1980Scouter

On 9/1/2022 at 9:32 AM, Eagle1993 said:

Big change in BSA's financials.

17c7637d-c326-4612-9685-10cfeb89a4f0_10280.pdf (omniagentsolutions.com)

They transferred their entire Unrestricted RBT Balance to cash.  So, their cash went to $83.65M; however, their RBT Balance is now at $0.

The RBT is their "Retirement Benefits Trust".  

They also state they have $63M additional in cash set aside to pay JPM as they exit.

Their bankruptcy fees dropped (which is a bit odd).  THey showed a decrease of $5.9M in professional fees.  Total is now $362M.

 

I really think BSA running out of money before this is final is a big issue.  If they burn through 8-10 million a month on average that was suggested not including bankruptcy costs, 83 million will not last long. 

Rechartering will help and surely HAB's made profit but in the end this could drag on for some time even if the plan is approved. 

I wonder how much the BSA foundation has available to loan national? This could buy time.

What do you think it costs to operate National for a month? 5 million? Under normal conditions not bankruptcy. 

Has anyone else noticed a LC hiring boom. I checked three area LC's and in the last month they all hired staff. 

Like 15 FTE's between the three councils. Many of these positions were left vacant for years and some are new positions. 

Some positions seem like a response to UMC unit oversight by the council and the need to monitor all units more closely for YP standards. 

I feel like the council's have a sense the bankruptcy will go through and they are going all in to try and maintain and increase membership. 

I think the time frame is longer than weeks. Months or longer due to all the parties that have to come to an agreement on different issues. 

Surely there will not be 100% agreement on any changes made. 

We have definite progress but I really begin to wonder if BSA will run out of money before this is complete. 

On 7/22/2022 at 6:37 PM, 5thGenTexan said:

This is part of our flyer.....

 

 

They left an option out. #4 disband the troop and scouts wanting to continue can join nearby troops. 

At least in my area you could find another troop within a 20 minute drive. This would be an option especially for the small, struggling troops. 

It would be a hard option but one that at least allows the scouts to continue. 

And it saves the troop from option #3 which most seem to dislike.

1 hour ago, Eagle1993 said:

Let this sink in.  Purdue Pharma, complex case, had confirmation hearings in mid/late August 2021.  Judge Drain did a 5+ hour ruling approving the plan September 1.  Days after the last hearing.  That plan was rejected by district December 16.  So, 3.5 months to get a ruling from the bankruptcy judge, have that plan then reviewed by district and rejected by district.

The BSA plan is already at 3+ months post confirmation hearing and still no decision.  This seems very odd.  Perhaps a bankruptcy lawyer can explain how common it is for a judge to not rule for 3+ months after a confirmation hearing where other complex cases are able to go through both the judges ruling and district court review within that same time period.

The only reason I have heard that may make sense is if she heard something during the Purdue appeals court hearing (back in April) that gave her pause.  There could be other reasons, but I haven't heard a good explanation.  She definitely doesn't want this plan to be rejected and if the appeals court either rejects or approves Purdue, she could use that language as guidance on the BSA plan.  That should help avoid loss at appeal.

In any case, only she knows why it is taking this long.  Hopefully we hear an answer soon.  Claimants need to start the next steps of closure and BSA needs to implement their post bankruptcy plan.  

I agree with your comment that is almost has to have to do with Purdue.

My question is can judges talk about similar cases to each other legally? What if she knew what the likely outcome of Purdue is and is waiting to be 100% sure before she rules.

Everything I have seen where following the court she has been very professional and I am sure she realizes this case could end BSA depending on the outcome. 

8 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

No idea.  Heard rumors the judge is waiting to hear appeals court ruling on Purdue.  If that isn't the case, it doesn't make sense.  I wonder if she has everything ready except the third party releases.

If that is the case, how long will that take? The BSA will most likely be out of money by then.

Why not a status conference and explain the reason for the delay. Maybe BSA would change the plan to BSA only to get this finished faster.

There are serious doubts about third party releases and not the best idea to include them.

