Cburkhardt

Another Outcome: Big City Remains Alone

I am trying to present outcomes that are realistic possibilities for different parts of the country.  This outcome would be a potential or even likely outcome where the big metropolitan council is reasonably well run and there are reasonable personal relations between most of the predecessor councils in the pretend Area.

Big City, Rich Folks and Happy councils get along fairly well.  There are good cultural ties among them caused by Happy council having encouraged their Scouts to attend Big City Scout Reservation and the common business and social links among Big City and Rich Folks board members and council volunteers.  The three councils realize that they can individually survive the national bankruptcy and the need to contribute to the Victim’s Trust Fund to get discharges.  They also realize that the other two councils and their properties are not going to be able to survive the process.  After a few meetings involving all councils and involving a representative variety of volunteer leaders from the unit on up, the following become clear:

·       Big City, Rich Folks and Happy councils want to merge.  They all prefer to put Camp Rich into conservancy and use it as a local version of a high adventure base during the summer.  They will lease it out for hunting in the off-season, something that will have to be specially arranged with the conservancy group.  The conservancy cash, Rich Folks endowment and Happy endowment would be folded into Big City council.  For liability avoidance purposes, Big City Scout Reservation will be spun-off into a separate ownership and management corporation not controlled by Big City council.

·       Merger of Equals council is a generally unhappy group.  Consistent with their record of not being able to process key decisions, the group seems hopelessly split about what to do, but really has no net assets other than the one worn camp.  Because the group is unable to decide its future, it is no longer able to effectively offer Scouting locally.  The group either voluntarily dissolves or BSA national withdraws their charter.  The camp is sold and a few other assets, leaving $100,000 after debts are paid.  The remainder reverts to national.  The local corporation files for Chapter 7 liquidation, so it receives a discharge.  After all of this is processed, Big City accepts national’s offer to include the old council territory into Big City council.

·       Sad council decides to go it alone and without contributing toward the Victim’s Trust fund for the discharge.  Two years later the two cases filed against Sad council for abuse in the 1960s go to trial and wipe-out Sad council’s assets and those of the VFW group that had been the CO of the involved Pack.  The council files chapter 7 liquidation and is dissolved.  Because of the bitter history of Scouting in Sad council, Big City will decide not to take on the old Sad council territory.  Units in the former Sad council territory directly contact with “new” national for program licensing.  However, COs in the area express reservations about hosting Scout units because of what happened to the VFW.  Many of the 30 units remaining in the council wither away.  Children interested in Scouting generally drive to a unit located in the Big City council.

Comment

This is intended to include some of the typical results for different types of councils.  The survival of councils will generally depend on the capability and willingness of the local volunteers to understand and address what is happening – and to make decisions that are future-oriented in the best interest of youth.  Next, the ability to maintain the confidence of the local families and community (COs, other volunteer organizations, business community) will help or hinder go-forward operations.  Where Scouting is divided, the result will probably be to shrink or disband the council.  Councils and their volunteers almost have a behavioral DNA that is a good predictor of these outcomes. 

The thrust of my concern is that the tort industry will have a roadmap to suit the going-forward BSA organizations at the council level.  They will know which ones have accessible properties, how much those properties are worth and what the YPT records of those councils were pre-bankruptcy.  When one of these lawyers hears about disgruntled volunteers or employees on just about any civil rights or other issue, the suits will flow against the councils known to have assets.  I am nothing other than a Scoutmaster these days, but if I were on a council executive board I would be encouraging an effort to transfer-away almost any hard asset to trustworthy entities and immediatly designate almost any contribution post-bankruptcy.  Big City Scout Reservation should indeed become owned by an organization governed by a very strictly-worded trust.  Big City council itself should become a nearly-pure cash operation, keeping what it needs for year-to-year financial stability, but urging the big gifts to go to the trust or be otherwise secured from lawsuit attachment.  Of course, the Trust will need to position itself in a manner to avoid liability, because the lawyers will name the trust as a co-defendant if any untoward allegations are made about activities on the Reservation premises.  

Hard to say much about Eagle and Remember Schiff's circumstances.  Eagle's council should consider transferring the camp(s) that survive the Victim's Trust Fund contribution activity.  If not, it ultimately will be in the position of Sad or Merger of Equals council.  Not much cash left, properties that probably need deferred maintenance, no big contributions in sight and a local trial bar praying for a program or membership slip-up.  This is not a formula for long-time existance.  Maybe that council should find a Big City council to preserve the viability of the property.

