fred8033

Define "end"? BSA exits bankruptcy as a new fresh company? Or approved agreements? Appeals / challenges resolved? Money is in the trust? Money distributed from the trust? If just simply BSA exits bankruptcy ... BSA entered Feb 2020. ... Exit date? ... I have no clue. All legal wrangling? Years. This forum will have a thread on this very topic going still in 2024. I hope BSA can exit bankruptcy this year. ... but it's just hope ...

I'd encourage everyone to find a way to work together. This is stressful and gut wrenching for all. General comments. Your church has a right to be concerned about signing the charter org agreement. It's not honorific. It's a contract. Words matter. ... The agreement says your church would "Conduct the Scouting program consistent with BSA rules, regulations, and policies." By signing, it your church is accepting responsibility. Your church needs to have a plan to fulfill that commitment. Maybe it means a board member involved in the unit. Maybe the COR/CC are involved in the church board. Maybe there is a planned staff structure. Maybe there is a reporting structure. ... The key is if the church is not willing to set that up and take responsibility, it should not sign the charter. Your church still owns the unit even if it doesn't re-charter the unit. Chartering is about being active and having members. Ownership is about unit numbers, bank account, assets, etc. If you want to change to another church, you need to work with the current church to release the number and assets. Your church spinning off an independent board with leadership to run the unit and at the same time pursuing a facility use agreement sounds like they want to keep the unit running. It can be seen as good. Getting a tax id is easy. Keeping non-profit records is a bit harder, but not a killer. Youth will notice #1 a new building / facility and #2 adults not getting along with each other. This really sounds like an adult and adult relationship issue triggered by the current chartering challenges.

Hand it to the council and buy the award.

Absolutely. I agree. My pack(s) had to do that multiple times too. My apologies. Too late at night and I probably did not write sensitively. I'm like that. Sometimes I miss being sensitive. I did not mean to put the emphasis on the registration issue. I brought up registration to communicate that you should not penalize the DL because the registrations did not meet the exact award. Often, the registrations are outside the DLs control. My emphasis was on the fill out the award application and get them registered. IMHO, the adult awards are a thank you and should not be treated like the requirements in the scout handbooks.

"need to be registered" is the official answer. The answer I've often seen ... including from our council officials ... is if the person is doing the job, get them the recognition. ... NOW ... it begs why the pack doesn't have everyone registered in the right position. That is very important for training and knowing who works with the scouts. BUT, that's the committee chairs job to get all that straight. Don't penalize the den leader who's often only been in scouts for a few years and rarely has worked with chartering the unit and doing the registrations. The adult recognition awards / knots are about recognizing their investment and saying thank you.

Your situation is horrible and truly unimaginable. I did not imagine it. In my council, there are two more levels between DE and SE. A DE would never be promoted directly to SE. First promotion to a field director. Then, a promotion to a higher level director role. It's a 25-30 year route in my council. I really have a hard time imagining (not saying it didn't happen ... I'm saying I can't envision it) where an SE would give drugs, alcohol and porn. Perhaps I'm just too shielded from ugly things that people can do to each other.

Understood. A personal context is meaningful. The question was about whether someone could be personally liable if the insurance was not properly in place. The DE at the time was probably in his young 20s. Probably first job. Minimal pay. Not an excuse. Just that he was not in a controlling situation. I'd hope he would have prevented the abuse. But as an inexperienced, minimal pay, passing on info he was given, I can't see a court order reaching into the company and having him pay for your victimization. Those held personally liable and asked to pay are more in the Purdue situation (owners, top level executives). I'd expect the DE's boss is in his retirement home and the scout exec from that time is at best really old. No excuses. The question was about whether anyone will be personally held liable. I can't anyone from 40 years ago would be held liable because they were too young or they are in their late years at best.

BSA? National is bankrupt. There is no money there. It's moot. People? The former DEs that were making a small wage at the time? Probably not. They were simply the middle-man for the message they were being given. Negligent medium-level professionals who repeated it in the 1970s / 1980s / 1990s? You need to pull them out of the retirement homes to be sued. The executive professionals who planned / signed the insurance contracts? They need to be dug up to be sued. Local councils? Individually they just don't have the cash to cover the liabilities without insurance. Many would argue the scouting program was happening in the CO's presence; in their facilities; under CO selected leadership. Plus, most LCs could argue they were hood-winked by the insurance problems too. IMHO ... there is no recovery path. FYI ... I forget the thread. A thread said that there are 40,000 to 100,000 COs that could be sued as part of this. I wish I could remember the context. Wow.

