has at least one known gay member so before we discussed it with the cadets, we discussed it amongst the seniors and weighed the benefits vs. the downside.  I recommend that this be done before a decision is made.  We then put it to the cadets to vote on it.

As far as the 12 and 13 year olds, they would not be able to participate in Ventring activities that would be prohibited under CAP regulations as they cannot be a member of the Venture crew until they turn 14.

I am not going to spend any more time defending this as I have stated my case precisely.  With this, the defense rests....LOL 

If you have any questions please feel free to PM me.

I do however reserve the right of rebuttal.

[Nathan]

The cases stated above go to the rights of the BSA to exclude membership from a person or group of people.  It is the basis for the whole argument about who follows whose rules.  Read through the actual cases rather than the brief synopsis I have given and you will see more in depth argument and ruling.  The membership requirements and leadership requirements are the same for a Boy Scout Troop, Cub Scout Pack and Venturing crew as I previously posted.

Only true when the Boy Scouts have full authority to approve or deny members. With dual charters including CAP, that is not the case, therefore, your cases are irrelevant.

See the attached charter agreement that is the LEGALLY BINDING agreement between the "host" organization and the BSA.  Pay particular attention to what each group is agreeing to.  Specifically the part about selecting leaders according to BSA policy.  No where does it state that the BSA will abide by any group who is requesting a charter's rules, only that they will respect them.  It is up to the requesting party to adhere to the BSA regulations, not the other way around as I have previously stated.

Read this one, it's important.

I don't see anything where it says that the BSA members will approve leader applications according to BSA policy. I see where it says BSA members will approve leader applications. Nowhere do I see in this charter that BSA policies have to be 100% enforced in the selection of leaders in the dual charter program, nor do I see where gay members (as stated in this charter) are excluded from leadership positions.

As far as it reads, the BSA must merely approve leader applications. Because this is a dual charter, it is accepted that the host organization (which is the one to select the leaders in the first place) will have rules that others do not. In this case, CAP's rules are that their regulations take precedence. With that, if the BSA leaders approved of that (and therefore of the charter as a whole), it is not even illegal (per this contract) for them to approve a member legal by CAP regulations but not by BSA regulations.

The only place you may have a point is where it says that CAP will screen for "BSA Leadership standards", but once again, since CAP has regulatory jurisdiction in ALL Venture crew joint activities, I would imagine this applies more to a charter where this is not the case.

Thanks for showing it. I couldn't find it on Google.

Our squadron is in the process of dual chartering and I made it perfectly clear what we are agreeing to.  The squadron has at least one known gay member so before we discussed it with the cadets, we discussed it amongst the seniors and weighed the benefits vs. the downside.  I recommend that this be done before a decision is made.  We then put it to the cadets to vote on it.

I am certainly hoping that you are talking about voting as to whether or not to participate in the venture program, and not whether or not this gay member would be allowed to participate.

I am not going to spend any more time defending this as I have stated my case precisely.

I do however reserve the right of rebuttal.

What's the difference, exactly?

[RiverAux]

Hmm, I can't see CAP signing an agreement that totally invalidates the way CAP squadron commanders are appointed.  It is not up to the CAP unit and the parents of its cadet members to select the leaders. 

[cap235629]

The CAP commander is the Organization head, not necessarily a leader in the BSA view. 

Look at it from this perspective.  The Pastor is the head of the church, the church sponsors the troop/crew, the Pastor chooses 1 person to be the Chartered Organization Representative to act on his/her behalf (this person is the first REGISTERED adult) who then organizes the committee who then screen and choose the Scoutmaster/Crew Advisor.  Just as the BSA does not choose a Pator, it has no say on the Commander. 

Now substitute Commander for Pastor and you can see how it works.  The Commander is not required to register as a leader.

Hope this clears it up.  Also there is not a special "Dual Charter" agreement, the BSA ONLY uses the one I posted.  So if the unit is dually chartered, someone signed this form on behalf of the CAP Squadron.

[RiverAux]

The squadron commander also has TOTAL control over what positions are filled by members under their command and there is no provision in the regulations that lets any member of the unit, much less non-CAP members (parents of cadets) choose who is in charge of an activity. 

