fred8033

Cynicical versus positive. "They only care about money." ... I really disagree with that. No one starts a professional scouting career to become rich. Yeah, you can argue whether executives are paid too much, but running a million member organization takes a large infrastructure. The same complain about BSA execs can be made about almost every school principal and superintendants. They are paid too much. They should be volunteering more to educate our children. "benefit from these lawsuits" ... Scouts are benefiting from the drastic learning that happened in the 1980s/1990s and matured around the year 2000. Much came from lawsuits against day cares, churches, scouting, etc. Much came from opening up medical understanding of the abusers. Nothing new will be proven or learned by this lawsuit. No one will be made whole or even close to whole. We are digging up mostly old cases before a modern understanding of the crime and before current youth protection. This is just digging up old dirt ... only benefiting lawyers. I feel strongly because the worse is happening. Fewer youth will be in scouting because of this lawsuit. In no way is the average youth better by not being in scouting.

Not exactly parallel, but with interesting points. Analogy is Diocese = BSA Diocese own / hold parishes ... at least as strong connection as BSA to councils ... if not stronger. Parishes fund and run their own churches same as local councils Diocese does not give money to parishes same as BSA does not give money to councils Diocese has same or stronger control of parishes than BSA over councils. (staffing, funding, etc) https://www.mprnews.org/story/2015/01/16/explaining-archdiocese-bankruptcy "In most of the 11 other diocesan bankruptcy cases, parishes and schools were treated as separate entities. "

If you pull in local councils, what about troops that own their own building. Or scouter friends that established a foundation for to own their own camp (I know two locally). ... I suggest you also pull in almost every school district in the country as every school district actively supported scout recruitment and made space and time in their schedule for recruitment until the late 1990s ... and the 12000 that chartered troops ... now that's deep pockets ... and churches ... and so many other groups that did not pursue things. The government recognized the separate legal existenance of councils thru incorporation and taxes. Non-profits were structured separately. How far do you really reach back? This whole thing is wrong and abuse of the legal system.

Yeah ... We're just 100% different on this. We can agree it should pay what it "owes", but I'd argue on what it owes. This lawsuit is fundamentally wrong. The abuse was 100% wrong, but so is this lawsuit. The whole situation is wrong upon wrong and immoral upon immoral.

Saw that too thru IT automation. Billing every phone call, every DB search, every piece of paper copied, every office expense, etc.

Timely news ... "Lawyers involved in a massive settlement of civil lawsuits arising from the Flint water crisis would receive up to $202.8 million in attorney fees, plus nearly $7.2 million in expenses, under a proposal filed with a federal judge late Monday night. Overall, attorney fees would consume about 32% of the total settlement of $641.25 million." https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/flint-water-crisis/2021/03/09/attorney-fees-flint-water-crisis-civil-lawsuit-settlement/4626273001/

There is no reasonable in cases like this. It's far, far, far too low and also too high at the same time. I just don't see any good from this. The only good is ending the case.

Continue to be amazed. Once entering bankruptcy, I didn't know a debtor could choose to route money to a specific set of claims. Rather, the court would have to settle. i.e. the $300m BSA offered in first offer would be for all debt claims and only a portion would go to abuse claims. Or was $300m part of a larger bankruptcy filing with more funds. Complexity of this case will be amazing.

I'd like to understand ... how law firm interests will affect which scenario happens. I know they are to work in their client's interest, but I'm already not sure that's really happening at all. #1 For scenario #1, would law firms suing for abuse get any proceeds? Or they are also zero because victims are zero? #2 There was an earlier post reflecting those who filed claims. Does the above scenarios reflect the order of those who filed claims (banks, institutions, victims, venders, etc)? ... i.e. When BSA said it would kick in $300m to the bankruptcy, was that for all bankruptcy claims or just the abuse claims? #3 For all the scenarios, how much would law firms earn? How much would victims earn? Example: Scenario #3 is $11,494 to claimant. Or is it $3,448.2 to law firms and $8,05.8 to lawfirms. For #4, would it be $6034 or $1810 to law firm and $4223 to victim ? I just don't see how this case results in anything except more cumulative damage on top of previous damage.

