7 Reasons Why the National Council Should Have Sole Authority Over Membership Dues: Cliff Notes Version

Earlier this year, I wrote a War & Peace version of why I believe the National Council should have sole authority over membership dues with an accompanying post about how the National Board & GSUSA’s version of the membership dues timeline in the 2020 National Council Session Workbook is false.  My friend Amy D and I also recorded a webinar for the fun of it recapping things.  We lip sync and the presentation is neat looking, so if you have 22 minutes to spare, check it out.

But I realize a lot of people don’t have the time to read a lengthy explanation or watch a webinar about why Proposals 2 through 4 should be shown the door.  So National Delegates who need a short recap, this post is for you.  Everybody else, if you agree with it, please forward this to your National Delegates and/or raise these points when you meet with them (and hopefully you do).  This message has to get out via grassroots channels because many Facebook groups no longer allow links to blogs, whereas GSUSA and the National Board have direct contact with ALL delegates via email, their council leadership, the delegate website, webinars, and regional meetings.

So here are my seven reasons why Proposal 2 should either be amended to naming the National Council as the ONLY authority or why it should not pass as written.  I also speak to Proposals 3 & 4.  I’m going to be very, very blunt, but I just want to cut to the chase for time’s sake.  If you want a more diplomatic version and more in-depth rationale, read the first one.  Also I’m going to write short rebuttals for some statements I’m seeing out there.  I promise I will keep this one short.  Buckle up. 

WE Own The Movement

WE’RE the National Council.  The National Council represents EVERYBODY (aka the MEMBERSHIP of this organization) and WE’RE responsible for The Movement per the GSUSA Constitution.   Not just some people up in NYC, and not just twenty-five people who meet a couple of times a year on a conference call.  US.  This is why WE should control membership dues.

1)  Asking the National Council for approval on membership dues ensures that THE MEMBERSHIP is engaged in matters and not just a select few.

National Board & GSUSA, you had your chance.  There was a hostile takeover at the 2008 NCS, and you promised that we’d be a part of the picture through the years when it came to membership dues among other things.  It didn’t happen.  I provide proof via direct quotes in my original blog post.  Not giving the Nat’l Board authority in the Constitution FORCES the Nat’l Council to be a part of the picture.  But wait, doesn’t bringing these proposals to the NCS count as getting our take?  Let’s be honest.  For the past 12 years, the only reason anything dues related came to the NCS was because they needed something changed in the Blue Book that they couldn’t do themselves.  And that’s what is happening here.  I don’t like it any more than the next person, but let’s call it for what it is.

2)   The National Council truly understands “the market” because it IS the market.

WE, the MEMBERSHIP, know how much we can afford.  WE work directly with parents.  Not people up in NYC and not people on a conference call who meet a few times a year.  And no offense, but not all council CEOs and board chairs on task forces created by GSUSA are plugged into the volunteer and the older girl voice.  They do not represent the MEMBERSHIP as the Nat’l Council does.

3)   Shared authority won’t work.

Say the Nat’l Board raised dues between a NCS, and then the Nat’l Council thought it was way too much and brought a proposal to the next NCS and lowered them.   That would create a very dangerous power struggle.  Is that what we want?  Like the movie Highlander said, “There can be only one.”

4)   The National Board making decisions about membership dues doesn’t allow the National Council to fulfill its directed role.

The GSUSA Constitution says the Nat’l Council fulfills its role (emphasis added) “by considering and acting upon proposals directed toward the fostering and improvement of Girl Scouting, by receiving and acting upon reports of its National Board of Directors, and by giving guidance to the National Board upon general lines of direction of the Movement and program.”  Just receiving reports from the Nat’l Board turns the Nat’l Council into a passive body.  Next thing you know, they’ll say, “Why do we even need a Nat’l Council?” – if they’re not already saying it.  Then bye bye membership voice.  We struggle enough trying to be heard right now.

5)   The National Council controlling membership dues puts GSUSA on a budget, acts as a check & balance, and holds them accountable.

Right now, there’s no check & balance for the $55.7 million going to GSUSA via dues.  All we can do right now is wring our hands and ask what they’re doing with our money and complain when we see it being wasted.  The MEMBERSHIP controlling membership dues is a way to keep them on a budget and find out where our money is going via detailed reports like they used to create back before the 2008 Hostile Takeover.  Now, you could say GSUSA will just raise prices on uniforms and sell dog treats and what not, but here’s the thing.  If you want to be a Girl Scout, you have no choice but to pay membership dues.  This would protect those who could least afford it.

6)   There’s no need to “establish a procedure” or issue promises when it comes to membership dues – because there’s already one in place.

This has to specifically do with Proposal 3, which is the one in which the Nat’l Board & GSUSA claim they’ll get input and then send out a report to councils and National Delegates after action is taken on membership dues.  Here’s the problem with that:

1. The Nat’l Board & GSUSA say they’ll put out a “report.”  What will be in it specifically?  A paragraph could serve as a “report.”
2. They say they’ll get input before making a decision.  From whom?  All they’ve used in the past are task forces with hand-picked CEOs, board chairs, and national volunteers.  And some of those people could also serve as National Delegates, so technically, they’ve fulfilled their promise right there.
3. They say they’ll let Nat’l Delegates know once they make their decision. How?  Post it in the delegate website and not tell anyone about it like they’ve done in the past?  Leave it up to councils?  A lot of councils don’t engage their Nat’l Delegates after the NCS is over.
4. How do we know this isn’t just lip service?  There’s no guarantee anybody is really listening to us.
5. What happens if they either don’t ask for input or send out a report?  There’s nothing in this proposal that would hold them accountable if what they put out wasn’t acceptable or they didn’t do it at all.

