fred8033

Wishing you the best. This whole process is an emotional gut punch.

@ThenNow ... So, civil liability was retroactively extended as Supreme Court applied a difference between civil and criminal. Criminal cases were still bound by SOLs. So, are corporate criminal cases also bound by SOL? Or is there a SOL difference between human criminal cases versus a corporate criminal case? It seems then that we are bound by only recent criminal activity. For example, what is the SOL for the appropriate criminal activity for not reporting. Sexual abuse cases have extended SOLs, such as memory + years or adult + years. But what about failure to mandatory report? Essentially, what crime and what look back window? It seems the SOL starting point is NOW and then minus the window. 7 years. 10 years? 15 years? I'm hoping BSA was following the appropriate state law for the that time window. When did MI make youth program leaders mandatory reporters?

There is no ban. My favorite humor on this is the national Jamboree depended on scouts having cell phones. It's a 50/50. Some allow. Some don't. All say to use appropriately. In our troop, it was don't use the cell phone at the detriment of program or socializing with other scouts. We asked adults to follow the same standards as the scouts. We absolutely would not make the scouts search their gear and we would absolutely not collect phones. It's really not a good way to grow a connection with scouts or to treat them as mature, responsible people

Just checked the G2SS ... Register as a MBC and complete training. The G2SS says anyone camping more than 72 hours must be registered as a leader. ... It doesn't say "in your unit". Just as a leader. If you register as a MBC and take the YPT training, then show your BSA registration and BSA training certificates to the troop. As a CC, I'd accept that as fulfilling the requirement to be registered. I'd let you camp with the troop. The question is whether the church requires a Virtus training for camping with troop too. Or just being a key leader. There must be other non-Catholic members in the exact same boat.

This is the root of everything. It's something individual churches need to find a way around. BUT, it's hard. I'll sadly attribute the rest to words said in frustration by everyone. I'm sure the SM/CC and others were frustrated too. It's a huge mess. If they were friends before, find a way to patch the friendships. Apologies. It's easy to get defensive when we are affected and we are helping our kids. I'm betting historically, the troop has not been seen as a tightly linked program of the church. ... BEFORE ... NOW, driven by scandals and legal cases. Now, newly recognized liabilities made visible by BSA bankruptcy abuse settlements and possible CO exposure. NOW, the church must treat this as a church program following the church's official procedures. Training. Background checks. etc. ... It's why I'm recommending my troop's charter org sign a "facility use" agreement instead being a charter org. A few nice words and seeing how you can make this work will go a far way. Also, if your son was having a good experience in the troop ... find a way to let it go. Let your son have HIS experience. Try to minimize how your experience affects his.

Virtus training and additional background check. A church admin nightmare for non-members. The church might be boxed in to stay complaint with training and background check requirements. I ran a program at my Catholic church that had a large number of non-Catholic volunteers. There was a transition to require Catholic vulnerable person training and tracking background checks differently. ... It killed the program. ... We depended on dozens of volunteers from many areas. Multiple parishes. Multiple faiths. Some of no-faith. .... Tracking their training. Getting them "VIRTUS" trained. An extra church special background check ... It quickly killed the program. We had always required apps and background checks. ... The training and background checks were coordinated thru the home parish. ... aka a sponsor church ... If you are not a member, the background investigation cost needing to be paid for by the church and the church signing you up for VIRTUS training was really hard. We went from a great volunteer program that I had the honor of running it for almost ten years to something our volunteers had to support out of other churches. NONE of the other churches had a YPT requirement. https://www.virtusonline.org/virtus/ ... FYI ... the Virtus training was excellent. I always thought BSA & Virtus training I took were very complementary. One procedural (BSA). One eye opening (Virtus) ... None of the other churches had a background check requirement. .... Dozens of local churches. Lutheran. Episcopal. Methodist. Jewish. etc, etc, etc. To this day what I ran thru my church, I now volunteer at a different church. I'm still surprised my home church that I love requires the extra steps and the other church does not. Coordinating across parishes ... We even had a nightmare coordinating Catholic volunteers from a different parish (possibly incorporated separately, property is separate, admin separate, etc). The background checks are considered PRIVATE. Required individual release forms. Then, each home parish had to release data one-by-one. ... Admins (aka real individuals) have enough challenges organizing their own members. Organizing from other parishes and non-Catholic members is really hard. Serious issue ... Recent scandals and legal cases have been hard. New procedure. Extra oversight. The Church must take this seriously. Getting it right. Keeping records current. Paperwork in-place before the involvement. ... Changes continued to happen each year. .... Real challenges. Real cost. Timeline ... Think of this ... person wants to volunteer. Virtus first (schedule, take, a few weeks). Then money for background check. Do background check. then BSA registered and BSA training completed. Easily a month passes. Person can start volunteering. Every month, church needs to check for who will need their data refreshed. New background check. New training. etc. Nine months later it starts again. (two month buffer). Then on every twelve months after that. My recommendation ... is there a middle ground? I really, really doubt they are rejecting you or your son because of who you are. I bet it's a huge admin nightmare. QUESTION - Is there some way for you to volunteer / help without being registered on the committee? Campouts require BSA registration and YPT, but not necessarily troop registration. So, volunteer somewhere else to be registered and trained. Such as MBC or District or ??? or OA ? or ... Then, continue to help your troop. Drive scouts. Cook for adults on camp outs. Etc. Heck, the best job might be as standing cook for the adult patrol.