Quote

 

 

The Continuing exposure of the properties to lawsuits is a huge issue as well.  Bankruptcy will force us to close and sell some properties.    Local councils will do their best to keep our best properties.  After the bankruptcy is over the tort lawyers are not going to lose interest in BSA assets.  Post-bankruptcy suits will continue.  Every time someone has a complaint against the Bsa for just about anything, a suit will be filed in an attempt to liquidate our remaining assets.  Smart councils will not wait for those suits to be filed, because it will be too late at that point.

Good point WIW.  The councils would have to transfer properties with extensive trust conditions to prioritize Scouting uses.  I think of the summer camp programs as being operated by council camping program committees and the land/facility management companies as focused on maintenance and off-season uses to build maintenance-specific endowments.  Council executive boards don’t typically have the bandwidth to focus on generating revenues that way.  One result is maintenance backlog.  Another is allowing the camps to become financial burdens when they could generate revenues.

National Staff Reductions.  Great questions.  Under both possible outcomes I posted, the national staff reductions are near-total.  If there were a liquidation, “national” could essentially be a program research, development, supply and licensing service unit owned and operated by the larger go-forward councils.  That might mean 15-20 program development staffers and a similar amount of supply division staff (most of that would be contracted out).  Under those outcomes there is no national field staff.  The mega councils are on their own to do as they please and for practical reasons don’t report to anyone.  
 

I posted these two outcomes to show that even under liquidation, the BSA can very much continue as a healthy, meaningful organization in firm control of our future.  I will soon post a non-liquidation outcome that I think is more likely to occur.

How would the national liquidation potential outcome affect rural units in small towns?

The unit leaders and youth participants probably would not feel much difference, except their registration fees would plummet.  They would have on-line access to all program materials and the licensor would sell recognition items directly to them.  These items would also cost less, as the licensor would only seek to break-even on its program research and development efforts.  There would be no volunteer or professional structure above the unit level in these geographies.  The chartered organization concept would not function outside of council territories, because the BSA would not supervise or service these units in any traditional way.  Liability insurance would be arranged locally — probably through the church or other organization where the unit is allowed to meet.

These units could attend summer camp at any council property with excess capacity to serve them.  They would need to pay an insurance surcharge in order to cover the week of summer camp.  Some units would choose to run their own week of camp nearby.

How would ownership of properties be handled?  Under any of these potential outcomes, it would seem wise to separate ownership and management of properties from the councils in order to protect the assets from future suits.  Under the hypothetical, I might suggest that a separate property organization be formed to own Big City Scout Reservation and the training center.  Between the investment bankers from the former Rich Folks council and the members of the former council camping committees of predecessor councils, there would be plenty of talent to get that done.  It would be best to establish the new corporation and make the property transfers as soon as the bankruptcy is over.  A benefit is that the new entity could probably do a better job of figuring out how to generate some Private sector cash income for off-season property use.

Parkman:  Great points, all.

My second potential outcome was designed to show how a new BSA organization could fairly easily emerge even if there was a national liquidation (which I don’t predict will occur).  The dynamic is that the resource-abundant geographies will be able to move forward.  The surviving entities that would lead the movement in those areas would be the ones that have the best financial, property management and volunteer leadership resources.  Smaller councils will only survive if they have some unique attribute that allows them to continue.  The best will pal in with the larger councils.  The remaining geographies will either offer Scouting on a unit basis through a licensing arrangement with one of the continuing councils or directly with he “new” national.  
 

As for the areas that might not initially be in a council geography, I think a licensing agreement could probably be arranged fairly easily.  The cost would be minimal compared to current fees because the “non-council” troops would obtain their insurance elsewhere.  The mega councils will be very picky about what geographies they include in the council, because they will not want to incorporate vast tracts of unsupervised YPT risk in the council insurance pools.  The bankruptcy will have made the BSA the most abuse-secure youth program anywhere, because post-Bankruptcy YPT incidents on the part of any youth serving organization will spell the end of those organizations.

Someone on this site probably knows the history of how Scouting first spread across the country.  I seem to recall reading that groups of individuals could petition the BSA to organize a territory if they met certain standards.  Seems to me that the formally-unserved territories could organize where there is sufficient support.

Here is a different potential outcome, perhaps more consistent with the views of some commenters:

 

A March, 2021 announcement by the Bankruptcy Court that 26,000 claims filed had been determined to be credible caused the national BSA reorganization bankruptcy case to teeter on the edge of conversion to liquidation.  After a series of hearings and decisions, the Court ordered that substantially all non-designated assets of councils would need to be applied to the Victims Trust Fund in order to raise a sufficient total to allow a national Chapter 11 to move forward.  Or, the national organization case could be converted to liquidation and the councils would be on their own to either file council bankruptcies or defend individual civil actions.  National expressed preference for liquidation.

