CynicalScouter

The more I look at this, the more I question the legality of some outside entity "buying" Boy Scouts of America.

The corporate entity itself, as chartered by Congress, appears to be simply unsellable. Boy Scouts of America assets can be sold, (OTHER than those given to Boy Scouts of America by Congress 36 U.S. Code § 30905) and any real property it has can be sold under certain restrictions (36 U.S. Code § 30904(b)), but the charter would seem to make it impossible to authorize a sale of the corporation itself.

Moreover, any buyer would be prohibited by the charter itself from clearing out the board. Only the board itself can clear out the board or replace members of the board under 36 USC 30903 ("A vacancy on the board shall be filled by a majority vote of the remaining members of the board.")

25 minutes ago, qwazse said:

If a governor limited youth camping to "groups of no greater than 10 close friends from the same neighborhood, adult supervision and other groups no closer than 100 yards," how many council/units would comply?

Given the potential legal liability? I would hope every single one.

Given the obligation each unit and council has to comply with the law? I would hope every single one.

EDIT: Note that national's policy on this is that this is taken directly from the Guide to Safe Scouting: units and council may camp "absent any legal constraints."

A governor's (lawful, not overturned by the courts) limitation like the one above? That's a legal constraint.

12 minutes ago, mashmaster said:

Can someone explain to me why this is really such a big deal?  I am not downplaying the girls that are and have been working hard on earning their Eagle, I commend them.  But is there a specific benefit a girl gets from being part of the innagural class of Eagle and someone the gets in a month later?  Isn't the point of earning the Eagle rank to be that they are basically equivalent in rank forever?  And Eagle scout is always and Eagle scout.  Maybe I am missing something.

 

https://www.scouting.org/programs/scouts-bsa/program-updates/?utm_source=scoutingwire&utm_campaign=swvolunteer9232020&utm_medium=email&utm_content=B

 

Because they are the first.

Here's the additional information. Notice the provision "absent legal constraints." If Council believes that units are legally constrained from conducting camping, then Council gets to make that call. Don't agree? Talk to a lawyer.

Quote

 

Local Council Membership/Participation Guidelines Regarding Life-Threatening Communicable Diseases

The BSA policy regarding communicable diseases (acute or chronic) is as follows:

Local Scouting units and their chartered organizations traditionally determine their own membership and participation, absent any legal constraints. Accordingly, units and chartered organizations allow youth or adult members who have, or are suspected of having, a communicable disease to continue to participate in Scouting activities.

The chartered organization and/or a local Scouting unit may request local council assistance if needed, absent any legal restraints. (See See Local Council Membership/Participation Guidelines Regarding Communicable Diseases, No. 680-453, for the steps in that process.)

 

14 minutes ago, David CO said:

If the council tells you not to camp, the council is violating the charter agreement.

Depends. There's a whole bunch of things getting conflated here.

1) No unit camping at Council Camps. This was the original poster's example. Of course a council can decided whether to open or close its own camps due to health concerns.

2) No unit camping at all. The council is well within its rights to say that it is NOT safe based on current health conditions to conduct any official scout camping. That's not a charter violation at all.

EDIT: And National has specifically authorized Councils to make these calls.
 

Boy Scouts of America

• Local Council Membership/Participation Guidelines Regarding Communicable Diseases
• Prevention of Communicable Diseases in Scouting: Recommendations for Unit and Council Event Leaders
• Pre-Event Medical Screening Checklist
• Model Pre-Event Medical Screening Checklist (COVID-19 version)

You are of course free to go camp all you want, but you cannot do so under the banner/umbrella/name of scouting.

2 minutes ago, Owls_are_cool said:

Isn't it BSA policy that parents (or guardian) must attend meetings with their cubs? Maybe that was a rule the Pack I was associated with had.

Lions must have a parent, per BSA.

I know some packs that have imposed the parent rule at least for the younger ranks.

1 hour ago, scoutldr said:

The BSA has NO authority over me and my interactions with my own family.

OK, then how about this rule.

Quote

Tenting
• In Cub Scouting, parents and guardians may share a tent with their family.
• In all other programs, youth and adults tent separately.

So, you are on a Scouts, BSA camp out and decide that you are going to tent with your son (we've had this come up with camping in my area due to COVID). Are you therefore indicating that you'll ignore the rule and tent with your son?
 

14 hours ago, Momleader said:

We have a family in the pack who joined and stayed a year then transferred to another pack and came back last school year.

Wild guess as to why the bouncing: she tried pulling this with the pack they transferred to and they told her off/BSA does not stand for Baby Sitters of America.

5 hours ago, Sentinel947 said:

My understanding is that family members are always ok in regards to the one on one rule.

Yes, EXCEPT tenting outside of Cub Scouts.

1 hour ago, David CO said:

They are more than willing to help out, for a good cause, but they aren't willing to put up with all of this elitism nonsense.  

Sorta.

The research I've see has suggested that millennial believe in "flat" organizational structure. No hierarchy. EVERYONE is a leader.

