Cburkhardt

We just did not experience that. We were at a high-quality camp run by a best practices council. We are a racially diverse Troop and there were other racially diverse Troops as well at the camp. Nothing will ever be perfect on those topics, but I am glad to wee everyone maintaining an awareness of not wanting those matters to get out-of-hand.

We are a 30-girl, non-linked troop. We had 21 in summer camp -- mostly 11-13. We had strong leadership from co-SPL's aged 15. Many of these girls have been together since we formed an early adopter Webelos group in January '18. We prepped our kids for camp, had three camping trips this past spring and almost all were Scout or Tenderfoot. Maybe our girls just had more comfort and confidence because of the rigor of our start-up. Hard to say -- but my view is that the program works very well as-is for our girls.

Different girls in different groups in different camps. Sorry to hear you had such concerns. Our group turned out to be quite "boy like" on these issues, including the spiders and competitive matters (our girls beat several all-boy Troops in soccer). It was fair play all around. Your points #1 and 2 were largely absent in our experience last week. Our 21 girls were a pretty tight team that hung together. We had several female leaders with us to ease the way, which I believe helped prevent those problems in our case.

All-Girl Troop Report from Summer Camp Our all-girl, non-linked Troop just returned from a week of summer camp. We had 21 of our 30 Scouts go with a total of 7 leaders. There were 17 Troops and 350 Scouts in camp. In addition to our all-girl Troop there was another 6-girl group. Every Scout earned at least 2 merit badges, with a couple of superstars earning 6. At this particular camp there was an objective point-based system to determine a few "honor troops", and our unit was one of three that qualified. The co-SPLs figured out the point system on their own without adults running that show. The camp had traditional wall-tent/wooden platform/army cot accommodations and a dining hall. The experience overall was -- ordinary. The youth members of all-boy troops treated our Scouts well and took almost no notice that something had changed. Several unit Scouters approached our leaders starting mid-week to remark that, while they had early questions about the addition of girls, they were really glad to see us at camp. Young people can be silly, and early in the week there were the limited instances of teasing which the Scouters and Staff easily curtailed. I frequently circulated through the program areas and found our Scouts welcomed, including instances where one of them was the only female in a merit badge class. At the closing campfire the 2 all-girl troops combined to sing a song for the camp and were applauded heartily without cat-calls or other disagreeable behavior. The true impact of our membership policy changes over these past few years is best assessed by observing how our young people have reacted. I sensed no change in how Scouting is experienced by young people at this summer camp. When pressed, the only thing I could come up with was to suggest that the camp's new swimsuit rule be made more clear and universally applied -- pretty minor stuff in my view. Our youngest Scouts had no more or less difficulty getting used to "summer camp things" like insects and simple accommodations than those from other troops I have camped with in the past. There was no "hover parent" difficulty and just a few early-week expected instances of home sickness that were handled. So, to any Scouters who are concerned about our summer camp experience being changed, there was nothing of concern I could discern this past week. WE were welcomed and -- hardly noticed.

These are month-to-month statistics and are only the Scouts BSA program numbers. What they show is that there continues to be slight incremental net growth of Scouts BSA youth members and Troops on a national basis since adding girls. My interpretation is that -- for the moment -- Scouts BSA program statistics are holding steady as incoming female membership and all-girl troops join and partly offset other membership losses. We need to be cautious in our optimism, because there might be significant "bulk" LDS membership and unit losses in Scouts BSA as we approach the end of the year. The degree to which all-girl unit formation and member recruitment succeed this fall (during the first "standard" recruitment cycle for female program operations) can help maintain our membership, but we should redouble our recruitment efforts for our all-boy units at the same time. These next few recruitment cycles will be critical to maintain vitality.

Numbers released today show Scouts BSA still expanding. Youth membership up net 1.4% and units up net 5.6%.

Sorry, Eagle. That just does not add-up. I think there has to be more than that at stake in your council. Either that or they had a good number of “paper units”. Sounds like they are in a tough spot.

Statutes of limitations have an important function. They prevent the abuse of lawsuits being filed decades after an alleged event -- when so much time has passed that the party sued cannot provide a reasonable defense. State policymakers are eliminating those statutes of limitations, which will consequently allow the BSA to be sued by anyone in relation to events alleged to have taken place many decades ago. If the BSA lobbied to explain what the impact would be of such a change, that is entirely reasonable.