One effect of the national BSA liquidation is that the rights to the BSA program were sold in a pre-packaged deal to a group of 45 local councils that had sufficient endowment funds to make the purchase and hire a small staff to maintain and license the program to councils.  All national properties were liquidated, including the bases.  The councils are now on their own to determine whether they will continue and on what basis.  The practical relationship between councils and the new charter-issuing group is that of a licensor-licensee.  Congressional leaders indicate they will recognize the new licensing group as the “new” BSA.                              

Sad council and Merger of Equals council filed for Ch. 7 liquidation and ceased operation.  About half of their units continued with BSA programming by choosing a new council affiliation with Big City council so they could still participate in advancement and attend a traditional BSA summer camp.  These stand-alone units pay a drastically-lower dues amount to have their Scouts have “official” status for their ranks and access to the new version of the BSA rank patches.  That is substantially all they get for those dues.  Units that affiliate with a council also have some liability insurance.

Happy council determined to file for Ch. 11 reorganization.  Not having a camp to operate, not having debt and having the management relationship with Big City council makes its reorganization plan reasonably strong.  However, the volunteers that assembled its previously-robust endowment are heartbroken that they have been required to turn over all but $250,000 of their hard-earned endowment.  Their Scouts will continue to attend Big City Scout Reservation, which now operates at high capacity due to so many other camps having closed.  It has become a genuine profit center for Big City council.

Big City council made a huge contribution to the Victim’s Trust Fund, significantly and permanently trimmed-back its staff, sold the training center and is exploring a significant reduction in the size of its Reservation.  Big City is one of the councils that owns the program licensing rights, which is more of a service to other remaining councils and not an income-generator.  

Rich Folks council was able to avoid paying a huge contribution to the Victim’s Trust Fund because much of its endowment income was not directly held by the council.  Its operations continue largely as-is, with a diminishing number of youth participants each summer.

 Notes

 

A national liquidation might result in 50-60 surviving large councils of focused functionality continuing forward, with a small licensing organization becoming the new “national”.  Essentially, Scouting would have BSA councils in metropolitan areas (often operating a camp) and a limited number of small councils would exist outside those areas because of unique circumstances.  Most small councils would no longer be capable of owning a camp and very few would conduct summer camp due to insurance reasons.  The surviving councils would continue to serve their geographies, and the unserved areas outside those geographies would allow units there to license directly with the “new” BSA.  There would be vast portions of the US outside the metropolitan areas without volunteer or professional Scouters above the unit level.  A number of local and unaffiliated clubs continue to engage in local camping activities and include only adults and youth who ascribe to the social, religious or other philosophical views of those clubs.

7 minutes ago, walk in the woods said:

It would have taken way less words if you'd just said Chicago/C7.

There are some similarities, but if you look at my "first version" result you will definitely see differences.  Chicago/C7 is a microcosm of a lot of the challenges and provides all sorts of examples of things done well and poorly.  I love the "cage match" fundraising idea!

One Solution:  Two councils dissolve, two council merge and one council gets new responsibility.

The Big City and Happy councils must have some positive program things happening, because maintaining reasonable membership amid the difficult overall circumstances is a leading indicator of success.  They will turn out to be the key local organizations that survive.   

The Rich Folks council is kind of a mystery.  Dropping membership could be an indicator of program difficulties there, but they seem like they can choose to attempt anything they want because of their endowment.

 

The difficulties are the Merger of Equals council and Sad council, which lack resources to obtain a discharge.  Members of their current executive boards and other local volunteers do not want to continue the council structures if they have to defend against abuse lawsuits by themselves – and maybe face liability for things that happened decades ago.  Both councils have worn camps that need work, but Merger of Equals council has no cash on hand to make improvements and Sad council only has $150,000 of equity and cannot borrow more.  Both councils have questionable organizational reputations for overpaying professionals, internal disputes and (in the case of Merger of Equals) inability to make key decisions.  Raising capital funds for the camps with such reputations would probably be tough.  The decision is either to liquidate in bankruptcy and get liability discharges, or convince other councils to absorb them, have them pay the Victims Trust Fund contributions and hope the combined going-forward council does something good with the worn camps.

