CynicalScouter

1 minute ago, fred8033 said:

pulled into another council that has a functional structure.

A council with a functional structure?

Where would you find such a magical creature?

Sorry to hear it. What a mess.

At one point I think you talked about your Council folding, is that still on the table?

45 minutes ago, OLDRIFLE said:

We have several issues with the scoutmaster not following the BSA advancement rules. Who should I turn to when everyone in the K3 is OK with that?

What specifically are they violating? Adding? Subtracting? Etc.

Since you indicate that the Key-3 are "OK with that", then depending on the advancement rule the answer is going to either by the district executive or council advancement (or both).

17 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

Will the Debtors BSA assume subsidiary Arrow WV's lease of Summit Bechtel to the BSA?   Maybe   @Jameson76 can explain.

I seem to recall there was an appraisal/study of the amount Bechtel could be sold for. This move seems to indicate they are cleaning up any claims in order to offer it up for sale to settle claims.

One down, three to go?

1 hour ago, RememberSchiff said:

2. The Coalition presently comprises more than 12,000 Members, each of which is a sexual abuse victim holding claims against Debtor Boy Scouts of America, among other parties…

They had in a previous court filing in July when they entered the case said more than 10,000. Now 12,000. And that doesn't even include however many thousands are being represented by Abused in Scouting and other firms/groups.

The numbers are not boding well for National. I am still in the "National survives but crippled" camp, but 12,000 claims * even just $50,000 payout per claim is $600 million.

Net assets at end of 2019 was $745,818,000 and that number will go down due to a decline in contributions in 2020.

And the number that the attorneys for the victims are tossing around is $1.5 billion.

The Councils are going to have to be on the hook for big, mega bucks.

12 minutes ago, David CO said:

Lone Scouting offers that flexibility.

Which is interesting because Lone Scouting by its very nature was (and is?) almost antithetical to the original Baden-Powell model “The patrol system is not one method in which Scouting can be carried on. It is the only method.” Lone scouts have no patrol.

Now, one thing I have heard Councils doing is to have lone scout "troops" and "patrols" but I am not sure if that is widespread.

Just now, ParkMan said:

Let me get this straight.  The strategy is to complain about what we have, hope it fails, and then hope it is the replaced by an organization like you like.  If so,  I am quite certain that there is no chance this works out as you hope.

The most likely path to getting the Scouting unit you want is to be building such a unit now.  Then, when there are opportunities for change and influence, provide both. This is part of why constructive engagement is so important.  

I don't hope National fails (as in "is liquidated"). I just think it something of a dichotomy between

1) Those who yearn for the "good old days" and want Scouting to go back to where it was circa 1960-something  (or 1940-something) in some "golden age". We aren't that nation anymore, the youth are not the same youth, therefore any version of scouting that tries to operate like that would be little more than anachronism and offer nothing but nostalgia for the scouters leading it and have about as much viability as an automat.

2) Those who yearn for complaining incessantly that National is screwing things up. Yes, they are. Leadership always does, if/when you gauge it against some utopian vision of what "should be". There are trade-offs. Unlike some on here I don't look at National's leadership as either a) gross incompetents or b) people actively engaged in an effort to harm scouting and individual children. I don't think Roger Mosby is either evil or a complete moron. They may have photo-shopped the horns and fangs off of his photo, but somehow I think they just were not there in the first place. National has a massive problem (well, several) that would stumble the best managerial minds. Bankruptcy? COVID? Thousands of claims of sexual abuse? Declining membership? Yeah, any one of these would hobble most volunteer organizations. Stack them on top of each other? Yeah.

If you look at National as the harbinger and bearer of "Scouting" you will be disappointed because the harbinger and bearer of "Scouting" are the scouts. If young people don't want what you are offering in the form of some retro-1940s vision of scouting or some hash or rules and obligations (which is where we are today, more or less), fix it.

If you look at National as a source for certification of your programs (which is what chartering is if you get down to it) then so long as they do that, everything else is just garbage. YPT exists not because National is stupid or evil, but because we are not where we were in the 1960s. You want to operate a youth organization today? You are getting some version of YPT. Want to yearn for the "good old days", remember those "good old days" got us thousands of abuse cases.

So no, I don't hope National fails. I hope it survives and changes for the better. But while I hope it changes, I also recognize that change can sometimes mean "justification for any harebrained thing we came up with" and "let's go backwards". Neither will work.

1 hour ago, dkurtenbach said:

To me, the nightmare scenario is that BSA comes out of the bankruptcy poorer and smaller, but otherwise determined to run Scouting as much as possible exactly the way they did pre-bankruptcy.  With exactly the same steady decline in membership.