6 hours ago, gpurlee said:

In our council, UMC represents closer to 30% of both membership and total units. Our council is clearly reluctant to endorse the affiliate model. Their stated concerns are a lack of professional staff to oversee the process, increased costs such as accounting and auditing and a very undermanned commissioner staff to visit and monitor units.  The national guidance apparently indicates that it should be volunteers who approve leadership, ensure youth protection is in place and fulfill the other duties of a chartered organization. Their strong preference appears to be that UMC affiliated units seek alternative chartered organizations. Unfortunately, the council seems to be willing to walk away from more than a one-hundred-year partnership at this point despite urgings from the national council. If the affiliate model is forced upon them, council leadership has suggested that the "council units" may be assessed a (significant) fee to cover the additional expense to the council. 

Given the loss of many of the evangelical churches, the LDS Church, most schools, the Elks, several Roman Catholic churches (at least in our area) among others, one has to wonder how many chartered organizations remain willing and available to sponsor Scouting if the UMC is no longer a significant sponsor?

 

I think this next round of rechartering will really tell us the future of the BSA and if it will be able to get through this. 

As others stated definitely too many councils. If you have less than 5,000 scouts a merger should take place.

Most of these small councils are hurting financially so I feel it is just a matter of time before a merger happens. In my experience money or lack of it drives mergers.

We need to make Scouts BSA more affordable.  With some LC charging fees on top of national it can get expensive to be a scout.

Eliminate the excess ie national and excessive LC staffs.

Why do we need a National Council? It takes so much money and you do not see much at the local level.

Replace it with a board of SE from each council who make and vote on standards. That is really all that matters is minimum standards across the county. With technology meetings could be zoom with a yearly in person. 

Have separate sub committees for projects. All LC would have a say in the BSA and its future.

HAB could be turned over to LC or form a separate non profit for each. They make money and can be self sustained. 

We could make Scouting much more affordable for all.

I think as everyone knows there are issues with the plan. LC and CO releases being the most important. 

Also many other details, non settling insurers,  CO'S not on board. 

My question is what is going on behind closed doors at the National office? They have to be really worried that this plan could fail and the BSA would too.

1 hour ago, SiouxRanger said:

So, 3 Omnibus hearings set through 10-27-2022.

What does this mean?  Perhaps no final ruling expected until or after 10-27-2022?

My understanding of "omnibus" is that everything that any party wants to raise can be noticed up for hearing. Why would three omnibus hearings be set up front when perhaps all issues will be resolved at the first omnibus hearing?

Perhaps the judge envisions an iterative process whee issues are raised at one hearing, followed by private negotiations, progress or lack thereof reported at the second hearing, and so on.

Perhaps the Judge will announce a preliminary ruling, and seek comments from the parties, all perhaps to spur further negotiations amongst the parties.

One would think that ONE omnibus hearing would be sufficient, or one omnibus hearing setting, being continued to other dates as needed, but to dates following close on the initial setting-not with evenly spaced month gaps.

That there are three omnibus hearings spaced out over three months, considering the cash drain on National, seems rather strange to me.

Could national survive until the end of the year? There will be rechartering money but if this drags on with more legal negotiations the legal fees will be huge.

I would think whatever is to happen in the ruling, sooner is best to let it be known. Even if rejection at least they can attempt to make changes and get something that works.

Obviously the plan will not be approved without changes to the plan or it would have been approved by now.

I see many LC's are posting 2021 annual reports lately on their web sites. You have to really search to find them.

Comparing maybe 5-6 years ago, my LC went from 15,000 to 6,500 scouts. 

What are other councils showing? Also spending is down a lot from prior years.

On 6/24/2022 at 2:34 PM, Eagle1993 said:

It goes to the Girl Scout model.  There should be ownership of units.  Most charters do not have the capacity or desire to actually own the units.  Therefore, it should fall on the BSA through councils.  

Councils could ensure oversight by interviewing unit leaders (the CC & SM/CM).  Ensuring they are trained for their position.  Then allowing them to run the show with the rest of the leaders (checking on YPT).  Perhaps councils limit units based on area.  Perhaps they even have to limit # of scouts per unit if they grow too large vs the number of trained leaders they have.  

