Cburkhardt

Looks like the conversation is going in another direction, so I'll end my thoughts by simply sharing that I highly doubt a Victims Trust Fund would be funded by future national registration fees.  This would be too unreliable a funding source in a bankruptcy negotiation.  Registration fees might continue to increase for other reasons, but not to fund a trust.

I remain supremely confident that the BSA will get through this for several reasons.  We still have a great purpose and many great supporters.  And, the nature of the bankruptcy reorganization will assist us do justice by providing reasonable recompense for the past and continue forward.  Economic incentives are there in the bankruptcy process to encourage a settlement here.

The potential method and formula for funding a BSA Victims Trust Fund is the subject of highly confidential discussions at this point, and anyone having that information should maintain the confidentiality of it.  Anything I share here is not inside information, but just general bankruptcy information.

The normal circumstance is to fund a trust of this particular nature within a reasonable time after a reorganization plan is ordered by the bankruptcy court.  That's because we don't have near-guaranteed future consumer spending to rely on (like future proceeds from the purchasers of tobacco).  

The bankruptcy trustees, their experts and involved lawyers figure out in advance the grand total of what the trust fund should have in order to make reasonable payments to known and (sometimes) future victims.  Consultants that assist this work estimate key factors, including the potential presence of fraudulent claims.  Then they search for ways to fund the trust from things like insurance, bankrupt party assets and contributions from non-bankrupt parties that desire to obtain a liability discharge.  The effort culminates in a negotiation where the various parties commit to funding obligations and how they will satisfy those commitments.  The various funding parties use different techniques to marshal and provide their contributions.  For instance, allowances would be made for time needed to liquidate an asset, if that were to be a source of contribution.  

Very directly put, the claimants and their lawyers should want to see a BSA national and the councils to continue to exist so they can continue to pay into the pension plan.  If national liquidates, the Guarantee Corporation attaches pretty much everything.  I share this to encourage everyone that there are significant reasons why the claimants will want to agree to a reorganization plan.  

The lawyers and claimants are incented to agree to a reorganization plan that includes payments to a victims trust fund.  After the trust fund is in place and funded, a trustee would review the claims in detail. She would eliminate the ones she thinks are fraudulent, and pay remaining claims by applying criteria she would develop.  More severe claims get a bigger payout, etc.

If national liquidates and the Guarantee Corporation takes most or all national and council assets, there would be little or nothing left for either national or councils to fund a victims trust.  (The council portion would be the local council contributions to the trust fund in order to receive their own discharge of liability.)     

Clarification on Pension Plan Debt

All council and national entities participate in the same “pension plan”.  If the national bankruptcy “reorganization plan” fails and national liquidates, the pension plan covering council and national employees will immediately terminate by function of law.  All available national and local council assets can then be attached by the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation to satisfy the pension plan indebtedness.  The Guarantee Corporation has first priority, including before victim claimants (and their lawyers).  National and every council are “jointly and severally” liable for the entire pension debt, so if national liquidates, it will cause council assets to be attached by the Guarantee Corporation to satisfy the “pension plan” shortfall.  

Liquidation of national is ultimately to the disadvantage of national, councils, lawyers and claimants alike, because very little (if anything) would be left afterward.  There are strong economic incentives for everyone to agree to a "reorganization plan."  The only people who would have reasons to support a national liquidation are those who seek complete destruction of the BSA nationally  and locally – without regard to economics.   

1 hour ago, yknot said:

We still had a pitch for FOS. We were still asked, though not required, to participate in popcorn sales.

We will do our once-a-year contribution that I described, and that is it.  If we paid an annual fee that was particularly low (like the $3 one some council charges -- I mean, what is the point of that?), I would make sure it was supplemented with a unit FOS gift to provide a reasonable level of support -- after all, we do need to maintain things at the camp and in basic operations.   I just think the old ways of funding the council through multiple asks and inefficient product sales will fade away.  Wrap it into a reasonable all-in fee that is transparently explained and be done with all the running around.  Let the pros, and Scouts concentrate on program.

I think council fees are the best way for the future in lieu of FOS and product sales.  Please hear me out on this.

Our Troop approach is to ask families to pay all-in semester dues (this includes everything except campout and summer camp fees) and contribute to our annual coffee fundraising gathering at whatever level they can.  We get family contributions ranging from $20 to $500 at that event, and outsiders contribute as well.  Under-resourced families pay 50% dues and 50% camping fees (some get more) and this is supported from our event proceeds.