OR they do change, but to something worse (marginally or massively). Something like

Quote

"We can't go back to the good old days. We need to change and adapt to the new environment."

25 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

They may not be different, but they get to the nature of someone's dislike of the BSA and our prospects in the future. 

• For those people who so strongly dislike the BSA, I suspect there is no path forward that keeps the BSA in place as an organization that provides a Scouting program.  If someone is upset about what happened years ago, then there is a chance a reformed BSA that demonstrates it's commitment to youth safety can win their trust. 
• For those who strongly dislike (dare I say hates) the BSA as an organization, then I find it improbable that those people can find a way to support the BSA.

It comes down to the bankruptcy judge. If National can convince the judge to avoid liquidation, then BSA shambles on as a shell of its former self.

As I mentioned previously, there's a massive presumption against Chapter 7 liquidation where the entity is looking to simply restructure (Chapter 11).

4 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Why would so many girls families join the dysfunctional Boy BSA Scouts. 

BSA Eagle > GSA Gold Award

2 hours ago, David CO said:

I'm fine with it so long as they don't require scouts to take a partisan opinion on disputed political issues such as global warming.

Global warming is already mentioned in Eagle Required: Environmental Science (although you can substitute Sustainability).

1 hour ago, RememberSchiff said:

Will this replace Hornaday Awards? 

I doubt it. Notice this is a temporary thing with the option to extend based on EPA's 50th anniversary.

Also, I noticed that while there are a few older references to the awards, the main Hornaday page is now gone. https://www.scouting.org/awards/hornaday-awards

It was my understanding National planned on renaming the Hornaday, not replacing it.

This seems closer to a Nova/Supernova program.

18 minutes ago, David CO said:

Our Chartered Organization has a similar committee.  Since the scout unit is owned by the CO, it is subject to the same rules and restrictions as everyone else.

I would be more OK if the Chartered Org did this. That I can grasp.

I would be more OK if this was a situation where the PLC came up with ideas and they got vetoed on health/safety grounds by troop committee. PLC says they want to hike and the troop committee vetoes due to health concerns OR better still send it back to PLC to come back with corrections and COVID-related adjustments. Not thrilled, but I can get that.

But as it was described to me this is grouping of a) non-committee parents and b) committee members that are c) making up a list of "approved" activities and handing it to the PLC and telling them "pick from this and nothing else."

That doesn't sound like scout-led.

So I am seeing and hearing from people at roundtable more and more efforts by parents to convert Scouts, BSA into Cub Scouts.

The latest: a "health and safety committee" made up of parents and troop committee (and 1 or 2 "invited" scouts) that will provide the SM & PLC a list of things that scouts are allowed to do. The PLC would then select from the list and the "committee" would plan everything and recruit scouts who want to attend.

Anyone else seeing anything similar? This seems insane.

Update: Moving Some Churchill Recommendations Forward

While several items were mentioned about not moving forward "at this time", there's nothing about

Quote

"Establish minimum standards to be considered a council"

Since they haven't explicitly rejected, I can reasonably assume they are going ahead with it.

And we still have no idea what the "minimum standards to be considered a council" are going to be.

I am thinking this is probably right.

On 7/10/2020 at 12:12 PM, David CO said:

How much income a council generates for national.

But this was interesting

Quote

Recommendations that were paused for possible consideration of implementation in the future, include:

• Establishing a fee-based structure for councils in place of the National BSA collecting membership fees from councils

11 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

I think they are "punting"  because the leaked Churchill slide caused a major protest of the rank and file.

I found it on Reddit, and the National staffer who leaked it was cut as part of the recent layoffs.

I wonder what would have happened had that not been leaked. How bad it would have been.

6 hours ago, yknot said:

BSA is so caught up in its old view of what it is that it missed an historic opportunity this spring and summer  to recruit youth especially at the cub level. No other youth organization was as well positioned as this one to provide outdoor opportunities to youth. Instead it focused on online merit badges and zoom meetings.

First, I cannot fault them for that because as you may recall in the spring and early summer it was literally illegal in many states for pack gatherings. No one wanted anything other then outdoor opportunities for youth. But BSA is not about to order packs to meet in defiance of health orders.

Second, one of the reasons why BSA and councils focused on online and zoom meetings is that there was a concerted effort to keep scouting alive in some form or fashion. Remember this happened right when most AoLs crossed over and when lots of spring camping was going to happen plus summer camps. I know in my area there were units that have simply stopped meeting for weeks in any way or shape. The online stuff was not optimal, but for lots of units it was the only scouting they were able to get exposed to because they unit leaders had checked out.