I can accept your view. I think scouting is more advanced than many programs especially as the leaders are now so focused on YPT. But I accept your view. ... I think the real risk in scouting is the stupidity at times. Do we really need a G2SS to prevent the use of canons at camp? Well, yes we do because ..... My concern is mainly from what I've seen through my life. Not seven layers of separation, but two. My city. My school. My kid's school. My kid's classmates. Local teachers. Local roller rink. Local music teacher(S). When I was a kid, it was several hockey players in my high school class suspended for what today is a felony. I truly believe more damage will be done by treating it as BSA specific. Society needs to recognize abuse happens, even where you least expect it. It needs to be recognized and reported. I remember what I considered a shocking YPT violation in the last ten years by a hockey team leaders. Traveling game. Hotel room. All the dads went out for an evening at the bar. One guy stayed back with the players. Was it always the same guy staying back? Staying late? Socializing with players on his own? ... IMHO, it should have been clear two or more should have stayed back. ... Ahhh ... but it's hockey. Abuse never happens there. (sarcasm) ... My wife has similar stories. The youth pastor who somehow quickly married a young lady that was one of the youth in the church.

Sometimes it's not about the money. It's about the key unique identity provided by the HA bases.

This is where I disagree. Really. I do disagree here. I hugely disagree that there was less opportunity. Mentors. Sleep overs. Camping. Lots of private locations (barns, shops, trips, etc). Previously also lacking YPT rules such as no one-on-one contact (getting in mentor's car). Parents trusting the great virtue of the volunteer leaders. ... This is where there is much in common with BSA. I'm not saying it's the same. I am saying it's naive to think it's fundamentally different. Abuse requires opporunity, time, privacy, etc. It is all there in 4-H just like BSA and many other programs. SLEEP OVERS ... https://www.deseret.com/2007/7/4/20028174/4-h-leader-in-tooele-is-charged-with-child-sex-abuse Monroe Music Makers in the Monroe County 4-H program ... https://detroit.cbslocal.com/2015/06/12/former-music-store-owner-convicted-in-child-porn-case-awaiting-trial-on-sex-assault/ 4-H Mentor and Coach ... https://www.abc15.com/news/crime/pd-former-glendale-4-h-coach-accused-of-sex-with-minor Acquittal, but very familiar comments. People testifying to volunteers good nature. People not believing accuser. Imagine this was 1980. This is how many trials would have gone. https://www.augustachronicle.com/article/20131006/NEWS/310069882 Search engines do yield far, far fewer results. Search engines have trouble with 4-H as a search parameter. Not key issue, but it is there. Much easier to search on BSA, YMCA, youth pastor, etc. I suspect it has to do with the 4-H as a tag and how it's search indexed. Change term from 4-H to YMCA or school or teacher or youth pastor and you get a current incident rate that is at least as high as BSA. I do believe 4-H as a search parameter is hard to queue up correctly. Looser boundaries may not be reported as 4-H. Family friend hosting a sleep over. Unless there is a cow or an animal, youth programs that don't immediately trigger "4-H" connection, example Music Makers. Scouting is "uniformed" and much more clear boundaries about inside scouting or outside. Reflecting back decades and you think about an adult friend / community member who taught you about animals or music and not necessarily a uniformed troop member. Do you immediately think 4-H? Or just a guy who did something wrong? Certain gender mixes and age mixes trigger less outrage. Seriously. Example is male youth with high school female teacher. In the 1970s / 1980s, this would not have been brought to police. If anything, friends would give a pat on the back and non-family adults would be not necessarily consider it abuse. ... NOW ... you see many female teachers regularily in the news arrested for sex abuse. ... I'd argue that was true with female-to-female also. ... And the nature of the incident is different, but yes, men tend to be the main predator. I think it opens many more possible cases once you recognize it was an abuse situation and not just a he's too old(20s) and she's too young. Or F/F or adult woman / male youth. I'm not debating a statistical difference. I'm asserting it's naive to 4-H has less occurences even though it has mentors, a loose program structure and a similar history to BSA. ... What I am betting is there is a definite difference in that 4-H doesn't have a 70+ years of records of volunteer incidents . I'm betting because it's recorded and administrated very differently.