In addition to YPT, I personally spend at least an hour over a cup of coffee with every potential member of our committee. I get into why they want to be involved and talk about YPT quite a bit. I want to use my own personal common sense on these folks as well.

This is not a matter of hate on the part of the litigators. They are simply pursing a commercial opportunity that is being enabled and encouraged by the political policymakers in our state capitols. I don't like it, but this is the tort system we have in the US. Our political leaders are going to openly allow victims of alleged misconduct form the 1950s through 1970s to apply today's legal and behavioral standards at the expense of today's children in order to recover damages. The policymakers pursuing this change are generally and happily engaging in a process they think will enrich their political allies and lead to our demise. I hope all who read this now more-fully understand the absolute necessity of filing for financial reorganization bankruptcy at the earliest reasonable moment. Otherwise our ability to continue providing our program to the children of today wit our tremendous YPT program will be significantly and negatively impacted.

To Barry's issue: I think it depends on the audience that is receiving information on the BSA's YPT and the issues related to Dale. The parents in our new all-girl Troop have little concern about the Dale issue. One reason is that they are a full generation removed from those who paid close attention to Dale. They also understand that large, credible employers, NFPs and other entities have changed their policies on the issues of sexual preference only in the last decade. Even the Episcopal Church refused to recognize gay marriages as recently as 6 years ago. So, the fact that the BSA repealed its unenforced "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy four years ago is not really an issue to them. We have been an "everybody is welcome" Troop from the start and that is all they have experienced. For those who are older than about 35 years old, the whipsawing effect of pursuing and then backing-away from Dale continues to have a significant impact on views of the BSA. I agree that it negatively and significantly impacted our credibility with the pro-Dale right and anti-Dale left age 35 and older. Our parents of current Scouts in our Troop are similarly not as concerned about YPT issues as you would think -- but that is simply because they are observing a Troop that just started and is very-openly following best YPT practices. Our CO and the parents regularly marvel at how well we implement the practices and how far ahead we are in comparison to schools and churches. WE do it directly and openly -- the only way, in my view. For the press and over-35s who are either quite conservative or liberal , the BSA has probably permanently lost its once-pristine reputation. The result is that we should be able to appeal to the current and future generations of parents (and their children) who, for the most part, overwhelmingly approve of the membership standards changes and can evaluate the BSA for how it is following YPT now. Our membership can grow significantly (or at least replace LDS departures) a result. But the current 35-to-65 year-old leaders of press, government, NFP and business America formed views of the BSA during the BSA's 25 years as a cultural punching bag -- and seemingly refuse to credit the BSA for getting its act together on youth protection. They are continually arguing pro- or anti-BSA views based on political and cultural viewpoints and sometimes an overly-rosy view about what the BSA might have been at an earlier time. That age group is now "in charge" of the levers of power and has become so divided by cultural and political views that the stability of our country has been impacted. This includes people who write intemperate things in all-capitol letters on blogs about our adding girls, Dale and and the lawsuits. The BSA is big and familiar enough that our future prospects are a rough proxy for American society. That people argue vigorously about us means what we are doing is important. If we concentrate on appealing to our user-families and distance ourselves from the culture wars we will be better off.

I suggest we stop arguing the "100% Issue". The argument is what it is. We do not want to unwittingly provide litigators evidence that can be misrepresented in court. We have all agreed that 100% compliance is the unquestioned goal we are striving for now and in the future. Why don't we leave this sub-issue at that?

The very unfortunate reality is that states, with the urging of the trial attorney bar (and victims/potential claimant groups), are already well into the process of repealing the applicable statutes of limitations and are going to allow file of suits against the BSA going back decades. Much of the press seems on-board with that process and the manner in which news articles are being written is forming the minds of future juries who will determine those cases. We are a wonderful, well-run organization and absolutely have had our act together on these issues for a long time. But unless we file a reorganization bankruptcy fairly soon, the mere process of having to respond to the coming tsunami of lawsuits can itself can deform the continued operation of our programs. Financial reorganization bankruptcy will allow us to cut-off the financial liability through establishing a trust fund of insurance proceeds and yes, probably some sales of things we do not need to provide our program. We will be able to keep what we need to operate prospectively. The Bankruptcy Trustee can establish uniform national evidentiary and damages standards to evaluate claims that are filed. Victims will be paid if they satisfy the Bankruptcy Trustee that something bad indeed occurred. The trial attorney bar will oppose this because they will have to deal with a Bankruptcy Trustee who will bring less-emotional judgement to the task than a jury. When this inevitably is announced, I will be a supporter of the move. It will be a truly awful number of months to go through as volunteers -- as we explain all of this to parents and friends. But at least we will deal with it in a concentrated one-time manner. It is either that or an eventual unwinding of the ability for us to provide a program to the current and upcoming generations of Scouts. My personal take is that this will finally give us a broad and clean horizon as we look forward.