I understand your point. My doubt is that the lawyers pursuing these cases are looking for national organizations or organizations with deep, deep pockets. The local churches have a building, but often with mortgages, debt and a year of cash at best on-hand. It's too expensive to sue and pursue each individual organization without knowing who has assets to pay. For local cities and local school districts, it's too expensive to pursue each school district, city, etc. This type of civil suit wants large deep pockets. These lawyers are chasing huge rain-makers; big a wind-fall; not a life-long slow drudge campaign, one organization after another, lasting years at a time for a smaller amount of money. Your above school teacher example is a repeating pattern. I can think of several non-scouting cases in my primary school years directly in our district (full-time teachers, paid coaches, city employees, etc). Your example above also does not surprise me at all. At one time, one of the larger charters of scouting units was public schools. This own forum discussed this in 2004. Eamon said in 2004: "... in 2002 PTA'S were number 11 in the top 30 Organizations that charter Scouting units. They had 77,894 youth members in 1,593 units. Public Schools, Board of Education were number 3 with 383,657 youth in 10,566 units. This is yet another reason I find this lawsuit so simply wrong. 12,000+ units were overseen by professional educators and parents directly. People with professional and immediate expertise !!!! People vested in this topic. This was a national issue / standard-of-practice.

Sending PM.

I like multiple scouts being recognized together. I prefer unit level as it inspires younger scouts. Fellowship and setting an example is important. Our troop had an ECOH with a large number of scouts. It was one of the few really enjoyable ECOH I've attended. Everyone happy and smiling. The ECOH also taught me a lesson that I trusted each and everyone of these scouts with fire, knives, guns, etc, but strangely I was very scared when they got the microphone.

Wow. I thought I wouldn't be surprised anymore by this. But then again, this only re-enforces lawyer jokes. Does the profession ever discipline abuse like this? It's either malpractice or ambulance chasing. In either case, it only further damages those asserted as victims already.

Existing scripts are easy to modify. My only opinion. Watch time. Long ceremonies can be painful.

It will never happen. BSA and Catholic church were perfect targets. Massive targets with deep cash. BSA even provided tracking records from their attempt to block bad volunteers. Government agencies, youth and sport, parks and rec are usually city sized. Just not big enough for a national class action campaign looking back 50 years.

@mrjohns2 is pointing out where authority lies with approving the service hours. Per GTA, that's clearly with the scoutmaster. Whether he should or should not approve that type of hours is a separate qusetion. Whether a BOR can reverse him is an extremely very ugly situation and usually only results in explicit damage. With that said ... once we get to the point of discussing who has the authority and how, we're way off the tracks. As with many things in life, the best way to handle differences is by direct conversation. Get to know each others views. Repeat his words to him to see if you are really hearing him correctly and if he said it right. Try to understand why he's taking tha tposition. See if there is a compromise. See if there is a way to accomplish each other's goals in a different route that creates common understanding. Even bringing before the committee often makes things too stressful and creates annimosity. And accept, you will not always get what you want. You may need to look at the preponderance of the situation. Is the SM generally doing right by the scouts? If so, be thankful and support him.

Isn't this analogous to a franchise that buys goods from the parent corporation? It's 100% separate for legal, tax and execution. But if the franchise fails, it often has to return relevant assets to the franchising corporation. In this case, the council promises to "vest" (... secure in possession ... ). that does not necessarily mean "ownership" as much as ability to transfer to another agency to execute the purpose of the previous council. .... I'd be curious if vested, legally means the same as "owns". ... I'd also be interested if the "charter" agreement is binding between national and council. It seems more like a friendly statement of agreement and not a legal contract.

Yeah, if Dec 2020 ... it's sad but not as alarming. Covid. LDS transition. Price shock. I know one local pack that is not 100% registering all youth or all adults due to cost of registering. So if the family is tight on funds or the scout doesn't care as much about advancement, then the scout doesn't know but the pack doesn't "charter" the scout. I can't blame them. The only thing really on record about cub scouts is AOL. Plus, we really need to consider the results of 20 years of bad press. BSA has had a target on it's head for a really long time. We've lost a generation of youth because of bad press. It always makes me very sad. Personally ... some of this begs the original question. Why scouting? What draws kids? What pushes them away? ... I really don't think this is as hard as we think.

