Eagle BOR Makeup?

[smtroop168]

For #2's, we (his parents) gave the DAC a short list of people that we knew would be happy to sit on his board, and then left it up to him to decide and arrange. The only input #2 gave was that he asked the DAC to please NOT include the CC on his board.

You of course know that this was inappropriate.

[6yearscouter]

Our district asks each eagle scout candidate to bring 1 or 2 people to his board. They don't sit on his board though. The district trades those people out with the other eagle scout candidates BOR's. That way the district doesn't have to provide all the adults for each board and they get new blood coming in who often decide they like doing eagle boards and sign up to help the district eagle board committee. It seems to work out. While waiting and for the group introductions, the scout has people there who he knows and trusts which helps him start out on the right foot.

[AquilaNegra2]

For #2's, we (his parents) gave the DAC a short list of people that we knew would be happy to sit on his board, and then left it up to him to decide and arrange. The only input #2 gave was that he asked the DAC to please NOT include the CC on his board.

You of course know that this was inappropriate.

Which part? Giving him names? I don't see how. They were men that we knew would make themselves available to give up an evening, who had done EBORs before and knew what they were doing, who we knew would grill him, and who support Scouting. The makeup was the DAC's decision, and he knew that; we simply gave him some resources.

Or did you mean the CC? Because of the "no input"? That's a toughie. Having sat on EBORs, I think I would want to know if someone else was coming in with an agenda. Does that serve the Scout, or Scouting? I suppose it would have been better coming from us (the parents).

[smtroop168]

For #2's, we (his parents) gave the DAC a short list of people that we knew would be happy to sit on his board, and then left it up to him to decide and arrange. The only input #2 gave was that he asked the DAC to please NOT include the CC on his board.

You of course know that this was inappropriate.

Which part? Giving him names? I don't see how. They were men that we knew would make themselves available to give up an evening, who had done EBORs before and knew what they were doing, who we knew would grill him, and who support Scouting. The makeup was the DAC's decision, and he knew that; we simply gave him some resources.

Or did you mean the CC? Because of the "no input"? That's a toughie. Having sat on EBORs, I think I would want to know if someone else was coming in with an agenda. Does that serve the Scout, or Scouting? I suppose it would have been better coming from us (the parents).

How about all parts...Giving names or asking someone to be excluded is not allowed.

8.0.0.3 Composition of the Board of Review
A board of review must consist of no fewer than three members and no more than six. For further specifi cations, see “Particulars for Tenderfoot Through Life Ranks (or Palms),” 8.0.2.0, and “Particulars for the Eagle Scout Rank,” 8.0.3.0. Unit leaders and assistants may not serve on a board of review for a Scout in their own unit. Parents or guardians may not serve on a board for their son. The candidate or his parent(s) or guardian(s) shall have no part in selecting any board of review members.

[AquilaNegra2]

How about all parts...Giving names or asking someone to be excluded is not allowed.

8.0.0.3 Composition of the Board of Review
A board of review must consist of no fewer than three members and no more than six. For further specifi cations, see “Particulars for Tenderfoot Through Life Ranks (or Palms),” 8.0.2.0, and “Particulars for the Eagle Scout Rank,” 8.0.3.0. Unit leaders and assistants may not serve on a board of review for a Scout in their own unit. Parents or guardians may not serve on a board for their son. The candidate or his parent(s) or guardian(s) shall have no part in selecting any board of review members.

Have to disagree with you here. We gave names of people who were willing; the DAC made the choice whether to include them or not. Perhaps your district has adults chomping at the bit to sit on EBORs. That's not the case here. We did not select the members for his board, we just provided a larger pool.

As for the CC, I suppose it would have been better to make an explanation rather than a request. The decision who to select was still his.

The obvious purpose of this provision is so that candidates do not stack the board with those who will pencil-whip them through Eagle.

[smtroop168]

How about all parts...Giving names or asking someone to be excluded is not allowed.

8.0.0.3 Composition of the Board of Review
A board of review must consist of no fewer than three members and no more than six. For further specifi cations, see “Particulars for Tenderfoot Through Life Ranks (or Palms),” 8.0.2.0, and “Particulars for the Eagle Scout Rank,” 8.0.3.0. Unit leaders and assistants may not serve on a board of review for a Scout in their own unit. Parents or guardians may not serve on a board for their son. The candidate or his parent(s) or guardian(s) shall have no part in selecting any board of review members.

Have to disagree with you here. We gave names of people who were willing; the DAC made the choice whether to include them or not. Perhaps your district has adults chomping at the bit to sit on EBORs. That's not the case here. We did not select the members for his board, we just provided a larger pool.

As for the CC, I suppose it would have been better to make an explanation rather than a request. The decision who to select was still his.

The obvious purpose of this provision is so that candidates do not stack the board with those who will pencil-whip them through Eagle.

I guess your definition of "having no part" is widely different than mine. Were you successful in having no part in that your pool candidates sat on the EBOR and the CC did not? It is the DAC and CAC's concern to find board members. Your council web sites shows they had over 500 Eagles in 2010. Finding EBOR members can't be that hard in Seattle!! Your statement on "obvious purpose" is correct. So why provide any input since it can be construed as "having a part".

[RWSmith]

Enough already!

[ Hint: January 1, 2012 ]

[smtroop168]

I received the exact same question from a CC from a unit today. A Mom in this unit insists that she provide the CC with EBOR members for her son.