Merger of Equals council and Sad council choose to liquidate, because there is little rational basis for other councils to take on their significant financial burdens.  Liquidating in Ch. 7 bankruptcy provides them their liability discharges without a Victims Trust Fund contribution.  The remaining assets are sold, the cash is applied to the debts and the charter to provide BSA programming in their geographic territories reverts to BSA national.

In the meantime, Big City council’s executive board rejected the idea of using City parks for summer camp or selling any part of Big City Scout Reservation.  Big City paid its Victim’s Trust Fund contribution out of its endowment, and received a discharge.  During the process, its council camp committee determined that the program at the Reservation needed to be entirely re-vamped.  They also want to attract scouts from the previous rural and suburban councils that no longer have camps to start attending summer camp at the Reservation.  They decide to re-name the several camps on the Reservation after the now-closed legacy camps of the suburban and rural councils – and they invite the volunteers from those geographies to “adopt” these re-named camps and bring former camp signs, traditional displays (like a favorite totem pole) and similar things to the Reservation.  They ask the best volunteers who had been involved in the legacy camps to join the Big City council camping program committee to reinvent programming on the Reservation.  The previous OA lodges (now re-designated as Big City OA chapters) and other program groups are encouraged to focus on using use their respective “adopted” camps.  

Happy council made a $500,000 contribution toward the Victim’s Trust Fund and received its liability discharge.  Happy council was thereafter approached by BSA national and asked if it wished to operate Scouting in the geographies of the previous Merger of Equals council and Sad council.  It agreed to do so on condition that it would not be expected to purchase or maintain camp property.  Happy council also expanded its administrative/business management agreement with Big City council to handle the additional membership load.  Happy council concentrates on program and field service and focuses its endowment toward that end.  Some of the Scouters from the previous rural councils quit when they heard that Happy council did not want to buy their worn camps out of bankruptcy.  They joined other youth organizations that better-reflect their program and membership preferences.

While all of this was going on, the investment bankers on the Rich Folks council executive board decided they had a problem with their overpaid Scout Executive who they discovered was not leading an honorable effort to provide Scouting to more youth and was over-using endowment funds on a numerically diminishing summer camp program.  This negligent approach was found to extend across other council operations as well.  This all came to a head when a former executive board member made an unsolicited offer to purchase the far-away Rich Folks council camp and convert it into his personal hunting preserve.  Since only 192 Scouts attended the camp last summer, the council accepted the offer, used a part of the cash to contribute to the Victim’s Trust Fund and got their discharge of liability.  After studying what to do next, the board members decided to approach the Big City council for a combination.  The significant Rich Folks council endowment was placed in a restricted trust to be only used for ongoing camp maintenance and program expenses at the Reservation.  One exception was that before they combined with Big City council, the Rich Folks council purchased the small worn-out summer camp that had belonged to the now-defunct Sad council.  It was restored to a pristine state, but as a “close in” camp, training center, Scout Shop and small office that is leased to Happy council for some of its rural-based District Executives.  The former Sad council Scoutmasters who joined other youth serving organizations were enraged when they learned the old Sad council camp dining hall was re-named after a long time contributor to the Rich Folks council.  They promise to never step foot on the property again.  They also despise the new green roofs that were put on the camp buildings, because the roofs were brown when they attended camp there as kids:  “Those city folks and their rich friends have ruined the Boy Scouts of America because they destroyed the appearance of our camp.”

Summary

·       Big City council combined with Rich Folks council.  Both councils made Trust Fund contributions and received discharges.

·       Sad council and Merger of Equals council both took Chapter 7 bankruptcy and liquidated, including their worn-out properties. 

·       Happy council made a trust fund contribution and received a discharge.  It agreed to administer Scouting in the previous territories of Sad and Merger of Equals, but only retained two of their highest-performing employees.

·       Big City council now owns the only go-forward camps, the multi-camp Reservation and the small “close in” camp that used to belong to Sad council.  It was purchased out of bankruptcy by the defunct Rich Folks council and transferred to Big City council.  Happy council leases part of it for a small office.