[cap235629]

Never implied there was, all I am saying is the Commander has to choose someone who meets the standards of the BSA to be a leader.  Think of the committee as the Command staff of the unit and it might make more sense.  The Commander or his representative has final say and approval authority.

[RiverAux]

all I am saying is the Commander has to choose someone who meets the standards of the BSA to be a leader. 

That may be what you're saying, but the document you posted says that a committe that includes parents of members chooses the leaders. 

[Nathan]

And, once again, so long as CAP retains control of all regulatory power (which HAS to be true, otherwise CAP isn't allowed to participate), then the "standards" become much more flexible. If the leadership standards for the BSA conflict with the leadership standards set forth by CAP, then CAP's win.

And luckily for us, the contract you provided says that the BSA leader only has to approve. It does not say that the BSA leader has to approve according solely to BSA regulations. With that in mind, the BSA leader, according to this contract, is quite free to approve a gay member, because the contract states that CAP would have full screening and selection authority.

It really comes down to this. We are given the authority, as the host organization, to screen all applicants for eligibility according to the standards of both organizations. If the two organizations collide, then the decision is in the detail. If our regulations say that CAP members are ALWAYS CAP member first, then CAP leadership standards trump the contradictory parts of BSA regulations. If the BSA disagrees, then the union is off; CAP regulations do not permit CAP to permenantly forfeit hosting priviledges.

With that in mind, CAP has screening authority, according to the contract. When we screen CAP members, per CAP 52-16, we screen them FIRST as CAP members, then as BSA members. CAP screening takes priority. And luckily for us, since the BSA leader only has to approve, but not specifically approve toward BSA regulations, then CAP wins the deal. If the BSA tries to block a member due to sexual preference alone, it would violate the membership authority clause of our regulations. So the charter doesn't happen.

And so far, the BSA hasn't been willing to let all the good of a CAP-BSA union dissolve for one tiny issue like this. With precedence on our side, I'm not sure how much more argument you have.

[Major Lord]

Nathan, I think a good analogy to CAP's relationship with BSA is that of CAP and the Air Force. CAP has a very open recruitment policy, and is indifferent to age, gender, sexual preference, sexual practices, and affiliation with organizations that may support the violent overthrow of the U. S. Government. The Air Force would deny membership, and/ or terminate or imprison you for things that CAP members practice with impunity.  Although we are affiliated with the Air Force, its clear that we are not Air Force, and never could be given the way we do business. A narrow exception has been carved out of regulations of both organizations, with both organizations in many ways agreeing to look the other way.

Curiously, the DOD non-discrimination policy, which we are not bound to but have agreed to support, voluntarily prevents us from supporting organizations that do discriminate on the aforementioned basis. By our own non-binding rules, we have prevented ourselves from supporting the Air Force and the Boy Scouts . It has been said that the ability to cope with ambiguity is the mark of genius.....

Major Lord

[cap235629]

Nathan,

You seem to be avoiding the most critical part of the agreement with your arguments.

In order to be a Venture crew the squadron must comply with BSA's leadership standards.  BOTH standards.  The is a difference between the words MAY and SHALL.  Shall in mandatory, MAY is voluntary.  While members of CAP MAY be atheists and homosexuals, it is not mandated that they must be to be a member.  It is however mandated by the BSA that leaders SHALL NOT be homosexuals or atheists.

The defining paragraph of the charter agreement is clear and I quote:

"Select a unit committee of parents and members of the chartered organization (minimum of 3) who will screen and select unit leaders who meet the organization's standards as well as the leadership standards of the BSA"

It is plain to see that a leader in the Venture Crew must meet the standards to join CAP in addition to the BSA requirements.  The BSA will not issue a charter to a unit that does not agree to this.  Argue all you want, it will not change facts.

[Major Lord]

Bill, perfectly said.

Major Lord

[Nathan]

It is plain to see that a leader in the Venture Crew must meet the standards to join CAP in addition to the BSA requirements.  The BSA will not issue a charter to a unit that does not agree to this.  Argue all you want, it will not change facts.