So to sum up Proposal 3 in which we’ve heard this promise before:  fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.  Anyway, there’s already a procedure in place per the GSUSA Constitution, and that’s to bring a proposal to the NCS.  Let’s not recreate the wheel.

7)   Using the democratic process via the National Council ensures that the best decision for Girl Scouting is made.

Here’s what happened when the decision about membership dues was left up to the folks in NYC and the ones on a conference call who meet a couple of times a year claiming they need to act “swiftly:”

1. Everybody freaked out when dues went up $10 because that was a lot.  And they had JUST been raised by $3 before that.
2. Everybody yelled at council staff wanting to know WHY dues were raised so much.  And the staff had a hard time explaining why.
3. Councils had to make up the difference with financial aid.  They’re pinched enough as it is already.
4. The Farthest North council sued GSUSA because of the 2008 Hostile Takeover and WON.  Oops!
5. The Nat’l Board & GSUSA rushed through the decision about the extended membership level and had to make two changes in less than a year.  They should have just asked the Nat’l Council at the 2017 NCS which was sandwiched in between, and we would have had just ONE decision.

And can they not budget for a three year period?  Sure, bringing dues proposals to the NCS slows down the process, but there’s a good reason for it.  That’s so that we will study and discuss all sides of the picture and make the CORRECT decision as a true Movement (which in case anyone forgot, includes the MEMBERSHIP).  This can only happen via Nat’l Delegates at a NCS.  We cannot afford to screw up when it comes to this.

IN SUMMARY

If you vote for these proposals as written, you are leaving decisions about membership dues in the hands of only twenty-five people and a handful of others who may or may not consult with a handful of people who may or may not know their membership, and something that could be called a “report” may or may not be sent out to a select few, or maybe more than that, who may or may not share this information with their membership. Also, if the Nat’l Board has control, you can’t complain the next time dues are raised whether it’s by a few dollars or doubled.

Other Statements and Questions

What about Proposal 4 that would limit the Nat’l Board from raising dues by no more than 25% between National Council Sessions?

I did the math, and this is potentially what it could look like in the future:

So that means a girl starting her first year as a Daisy next year could pay $80 by the time she graduates as an Ambassador.  I’m not saying it WILL happen, but it COULD.

We need to bring our membership dues up to what everybody is charging to make us more relevant. People don’t take us seriously because our dues are so low.

I’m not sure what this has to do with who should have what authority. It’s a straw man argument. But let’s go there.  People who say this forget that some councils charge a service fee on top of dues, and a lot of troops charge dues on top of that. They also forget that parents and troops still have to shell out money for badges, patches, uniforms, books, events, programming, etc.  So add all of that up, and I bet we get close to what others are charging. Plus, who cares what others are charging?  We’re not them. Let’s not be elitist and push out a whole segment of society just because they don’t live up to a certain standard based on money.

The Nat’l Board has authority anyway and this just makes it “official.”

FIVE impartial state Supreme Court justices disagree with that statement, and they base their opinion on Washington D.C. law. Supreme Court justices > general counsel at GSUSA.  Just sayin’.

The Nat’l Board needs to be able to raise dues because the viability of our Movement is at stake.

Let’s read between the lines here.  Basically whoever says this doesn’t trust the Nat’l Council, meaning they think volunteers will keep dues too low and we’ll go bankrupt or something.  How about giving the MEMBERSHIP and our organization’s governance structure some credit, please?  We’re not a bunch of uneducated idiots.  If the Nat’l Board & GSUSA bring a very good rationale to a NCS as to why dues need to go up, the democratic process will take place, and the Nat’l Council will decide what’s best for Girl Scouting.

By the way, this isn’t just about raising dues.  This is also about creating new levels of membership dues.  What if they decided to create a dues level that we thought didn’t make sense?  Or it puts our financials at risk because they didn’t foresee certain consequences because they’re not in touch with the MEMBERSHIP?  They would have the authority to do whatever they want.

The membership dues timeline in the Workbook shows that the Nat’l Council has been okay with what’s gone on the past 12 years.

Sorry, but that Workbook timeline is waaaaaay misleading.  And the 2008 Workbook rationale they include in it?   It’s a manipulation of the Blue Book, and the Farthest North lawsuit proved their rationale false.  What’s gone on for the past 12 years was a big Jedi Mind Trick by biased legal counsel from GSUSA, and they’re STILL trying to put the whammy on us.  Come on, GSUSA.  We’re better than that.  You can read about it in more detail in this blog post featuring Alice in Wonderland pictures.

So what do we do about this? 

I include my thoughts on what has to happen from a parliamentary procedure standpoint in my lengthier blog post.  Just scroll down to the bottom.  I’m going to write some future blog posts with some more thoughts and suggestions when it comes to parliamentary procedure too.  ‘Cause I’m nerdy like that.

Thoughts?  Feel free to post them below whether you’re a National Delegate or not.  It’s part of the democratic process.  And then read about how GSUSA & the National Board are going to interpret voting.

Addendum:  I am not a National Delegate nor do I represent my council’s delegation with these views.