Court is Now in Session
National Governance 12 Comments 
blue book, farthest north council, governance, gsusa, membership dues, national board, national convention, national council, national delegate
Someone the other day in a Facebook group asked about the status of the Farthest North Council’s case versus GSUSA. In case you’re not familiar with it, Farthest North is suing GSUSA for overstepping its bounds per our organization’s Constitution when it raised membership dues from $12 to $15 in 2013 (effective 2014) and then $15 to $25 in 2016 (effective 2017). Well, that trial is being heard TODAY!
If you weren’t around during last summer’s blog drama and are wondering, NO, the National Council did NOT vote to give the National Board authority to raise dues at any time. And NO, the National Council did NOT vote for the increase from $12 to $15 OR the raise from $15 to $25. Don’t believe me? Read through all of the proposals and the results since 2008. While researching all of this, I was completely fascinated by the wholesale confusion about what really happened when discussion about past National Council Sessions took place. A friend told me the other day that this is a perfect example of what’s called the Mandela Effect, or a collective false memory.
Unfortunately, the case will not be airing on Judge Judy, so we’ll have to wait for a verdict. It may take weeks or even months for the judge to rule, and I’m sure GSUSA will appeal if it loses, so I don’t think this will be decided anytime soon. It’s also too bad Judge Judy isn’t hearing the case, because I wonder if we’d hear classic Judyisms like her telling GSUSA’s lawyers, “Don’t pee on my leg and tell me it’s raining.” And if she felt particularly nasty that day, she’d say, “Beauty fades. Dumb is forever,” much to the delight of the television audience.
And YES, I do feel I can prove the case that the National Board does NOT have the authority to raise dues, and if you’re so inclined to either read it for the first time or to refresh your memory, here’s the original post from last summer that kicked off the madness. That said, all of those blog posts and a few dollars will buy you a cup of overpriced coffee at Starbucks, because now it’s time for the professionals to take over.
Want to read the case?
Here’s FN’s side: FNGSC V GSUSA VERIFIED COMPLAINT
And GSUSA’s Motion to Dismiss: GSUSA Motion to Dismiss
The Entire Saga can be found here:
- Court is Now in Session - March 19, 2018
- GSUSA Claims To See Russia From Alaska - May 7, 2018
- Farthest North vs. GSUSA: The Sequel - April 18, 2019
- Farthest North vs. GSUSA: The Final Battle - September 19, 2019
- Farthest North vs. GSUSA: The Animated GIF Edition - October 10, 2019
- Farthest North vs. GSUSA: It’s Over. For Real This Time. - January 17, 2020
- Stop Being Hypocritical, GSUSA - January 2, 2021
- If You Can’t Beat ‘Em, Yank Their Charter - May 4, 2021
- Farthest North vs. GSUSA: It’s Over. Really Really Really. - July 22, 2021
Time for justice. Excellent research and presentation of what the GSUSA rules are. If GSUSA gets away with this and isn’t held accountable to its own rules, how do we expect any council, service unit, troop or individual to take and GSUSA rule or guideline seriously!
What I don’t understand is why no other council followed suit. They certainly should be more than one council, if women leaders truly believed that well behaved women did not make history – this would be one time not to obey when you are being stripped of your power to make a decision that effects the number of girls that can be Girl Scouts.
Good question. I’m guessing turnover on both council staff and local boards was a factor.
THAT (to GS Since 1968) is the conundrum and it’s probably related to two key things – Council staff execs desiring to keep their jobs (not rocking the boat with the mother ship) and Council boards that aren’t quite that astute to the nuances of the blue book and proper protocols (the farthest north board gets it). Or it could be that there’s been such a revolving door at Councils that few leaders are actually equipped to really pay attention to and understand the governance of the overall organization coupled with “well that’s what GSUSA says” so it must be right. And let’s face it, not everyone is cut out to be the force behind constructive dissent. The dissenters standing up for the beliefs of the organization are the first to be chastised and chased out. They are also smart enough to realize when to cut bait and move to a new fishing hole. Kudos to the Alaska mighty, may they prevail.
Amy, thanks for this update. I have wondered about the status of the case. I had to “step back” this year because of all the negative feelings I’d been developing about the organization over this and a few other issues. I hope that Far North prevails in the case and that sanity somehow returns to stabilize the organization. Unfortunately, there have been many casualties of the decisions made and way the organization (national administration, and filtering down to council level) conducted itself over the past 10 years that I think there’s a whole lotta people that already voted with their feet, myself included. I admire you and others for sticking with it and working for change.
GIRL Power in action. Girl Scouts make great leaders, and this council is paying attention. I really wish others would follow suit.
Councils don’t sue because they would risk having their charter revoked or (more likely) granted on a year-to-year basis. No charter = no right to use GS name.
Ann, do you know if a charter has ever been revoked, and if so, do you know the cause?
Technically, charters are revoked when councils merge, but I don’t know of any punitive revocation. There are cases where charters were renewed for unusually short periods.
Part of the problem is separating out the question of how much the dues should be vs the question of whether GSUSA is required to follow its own bylaws. Whenever the discussion of the latter comes up, the defense is some argument about why the dues need to be $25. Which is why I applauded Amy’s brilliance in trying to bring a motion to the National Council so that the National Council would explicitly vote to raise the dues to $25.
This isn’t about what the dues are, it’s about who’s in charge. If the membership is not in charge, then it’s not Girl Scouts.
Re: revocation of a charter- When I lived in the Boston area in the 1970s, there was no Scouting available in the metro area. The charter had been revoked. I do not know why the charter had been revoked, but it was gone. Just at the end of the 70s, Scouting returned and several councils were formed.
Someone pointed out to me that the results of this case do not affect the rest of us and do not establish any kind of authority except in the state of Alaska.