The girl and her parents pressing a public relations campaign for "immediate" Eagle Scout recognition are trying to pressure the BSA into retroactively recognizing activities apparently engaged in during years prior to the official admission of females into Scouting. This is most inappropriate, in that such a practice would result in a rush of others desiring retroactive application of activities and events prior to their admission into Scouting. To allow this would invite litigation over the matter as others come forward to force claims of apparent retroactive activities as satisfying advancement claims. Retroactive recognition of activities in advancement has long been prohibited in Scouting and should not be allowed in this case. To do so would violate the across-the-board opportunity being offered and invite sham evaluations of retroactive activity. This is absolutely, not going to happen. The pursuit of this and the act of wearing a Life Scout badge confuses the efforts of youth who are working within the opportunity extended -- which this young woman can do if she chooses.

As a Scoutmaster of a larger, best practices Troop for girls in a council that now has over 40 girl troops, I cannot agree with much that has been written in this posting. There are no known instances of easy rank sign-off for girls in our council — and I would know. There are the expected instances of rapid advancement of a few older girls who are on the edge to earn Eagle in 2 years, and that is to be expected for many of the reasons stated here and on the other posting on hints for new youth trying to earn Eagle in short time periods. As in the earlier camporee posting, there is a tendency for some to take isolated instances and generalize them into a broad conclusion When there is no evidence of an actual trend. There is, absolutely, no evidence of a trend rank inflation or camporee fixing favoring girls. Making broadside and unsupported allegations based on one or two unsubstantiated or unexplained circumstances is inaccurate and plain wrong. And, those instances might be absolutely fine if we had the details. There are complacent scoutmasters and SPLs out there happy with smallish and not-so-well-run Troops that have been used to griping and explaining-away the successes of well-run boy Troops for years. Now they have an assortment of some pretty sharp girl troops and girl members coming on line to think about. Complaining like this did not happen at our district camporee 2 weeks ago. Our girls were truly welcomed and treated just like the established troops when they competed. When they won one of the events that weekend, there was no sour grape in the crowd. They earned it fair and square.

Scouts BSA youth membership grew 2.2% at end of April compared to April last year. From 708K to 723K. Cubs is up 1.1% over same period from 840K to 850K. No girl-specific numbers available yet, but it can be concluded that we would still be losing membership if we had not welcomed girls.

My intention with this posting is to see if others are observing a renewed interest in supporting Scouting on the part of the Episcopal Church as it currently exists. I am observing some movement in that direction locally because that church is in alignment with the direction of the new BSA membership policies. The increased number of units is being requested by BSA folks and is now being welcomed, whereas before I speculate there would have been a less-interested reaction. My personal observation is that all families are being welcomed to participate regardless of their current faith or rigor of belief.

Recent membership policy changes may be renewing interest on the part of Episcopal parishes in the sponsorship of Scouting units. In our large metropolitan council our Bishop personally supported formation of new units and appeared and spoke at the formation of our first new Scouts BSA Troop for Girls (sponsored by an Episcopal parish). This was motivated in part by our having visited with the Bishop's staff long before unit formation. I solicited and followed several suggestions they provided and they consequently have a very favorable view of the program and the "ownership" viewpoint we always try to encourage in chartered organizations. Other Episcopal parishes have formed new units this spring as well in our council. It would appear that, perhaps, there may be a turn-around in what appeared to have been a reluctance to engage with the BSA because of some of the previous membership policies. This posting is intended to focus on whether you see similar things happening in your council with respect to increased or renewed interest in your Episcopal parish or Episcopal diocese. It would be interesting to have the views of members of the Episcopal Scouters Association on this, as they would have the "long view". I do not wish to discuss whether the membership policy changes were good ideas. There are several postings elsewhere to do that.