Yep. No such files exist there. They did not track occurrences. Either the larger organization was more loose or the nature of the program had weak boundaries with inside / outside the program. 4-H had less occurrences. I don't buy it. 4-H has lots of private opportunities and lots of youth-adult interaction. What I do buy is either the incidents took a slightly different form that people don't interpret as so ugly or the program has suck lose boundaries that people don't strictly interpret it as a 4-H issue.

Per #1 LDS always had a special and unique relationship with scouting. It almost needs to be discussed separately. Per #2 Smaller collectives ... I've never really seen that. I don't think it exists. From what I've seen ... outside LDS ... I've not seen any hint of a faith based national org that knows which churches (or school districts or elementary schools) host scouting units. ... if anything, national level faith oriented scouting groups were more about disseminating info and providing options for faith specific pursuits. "if your church hosts a scouting unit, consider *******" Per #3 Yep.

Current events demonstrate the importance of having documents match reality. Yes. The charter org agreement did not match expectations. Now, it's an issue. The COs knew. The unit leaders knew. The councils knew. BSA knew. Most parents knew. ... Maybe less involved parents didn't think about it, but anyone attending committee meetings or campouts quickly saw a lack of CO involvement. Those signing just didn't think the CO had the level of responsibility now attributed to it. ... The charter agreement was more a promotional tool to increase CO involvement and not really a contract describing responsibilities. Now it's being used to argue a higher level of involvement and responsibility than was expected. So, it's important to have documents match reality. It's why I'm suggesting our CO move to a facility use agreement instead of a charter org agreement. I'm just asserting current legal attributions don't match what people were expecting.

Yeah, I flip flop all the time on OA. There is value in the OA elections and ceremony. It causes lots of reflection. It causes lots of pain too ... mainly from adults and parents ... why didn't Timmy get in? ... Well, maybe Timmy should be a #### in the ###. .... I'm in a flaky mood right now .... But the fact is except those scouts running OA, I see little practical use for OA. The elections and ceremonies teach lessons. But the actual day to day activities? ... I don't see. ... but that doesn't make OA meaningless. Maybe it is the election and ceremonies. That's the value OA provides.

This sounds like an over zealous volunteer situation. I've never seen a church vote on a unit budget. I've scene the budget submitted at times, but never voted on. Church has the right, but umm ... doesn't happen.

Yeah ... this is where most disagree. Most everyone in scouting ... and the families of the scouts too ... know the churches were not running the show. It was not a real expectation. The unit leaders knew this. The churches knew this. The local councils knew this. The problem starts with taking a 1920s casual "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington" style agreement and treating it as a more mature modern era legal agreement. Many time-honored hallowed organizations have this trouble. Since WWII, roles and expectations continue to change faster and faster. Organizations like BSA, Catholic church, etc just aren't able to keep their internal structures up to date. I myself continually shake my head wondering where BSA's lawyers were in the 1990s. Revisiting charter partner agreements because they can be taken to mean more than they are. Revisiting the practice of keeping a private record of effectively crimes. These originally really good ideas became huge legal liabilities. I could see that argument. All youth often registered in scouting. Bishop directly telling leaders they would be a SM. Much more direct involvement.

Agreed. It's why I think the facility use agreement is much more more accurate for how churches relate to scouting and is a much better match. Not perfect, but better.

Well said ... very good argument for CO liability. Same could be made for national government liability. I'd strongly argue those from patriotic families would be strongly drawn to scouting. Uniform. Salutes. Federal support (president, charter, etc). Military benefits. Previously recognized on college loans. etc. National government definitely benefited in military, projects, and promotion of patriotic citizenship. The whole scouting patriotic package is extremely appealing and benefited Uncle Sam. It's definitely one reason BSA has a congressional charter.