This is great, to a point. But it also results in a one-person or a minority veto ("cancel" culture) where is a vocal enough portion of a group objects, nothing happens.

15 minutes ago, yknot said:

Millennials do not seem to have the same interest in volunteering as prior generations. Or maybe they do, but they want to do it differently. They certainly do not want to waste their time with ridiculous  paperwork. Instead, they want phone apps and seamless, one stop digital portals for registration, payment, scheduling, and management of their child's activities and their involvement with them. The youth organizations that are succeeding are ones that are adapting to this and looking at new ways of operating.

That's exactly right. Millennials are actually more likely to volunteer that other generations BUT a) they will only stay with something for a short time and b) they want it easy.

I saw a presentation where the speaker made this point.

His father was with the Sierra Club for decades. Had an old, tattered Sierra Club card from 40 years prior in his wallet.

He was part of some organizations in his youth/early career but towards the latter half changed focus to another set.

Millennials are likely to donate/volunteer for one cause this year, another next year, and another the year after that. It is impossible to development a membership based on annual turnover like that.

3 minutes ago, yknot said:

This is interesting because I think it's one of the things needs to change.  I've had to scan in and submit health records for other youth activities. Not sure why BSA is continuing with paper.

Same reason why adult applications and 90% of the registration process is paper: institutional inertia and (most recently) the mass layoff at National crippled their ability to anything new.

5 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

That Congress no longer issues charters begs the question as to why others are allowed to continue...

Why can the DuctTape Scouting Association (the DSA) not get a Congressional Charter??

First, others are allowed to continue because in order to end them Congress would have to pass a bill revoking the charter. That's not going to happen.

Second, the DuctTape Scouting Association (the DSA) can get a  Congressional Charter just like any other association can: just lobby, lobby, lobby.

Third, Congress does still issue charters.

Quote

In 1989, the chairman of the House Subcommittee on Administrative Law and Government Relations, Barney Frank, and the ranking minority Member, Craig James, announced that the subcommittee had approved “a motion for a moratorium on the granting of federal charters.”

BUT
 

Quote

 

This subcommittee moratorium did not, however, stop all requests for, or consideration of, charter requests. Notably, it remains possible for another committee, or for the full Congress in its plenary capacity, to “charter” nonprofit organizations and have them listed in Title 36. Indeed, this has been the case in several instances in recent years. In 1996, the Fleet Reserve Association was chartered (36 U.S.C 701) without the legislation being referred to the Judiciary committees of the respective chambers. The charter was included in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (P.L. 104-201, Title XVIII; 110 Stat. 2760). Also in recent years, corporate bodies (e.g., Corporation for Promotion of Rifle Practice and Firearms Safety, 36 U.S.C. 40701; National Recording Preservation Foundation, 36 U.S.C. 152401) have been created by Congress and listed by the House Office of Law Revision Counsel under Title 36.

 

2 minutes ago, John-in-KC said:

Except that if the Corporation is liquidating, there IS no corporation to hold on to said IP. 

I had just gone to law.cornell.edu to search that. 🙂

The Corporation is perpetual. 36 U.S. Code § 30901 Unless you think that a bankruptcy court is going to strike down a Congressional Charter as unconstitutional (hint: they won't).
 

Quote

 

As I said: I think the idea of a liquidated National that no longer exists is about 0% likely. A crippled, hobbled, penniless shell? Yes. Total liquidation? No. And it is the congressional charter that may save it.

 

First, welcome.

Second, BSA practice is for the committee to have two registered adults for this.

The Committee Secretary is to keep the unit versions of the form. ("Work with the outdoor/activities coordinator to assemble the medical and insurance binder for the Scoutmaster to take on each outing.") and the outdoor/activities coordinator ("Work with the secretary to assemble the medical and insurance binder for the Scoutmaster to take on each outing.")

Unregistered adults should NOT be in charge of this. This is just bad practice.

Third, HIPPA aside (and if there's one law that has been grossly misunderstood in the last 6 months, it is HIPPA and who it covers) do NOT scan it. Don't. Don't. Don't. It is just too fraught with peril and panic on the part of parents who will misinterpret HIPPA to think you are doing something wrong. Just. Don't.

Fourth, as for "loopholes" ask yourself this: if it is wrong for you as an adult leader to do something, does it make it any better to direct a non-registered adult to do the wrong thing for you? Answer: No.

What my unit does is this. There is an event binder that is made up of copies of the A/B/C for those scouts and leaders who are going. This is in the hands of the Adult Leader/Scoutmaster. There is also a Troop binder with copies of the A/B/C for all registered adults and scouts. This is held by our Medical Forms person who is a registered adult leader/committee member.

We do NOT scan unless it is an absolute emergency (read: the event will be cancelled or a scout will be forced to go home). The Medical Forms person back home could, in that emergency, scan and email. We've never had to do this.

14 hours ago, David CO said:

If that is the case, BSA should lose its tax exemption.  

Keep in mind, tax exemption for IRS purposes covers a broad array of activities that do not have to be 100% what we think of as charities.