UMC & Elks are the start.  I wouldn't be surprised to see Catholic charters follow.  BSA will need a model on how to own units.

So the Elks are not doing charters anymore? I used to be a member of a Lodge that had an active troop.

12 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

Agree everyone deserves safe drinking water, but what is safe "adequate", what is being tested, and where - campsite, camp kitchen,...

The EPA does not regulate private wells, so I would be surprised if the EPA fined camps over drinking water quality.  Regulation and enforcement  is left to state and local authorities or self-policing camp associations.

Nothing to stop a scouter from drawing a water sample and having it tested by a private lab. Testing for bacteria and E.coli might be less than $100, radon and arsenic a little more, and testing for PFAS would likely be $400.

https://www.ncsl.org/research/environment-and-natural-resources/unregulated-drinking-water-systems.aspx

The Ohio EPA where I live does regulate any water supply over 25 people. This includes scout camps.

My LC camp has been fined thousands for failure to sample. And the wastewater system is in significant noncompliance. 

They are working on fixing wastewater but I think it will take a fine to get it done.

The camp is Beaumont Scout Reservation. Nice camp but poor water and wastewater.

What is everyone's experience with your LC scout camp and EPA compliance with water and wastewater standards? I have multiple LC camps in significant non-compliance,  some were recently fined large amounts of money.

It appears at least in my state that the LC's ignore water standards even failing to collect required samples.

Scouts deserve safe drinking water and LC's should be held accountable. 

Does anyone know what is going on with the Catholic Church and their future with Scouting?

I know some dioceses ended the relationship but not all. I would think there will be a national guidance issued.

I just saw ABC news featured it on their web page. Hopefully more people can watch it and decide how they feel about the BSA.

I think the judge is trying to determine a plan that will stand up to appeals. I feel that the plan will be BSA only, with LC  and  CO to be decided locally. There is no way this plan will pass appeals with third party releases. The judge is taking all this in from other similar cases and realizing this may be the most important case of her career. 

Are LC's in your area communicating what is going on with bankruptcy and scouts being abused in your council to new parents and prospective scouts?

I feel like LC's in my area are not. I would like to raise awareness to protect future scouts. I know YPT will get better in the future but now parents need to know their child may not be safe in the present BSA. 

Thinking of renting billboards by the council office and camp highlighting the amount of abuse cases and need to be cautious. 

3 minutes ago, malraux said:

Officially, yes. Took lots of lawsuits and controversy.

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/15/nyregion/catherine-n-pollard-88-first-female-scoutmaster-in-us-dies.html

Thank you.  I had no idea it happened in the late 80's. I never saw any during my time in scouting as a youth of that era.

1 hour ago, MYCVAStory said:

From the TCCBSA.COM website:

The TCC will be holding a Town Hall on Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 8 pm (Eastern) to discuss the latest developments in the BSA bankruptcy.  Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 (no registration required)  or by phone: 888-788-0099 (toll free), Webinar ID: 822 7282 6295

I hope they discuss the reasoning behind not demanding LC's contribute more to the fund. That was a big item for them for a long time.

42 minutes ago, malraux said:

BSA v Dale was over 20 years ago. Women/girls and BSA has been an issue for a long time, with the first recognized scoutmaster coming in 1988. Religious doctrines have been an issue. Segregated scouting units is an old issue.

So the first female scoutmaster was 1988?

There should be a paragraph in the final bankruptcy saying"Going forward any local council that has more than two serious abuse claims that are found to be justified,  that council will be shut down and not allowed to continue. A merger with a better non abuse laden council would be allowed."

While definite progress as been made which is good. There are still too many objections to the current plan. 

While it is impossible to get all on board I think there are still key players with objections. 

I think a late summer date for this to be settled is optimistic. It will likely be much longer.

One other issue is CO's and their future with BSA. If they lose catholic and other CO's this would likely end the program. No protection for CO's not contributing is the surest way to do this. I think this is where LC's could step in and fund releases. They are truly who is responsible for oversight of CO's and did not do their job. I struggle to see why any CO would take the risk in the future to sponsor a unit. Even if it is a core part of their ministry the risks are too great.