Thanks, Mark. I will prepare a 1-page summary of the 2-year advancement "heads-up" suggestions provided by everyone and post it in about a week.

Older girl advancement is proving to be a lot like ..... older boy advancement. Not a surprise because the younger girl advancement in our Troop has already evidenced the identical tendencies. At the 10 week mark we already have our first Eagle-type go-getter with 3 merit badges, almost tenderfoot, etc. And, we already have a few laggards with drastically less to show. My conclusion from all of the (mostly) wise comments is that I should focus our assistance on understanding and complying with our advancement process on Scout C. Some of you are, in my view, just a bit harsh on her circumstance. Our advancement system is complex as it should be. Scouts A and B are from families that know our system. Family C needs some help or they would just not be able to penetrate the system sufficiently. It would be substantively unfair to see their daughter fail because of a “gotcha” omission or mistake. So, we will share the specifics and “heads-up” ideas skillfully detailed in this posting and recommend the other 2000 Scoutmasters of these troops do so as well. Apparently most of you must be reading this because our viewership on this posting is pretty healthy. I think there are some additional hints out there that yet need to be shared with the wider world. So readers, continue to share your thoughts and strategies.

We are using the same theme in DC this weekend. Since the OA is running our event, they must have picked up the idea at a conclave.

Jameson: You are correct in concluding this will be very complicated. Perhaps one of the most complex financial reorganizations in bankruptcy history. Essentially the BSA is the national organization and contains within it all above-council governance and assets (the extent to which they are owned). Councils are separate from a corporate standpoint, and their assets are owned separately. However, there is a close relationship between BSA and the councils to the point where "control" over councils can become an issue in legal proceedings. The degree to which council assets are at risk in bankruptcy is unknowable to me due to lack of information. It might be that councils which have significant potential liability for abuse claims might want to be included in the financial reorganization process in order to receive the benefits of the liability discharge. The degree of potential liability probably varies widely between councils, but with the statutes of limitation being lifted, almost any council is now going to be subjected to claims regarding events from long ago. Bankruptcy specialists might even construct a process by which all councils can benefit from the discharge as well as BSA. When you think about it, we do need the organizational "fresh breath" which is a significant purpose of bankruptcy. After the process starts and the expected uproar dies down, this will be a fascinating case to follow.

I'll be at our District Camporee with our Troop this weekend, so I won't be too active on this posting until Sunday night.

The news conferences this week again raised the issue of the future of BSA finances and properties in light of abuse incidents and the ongoing repeal of "statutes of limitations" by states. This topic will narrowly focus on what financial reorganization bankruptcy is, the high likelihood that the BSA will file one this year and the likely organizational and operational impacts such a process will cause. I am doing this to allow Scouters to be informed in an organized manner in advance of a filing so we can help others understand the circumstances when they occur. The filing will provide an opportunity for significant misunderstanding by our own people and a massive "pile on" by BSA competitors and advisories. Please do not argue BSA membership policy changes, alleged linkage of homosexuality to abuse, adding girls to Cubs and Scouts BSA and similar matters on this posting. There are other postings where those issues have been well-discussed. Please use lay terms rather than legal terms to describe the proceedings in order to make the discussion welcoming and understandable to all. The Basics Bankruptcy is established in federal law. The reason for its existence is to allow individuals and organizations to get a "fresh start" after extreme financial difficulties. The most common form of bankruptcy occurs when the entity has run out of cash and piled up so many bills that the financial circumstance just cannot be favorably resolved. This is typically called a "Chapter 7". The Bankruptcy Judge and the Bankruptcy Trustees that work for the Judge total up the remaining assets and debts, and the creditors get a proportionate share. Often the creditors get nothing because there are no remaining assets. If an organization files a "Chapter 7", it generally ceases to exist after the process is complete, because it is "going out of business". The other principal type of bankruptcy is a financial reorganization bankruptcy, often called a "Chapter 11". The essence is that a financial reorganization bankruptcy recognizes an extreme financial circumstance -- but also an ongoing viability of the organization. The entity gets to keep assets and properties necessary to continue its existence, settle its debts with creditors as of a particular date, and continues future operations with its previous debts discharged. This is the type of bankruptcy proceeding the BSA would file -- because it has cash, property and insurance accessible to pay abuse claims and continue program operations. Should the BSA File for Financial Reorganization? The BSA is generally well-run from a business standpoint. It pays its bills on-time. It's principal financial problem is that lawsuits claiming abuse have become a huge drain on finances. The BSA has settled most cases over the years, but more-recent cases have gone to trial and have resulted in eye-popping judgements against the BSA. A huge driver of new suits is that states are now repealing applicable "statute of limitation" laws that normally require a person to file a case within a stated number of years from an alleged incident. So, the BSA will now be sued for alleged abuse violations that took place at any point of history -- regardless of whether the alleged perpetrators or witness are even alive. It really does not matter how you feel about the substantive issues regarding the abuse allegations -- this is going to result in a cascade of lawsuits that will simply overwhelm the BSA's ability to defend or settle these cases and continue to serve youth into the future. My personal view based on public information, is that the BSA can and should file for financial reorganization bankruptcy at a time when it fully understands the basic financial circumstances. It has retained preeminent attorneys to provide advice on this. If the BSA does not file for financial reorganization, it would then face the significant risk that its insurance and assets and the insurance and assets of councils (that might additionally found liable in an abuse event) would be overwhelmed by the lawsuits. Financial reorganization bankruptcy is also the just and Scout-like thing to do. It will cause a Bankruptcy Judge and the Bankruptcy Trustees to evaluate what the BSA needs to retain and thereafter marshal a fund of insurance proceeds and some BSA resources to pay victim claims which must be submitted to the Bankruptcy Court by a specific date. The Judge/Trustees would then pay claims that they believe are credible from that fund. There would be no more state court trials. Afterward, those who did not file a claim with the Court would not be able to sue the BSA. In my personal view, this pays more claimants and prevents a huge windfall for trial attorneys. It also allows for a single nationwide standard to determine the credibility of claims. The choice is this: Shall the BSA be substantially dissolved as an organization and its services be unavailable to future generations in order to pay abuse claims largely from the early 80s and before? Or, should the BSA establish a set amount of funds available through a financial reorganization bankruptcy for the Bankruptcy Trustees to assess and pay those claims -- and keep needed assets to continue our programs (under our current Youth Protection program)? I prefer the latter, because I know through personal engagement and observation that Scouting is as relevant today as ever and is quite safe for out youth under its YPT program. A Chapter 11 financial reorganization bankruptcy for the BSA will be extraordinarily complex, time-consuming and expensive. A key issue will be determining how council assets will be treated and assure that councils are protected from future lawsuits. But, this is the best way for abuse victims, future beneficiaries of BSA programming and the BSA itself (including councils) to go. Only My Personal Opinions Everything I have written here is my own personal opinion and is informed only by available public information. I am not an insider on this potential legal proceeding. However, we have a duty to educate our fellow Scouters in advance of what will probably be a sudden announcement followed by a whirlwind of media attention. The BSA is a strong and safe organization and it programs are popular and safe for children. We argue about its program because we care about our children. This is good. I invite you to share thoughts, questions and opinions on what you believe is best.

