Jump to content

T2Eagle

Moderators
  • Content Count

    1200
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    21

Everything posted by T2Eagle

  1. The challenge I see with TCC or any other claimants submitting a plan is that while it may be look good to the claimants, if your postings are any indication of TCC thinking the plan will get nowhere with the non jeopardized LCs. The sample council you posted proposed the council paying in 75% of its assets. That might look good to a council in NY or CA, but I don't think my council, or a council in TX is going to go along with that. I remain very skeptical that the LC property can that easily be expropriated. At a minimum that's a years long slog of litigation before it happens. As I
  2. I don't think anybody does any more supervising than BSA COs do, and I don't think COs ahve any extra special responsibility that is different in kind from all the other youth serving programs. I've coached rec league baseball and hockey. My qualifications to do so were that when i signed my kid up they asked if anyone wanted to help coach and i raised my hand. I filled out an application just like BSA's, I said OK to a background check just like BSA's, and I sat through an hour of training just like BSA's. No one conducted an in depth interview about how I handle kids or what ex
  3. I'm not sure that the structure for Units with respect to COs is all that different from similar programs that rely on volunteers for the program to run. I'm part of a troop and pack chartered by a Catholic parish. The pastor always knew who the unit leaders and/or committee chairs were. But he only knew them as well as he knew the other volunteer program heads. He certainly knows who the Athletic Director is, but he doesn't necessarily know and certainly doesn't select all the various and sundry coaches, or at least to the extent he does he knows them, it's as parishioners not because
  4. I think it's a very open question whether the charter provision really means what the claimants would like it to mean, or can be used the way the claimants would like it to be used. This provision has only been in the charter agreements for a couple of years, so first and foremost no one has ever tested it in any kind of court to find out what it means. I'm not sure that either side, certainly not the LCs, understood this to mean that, contrary to 100+ years of practice, they were effectively giving National the ability to claim their assets as its own on a whim. Are there people at nat
  5. I started a new thread about LCs. I'm going to move some posts over. If your post disappeared that's where it went.
  6. I don't think I understand what this is about. What would be the value added by TCC or BRG? What would they be telling councils that councils don't already know? Assuming a median level of competence, each council knows what its assets are worth. I suppose maybe a different metric on the real estate value of a camp might produce a significantly different valuation, but that seems like it would be an outlier. My council has a few decent size endowment funds, their value can be known to the penny at any given time. We also own two camps; any competent real estate appraiser is going to
  7. Interesting, summer may be our busiest time. In normal times we have summer camp; a longer more adventurous campout, usually 4 days canoeing, backpacking, type; high adventure crews about every other year; and two weekend trips to some rural properties that friends of the troop let us camp at every year. We certainly have families on vacation, but since there's a window of no extra-curriculars from end of school until band/sports camps start up right before schools are back in, meeting attendance remains about the same. We're not a big troop, about 30 scouts on the books. Outside of s
  8. First, a unit that takes summers off has, IMHO, bigger problems than worrying about whether to count or not count that time towards a POR. More to the point, the unit, which means the PLC and the adults assisting them, should be able to set creative expectations for any POR that can reasonably be met even if Covid is disrupting their schedules and plans. In just about every case where I've seen problems with POR expectations, and disagreements about whether a scout was fulfilling theirs, it was usually the unit that hadn't bothered to properly lay the foundation for success. Four ,
  9. You know, leaders need things to occupy themselves all week too. Any mention of having an adult session?
  10. There are no bears where I live, and I don't think there are any in Ames Iowa --- or in most of the more populated areas of the country. I have feeders out and filled all year round. I do know to periodically clean them with detergent and water.
  11. That's where you lose me. Somebody lent the BSA a boat load of money to buy and develop Summit. BSA never had that kind of money to throw around, and JPMorgan didn't become JPMorgan by giving money away. Whatever twists and turns of rolling over that debt looked like, the idea that the Summit is unencumbered defies sense. Is there some assertion, let alone some proof, that JPMorgan or some precursor to JPMorgan didn't issue a bunch of debt and send out the cash to buy the property and improvements? You can make a lot of transfers of both debt and equity between LLCs more or less c
  12. That doesn't really explain it. That may mean BSA constructively owns Summit, but it skips any mention of JP Morgan. BSA may own Arrow, which owns Summit, but that doesn't mean Summit isn't encumbered to something like its full value by a JP Morgan instrument that's going to stand in front of any other claims. I could set up an LLC or trust to own my home, but if there's a mortgage close or equal to the property's value, forcing me to reclaim title from the Trust/LLC wouldn't make any money available to me or a creditor until the mortgage note is satisfied.
  13. can you explain how you see this as a shell game. I don't have a preconceived notion of it, but i can't seem to piece it together that way from the pleadings. The common understanding among scouters was that BSA borrowed an absurd amount of money to buy and build the Summit. There's no reason to think they've paid much if any of that off, which would suggest that there is a big honking mortgage/note still outstanding owed to somebody. It wouldn't surprise me to find out there's little to no actual equity in the property. But how do you see it?
  14. I took a quick look, there are very few listings for the states with new SOLs:, zero in CA, two in NY. Weirdly there are 13 in MI, no idea what that's about. For 250+ LCs this actually looks like a pretty low level of churn. There are lots of reasons to take a job that may or may not have a long tenure. I once took a job with a company that was being bought and would likely eliminate my position when the merger completed, but I didn't like my old job, liked my new boss, and figured better is better while it lasts. They paid me while I worked there, and when it was time to leave I le
  15. You do know that DEs are low paid, entry level jobs , right?
  16. Back when the world, or at least you and I, were young, insurers wrote much more open policies than they would today. I roughly understood this when I worked for an insurer a couple decades ago, but never well enough to explain it. The quickest sort of explanation that I could find for what these might have looked like comes from the wikipedia article on Lloyds. "Unexpectedly large legal awards in US courts for punitive damages led to substantial claims on asbestos, pollution and health hazard (APH) policies, some dating as far back as the 1940s. Many of these policies were open-pe
  17. In addition to the challenege of figuring out what the coverage was, the insurance companies also argue, similar to the victims, that BSA knew about the extent of the problem of predation, and that by hiding that they either voided or limited the amount of coverage that the insurers need to provide. So it's not even a straightforward math problem of totaling up all the policies. I would be surprised if there a billions with an s available in insurance payouts unless the insurers were unusually dumb or open ended in their policy writing.
  18. Probably not, Montana is not one of the look back states so these older claims are beyond the statute of limitations. Montana Council might decide to put some of that endowment into the victim trust fund in return for a release of any the old claims against it. Of course, if a scout or scouts were abused more recently, and it's shown that some negligence on the part of the council contributed to that abuse, the endowment could be wiped out by that. Nobody thirty years from now would then be saying "hey, my scout is being punished today for something that happened thirty years ago".
  19. One distinction you and others may be missng is that in our legal system criminal and civil actions have very different purposes. Criminal actions are where we look for punishment, but civil actions are focused on compensating injured parties. That's why you cannot insure away your criminal liability, but you can virtually eliminate any cost to yourself of your negligence through insurance. These cases aren't about finding someone to punish, they're about trying to compensate people who have been injured. And this cannot be said enough, no scout is today is having anything taken away
  20. I'm a little unclear what you're saying here. The insurance companies were not insuring the victims of abuse, they were insuring BSA against their own negligence in allowing the abuse. I have no idea what the original coverage was or what exposure the insurance companies had. BSA doesn't have much incentive to negotiate with a bias in either direction. They're not going to be the party that collects the proceeds so they're probably not holding out for the last marginal dollar, on the other hand, the more money they procure the more hope that a final settlement can be reached. I suspe
  21. That sounds like a lot of money, and I suppose in absolute terms it is, but with 84,000 claimants that's only $7738 per claimant. Combined with the original BSA offer that's less than $14000 per claimant, which doesn't sound like the level of recompense most folks would be looking for.
  22. The challenge with it, besides leaving a lot of victims completely uncompensated, is that it would lead to bankruptcy for virtually every council in at least half a dozen states, and a lot more trouble for the COs there also. So that much more money into legal fees on both sides and a very non-rationalized change in resources in those states. For instance, some really well run, really well attended camps that happen to not be deed restricted would end up sold, while camps with few resources, probably lacking in modern enough facilities and infrastructure, but that happen to be restricted, wo
  23. I would certainly concede that, especially the latter point. The near uniformity of that challenge is really something we've only come to understand in recent decades. Which I think argues for recognizing the need for justice now for wrongs done then.
  24. It's hard to know where to start, but I I want to look at two ideas that I see as somewhat related. 1) that today's scouts are being punished and 2) that somehow these crimes are being judged too harshly because things were different then. My council owns two camps, one is over 100 years old and the other is over 50. Neither I nor my scouts are entitled to those camps by virtue of anything I or they have done. I've invested some time, treasure, and talent towards them in the last 20 years, but that's certainly only a small part of them. If I and my scouts are going to benefit from those
×
×
  • Create New...