So let's game out your plan. In spring 2020 BSA and local councils reach out to Cub packs with the message "It doesn't matter that your state and local health officials have prohibited gatherings, come join us for an outdoor adventure this Saturday!"

Aside from defying legal health orders (and thereby violating at least 4 provisions of the Scout Law) the Pack would have subjected itself to massive legal liability if any child or adult got sick.

3 hours ago, skeptic said:

 But they threw the first rocks.

The first rocks were thrown by the pedophiles.

The second by scout leaders at every level that failed these scouts.

That they are seeking legal recourse it not "throwing rocks".

12 minutes ago, tnmule20 said:

Will this mean that Philmont is no longer open for treks until this is settled?

No. This is just appearance of counsel. Think of it as an introduction.
 

Quote

Hi, my name is The Waite and Genevieve Phillips Foundation. You can call me "The Foundation."

So...I hear you want to seize my assets and possibly sell them off? Or are thinking about it? If so, you can talk directly to my lawyers. Here is their name, phone number, and email. Thanks.

11 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

As much as I would love all three of my sons to make Eagle, I don't know if the youngest will due to everything going on.

My own believe remains there will be a "shell" of a BSA and that Eagle will still exist.

My committee chair, however is in the "they are doomed" camp. had a meeting with myself and the SM and insisted that the Star/Life we have are going to get pushed through before December 31, 2020 and that after that all bets are off.

15 hours ago, Mrjeff said:

Do you really believe that the BSA will ever even be able to get insurance coverage again?  If an insurance carrier is willing to provide insurance do you think that after everything is said and done the BSA could afford insurance.  My point is that the national level BSA is being squeezed to death and we will have to work locally if the BSA or the Boy Scouts or Scouting USA or whatever it's going to be called,  is going to survive.  The Boy Scouts of America is in desperate straits and if the locals dont work to save some piece of it, it's going to die.

Yes, they'll get insurance. At astronomical premiums.

And for all the calls for "local scouting", that's fine. But you'll still have to insure or bond. Heck I can remember being on my local Babe Ruth Baseball board and the single biggest expense each year was paying the insurance/bond fee.

If you plan to have any kind of youth organization, you will absolutely have to have either insurance under the chartered organization or go buy your own. And if you use the phrase "scouting" the insurance companies are going to go nuts with the premiums.

17 hours ago, tnmule20 said:

Do you really think the Middle Tennessee council has a target on it's back now?  Will they be unfairly targeted?

Yes, and it is not "unfairly targeted" if a) you seek and get an injunction or stay of 35+ lawsuits against your organization and then b) try to play hide-the-assets in the meantime.

Stay means stay: it means ALL parties halt their efforts to either grab assets (plaintiffs) or hide assets (defendants) until either a) a settlement or b) special court permission.

For example, when National has had to hire people for contract work (and thereby spend assets) they got special permission from the court to do so. That's fine; if the court says you can spend or transfer certain assets during the stay then you are in the clear.

What is not ok and yes does get a target on your back is when you try to use the stay or injunction like this.

Middle Tennessee just bought themselves (and National if they can prove National knew about it) a world of hurt.

3 minutes ago, tnmule20 said:

If we lose 100 councils will there not be areas of the country that will have no Scouting at all?  Do you think surrounding councils will really want to absorb other councils that may be poorly run?

This is not a question of poorly run (although some are). It is a question of diminished membership and liability.

On membership,see what happened when the LDS units left; Utah merged several of its Councils into one.

On the liability: some very well run Councils are not going to be able to easily handle the amount of money they will have to put in for any settlement. For larger councils, we are talking millions. Even a "well run" council may not have that much cash sitting in reserve, so it's off to sell camps and other things.

So no, we won't have a situation where parts of the country are without a council. We will have mega-sized councils.

1 minute ago, tnmule20 said:

Does the BSA survive this?

Yes, in the sense that the incorporated entity chartered by Congress in 1916 as codified as Title 36 US Code Chapter 309 will not be dissolved and that Congress will not repeal the charter.

No, in the sense of anything as we've know National. It will be a hollow shell. Maybe a few dozen employees. Your councils will be responsible for everything and the bankruptcy will result in the number of councils collapsing from ~250 to something in the 150 range.

Ok, so then there are councils doing this since at least 2012

https://www.delmarvacouncil.org/document/introduction-to-outdoor-leader-skills-test-out-application-form/119292

http://www.baltimorebsa.org/document/introduction-to-outdoor-leader-skills-test-out-application-form/119292