Comment

I think the illustration can be a typical arrangement that will happen within the next two years.  Councils that cannot or will not contribute to the Victim’s Trust Fund are highly likely to dissolve.  City councils will combine with suburban councils, but those suburban councils can have a say about the resulting camp and council structure.  Sometimes the suburban councils will dominate.  Disagreeable or obstinate councils and personalities will be left behind, because there will be no time or inclination to accommodate organizational deformities when so many key decisions need to be made within a short time.  “Mergers of equals” and drawn-out contests over which camps will be kept or operated will no longer take place.  A focus on fewer and better-endowed camp properties will happen – because the Bankruptcy, COVID and need to contribute to the Victim’s Trust Fund will force termination and sale of marginal operations. These changes will take place very rapidly, so the pain can be temporary.  Councils that continue will cooperate more closely on matters of maintaining facilities and even offering field service.  It the example, Happy council is reliant on Big City council for quite a bit – but they like it that way.  Big City council will be the dominant partner in that relationship, but knows it is better to have rural Scouting handled separately and locally. 

In a few days I'll post a dramatically different result.   

That said, the OA youth at the national level have a rule that when councils merge, a new combined lodge is always formed.  That sometimes aggrieves folks who would like to be a member of their childhood lodge.

I suggest we leave aside the more specialized topics like OA, Wood Badge and things like that for now and try to concentrate on the overall situation for our pretend Area.  I also suggest everyone concentrate for at least a week on posting their predictions and answers for the problem, rather than commenting on what is posted.  It would be just great to see the variety and categories of solutions first.  Then we can have fun.  And yes, I will put out my grand plan eventually so you can all “have at me”.

You Solve it – A Likely Bankruptcy Scenario

Ten years ago a city of 1 million had its own council, the “Big City Council”.  Surrounding it were three smaller suburban councils.  In a ring surrounding this metropolitan area were four rural councils.  This combined territory happens to comprise an “Area”, which at the time was a national BSA organizational structure. 

Over the decade and prior to the bankruptcy filing, two of the suburban councils had financial and membership problems and combined into Big City Council.  Their property was sold and the cash went into the camp endowment for the multi-camp Big City Scout Reservation and a small camp known as “Big City Training Center”.  Big City Council seems to be run well and the “city Scouters” are “nice enough”, but the other councils in the Area avoid dealing with it because they fear they will somehow be “forced” to combine into it.

One remaining suburban council is “Rich Folks Council”, where many of the economic elites from the metropolitan area live.  The council has a deluxe property (“Camp Rich”) located six hours away that is hardly used, but there is plenty of cash to keep it running for the diminishing number of “Rich Folks” Scouts that can afford to drive there for the two weeks the camp operates in the summer.  The operation of Camp Rich is subsidized by local citizens for $250/Scout. 

Two of the rural councils combined into “Merger of Equals Council” and have been squabbling ever since because the combined council executive board cannot decide which of two inherited small camps to sell – yet cannot sufficiently utilize or fund both of them.  Membership has been static, but slowly declining. 

The other two rural councils include “Happy Council” which has no camp because it has always used “Big City Scout Reservation”.  It is healthy from a financial and membership standpoint.  Everything there seem to run very well and everyone seems happy.  

The other rural council is “Sad Council”.  It has a medium-sized but severely run-down camp.  When some manufacturing plants closed a few years back, the population of the council plummeted along with membership, so the council executive board has been trying to figure out what to do.  The Scoutmasters and CORs are enraged that the dining hall has a leaky roof and that the pool no longer works.  They blame the council executive board for paying the two professionals too much and want them both fired.

The spring 2020 bankruptcy filing and stoppage of cash flow from COVID negatively affected Scouting in most of the Area.

 

• ·       Big City Council has terminated over half of its 36-member staff and has put the Big City Training Center up for sale.  Big City Scout Reservation lost a lot summer campers because its own Troops have started to attend camps in other states.

•        Rich Folks Council seems untouched, but COVID diminished recruitment.  Therefore, local citizens will now subsidize the Rich Folks scouts at their far-away summer camp up to $400/scout.

• ·       Merger of Equals Council announced that after ten years of indecision, it would sell one of their camps.  Unfortunately, the council entirely drained its endowment by operating both camps over the decade, so the camp chosen to go forward has a lot of deferred maintenance.

• ·       Happy Council has been weathering the downtime by leaving two vacant staff positions unfilled.  They also outsourced their business/administrative operations to Big City Council.  They do not own a camp to worry about.  They have a $1 million endowment, which they feel good about because they are a small rural council.  Membership is “steady”.

• ·       Sad Council heavily mortgaged their worn camp to get the pool running and the dining hall roof fixed.  However, an uninsured property loss due to a storm wiped-out most of the program areas.  The Scoutmasters and CORs blamed this on the single remaining professional, whom they made sure was terminated.  The council has no employees, no endowment and a camp worth $375,000 that is mortgaged for $225,000.

It is now the summer of 2021 and the Bankruptcy process has led to local councils being requested by the Bankruptcy Court to help fund the Victims Trust Fund in exchange for a discharge of local council liability.  Without discharges, the councils will be on their own to fund the defense of child abuse allegations going back to the beginning of each council.  The contribution amounts requested are based on the number and value of credible abuse claims filed by victims, which abuse is claimed to have occurred within the geographic territory of the respective council.  

Each council’s ability to pay the contribution to get the discharge is as follows:

• ·       Big City Council can pay by using half of its endowment or it can sell a part of Big City Scout Reservation.  Alternatively, it could sell the entire Reservation and rely on other councils to run Scout camps.  Some of the City political leaders wrote an Op-Ed that urged the Reservation be sold and have Scouts conduct summer camp in City parks instead.

• ·       Rich Folks Council can pay.  Heck, it’s a rounding error for its annual endowment income.

• ·       Merger of Equals Council cannot pay the bill by itself under any circumstances.  It will have either to liquidate or convince some other council to merge with it and take on its liabilities (including paying the trust contribution to get the discharge).

• ·       Happy Council can pay the contribution to get the discharge, but will have to liquidate half of its endowment.

• ·       Sad Council cannot pay the bill by itself under any circumstances.  It will have either to liquidate or convince some other council to merge with it and take on its liabilities (including paying the trust contribution to get the discharge).

Question:  What do you think will happen to Scouting in the Area?  You can go any way you want, but you cannot change the facts that I have provided, and you must confine your comments to local Scouting and not national BSA organization issues.  You must assume the national BSA organization survives to provide basic program development, supply and other core functions to units and councils.  You do not have to tackle everything.  Feel free to concentrate on a particular issue.  Let's have some fun with this to lighten our spirits and understand that there will be a future for Scouting after the bankruptcy and COVID have run their courses.  I promise to post my own prediction, but I'll keep you all guessing for a while.

My last posting on this thread.  The stage of resolving fundamental conflicts within the BSA will soon be upon us.  What is different is that an external decision-maker will determine the fate of our resources and opine what is "core" and "not core" to our written governance documents.   There will be little discretion whether to keep or sell properties or end valued services in order to fund council purchases of  bankruptcy discharges -- the decision makers' hands will be forced by the judge and trustees.  Councils who can afford to will protect generations of individuals (like commenters on this site) and institutions from exposure to tort suits.  All will attempt to continue a BSA presence in their geography.   The decisions will come very quickly and the implementation will be immediate.

This process can be very upsetting.  We are still a large enough organization to broadly reflect the same differences of opinion that exist in American society these days.  It is not reasonable to think that the BSA can be conformed to a particular Scouting philosophy, membership preference or operational construct.  What will be helpful would be continued respect among us regarding our differing opinions on these issues.  I respect the views of every commenter on this site and will continue to do so.  This even includes those who seek liquidation and abandonment of the BSA.  They should be heard, as should everyone else.

1 hour ago, ParkMan said:

I periodically get to the point where I need to step back for a bit myself.  For me, the spring and summer so far have been that.  

I hear you.  I noticed that when COVID caused a big downturn in our bankruptcy case prospects, some began enforcing a purely negative orthodoxy on this site.  This reminds me of my years on camp staff in the old Northern Indiana Council when a Scoutmaster named Igor used to be condemning of everything and everyone associated with the camp, council, district or whatever.  I'm sure he was beloved back home, but to this day I cringe when recalling the intensity and regularity of the negativity.  I ran into a guy I served with on that staff who I had not seen in 44 years and he brought up hilarious Igor stories.  Igor had a big Troop and his kids obviously loved him.  I finally settled on the view that Igor "worked" because he thought there was great value in his pointing out every imaginable shortfall he observed.  It was his way of being heard and he intended to be helpful despite the sharpness of his manner.

That is how I react when I read the kind of postings you are thinking of.  I think of Igor and continue to be an optimist for Scouting and for the BSA in particular.  I have really enjoyed your longer and thoughtful postings on difficult matters and surely don't live up to the example you have established.  I look forward to your continued presence and postings. 

I'm looking forward to a couple of things right now.  First, planning our Troop open house for new Scout families to have their child join our 38-Scout Troop.  We had a couple of new Scouts join us over the summer and they, along with their parents, love our unit.  A safe place to learn about how to grow into a confident citizen and have fun in the process.  I'm also looking forward to our late September outing, when our four patrols will go on separate overnight outings at our local Scout Reservation after satisfying our physician-ordered testing and distancing process.  The families that have joined since we started the Troop last year are not that concerned about the bankruptcy and related topics debated in this thread.  They understand that bad things indeed happened some time ago, the BSA got its policy and execution on YPT right, and there is a process for paying some recompense as a result.  They are the current-day joiners and are not impacted by the views of how things were and should be again.  They really don't care what property they visit as long as it is a nice place with nice people teaching Scoutcraft skills.  They would probably chuckle at all of us debating the particularities of organization structure and theories about how Scouting should or should not be experienced.  What they would say is that commenters should observe the basics of the Scout law when posting.  We should all do a lot better in that regard. 

Very interesting conversation.  People are not born evil.  Some adopt very advanced and evil tactics as they grow.  Those who abused children rightfully deserve the punishment and perpetual shame meted-out by today’s society.  Not-for-profit youth service agencies are not essentially evil.  They are as effective or flawed as the individuals involved.  

Many in the BSA were surely well intended when the so-called “ineligible volunteer list” was devised, but the inconsistent success of that effort and the insufficiency of protection must have been apparent to some in positions of responsibility – especially as the evolution of society toward encouragement of less-restrictive behavioral standards became plainly clear in the 1960s.  

We have to accept that because that list exists and provides a roadmap for abused to seek recompense, the BSA will be stripped of many assets, and this will soon include many council assets and properties – because people from Troop committee chairperson through the national BSA president had responsibility to protect our children.  

Some councils will be severely impacted to the point of dissolution, because the bankruptcy trustees will determine that volunteers in their units, districts and council committees looked the other way on these issues when they should have taken action.  Our tort and bankruptcy systems are the means through which American justice will be administered in those circumstances, and that system will deal harshly with the BSA.  In the spring, I expect councils will be given the opportunity to pay-into the victims trust fund in exchange for a discharge – or they can choose to face lawsuits and stand alone when cases against councils and local volunteers go to trial.

I would be careful about cheerleading a hoped-for disassembly of the BSA.  Over the last couple of months, some variously advocated that volunteers depart, professionals lose their livelihoods, national properties be dissolved and – well terminate just about every organized aspect of Scouting above the unit.  There is the allure of purity in these positions, because it might be wonderful to return to the Scouting of the 1910s, when legend has it that small groups of boys headed off with adult men and engaged in Scoutcraft skill teaching and rugged character-modeling in the unspoiled outdoors.

 

Nevertheless, just as there were good reasons for one-room schoolhouses to grow into today’s imperfect education system, there are good reasons why the BSA grew into a somewhat-bloated support organization.  I am not buying the thought that losing our professionals, financial endowments, high adventure bases, program assistance and the other assistance we have had for a primitive organization echoing a long-gone past is positive.  Nor do I advocate leaving things as they were.  An overall conclusion from our lengthy pre-COVID blogging is that this legal process will chop-down inefficient or unneeded sacred cows and leave behind essentials.  I’m hoping every commenter here will remain and help a rebuilding process with a critical but cooperative spirit.

I remain optimistic that what will emerge from bankruptcy will be adequate national and local organizations to continue Scouting into the future for my daughter and many other children that will follow her.  I hope for sound volunteer leadership, financial support to maintain core properties, competent and productive employees and continued upgraded prospects for young people.  Nothing except our fundamental purpose will be the same.

Our PLC Verdict on the Summit:  The Scouts loved summer camp there. 

We had our Zoom meeting of all incoming Troop and Patrol youth officers to finalize plans for the fall and review our summer.  The Scouts loved their week at the Summit.  You will be surprised to hear that not once were the cold showers, lengthy distances between program areas or mandatory-mask policy mentioned.  I finally raised those issues and got the "what are you talking about?" look back from them.  The only constructive suggestion they had was to make the food a bit better and fresher.   That would be a good idea, and in a post-COVID world I presume this could be done. 

Some Scouts wished canoeing merit badge had been offered.  A few expressed it took courage to overcome their fear of the bears that roamed at night -- but I believe they learned to overcome those fears by having confidence in the appropriate preventative measures.  When asked about favorite singular experiences, standing paddle boarding, kayaking, white water, climbing zip line, mountain biking and our nightly Troop campfires were mentioned.  Standing paddle boarding in particular was hugely popular.  During the evening open boating sessions, nearly every Scout and adult chose to do this activity.  The canoes and kayaks sat unused.  Council camping committee members should consider this as a program enhancement to local summer camps.  The equipment is inexpensive.

Later this fall our Scouts will discuss where they want to go this next summer.  We currently have reservations to return to a camp at our local Scout reservation in June, with an August reservation for an optional high adventure one-week backpacking trip through some council-owned Blue Ridge Mountains.  I'm guessing that will be their decision.  However, if we are still in a COVID environment next summer and our council facilities are not operating, it is comforting to know that we will have a alternative at the Summit.

12 hours ago, Jameson76 said:

…  not sure one can really evaluate the camp and program there without fully acknowledging what a huge waste of BSA resources this was.

I have not been part of the Summit effort and do not know the plans, numbers or other particulars.  I only shared what I observed about the place during our summer camp week as a Troop.  It provided a solid summer camp experience for our Troop and our Scouts loved it.  If it is within reasonable transportation distance for a one-week Troop summer camp experience, I recommend the program they offer.  My attitude is that since the place is there, priced appropriately for a week of summer camp and includes the unusual additional experiences, Troops might as well use it.  If the place survives the reorganization process and the controversy over its development fades, it might become popular with Scouters east of the Mississippi. 

13 hours ago, yknot said:

No one is debating the potential interest of Summit as a scout destination. The problem is accessibility. As you stated, it worked out for your unit. Mine would also probably have no problem finding the funds if they wanted to attend.

The cost to attend summer camp is always a reasonable issue.  I calculated the difference in attending our council's Goshen Scout Reservation versus summer camp at the Summit.  For us, that meant driving 1.5 hours further and a $20 higher price.  Accounting for the cost of the extra fuel across our scouts is about $4 each.  So the marginal additional cost to out Troop per Scout is about $25 (an increase of about 7%).  Because $25 means a lot to many people, the Troop picked up the total $500 difference.  My view is that this is not a significant cost difference issue.  The Summit is used for jamborees and high adventure activities, which cost more and would present the economic accessibility challenges you note.  My take is that getting both summer camp programming and the enhanced Summit experiences for a marginal increase in cost is a bargain. of sorts.  Said differently, why go to a jamboree when you can go to summer camp there and have similar experiences for about 25% of the jamboree costs?  

Smart Phones at Summit Summer Camp.  One thing I failed to mention is that while it is not necessary for a Scout to have a smart phone at summer camp at the Summit, it is really needed on the part of at least one leader.  Announcements regarding the schedule and other matters are made on-line and during COVID the campwide events were replaced by custom-made videos the Scouts could watch.  The base has an extensive wifi network donated by AT&T for use during the jamborees.  Our Troop policy is that the Scouts can have a phone at camp, but are only allowed to use it in connection with program.  They can also call home.  However, no video games or social networking. Many of the merit badges like photography, nature-oriented ones and even rank advancement are much easier to earn if a scout has access to their smart phone camera.  I was afraid the Scouts might over-use their phones and that things might degenerate in to a bunch of screen-watching and distant heliocopter parenting -- but this did not occur.  The Scouts respected the policy.  

8 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Could some of the skyrocketing costs be due to NCAP standards trying to make every camp identical and "branded?" 

Undoubtedly NCAP standards increase construction costs.  I don't know too much about the program, but I presume the standards are meant to require longer-term capital improvements that will need less repair, be safer and last longer.  What I was thinking of are operating costs like salaries, benefits, environmental requirements, maintenance and insurance  The increase in all of this is almost freakish.

12 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

 Instead of using these methods during the building process,they now have to pay more to fix the issues.

I agree entirely.  Fortunately, it appears the "fix" is relatively easy.  In the adult shower house I used, they essentially used the space of one of the seven shower stalls to install a hot water heater.  They did not really have to alter the physical construction.  I probably should have mentioned that these shower houses/toilets are indestructible because of the bears.  Thick, well-poured concrete walls combine with heavy industrial lighting, fixtures and roofs.  Shelves are made of 1/4" thick angle irons bolted to the wall.  Wooden uprights are 10 x 10 hardwood that attach to steel fasteners that are bolted to the concrete floor.  The bottom 10 inches and upper two feet are open-air, so there is no dank smell.  A rampaging bear can't really do anything other than throw around the plastic garbage can.  Our Scouts actually thought the structures were "cool"  Go figure.

15 minutes ago, skeptic said:

 I got the impression it also would be eventually open to non scouting individuals.  

Our national bases and the best of our larger council camps can be opened to non-scouting users during the off-seasons under proper tax circumstances.  The cash flows can subsidize Scouts attending summer camp and maintain and boost endowments.  The costs of operating and maintaining camps has skyrocketed during recent decades.  We need the cash flow to preserve these places for future youth.