Scoutmaster Response on a Community Blog Friends: I post on a community blog in our metropolitan area that is viewed by a large number of parents interested in Scouting. A posting titled “Do you trust the BSA?” Started yesterday after the articles broke. Below is the post I made this AM: Scoutmaster’s Thoughts on Abuse I’m the Scoutmaster of the Scouts BSA Troop for girls in Washington, DC who has commented extensively on this site. You can read the previous lengthy postings if you are curious about how Scouts BSA Troop 248 for girls operates. As an initial matter, our majority-female Troop Committee and Scoutmaster staff strictly observe the current Youth Protection regulations of the BSA and the Episcopal Church. These are publicly posted on our Troop web site and are quite rigorous. I am happy to engage in a separate discussion string regarding how the system works and what those requirements are. I thought I would let the discussion play out a bit before I jumped-in to provide supplemental information. The postings so far demonstrate great concern about the numbers discussed in the media and this is good. Youth abuse is one of those topics where “we can’t allow a single instance” is really true. Most people reading this blog are looking for opportunities for their young people to have safe, fulfilling activities. Our society has consistent instances of youth abuse — that is just a fact. We look around us and see it occur in schools, churches and youth groups. Having been on the front lines of youth service organizations for a lifetime, my position is not to trust any organization — but to understand and, if appropriate, trust the individuals and ground level group. Always meet individually with at least a couple of the adult leaders to take their personality measure and understand how that group implements whatever youth protection rules apply to them. This includes teachers and coaches of school activities. Yes, most organizations have rules somewhere — it is the regular and transparent enforcement of those rules that counts in weighing the safety of your child. In our Scouts BSA Troop this plays out as follows. Each potential adult volunteer not only has to subject to a criminal background check and take the 2-hour youth protection course, but must also meet with us individually for at least an hour to explore the background, interests and motivations of the person. Each parent attends youth protection orientation and is required to discuss these issues with their own child. We check that this has occurred. Then, each and every activity is examined in advance to assure ourselves that we have the sufficient number of certified and cleared adult leaders to assure no child is ever alone without at least 2 leaders in proximity. Our notes to parents are replete with references to our policies and confirmation that we have arranged for sufficient youth protection coverage. This is what parents must come to an understanding of when evaluating the “trust” topic of this posting. The BSA has experienced instances of youth abuse as have schools, churches, athletic teams and other organizations. When I was a Scout in the 70’s, the only policy youth service organizations had was, I guess, whatever they thought made “common sense”. This usually relied on the individual leaders and parents to become aware of a problem and take action. That usually meant throwing the person out of the group, not letting the person back in and in limited instances informing law enforcement or the applicable child services agency. If we apply today’s standards and what we know now to that time, we instantly know more and different things should have been done. In the specific case of the BSA, back then the local-council leadership and employees were to evaluate the situation and if indicated took the above kinds of actions. If they took action, they reported it to the BSA national office, which put the person on its “ineligible volunteer” list. It is the unfortunate events combined with the existence and use of that list which has triggered the litigation we now see. While beyond the scope of this brief note, it is accurate to summarize that the BSA came to an understanding that it had to take a dramatically different approach in the early 1980’s, and began directly implementing better youth protection measures which are now considered the leading national standard. Instances of youth abuse diminished to a trace-level after that. Despite extensive measures, nothing will keep every evil perpetrator of this horrible crime from our youth service organizations, so there will be a low number of crimes that have occurred since then. Consequently, the names of reported individuals and the related incidents pre-date the change. Broadly-speaking, participants in BSA programs experience violations at a trace-level. Evil perpetrators know this and focus their criminal activities elsewhere where the is little or no vigilance. The BSA can, should and unavoidably will participate in providing a sense of justice to those who were harmed. It has been sued through the years and has paid millions in settlements when juries have found it did not sufficiently protect a young person. Now that states are eliminating the laws that required lawsuits to be filed within a certain time after the abuse event, there will be a cascade of lawsuits presenting allegations as far back as the 40’s. Most of the cases will relate to events from the early 80’s or before. The circumstance is that the sums juries will Award victims would vastly exceed by many factors the entire value of properties and endowments the BSA has, and the organization would cease to exist. The question therefore is: shall BSA programming be terminated and denied to current and future youth because of the incidents of the early 80’s and before? Some on this blog might be expected to desire this outcome based on a wish to eliminate this risk. Others have presented unrelated views based on recent membership policy changes or disappointment that the BSA is now offering programming to elementary-secondary aged girls. These other views have been vigorously debated on earlier postings, so I will not discuss those views. My judgement, based on direct experience, is that BSA programming is fundamentally safe, appropriate and popular with youth and parents and should be continued in its current safe format. There will be even more enhancements to the youth protection program as more is learned through the lawsuit proceedings and a likely financial reorganization bankruptcy filing. A financial reorganization bankruptcy is the best way to go in order to provide justice to as many as possible and in order to allow the BSA to keep what it needs to continue providing safe programming. It will allow everyone aggrieved to file claims on a national basis, have the BSA marshal assets to fund the claims, and keep only what it needs. It will cause more of the award amounts to go to more victims and substantially less to trial attorneys. The alternative is the termination of the BSA and payments a limited number who filed their lawsuits first. The BSA is a sound organization with very good intentions. We argue about its program because we value our children. This is good.