For example, Boy Scouts of America as an organization chartered by Congress would qualify for tax exempt status as a 501(c)(1) even if 501(c)(3) was repealed tomorrow while the local councils are 501(c)(3).

Want to complain that 501(c)(3) is too broad and covers too much? Take that up with Congress, not the BSA.

17 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

If you dared, you could ask your council office for their current IRS 990, which they are required, by law, to provide to the public upon request.

The current (meaning last fiscal year) can usually be found online. No need to poke the bear

While 990s are due May 15 of the following year (e.g. 2019 was due May 15, 2020) almost every not-profit, including Councils, I know takes advantage of the automatic (on request) 6 month deferral until November 15.

The real challenge is when you ask for financial statements. 990s tell you broad categories. Asking where particular funds went/are going is a whole other matter. Asking for THAT gets you the scout executive and/or boards ire.

Something that came out of a thread about National's bankruptcy by @Cburkhardt is Council bankruptcies.

I think there are two ways they go into bankruptcy.

1) Most councils will climb on board the global settlement agreement that is eventually struck by national. BUT in order to participate, many will have to come up with so much money as part of their share of the settlement that they will be forced into bankruptcy.

2) Councils that survive the initial payouts without the need to go bankrupt are going to face enormous pressure from declining memberships, COVID, insurance premium hikes, and depleting coffers. They'll be bankrupt and merged into other councils (likely) OR restructure their debt and allowed to re-emerge as stand alone councils (very unlikely).

How many will go bankrupt? It is really hard to say to not make is wild speculation. The hard part will be option #2 and forced mergers. I suspect Council A will NOT want to take on a crippled/dying Council B in a merger and may insist that Council B goes through bankruptcy first, settles all claims, and then merges.

10 minutes ago, Cburkhardt said:

We have not discussed it much, but I think a good number of councils will enter some form of bankruptcy.

Totally agree, but think this should be in the council relations section? I'll start a thread there, because I agree it should be discussed.

I wanted to post this separately, because I think the idea of a liquidated National that no longer exists is about 0% likely. A crippled, hobbled, penniless shell? Yes. Total liquidation? No. And it is the congressional charter that may save it.

The Charter is currently codified as 36 U.S. Code Chapter 309 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/36/subtitle-II/part-B/chapter-309

It grants Boy Scouts of America perpetual existence. It provides the Executive Board of the Boy Scouts of America exclusive power to "use emblems, badges, descriptive or designating marks, and words or phrases the corporation adopts."

The only recorded instances of congressionally chartered entities dissolving is where the entity's membership reaches zero. For example, when the last World War I veteran dies, so does Veterans of World War I of the United States of America, Incorporated

The same happened with the Grand Army of the Republic.

The odds that a bankruptcy court judge is going to order the dissolution of an entity that Congress has declared to be perpetual is about zero.

8 minutes ago, John-in-KC said:

This is the real answer. Unless the Court specifies a bidding structure, the BSA IP, in liquidation, could go anywhere.

Except, and this is the big exception, that the IP is defined by statute and therefore cannot go beyond the corporation created by statute. The Bankruptcy court cannot override a statute unless it somehow held the provision unconstitutional (it won't).

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/36/30905
 

Quote

The corporation has the exclusive right to use emblems, badges, descriptive or designating marks, and words or phrases the corporation adopts. This section does not affect any vested rights.

The corporation is defined by statute as perpetual. I don't see a bankruptcy court overturning a congressional statute.

9 minutes ago, yknot said:

It is doubtful that there is any scenario under which fees will decrease. It's very possible that they may increase again. 

My understanding was that when it went from $60 to $66 national was also prepared to announce two more years increases ($66 to $72 and $72 to $75) in the upcoming years with the promise of freezing in place at $75 after 2022.

So sayeth Middle Tennessee Council https://mtcbsa.doubleknot.com/CMS/PageViewer.aspx?PageID=19549&preview=yes
 

Quote

Last week, the Boy Scouts of America announced that the annual membership fee for youth and young adult participants will increase from $60 to $66 effective August 1, 2020. There will also be a onetime BSA joining fee for new members of $25. If a Scout has been registered in the last five years, BSA will not charge the new member fee. In addition, BSA plans to increase the membership fee to $72 on August 1, 2021, and to $75 on August 1, 2022. No fee increases are planned past 2022. None of the membership fee charged by the BSA stays in the Middle Tennessee Council, all the fee is sent to the BSA. The BSA membership fee changes can be found below.

You have a dwindling membership base and an expensive infrastructure PLUS massive insurance premium jumps AND a potential billion dollar settlement in the offing.

You either keep jacking up fees (which further reduces membership, resulting in a death spiral) or close up shop and convert your bankruptcy into a liquidation/fire sale.

33 minutes ago, qwazse said:

I am honestly astounded that the parents in my troop think it's worth the price of admission.

Still get a ton of "son (now daughter) has to make Eagle to get into college/good career".

They are buying a credential and dragging the kids along for the ride.

1 hour ago, ParkMan said:

Interesting analysis.

What was the cause of the significant increase in liabilities?