And the fact is that CAP MUST maintain regulatory control over the relationship with the BSA. The charter works right up until CAP says it doesn't work. In terms of membership, think of it this way. If a gay member was perfectly eligible for CAP membership, it would be mighty difficult legally for CAP to discriminate against that member for his or her sexuality, regardless of the omission in the discrimination policy. Using that logic, it really isn't hard to figure out the rest.

The BSA so far hasn't complained, and as I said, I know of an openly gay member who became a Venture Crew leader with absolutely NO objections from any BSA unit they worked with in the whole wing. If there were any objections, they didn't matter legally enough to become an issue. You can't be the only one to have these issues, right? We assumed that the BSA handled their problems internally. Either that, or nobody really cared to begin with (which, in an abstract sort of way means that the rule is enforced as much as rules against jaywalking).

I don't forget the fact that the charter was likely written for all of the organizations that the BSA works with, but when working with CAP, it's like adding a 0 on there. They can say what they want, but at the end of the day, it's going to be CAP's decision as to who they let through as leaders, because CAP leaders are going to be the ones who are running the joint activities 99% of the time. All it means is that the CAP-BSA relationship is far different than any other relationship the BSA has, because CAP REQUIRES us to be in charge. Our regulations come first, and as I said above, if the ONLY reason we have to discriminate against a member is sexual orientation, then it's going to be CAP having to fight the legal battle when push comes to shove, not the BSA.

With that, it means that CAP officers are in charge of CAP cadets. The CAP officers are judged as CAP officers before BSA members (since they are, according to regulations, more CAP than BSA), and if the BSA wants to fight back, they are more than welcome to withdraw. But so far they haven't, and at the end of the day, the nature of the relationship ENSURES that CAP can have the, "It's our way or the highway" attitude, NOT the BSA, as you seem to think.

If I was ACTUALLY barracks lawyering this, I could state that because the BSA prohibition against atheists (and homosexuals), the member would be protected by CAPR 32-9 1-1 b, where members will not be denied participation or eligibility for ANY CAP activity on the basis of, among other things, religion. Based on the wording, it doesn't have to be the member's religion, either. And so long as the Venture activity is still at least partially a CAP activity, the Supreme Court rulings still have no effect on our members, because, of course, regulations dictate that they are CAP members first. So what exactly is the moral guidance behind the BSA's decision to exclude homosexuals?

But that's barracks lawyering, right?

Just for reference, can you please post the BSA regulations specifically excluding openly homosexual members from leadership? We do need to make sure that if the wording on the contract says "leadership standards", then we should at least be able to look at the written document which defines them.

[cap235629]

look here for your answers, I am done.  I guarantee that if BSA knew the name of the member you speak of, they would no longer be a member of the BSA.

http://www.bsalegal.org/litigation-222.asp

In closing, I ask respectfully that this thread be locked because I am getting dizzy from all of this circular motion

[CadetProgramGuy]

and I request that it remain unlocked, as long as we can get off the Gay issue, and get back to the pro/cons of dual charter and hear some of the things that we are doing together.

Not everything can be a Uniform issue or IG issue.

You dual charter units out there....How is it working?

[whatevah]

I'll leave it unlocked for now. Nathan, the regs are clearly against you, as you have to comply with both regulations to participate in BSA stuff per the charter agreement.  Talk with your wing reg/legal folks about this and work up the chain.   Any further discussion on this topic will be deleted, along with the prior posts.

[CadetProgramGuy]

Thanks!!

[CadetProgramGuy]

Gonna bump my own for a minute.

CAP had a ranger program, venturing has a ranger program, are they even close to one another?

[Spike]

CAP had a ranger program, venturing has a ranger program, are they even close to one another?

Don't we still have a "Ranger Program"?  Venturing from my understanding and from looking at the materials is more in line with what CAP Rangers should be doing, as apposed as to what they are doing (i.e. eating bunnies, walking through the woods, eating bunnies, getting thrown in stagnant water, eating bunnies, walking to the top of a hill to watch Hawks, eating bunnies and of course eating bunnies)

They do share basic map reading, and basic land navigation.  Other than that I would opt for Venturing....over CAP's Ranger Programs. 

This is my opinion.  My Opinion may differ from your opinions, but we are all entitled to opinions.  So don't bash me for hating the Ranger Program in CAP, and I won't Bash you for loving the Ranger Program.....OK?!?!   :angel: