Eagle1993

3 hours ago, clivusmultrum said:

As to regalia, each Lodge is supposed to get approval from the Native American tribes in the Council locality, and if they don't approve, the Lodge is supposed to cease using regalia.

I am pretty sure that the Native American tribes in my area that were not eradicated were relocated to Oklahoma. Having no one to ask?

The council call out I went to had no regalia.  Apparently a local tribe objected when asked.  They still put on a good ceremony. I personally liked what an older scouter said before we headed to the OA call out.  He emphasized cheerful service and that it was an honor to be elected to the OA.  That OA represents the best of scouting and those chosen for the honor should continue their cheerful service.  

OA seems to be in serious trouble and I question it's long term viability.  Our council OA meetings are an hour away.  Our council camp doesn't have a Scouts BSA program and is over an hour away.  Building a service organization that does anything more than 1-2 events a year is tough as council camps are sold off and councils merge, expanding OA lodges across wide expanses of the state.

Most of my scouts preferred OA call outs to not have regalia.  They seemed open to if if a tribe was partnered with the lodge ... but several compared prior (regalia based) OA callouts to minstrel shows.

First ... I think OA needs to figure out the 1 lodge/council situation.  When we go to 80 councils (or there abouts) post bankruptcy ... 1 lodge/council doesn't work.  I almost think we should have a lodge per district.

Second ... Perhaps OA isn't just or primarily dedicated to service of council camps.  That worked when councils have several camps, many of which within a short drive.  Council camps are being sold off left/right ... OA should broaden their service.

Third ... If there is a tribe that works closely with the lodge, great.  Otherwise, figure out a non NA version of ceremonies.  Don't just copy the NA version without regalia.  Use it as an opportunity to use scouting history ... referencing great scouts of the past.  Dress in full Class A uniforms.  I could imagine some impressive ceremonies that are based on scouting history.

Finally ... Make OA more visible during camporees and other council/district activities.  It seems like I only hear of OA during election & callouts.

Hopefully OA adjusts.  They are a great organization, but have a lot of headwinds.  We will see...

I would look at the omnibus hearings as just a monthly meeting in front of the judge.   It is on everyone's calendar so if an issue isn't urgent, it could be addressed in the omnibus hearing.  If there is nothing to cover, it can be cancelled.  If something is urgent, another hearing could be requested.   

I don't take the schedule of omnibus hearings as indicating anything about the timing of the judge's ruling. 

I think BSA can survive until October but they are running out of cash and need some amount just to handle payroll and legal fees if they go Ch 7.   At some point, they will run out of cash.  I think you will see signs, such as canceling Jambo, before they would announce Ch 7.  I haven't seen any concerning announcements yet. 

This is painful for recruiting Lions/Tigers.  Add in the uniform cost, Pack dues and you can get to $200+ just to join Cub Scouts fairly  quickly. 

9 hours ago, mrjohns2 said:

What a bureaucratic nightmare. This is a UMC specific Facilities Use Agreement and not the standard BSA one. Too bad they could negotiate updating the standard one that came out a couple of years ago.

Every LC should use this version of the charter agreement.  It provides much more clarity in terms of liability of the scouting unit.  I'm not saying it is better for units, just for LCs. 

20 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

Yes, we have our less loaded, nonsensical Language of Scouting.  No doubt, we are working diligently to close the gap.

Or mind it.  

I hid some posts that deviated from the bankruptcy topic.  Feel free to start new topics as desired.

5 hours ago, fred8033 said:

@PaleRider   @skeptic ...  Should this thread be about arguing each point back and forth?  Arguing how BSA did good and where BSA failed?  Venting?  Defending?  

The challenge is most points can be strongly argued except the hell you experienced.   Obviously you can argue your points.  Others can strongly defend BSA.

I believe your experience was hell and I'm sorry for your experience.  I understand your wanting to vent your pain. 

IMHO, it's just destructive to use this channel for too much venting or too much defending.  


FYI ... I've been checking this thread several times a day as I want to see the next step in this court case.  Like so many, I'm going crazy waiting to hear the future. 

Hopefully we hear soon. BSA is down to $38.6M of unrestricted cash in May down from $45.6M in April.   

6 hours ago, MattR said:

But isn't the problem of no ownership what caused this mess in the first place? If COs weren't doing their jobs overseeing units then how will making councils responsible for oversight solve that problem. Now, DEs have the added responsibility of unit oversight? This seems to me like a bandaid.

It goes to the Girl Scout model.  There should be ownership of units.  Most charters do not have the capacity or desire to actually own the units.  Therefore, it should fall on the BSA through councils.  

Councils could ensure oversight by interviewing unit leaders (the CC & SM/CM).  Ensuring they are trained for their position.  Then allowing them to run the show with the rest of the leaders (checking on YPT).  Perhaps councils limit units based on area.  Perhaps they even have to limit # of scouts per unit if they grow too large vs the number of trained leaders they have.  

UMC & Elks are the start.  I wouldn't be surprised to see Catholic charters follow.  BSA will need a model on how to own units.

On 6/21/2022 at 11:42 AM, Tron said:

American Legion or VFW post that has a clubhouse

Unfortunately both of these organizations are in decline as well.  Our local AL sold their building and may be closed. They probably aren't bad short term. 

BSA will likely need this new agreement as I expect more and more units having issues finding decent charters.   Having a way that clearly addresses "ownership" will help some organizations accept units.  

As part of the plan, BSA councils are kicking in an extra $100M that would have gone to pension fund as the councils said the fund was already larger than needed at the time of the plan. 

I definitely agree most claimants would be better off in Ch 11, but some would be better off in Ch 7.  I certainly hope the judge comes back with an approval as it seems like we are running out of time.  At some point they will hit cash flow issues.  As long as Jambo 2023 is on, I think we are ok.  If you see BSA cancel 2023 it may be a sign the bankruptcy is taking too long and they need to save cash. 

7 hours ago, Tron said:

What you're talking about is an out of court agreement which prevents the bankruptcy from going into Chapter 7. Once a bankruptcy is accepted into Chapter 7 everything gets arranged into categories, then ordered in those categories for priority of repayment. To be clear, once a bankruptcy judge authorizes Chapter 7 it becomes a bankruptcy of winners and losers by order of importance and age.  As an example, if BSA were forced to file Chapter 7, and if it was accepted for Chapter 7 all secured debts/claims get absolute priority over unsecured, and older debts against those secured assets get priority. Using any BSA national properties with a mortgage as an example. Those mortgage lenders get priority before everyone else immediately; unconditionally, they just go to the top of the pecking order to get restitution on that debt; those mortgage lenders could potentially consume all of the value and leave nothing for lower prioritized secured debt holders (like 2nd or 3rd mortgages) and unsecured debt. 
 

It is not clear how everyone would be treated.  

First regarding assets available.   Everything is sold.  However, there could be deed restrictions that will be fought in court over Philmont (and perhaps other based).  Those legal fights could take months to years.  What about Trademarks?  The Eagle Scouts rank could be valuable; however, does the congressional charter prevent that being sold to a for profit business?  Who knows what comes up.

Then on claims.  The TCC already filed an adversarial hearing over the JP Morgan debt.  That will go forward and there is definitely a decent chance some of that debt could be questioned and changed to unsecured.

Pensions... Read the attachment if you like.  Pensions are actually unsecured debt. That alone is a mess.

For claimants, far less will be available as many of the remaining assets will pay lawyers as the fight months and possibly years over the carcus of the BSA.  No one wins other than those who's primary goal is to kill the BSA.

Even then, BSA 2.0 would be created in parallel and perhaps even purchase some assets from BSA 1.0.  

At some point, Ch 7 may be slightly less worse than continuing to try and proceed with Ch11 for BSA.  I doubt we are close to that and don't see it was likely but there is always a chance.  060503_bleb_lewis.pdf

1 hour ago, MattR said:

Coming up with a fun and purposeful meeting every week is a challenge for anyone. Just my opinion but this is a big part of the BSA's problem. If youth don't look forward to being at the meetings then they won't go on the campouts and it's over. The meetings don't have to be fantastic but there are easier ways to be bored.

I've mentioned NICA (Mountain Bike Youth Race League) in the past.   In their coaches training, they emphasized how to coach skills and how not to coach skills.  They showed a picture of a bunch of youth sitting in a group looking bored out of their minds.  That was under the how not to coach a skill.  That picture (of the bored youth) could be taken at many summer camp merit badge sessions I have seen over the last several years.

BSA seems to be, in practice, doing exactly what other organizations are saying what not to do.  Why should we be surprised to see our numbers falling. 

1 hour ago, ramanous said:

Boring meetings? Are these Scout led patrols? What Scouting things does the PLC plan for these meetings? If they aren't planning meetings, then that's the primary problem. If they are, then they need be "guided" towards fun activities with positive outcomes. If your patrols and troop aren't planning meetings, then the clique in charge (Scouts or Scouters) is winging it which can result in the appearance of favoritism and alienation... hardly the outcomes we want reinforced. 

In this Troop they are.  They have the SPL, ASPL at the head table.  Patrols then site at tables.  Then they work on advancement at their tables from planning outings to advancement.  

I think BSA needs to relook at the program given what youth need today.  That is tough as it varies a lot by income and location.  However, if I were to simplify BSA methods I would:

Prioritize

#1 Outdoors - I think outdoors makes BSA a bit unique and can be fun.  Downside is that some scouts more focused on STEM (which are a lot) would likely drop.

#2 Patrols - Again, unique to BSA and a key aspect of following methods.

#3 Ideals - Scout Oath & Law is key and should be taught and practiced by all.  

#4 Leadership - We need leaders in our country ... I see far too many willing to follow and not lead.  BSA has a great history in developing leaders.

It typically isn't hard to say what is important.  What is hard is to say what one would focus less on.  So, I think BSA should De-prioritize:

De-Prioritize 

#1 Uniform - Honestly, I would be fine if we just went to a neckerchief.  Show up in what is appropriate.  A suit for a formal occasion.  Work shirt and jeans.  Etc.  Just have that neckerchief and lets go!

#2 Advancement - Eliminate all ranks except Eagle.  Less focus on Eagle as closing out a checklist of activities vs an indication of top scouts.  Let Scoutmasters decide who their Eagle scouts are based upon Scout's accomplishments over time.  Other ranks ... end.  You learn scouting skills, but no need to advertise a rank.  Scout leaders can assign tasks & roles based on your skill.  Merit badges are fine, but reduced focus. 

#3 Adult Association - I think we actually have too much adult association right now.  Yes, keep scoutmaster conferences and adults involved in the program.  However, if we make the mistake ... make it with less adult association as many kids today have too much (helicopter parents, etc.).

#4 Personal Growth - I think this will happen anyway.  

My son just asked his best friend why he dropped out of scouting (from another troop).  He said Boy Scouts is 10 hours of boring meetings for every weekend of camping.   He can just go camping without the boring meetings.  Another scouting friend said the same thing.   I am debating if we stop indoor meetings as much as possible.  

This one took 8 days between the hearing and plan approval.

59 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

Approved reorganization plan of Abengoa in 2016. Note objection of US Trustee objection to third party releases.

http://bankrupt.com/misc/deb16-10790-1033.pdf

This one took 48 days between hearing & rejection.  However, that included both Thanksgiving & Christmas breaks.

59 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

Rejected the Fourth Amended Plan of Exide Batteries in 2002

https://www.deb.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/judge-kevin-j.carey/exide.pdf

 

 

Somewhat concerning that the approval took only 8 days but a rejection took a month and a half.  I know just two examples ... but we should be ready for a rejection (or a hearing/quick fix) situation.  I struggle to see why she would need >60 days to approve this.  Definitely a possibility ... just a bit concerning.

It sounds like a the scout did nothing wrong but yet he is faced with a five day suspension?  I fully agree with investigating, but once the truth was apparent stop the suspension and clear his name. 

Now, the video editing youth should face punishment.  

We are now two months after the hearing ended.  I'm shocked it is taking this long.  Articles from early May indicated people thought the judge would be back "soon".

BSA likely has 1 shot at this ... if district or appeals reject the plan, I'm not sure BSA has the cash to withstand the impact.  Plus ... I start wondering the impact on BSA from inflation, higher interest rates, market crash (impacting endowments), etc.  They really need to exit bankruptcy soon and I'm not sure anyone thought it would take more than 2 months for a decision.

This article (not sure if it was posted previously) really summarizes what the judge has to decide.  She knows this plan will have to be approved by district and then likely to be appealed.

https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2022/04/25/664463.htm

She spent a lot of time on this topic:

Quote

They contend the fund distribution procedures violate their rights and would result in grossly inflated payments of abuse claims, including tens of thousands otherwise barred by the passage of time. Opposing insurers also say the findings plan supporters want the judge to make would bind them and make it difficult to challenge claim decisions. In an email, one attorney for abuse claimants described such binding trust distribution procedures as a “Holy Grail” that mass tort lawyers have been chasing for years. Insurers say approval by the judge would set a dangerous precedent tort lawyers would use to their advantage in future lawsuits.

The way it was left, I have to say it seemed like the non settling insurers made some pretty strong points.  The judge kept asking why she needs to decide this.  I think the TDP/Neutral path language could be the #1 issue holding her up.  I don't know for sure, but she seemed very concerned about this area.

The other area that I know externally there is a lot of focus is third party releases.

Quote

Perhaps the most contentious issue in the bankruptcy, and the one most fraught with legal difficulty, is whether third parties, including insurers, local BSA councils and troop sponsors, should be allowed to escape future liability by contributing to the victims fund, or at least not objecting to the plan.

While some of the release language may be an issue ... I actually didn't get the sense that she had an issue including COs or councils in the plan.  I wouldn't be surprised if she came back with some minor fix requests, but an all out removal of COs/Councils would shock me.  There is a chance another court could rule otherwise, but for Judge Silverstein, I get the sense she was fine with the total package.

2 hours ago, SNEScouter said:

 

Also it was the only matter on the judge’s calendar on a Friday before a 3-day weekend.

 Judge would have kept it if either party wanted to proceed. 

51 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

Anyone see something ominous or nefarious in the cancellation of the June 17th hearing and rescheduling to July 20th?

Looks like the debtors & settling insurers agreed to the delay.

This came from an objection to the delay of litigation until Sept 12, 2022 (it was a quote from the hearing)

Quote

(“We recommend 90 days. We think that’s a reasonable time period for the settlement trustee to get her bearings, and get organized, and retain coverage counsel, and then, everyone could go forward with that litigation. So that’s our suggestion. Of course, Your Honor, we defer to you on that, but that’s -- we don’t see an issue or a problem with Allianz or any other nonsettling (inaudible) moving forward. We would just like some structure to that, that’s all.

So ... one way I look at this. 

- BSA during the hearing argued that state court cases (primarily with insurance companies) be allowed 90 days after plan approval.

- BSA THEN submitted a request in early May  that the judge delay state court cases until September 12th.

- Insurance companies objected saying, among other things, that BSA argued for 90 days ... why do they need more?  Just give them the 90 days.

- As of today, 90 days is September 11, 2022.  So basically, the request from BSA back in early May is meaningless as we still do not have plan approval.  It is likely plan approval will push the state court cases beyond the September 12th date BSA requested.

Therefore... no point in the hearing.

That is my guess.

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

Ack x ack. Was there any hint going to from whence cometh this foul smelling breeze? 

I do wonder given the timing if we are not looking at an approval.  The judge said she would be back with a ruling soon (at the close of the hearing) AND mentioned multiple times she knew timing was critical. 

I would have thought if it was a straight plan approval we would have heard by now.  Yes, she has to work on the wording of her ruling/order, but I can't imagine that taking months.  There is a chance ... but each day that passes makes me think a straight plan approval is not in the cards.

I also expect a full out rejection of the plan is also not likely.  Again, if she saw this plan as severely flawed she would have ruled quickly and told the sides to try again.

I'm leaning to a plan rejection (as I don't think she can change the plan) but with a very carefully worded ruling that leaves the door open to a relatively quick fix.  She may be very specific on the sections she agrees with and the area(s) she cannot approve and why.  This could lay the groundwork for all sides to quickly address those issues in the plan and get to a plan approval.  That could be why it is taking months (as she wants to be very careful on how she words the likely rejection).

I don't see this as her taking a summer break.  She kept court going for late nights and long days during the hearing to keep the plan on track.  I checked her calendar and is was pretty clear ... so I expect she is putting is some long hours on this ruling.

Just a guess ... but if the headline is "Judge rejects BSA bankruptcy plan" I wouldn't immediately panic and think all is lost.  It could mean she just laid out a path to a plan modification that will win at district and appeals.

We have discussed, in the past, the differences between UK scout leadership (open meetings, smaller board, etc.) and BSA.  UK Scouting has seen record membership growth since 2013, though it was impacted by Covid (and now since seen a bounce).  BSA ...well, you have seen our numbers.

Then ... I look at what is going on in the UK (just the first few videos I found):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1V4THmgTEQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBH8Mzf65iI

https://twitter.com/BearGrylls/status/1488554069341917189

If you watch the last video, there are 10,000 people who are attending a Jubilee party.  This isn't a dedicated scout celebration, this was a celebration where scouts were featured.  During the scout segment, Bear Grylls drops in on a rope from the ceiling.  

Looking at the UK, you frequently see Kate Middleton (who actually volunteered for a Cub Pack) wearing the neckerchief and talking about scouts frequently.  Matt Hyde is out, generating media and positive messaging about scouts.

Now I look to BSA.  Our national leadership is completely absent from national media.  I have see no ability to get scouts highlighted at major events (how about the super bowl, NBA, MLB, NHL, PGA, New Years Eve, Oscars, etc.)   They, for the most part are absent outside dedicated scout stories (which are limited).  

Where are our Bear Grylls, Kate Middleton, etc. ambassadors?  Bear Grylls was named Chief Scout at 34.  Young, energetic, media savvy. 

While Twitter is definitely not the only method to measure social media footprint of our leaders, I think it isn't a bad metric.  From what I can see, Roger Mosby is the only one with an an account (in his name) and he has 14 followers.  Every leader in UK scouting has an account.  Jennie Price (their board chair) only has 113 followers.  The rest have over 1,000 each and many tweet about scouting frequently.

So... what impact does this have?  It gets kids and parents aware of scouting.  They realize it is a current activity .. not something from the 1950s.  (I had a parent who didn't realize Cub Scouts still existed).   It generates positive opinions of scouting.  Yes, I'm sure UK scouting has bad media from time to time ... but it is offset by the frequent positive messages.

While I don't think we need to fully copy the UK model, we should consider the path they took and the results they are seeing.  Let's get a Chief Scout executive in his or her mid 20s - 40s.  Someone with a great vision of scouting, understands today's parents & youth, is energetic and represents scouting ideals and today's media.  Then find appropriate ambassadors who are respected by the majority of Americans and can spread the idea of scouting.

In general, most parents I have talked to have a slightly positive opinion about scouting.  However, other activities typically rank much higher in terms of importance.  Creating a national narrative about the values of scouting could change that.

2 hours ago, Tron said:

Nothing because we want to just move on and build back better or nothing because of something else?

Primarily because everyone will have moved on.  During the trial, there were expert witnesses who indicated there could be a large number of false claims.  There are also those who indicated that there are others who didn't file claims.

BSA will want to move on.  I don't think it would help for them to argue, 10-15-20 years from now that ... hey, we had a less rapes than reported. 

13 hours ago, Tron said:

So with all of these losses/projected losses what happens 10-20-30 years down the road when research and books like this start getting published? 

Catholic Priests Falsely Accused: The Facts, The Fraud, The Stories

Nothing.  

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

How many days out from the conclusion of the trial are we at this point? All I know is I have a Rip Van Winkle beard and a nasty crick in my neck.

53 days since the hearing closed

How are we to read the tea leaves where there is no tea nor leaves. 

I took a look at some of her past rulings ... and her approvals seemed to come fast (days/weeks after the hearing).  

I did see she rejected the Vivus plan but kept the record open to avoid killing the plan.  Then after some additional work from the DOJ and others, she approved the plan a month later.

Who knows ... but 53+ days is a long time.