When I read this, I think about a single insurance company paying out twice for the same incident. I can't see an insurance company paying out a portion for a BSA claim. Then, later paying a separate portion for a LC claim. And, a separate portion for a CO claim. ... My understanding ... and this is what I'd like to understand ... before the insurance company pays anything to cover a list of incidents, that payment would have to cover the incident as a whole; not just the portion owed by one party. Are we in a multi-billion dollar game of chicken right now? No one can afford never reaching an agreement. Not BSA. Not the LCs. Not the COs. Not the victims. Not the victim's lawyers. As sick as it sounds, the only parties that may do better if an agreement can't be reached seems to be BSA and the insurance companies. BSA because it could go thru a BSA-only bankruptcy. Insurance companies because they can push out, delay and fight liability.

Could suits also face a LC challenge to negligence? If an LC can show relatively few cases and the LC followed procedure to roll them up, the LC could claim it was following trained procedure, doing more than other organizations and was blind to the BSA records showing larger number of incidents? ... I'm not sure it would work, but the negligence tier changes. In some ways, this seems right as it moves general huge level negligence into looking at specific incidents. That seems to be a good thing; extremely painful, but good. I should clarify "good". By good, I mean that I absolutely cringe thinking of someone effectively getting $5,000 to $20,000 for the trauma of CSA. Dealing with the specifics seems to get people their day in court. I doubt it gets more money, but moves away from the hidden abstract and an insulting amount of money.

Great answer. Wrong thread. Perhaps aims/goals/benefits need to be split between where leaders actively invest and where the scouts passively benefit. * Actively invest in camping, outdoors, etc * Passively benefit from character building, leadership, etc. I swear camping overnight in a torrential down pour goes a long way to a new scout building character and far more than almost all scout leaders.

Yet another potential tangent. For revisiting purpose, Let's de-escalate leadership. It's the natural outcome we can brag about. We should invest on fellowship. Youth spending time with youth. Youth working with youth. Leadership will be a natural outcome. Too often the program is damaged by badly teaching leadership. Reviewing this thead. Clearly reflects I need to get back to work.

Absolutely. My youngest son has that on the back of his sash too. I'm not a fan of the metal pin devices to count extra, but it's one way. I'd like to see bragging rights recognition like that. Heck, if for every 25 nights, my oldest could have earned it 10 times before he aged out. My youngest 5 times. ... me ... I've lost count.

Your other points are good. I want to emphasize #1. Originally, Baden-Powell created scouting during urbanization and the loss of scout-craft. Using the military like structure that alienates many. Using archaic skills (heresy, but often viewed this way) that many now just don't care about. I really question "clarity of mission". As a parent, I scream for ways to get my kids outside and getting experiences. IMHO, this aligns with the society valuing "bucket lists"; another version of bragging rights. What items would you like to be able to say you've done? 50 mile bike ride? Swimming? Canoeing? Skiing. Snow camping. Rockies? Zip lines. Horses. etc, etc, etc. Laser tag. Dodge ball. Paint ball. (again heresy). Everyone wants bragging rights. Things to be proud of. ... That's the whole purpose of the merit badge sash. Bragging rights. ... Sadly, today the MB sash is "Look at what I wasted my time doing." ... Remember how I filled out that MB workbook. Remember how we sat in that classroom on Monday nights or that Saturday morning. Look I've got all four citizen badges. I know others might not like it, but the back of a few of my son's sash'es have really cool things they have done. High adventure base patches. National parks / monuments. IMHO, the back of their sash is more about bragging rights than the front. The back tells their scouting story. I really wish the front of the MB sash was for real bragging rights too. How about a stripe (or tent) for every 20 nights of camping. How about another wheel for every 50 miles of biking. Another pear of shoes patch for every 25 miles of hiking. etc, etc, etc. I wish scouting was a great bucket list activity.

