Frequently Asked Questions
What is the lawsuit (GSNEO members vs. GSNEO management) about?
The main question is simply, " Do Girl Scouts have a say in their own council?" .
The ironic part is that Girl Scouting everywhere has always stressed the importance of girl decision-making. At younger age levels, troops leaders ( or other adult volunteers) provide guidance. But as the girls get older, the leader's job is to back off and let the girls do more and more. By the time they are Seniors, the girls should be completely in control of their own program - with the adult volunteer tagging along as a resource. At age 14 Girl Scouts are eligible to vote for membership delegates. They may also become membership delegates themselves. The council board of direcors always includes two girls Girl leadership is the single consistant theme in Girl Scouting - regardless of whether the activities happen to be camping, badgework, travel, service projects, cookie sales, and now- the new journey programs and Take Action Projects.
Given our history and our very reason for being, GSNEO should have relied the opinion of the girls in deciding which camps to keep. They didn't.
The GSNEO board of directors set up a process to make it look as though they were consulting the girls ( see related FAQ ) . But the responces of the girls were not what the board wanted. So the board simply ignored the girls and patted themselves on the back for "consulting with the membership". After the board decision was announced, girls and adult representatives of girls protested in every non-violent way possible. They also used the council's own democratic process to present a reasonable alternative. The council staff - under the direction of the board - first set up roadblocks to prevent the members from using the democratic process. When these roadblocks were overcome and the GSNEO General Assembly passed a resolution requiring that the council halt camp sales until the decision was re-evaluated, the board took no notice. When delegates repeatedly pressed the boad to honor the resolution, the board set up a token and completely irrelevant "listening session"
So now we have a situation where Girl Scouting says "Girls can do Anything! ", " Take Action!" , "Take Charge! " yet the GSNEO board says " We will tell you what is best for you. You have no say. It's a done deal"
What the court will be deciding is no less than the fundemental nature of Girl Scouting. Either it's a movement promoting girl leadership or its a girl's club that sells cookies for the directors.
The main question is simply, " Do Girl Scouts have a say in their own council?" .
The ironic part is that Girl Scouting everywhere has always stressed the importance of girl decision-making. At younger age levels, troops leaders ( or other adult volunteers) provide guidance. But as the girls get older, the leader's job is to back off and let the girls do more and more. By the time they are Seniors, the girls should be completely in control of their own program - with the adult volunteer tagging along as a resource. At age 14 Girl Scouts are eligible to vote for membership delegates. They may also become membership delegates themselves. The council board of direcors always includes two girls Girl leadership is the single consistant theme in Girl Scouting - regardless of whether the activities happen to be camping, badgework, travel, service projects, cookie sales, and now- the new journey programs and Take Action Projects.
Given our history and our very reason for being, GSNEO should have relied the opinion of the girls in deciding which camps to keep. They didn't.
The GSNEO board of directors set up a process to make it look as though they were consulting the girls ( see related FAQ ) . But the responces of the girls were not what the board wanted. So the board simply ignored the girls and patted themselves on the back for "consulting with the membership". After the board decision was announced, girls and adult representatives of girls protested in every non-violent way possible. They also used the council's own democratic process to present a reasonable alternative. The council staff - under the direction of the board - first set up roadblocks to prevent the members from using the democratic process. When these roadblocks were overcome and the GSNEO General Assembly passed a resolution requiring that the council halt camp sales until the decision was re-evaluated, the board took no notice. When delegates repeatedly pressed the boad to honor the resolution, the board set up a token and completely irrelevant "listening session"
So now we have a situation where Girl Scouting says "Girls can do Anything! ", " Take Action!" , "Take Charge! " yet the GSNEO board says " We will tell you what is best for you. You have no say. It's a done deal"
What the court will be deciding is no less than the fundemental nature of Girl Scouting. Either it's a movement promoting girl leadership or its a girl's club that sells cookies for the directors.