I've been to many ECOHs over the years. My strong preference is to tack the Eagle recognition at the end of a normal COH. It creates a strong connection between the scout's accomplishment and the troop. Sets a great example. If it's separate, it's not really a "troop function" and attendance is always poor. Having ECOH in the normal COH, it's very well attended and adds to the celebration. But then again, the Eagle portion is five/ten minutes not sixty minutes. Parent involvement / stress is much reduced as the main challenge is to invite friends and family. If parents ask what they can do to help, I suggest contributing a bit more food to help cover the number of invited guests. ... Every one of our COHs is a meal in some way. Potluck. Grilled food. etc. First meal, then ceremony. A few times, the parents volunteered to host the food for the whole COH. Our scouts and leaders never said no to that. If asked what I liked, I'd say steak with a straight face ... then smile. ... Never got steak. But always a good time and positive experience for the scouts.

One I liked ... Tigers and Lions showing up at the elementary (after clearing with principal) and pulling weeds from bushes by the front door (for 15 to 30 min ... scouts 10 min ... dads 20 min or so) ... then playing catch with frisbee or foot ball ... and just so happens (by pre-planning) an ice-cream truck shows up at a specific time. Yes, you can usually find one that will show up on a schedule if you call them in advance.

@Kamala ... You can't find it in the Guide To Advancement because it's not a rule. It's troop folklore and what others leaders have traditionally seen. I myself do not like the idea of needing to use court of honor service as "service hours". ... BUT ... there is no official rule saying outside of scouting. BSA rank requirements are written to be precise to interpret. If the words are not there, it's not part of the requirement. Examples: Since joining scouting Do not include Before you start When the words are not there, it's not part of the requirements. Other than the Eagle rank, none of the other ranks say for an organization other than BSA. The earlier mentioned Bryan On Scouting was about "can it be" outside scouting? I'd suggest also reading this Bryan On Scouting. https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2019/05/30/does-helping-fellow-scouts-count-for-service-requirements/ "We’ve received this question numerous times from Scouters with many different projects in question: Volunteering at Cub Scout day camp Improving trails at a council camp Helping a Cub Scout pack set up for a blue and gold banquet or Pinewood Derby Cleaning up another troop’s trailer or meeting place Assisting Cub Scouts during a Cub Scout fundraiser "The simple answer is: Any of those projects could count." Another good Bryan On Scouting list of ideas: https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2015/10/09/101-great-scout-service-project-ideas/ In our troop, we routinely counted camp ranger service hours, helping charter org, etc. We did not count anything that was part of the normal troop meetings or activities. I'm sure our troop had counted planned a service project such as scouting for food or serving as an OA elangomat or helping with OA elections. I don't remember any scout needing to count ECOH service, but Bryan On Scouting said: "We also recommend that you encourage your Scouts to look for opportunities to help others wherever and whenever they can. You can point them to projects they can do for their fellow Scouts, " PERSONAL OPINION: Service hour requirements are an opportunity to celebrate service in a discussion between the scout and his scoutmaster. "Great job" "How did you feel after helping" ... We're teaching the wrong lesson when we get legalistic on service hours or give the scouts a form to fill out to track service hours. The "requirement" is about teaching scouts to value helping others. Period. Yes we expect a bit more each rank, but that's about maturing. ... If the SM sees a scout trying to "get away" with "iffy" hours or gaming the system, don't sweat it and don't play the approve/disapprove card. Instead open a conversation with the scout on why scouting values service. Then, resolve it during a friendly conversation. TOO BIG FOR THIS THREAD: Whether the BOR can reverse a SM on hours counted ... I don't think this is as clear cut. ... Easier to focus on a future discussion with the scoutmaster and not necessarily sending the scout back.

Is the "restricted" referring to donor conditions tied to Summit Becthel ? Or BSA considered restricted as needed for continued operation?

NTier ... The recreation area is called the BWCA. I question the accessible cash value of the camp beyond it's current function. I'm sure someone would acquire, but it would not be a windfall for the class action. Sea Base would be similar. Wonderful properties, but it would take years to convert to cash.

Wow. That doc was a fascinating read. Creepy. With business partners like that there is no possibility of justice.

This is one of the few ways that I could see as a fair recompense for the past. I just don't think you can compensate fair / correctly for things that happened in the past. But, perhaps some action like this would be a "fair" and "protective" for the benefit of people using these bases / properties.