Sad thought is the debt may save SBR during bankruptcy. Similar for Philmont with the question of whether the Philmont debt will be challenged. A similar thing may save BSA's IP. BSA's IP value is reduced by BSA's congressional charter that says BSA is a perpetual corporation. BSA can sell assets; such as it's IP. BUT, theoretically a future president (say an Eagle Scout) could restart / reinvigorate BSA. How much would you spend on BSA's IP if you knew that BSA could be resurrected and compete against you? BSA's congressional charter doesn't mean much, but it does mean BSA is perpetual and continues to exist ... even if liquidated. http://www.usscouts.org/aboutbsa/bsacharter.asp That would take an act of Congress to change.

Not a simple question. Scouting will survive. It has a strong legacy and many desire the program to continue. ... I look at today's youth. Couch bound with internet and video games. We need an outdoor program emphasizing fellowship and adventure. Will BSA survive? I think so. It won't be as rich for decades, but it will. In reality, it doesn't really need much to continue. BSA is it's intellectual property and vision. Perhaps the question is whether it will keep Philmont, Sea Base, Northern Tier and the Summit.

@T2Eagle is right. Id add on further. Coordinate with your DE or your a council staff. I'm sure there is a plan of communication even if the plan is that they have nothing yet to say this month. It is okay to push back on the DE. If you are getting curious unit leaders, let the DE know that you need something. In our district, it's the DE's job or even above him. I've yet to the RT commissioner or other volunteers speak to it. They are just not speaking from a point of knowledge. About as far as I'd share without good coordination is letting scouters know to look at articles on Bryan on scouting or other guided sources. Beyond that, I'd focus on the next district camporee or membership drive or MB weekend or ...

Great comments. I've been in multiple troops. Some of the worst scouting experiences we've had are in highly structured troops that often bragged about boy-led. Reality is it was boy-led and adult nagged. I think @InquisitiveScouter is exactly right. Scout's objectives may not be your objectives. Football and cards are great activities as they give the scouts a chance to socialize and connect. That is one of the most important aspects of scouting. Scouting is social. A successful scout builds life-long friendships. The only caveat I'll give is that not all scouts are the same. I'd encourage troops to find or choose at least one activity; maybe more. Maybe it's a hike to the highest point. Maybe it's a swim or exploring or ... something. If patrols or individual scouts don't want to participate, fine. BUT, try to give them the opportunity. There will always be some scouts that are not fully ready to socialize without guided activity. There will always be some scouts who know their parents are waiting at home for the scout to tell them what they did that was meaningful over the weekend. Oh, we hiked the XXXX up to XXXX and saw XXXXX. Or we earned XXXXX. Or we visited XXXXX. If the scouts choose the activity, you'll often see the scouts apply constructive cajoling to encourage participation. Hopefully, constructive pressure. ... BUT, ya know. If the scouts want their free time to de-compress and relax, fine.

I've seen several of our council level recruiting events. They bring in tens of scouts. A hugely successful event brings in a hundred. Usually the new scouts that were already going to join. They attend because they are aware of the event by having brothers or sisters or neighbors already in cub scouts.

I think we going back and forth over nothing. DEs help unit volunteer scouters and those unit volunteers do almost all the work. Council professionals help at the more indirect level of advertising, assembling materials, mapping out which areas are served, etc. The DE may help start a unit with a few meetings such as visiting the principal or a pastor; holding a recruiting night, etc. Beyond that, the local scouting is all unit based volunteers with the DE being the face of the council. Large councils tend to have more resources to staff the indirect level and the location of their offices is just not that important.

Yeah, I don't believe it. Units recruit. District execs start new units and support unit recruiting. Councils fund raise, plan and advertise summer camps, etc. Councils are extremely valuable, but the concepts of the past need to be rethought and resized.

Administratively, districts could provide the face-time; as they do now. Beyond that, the key face time is in the unit.

Sad. I can understand, but sad. Our council has at least three or four camps near. At least two less than an hour from downtown. Perhaps it's my view that the traditional scouting "office" building is not needed anymore. Yeah. Perhaps it's not the perfect answer. Perhaps an concept adjustment is needed. The issue is the cost of the council office properties is huge compared to the number of scouts served. I'm betting in my council, it's about $40 per scout given the pre-pandemic number of scouts ... not including staff.

I'd hope. GAAP is generally accepted. I've seen some. Some are posted thru non-profit sites. Per BSA: https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/financeimpact/pdf/local_council_accounting_manual_2014.pdf "Local councils are required to prepare and present financial statements in conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), which are established and promulgated by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). " I believe the statements are audited too by outside accounting agencies.