Our December fundraiser raised enough so we gave $1,500 to our council as a unit FOS contribution.  We had an additional $1,500 individual FOS contributions from people affiliated with our unit who replied directly to the annual council mailing.  We do not push individual family contributions to FOS, because we only want to ask families to pay our dues and participate in our single annual event.  

So, our unit-wide FOS total gift was about 3K for 2020, which works out to be about $75 per youth member (up from $62 last year).  Because we are inner-city, we don't do product sales with the council or other things that raise money for them.  However, we get a lot of services and benefits from our district and council and believe our FOS contributions are merited and well-used.  If our council were to prefer a fee instead of FOS we would be neutral.  We would still give at our current level to support our camp and help provide council/district services. 

A council fee to replace FOS/popcorn proceedings would be a more efficient way to raise funds and take less professional and volunteer effort.  It would be a wash for us, but would assure that all units contribute.

14 hours ago, PACAN said:

If your 130,000 girls in the program is correct, we have lost almost 1,000,000 boys since their arrival.

I was using the number I have seen that combines the girl registration for Cubs and Scouts BSA.  I believe the number for Scouts BSA is around 30,000.

We do not have any girls trying to get Eagle by this summer.  We purposely did not try to attract any girls (and parents) trying to earn it on the compressed program.  

Sometime in the Spring I'll share thoughts on how we have done as a Troop advancement-wise. So far, we fit a pretty typical Troop advancement profile.  About 1/3 of our Scouts are go-getters who have good chances to earn Eagle around the three year mark.  About 1/3 are taking their time and will probably do well in advancement topping at Star or Life with a couple of Eagles.  Around 1/3 are less interested in reaching the upper ranks and simply love advancement in a leisurely way.  At least in our Troop, the fears that some commenters had that this would all be about "getting there first" or "let's make the boys look bad" has not occurred.  It actually feels about the same as my own boyhood Troop.

Merry Christmas, everyone.  I was gone for a few hours and just read the latest.  I think we have definitely gone over the top, should put this to bed and move on to proposing mandatory wearing of knee socks by all Scouter.com commenters.  As your 2-year certified Scoutmaster of a "Boy Scouts for Girls" Troop, I officially declare that there is no actual confusion about what our 130,000 girl members and their families have joined (let's see, with parents that's over 1/4 million people who know precisely what they are doing).  Never heard of a girl who was misled and tricked into earning her Second Class.  Never tried to go down to the supermarket and buy green boxes of cookies to sell (in fact, we don't sell anything).  I further declare that efforts to prove me wrong are money-grubbin' and trouble makin'  mistchief!  Oh, and Happy New Year while I am at it!

Is it your professional opinion that these admissions make the case for GSUSA?

I should have directly stated that if we had taken the misguided approach of making ourselves appear to be associated with GSUSA, we would have not been successful.  The families that joined were not wanting GSUSA programming or whatever other attributes are offered by GSUSA.  Whatever the GSUSA “stands for”, our families are not looking for it.  

5 hours ago, TAHAWK said:

There were a few intances where councils wnet overboard in their enthusiasm  for the new revenue source, and spoke of "girl scouts" or used GSA art work.  This will not get GSA a judgment that it owns the terms at issue.  The provable wrongs are a tempest in a teapot. - primarily a bluff. 

As a Scouter deeply engaged in the roll-out of a Scouts BSA Troop for Girls during the applicable time, I can personally attest to the facts discussed above.  The attempt to conflate limited instances of brief over-enthusiasm and uninformed mistakes into a significant problem should fail.  The examples GSUSA cites are simply  isolated.  I am not an intellectual property attorney and don't know the applicable legal standards here.  If showing that a possibility of customer confusion is enough, perhaps they will have something.  If they need to prove actual and widespread confusion, they have a big challenge.  No girl or parent was even remotely confused about what they were joining when they visited and joined our Scouts BSA Troop for 
Girls.

As for the new title, I take it as a simple implementation of the membership change  No doubt it was caused by a new look at the legal issues.  The girls in our Scouts BSA Troop actually got a kick out of the old title.