I generally agree you are right, but as the CO charter agreement has been taken more serious recently to infer more responsibility on the CO, similar arguments could be made at the national level. Almost every year there is a picture of the president in the oval office with scouts to receive a report on how scouting is doing. For decades, military hosted and supported scouting jamborees and other events. Our own state has hosted an annual huge scouting event at the local military base. For a long time, military has acknowledged Eagle scouts with rank and effectively extra cash. For a long time, different levels of government have actively supported scouting and benefited by projects. It is easy to see strong national support / involvement for scouting. It seems easy to assert that if COs should have known better, the national government should have known better and was negligent. Until fairly recently, most COs thought their charter was ceremonial. ... who knows what the future will bring ... But I agree with you ... it's a much larger stretch to assert at the national level.

Isn't that protecting the individual "actors"? ... mayors, governors, police chiefs, etc. It doesn't protect the organizations. Cities. School districts. Counties. Federal government. Governments organizations are sued all the time for damages.

I've wondered that continually too.

Been following these cases for years and the bankruptcy from the start. Usually things make sense. In this case, I just don't understand how this case makes sense. Any settlement right now would need to be BSA only. I don't see how any settlement now would end liability for insurance companies, local councils or charter orgs. Even if insurance somehow was in a settlement, they just need to be sued via CO who thought they were insured by them too. This is a "BSA" bankruptcy. There is no insurance or LC or CO bankruptcy involved. There is no "class action" covering all unknown injured. It's only covering the debts currently owed by BSA. Even if there was a settlement, wouldn't that need to go to the bankruptcy to be shared / negotiated by the other parties. The only path I can see is a BSA agreement to lock the amount of funds BSA will put into a bankruptcy trust fund to pay debts. Then BSA can proceed forward. Such a settlement is beneficial to those owed money because it could quickly stop the BSA legal spend rate which could consume a huge portion of assets. Then again ... I just don't understand how this case works and I'm not a lawyer.

Agreed. Also, look at the money ... BSA's advice. https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/financeimpact/pdf/fiscal_policies_and_procedures_for_bsa_units.pdf "...the tax status of your unit is usually the same as that of your chartered organization if the chartered organization includes the unit in its tax-status." "... shall turn over the surplus, if any, to the chartered organization or the council." "Should our unit consider insuring our unit equipment? Yes. Remember, the chartered organization owns the assets" Even without the financial advice, it's clear because the CO selects the charter org rep / charter head. That rep then selects the committee chair and signs off on every unit leader application. There is vagueness. The charter partner agreement is written more as a friendly agreement than a strong contract. That's why I'm actually advocating our charter org partner using the facility use agreement. It's more accurate to how the church and scouting partner. We can still do pretty much the exact same things. Help the church with projects as a thank you for using their space. Sell flowers / popcorn. etc. ... you've never heard of folks thinking, but it's happening currently in your church? I've seen it twice in two local units. Once during starting the unit and once was a church elder who loved scouting and decided to become the Charter Org Rep ... and then attended every committee meeting, troop meeting and camp out. Yeah, little good comes of it. Churches don't have the manpower. ... I can envision it working, but I just don't see it happening. ... The trouble is the local churches don't have it as a core goal that they professionally monitor and grow. Rather, it's usually some quirky situation that is slightly uncomfortable with someone exercising a bit too much influence in the wrong way. IMHO ... facility use agreement ... sounds like the right way to go. The driving reason is liability. The church accepts liability for pastors and their own employees. They oversee their people. But from what I've seen, the churches have never overseen the scouting program effectively. In fact, in many units, most of the members are not from that church. ... point is if you don't want want to oversee and manage it, then down pretend to own it. Friendly documents from 1950s can be taken as legal contracts and proof of negligence now. Get the right agreement for the right situation. ... IMHO, most should switch from charter partner agreement to facility use agreement. Time will tell. I'll have to see how this washes out with our charter partner.

I thought I was the only one who had that opinion. I have never seen the unit commishioners as effective at all.

I'll take the bait. And, I'll answer for the month before covid. Things are rebuilding right now. #1 Yes. It was one person, but then they'd use the whole district committee to drive nominations. The person took the job seriously. #2 "Council" members? Is that a requirement to have some outside "council" person on the "district" nominating committee? I would have never known and I've taken lots of training. #3 All were unit leaders at some point. 50% to 70% still are, but usually at the ASM level or unit committee level. None were SMs at that time. It's just too much work to be a CM/SM and district committee at same time. A few were retired scouters looking for a place to spend time.

Well said.