Our "Scouts BSA Troop for Girls", which is the term we consistently use for identifying ourselves, has had about 60 girls and their parents visit with us during our open houses at the beginning of each semester.  I have met every one of them and none were even remotely "confused" about what program they were visiting.  Of the 45 girls who ultimately joined us, only two also continue their association with a former GSUSA unit.  Approximately 10 had previously been in Girl Scouts, but affirmatively joined us to associate with the BSA-style program, most often citing wanting to be part of a program they perceived was more outdoor-intensive.  They occasionally make critical comments about the product sale emphasis in the GSUSA, but other than that they have apparently moved-on or forgotten their experiences with that program.

The balance of the girls who joined us (and their parents) very clearly understand the association with BSA.  I have no plan to survey them on why they joined us because they very clearly joined us for the advancement and outdoor programs.  They love the fact that our girls operate a $50,000-per-year operation.  The suit to me sounds like an attempt to conflate isolated mistakes on the part of enthusiastic unit and district folks in the opening days of the effort into a false allegation of widespread of confusion or misrepresentation. 

We recently had our annual Troop no-cost community fundraiser on Zoom to raise our scholarship money for Scouts from under-resourced families (last year we did a live coffee reception).  We collected about $7,000 on our site within a day or two.  The cash zaps instantly into our bank account.  I think we would have received far less if we had encouraged potential donors to “mail it in” or “drop by a Troop meeting and leave some cash”.  Instead, we sent them a link to a special donor page on our beautiful web site (the viewing of which encourages them to contribute as well).  It is the same basic process for collecting dues and Troop event fees.  
 

Unit treasurers need to consider the cash income that goes uncollected from these younger Scout families and potential donors.  Most families only write a couple of checks per month and nobody uses cash anymore (due to COVID).  By the way, the Scouts themselves now manage our web site and are quite familiar with all of this, although they are not involved in the money management.  So, your Treasurers can look the the young people for guidance.    I’ll stop talking about electronic banking now, because I do want to wear out the topic!

Your Troop Treasurers have no idea how much convenience and efficiency they are losing by not collecting electronically on a web site.  More important, young families today have a better attitude when it comes to paying for something with their debit or credit card at home on a web site or in-person (using one of those devices that your treasurer can plug into his smart phone).  Parents today will promptly pay your fees without much fuss if you use a web site.  I am no expert about this, but the technology experience of the transaction itself somehow makes the payment seem more secure and “worth it”.

One aspect to all of this is convenience and regularity in the payment system itself.  We use our troop web site and collect nearly all fees and dues through it.  This is what every parent of a Scout today wants to do.  Any unit collecting cash or checks on a regular basis is rubbing against the personal finance practices of young families of today.

Another aspect is being really direct and up front with parents and others about the tremendous value a family and Scout get from participation in a Troop activity.  Compared to the fees of school, community and athletic groups, which often charge $500 - $1,000 for a single weekend ski, cheerleading, science or other event that requires registration, travel, food and program, we are “dirt cheap”.  We all know how to put on a program that delivers great value and program for very little cost.  We should not apologize for small fees we charge for a weekend Troop outing.  Our Council camps are similarly huge bargains compared to “sleep away” camps that charge multiples of 3 or even 4 times the typical BSA fees.

For a weekend event with our Troop, the Scout gets all snacks, meals, equipment use, volunteer supervision and instruction, plus whatever materials are necessary to participate in the theme of the weekend (rope, compasses, whatever).  Our grand total for this costs rarely exceed $40 per event per Scout, and we are charging a small extra amount to acquire equipment.  Our Troop took a canoe trip in September that even included transportation for a piddling $70 per Scout.  Yes, that even included the canoes, because our Council let us use them without cost.  I got on a high school web site from a district near the District of Columbia and found a less impactful weekend trip costing participants $345.  No kidding.
 

We should all be proud of what we are doing cost-wise.

I see huge disadvantages in Scouting continuing to wear this huge target on its back as it tries to recast a positive image for a program in which young people learn Scouting skills and values and are taken on safe outings.  We are not an ethnic-centric organization like the leagues of immigrants and descendants that preserve specific ethnic heritage.  There is no advantage for our young people if Scouting encourages them to impersonate native Americans.  Let’s keep the study of cultures and their attributes as part of our merit badge program and move forward.  

16 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

One other thing that my pack started to do last year: a fundraising goal. Scouts must either fundraise $200 of fall product sales (usually 2-4 hours in front of the local Home Depot) OR come up with $200 to the pack. Fall 2019 worked well and of course Fall 2020 was a bust.

Sounds like a valid approach.  Do the families tell you at the start of the year whether they will pay directly or fundraise? If not, you might ask that question in September and immediately invoice the families who opt to pay directly.  This might avoid awkward pursuit of families that do not fundraise and later use excuses like “If you had chosen a better product to sell my child would have participated.  Call me next year.”  It would also bring in cash early to fund the operation during early months.  In any case, great to hear about your success.

Very solid ideas from Parkman.

One difference between his Troop and ours is that we started from scratch two years ago and needed to build-in some capital acquisitions into our budget for the first three years or so.  We also had some extra start-up money from the church and a individual funding “angel”, but regardless had to pay for things ranging from flags, flag stands, essential program equipment to camping gear.  We are at 45 and are naturally growing approximately 5 Scouts net per semester.
 

After we have finished acquiring the basics, we will further build our “rainy day” fund and re-evaluate our dues level then.

15 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

1) Per semester- how often (as a percentage of scouts or families) do you have to chase people down? My troop and pack does dues-due-at-recharter (so, once a year) stemming from a concern in the past that the treasurer or committee chair would spend half their time chasing down parents who haven't paid.

2) How do you distribute the annual budget? My troop posts to out website and directs people to the page. My pack emails the excel sheet around.

3) "Only the Scoutmaster and COR know who receives scholarship support." We have a scholarship system as well (100% coverage for certain scouts) but the way we read the BSA financial requirements the treasurer must know (and it is our committee chair, not our COR, who is the third person). Is your treasurer in the loop?

1)     Our Treasurer electronically invoices the parents at the start of each semester and all amounts are collected on our web site.  We have a couple of families that pay by check, which is fine.  Because we build-in the national dues and a council contribution into our budget, this means we collect only 2 checks per year.  We have 45 scouts and have a few families that are habitually late, but they eventually pay without much fuss.  Our volunteer treasurer handles it all.  The Scoutmasters never are put in the position of a bill collector.

2).    Our annual budget is drawn on a program year basis each summer by our volunteer treasurer and distributed to all parents and registered adults.  It is reviewed and approved during the July and August Troop Committee meetings (now on Zoom).  We do not post it to our web site, but it is broadly available to anyone and reviewed by the Treasurer of our CO, a very respected Episcopal Church parish.

3).    I should have mentioned the Treasurer is fully in the loop.  After all, she sends the invoices and needs to know the proper amounts.

I should add that we provide extra assistance in many different forms for Scouts that need it.  This spans from purchase of equipment, uniforms, bus fare and some of those subtle items that under-resourced families can’t always provide.  Examples would be those canvas Scout Handbook covers.  We make sure to help Scouts who are using tattered book bags for backpacks and similar things.  We get things donated for some of this, but make sure to provide some brand-new things — that is important to them.

Families who wish to be on our scholarship program discuss things in confidence with the COR, who then confers with the Rector of the Parish and me.  We never put any of our Scoutmasters in a potentially-awkward decision making role.

Collecting Camping Fees

We send out a “Scoutmasters Note” two weeks in advance of each campout that includes a pre-drafted permission slip and web link to submit payment if their Scout will be attending.  Payments and slips are due one week in advance, so each patrol knows how much food to buy for their patrol.  The scouts plan their meals with a budget, purchase their food the week before the event and are immediately reimbursed by our Treasurer when they provide receipts.  The Treasurer maintains an accessible Google document listing who has registered to attend, so Patrol Leaders can urge attendance.

Disadvantages of Our System

I like our system, but because it provides for an “all in” dues amount, it can make it look like we are over-charging.  Other Troops are continuously collecting small amounts for everything like award patches and camporee fees which are not included in their “dues”.  God bless the Treasurers of those Troops, who fill one of the least rewarding jobs in a Troop.  We include absolutely everything and never, ever ask for another dime.  And we don’t do product fundraising.  However, we have an occasional parent who insists we charge too much.  We show them the transparent figures and offer them the chairmanship of a new Product Sale Fundraising Committee to fill the financial gap that would be created.  I have never had anyone take us up on that offer.

long Term Camp

In May, the families sending their Scout to summer camp with us pay our Treasurer the lump sum our council charges.  The families on scholarship are provided a 50% campership from our council, so they pay us that reduced fee (and we sometimes help with that as well).  What a splendid thing our Council does for us in that regard.  Almost reason by itself to justify our Troop’s contribution to our Council.  The fund for this was provided by a former national BSA officer.

An Alternative Way to Fund Local Scouting

Several commenters has suggested we need to finance Scouting in a different manner.  Prior to forming a new Scouts BSA Troop two years ago, our formation group conducted focus groups with parents of prospective Scouts.  We included discussion on dues, fund raising and camping fees.  Here are their opinions:

• They want to know the full, actual cost of operating the Troop and the actual costs of camp activities (both weekend and long term residential).  They want this on a per-scout basis. 
• They do not want their children to engage in product sales fundraising (they mentioned cookies, popcorn and candy bars).
• The families with ability to pay prefer paying full amounts and disfavor typical fund raising activities.  The families not able to pay the full amounts want to pay something meaningful, and would like some help with the balance.

We calculated the annual all-in cost of operating the Troop (except for out-of-pocket fees, registration, food, fuel and other costs of camping activities).  This includes national dues, equipment, advancement, program activities, specialty uniform items (hats and t-shirts, etc.), Scout Handbooks, rope, tents, dining flies, pots pans, I mean everything.  We turned it into a detailed proposed budget.  The long-term residential camp fee is what our Council charges and we have an average weekend camp fee for all seven campouts (3 in fall and 5 in spring).

The annual non-camp cost is added-up and divided by the number of Scouts.  The families then pay that “dues” amount in equal lump sums at the beginning of each semester.  The families pay only for camp events their Scouts attend.  We never, ever, expect a dime in addition to these amounts.

Scouts from under-resourced families pay half of the above dues and fees.  We budget the support we provide them as “scholarship” money and raise it from three modest churches and through a no-cost annual community coffee reception our Key-Three organizes.  These are not big dollars.  Only the Scoutmaster and COR know who receives scholarship support.

Our Troop Committee believes financially supporting the local council is important, so we budget a single annual Troop contribution.  The Council gets about $80 per Scout.  We do not sell Council popcorn and we do not have the Council solicit our families for FOS.

What is different?

• ·       No traditional product sales fundraising.

• ·       Annual single contribution to Council.  They get more and there is no hassle.

• ·       Under-resourced Scouts pay 50% of dues and camp fees.

• ·       “Scholarships” are raised from local churches and individuals at single event.

• ·       Families pay transparent dues/fees.  All amounts known the entire year in advance.

We are a new and modest urban Troop and nothing is “deluxe”.  Two years of success prove this is a valid way to finance our unit and Council.  Are some of these approaches responsive to commenters suggesting we need a different way to finance Scouting?

Very thoughtful.  I do not find it difficult to involve our CO, but it takes remembering that a unit has to directly include them in our program.  When our bus leaves the church parking lot for summer camp, a priest is invited to provide encouragement and a blessing.  When we wanted to do a service project at the church, some of our girls attended their facility committee meeting.  When a girl’s mother died we asked for a nun to visit and talk to us.  The Senior Warden is our Troop Chair.  They will want to be part of us if we ask them.  How the legal document is drafter would not impact those things.

I am inclined to agree with you.  The only apparent purpose of the presumed lessor-lessee option is to handle the liability issue and not to distance a unit from a religious affiliation.  I have my Troop as an example.  If our Episcopal Church CO was to somehow opt into this new arrangement at some point in the future (maybe at the insistence of a Diocese official?), it would not change our programmatic activity or relationship with the church at all.  The parish leadership and members love us and the Scouts admire them greatly in return.  The Bishop attended our very first gathering and dedicated the unit into existence.  In our case the shift would be simply regarded as a change for business reasons and it would hardly be discussed.  I don't think it would change our Troop's culture of "Duty to God".  I understand there are other potential impacts of such a shift related to unit-council matters, but those potential impacts are being well-discussed on the other thread.  

Will “renting” impact “duty to God”?  

A separate thread is currently discussing the apparent development that churches will now have the option to discontinue their chartered organization relationships with Troops in favor of a more-distanced lessor-lessee relationship.  Te practical and relationship discussion of this should continue on that other thread. However, from a cultural perspective, this presents an issue.

If a Troop is a “renter” and no longer part of a church’s program, how will this impact the “duty to God” aspect of Its program?  Does this present a bigger issue across the Scouting movement?

Sentinel is correct.  This was a discussion regarding District Executives.

As to the comment on the document itself, I agree the job requirements have become overly expansive and no longer suggestive of a “fun” career.  
 

As for the fund raising component, I am going to start a separate discussion in a couple of weeks sharing my view that Scouting should adopt a different model to raise funds for units and FOS for councils.  Stay tuned, because you will see things you like and dispute.