SiouxRanger

My unit always strikes out the release by a line run through each line, initial the block of lines, make a copy for the Troop file. No one has mentioned the practice-even Philmont. But we have our evidence if issues arise. I've heard pros mention that even if folks don't sign the photo release that, "There are ways around that." Lovely. We are all just sheep to be sheared against our wishes.

My comment was directed at my concern that program would not look like what it was-and negatively so. But, I think you may be suggesting that the failed administrative aspects of Scouting will be gone. One can only hope. Either way, my friend, it is a hideous mess. War, and litigation, are like that, civilities and pleasantries, the grist of diplomacy, devolve into slaughter, cruelty, devastation, and death. The tempest settles and clears, and the survivors pick up the pieces, and build anew. I've quoted Churchill before, and this quote specifically, but I will repeat it here. How the Great Democracies Triumphed, and so, Were able to Resume the Follies Which Had so Nearly Cost Them Their Life Winston S. Churchill The Second World War, Vol. VI And, to put meat on the bone: National exits bankruptcy (Triumphed), and went back to business as usual (Follies-concealing abuse claims, not reporting claims to its insurers, insurers being duped into believing that there are no claims, and thereby not raising premiums nor alerted that there should be an independent measure of effective oversight and management of claims), and resuming National's "business as usual" model which will carry National right back to today, just 30 years from now. Not having learned a whit from its near-death experience. As one poster commented, paraphrasing, "I see nothing in the Plan that actually reorganizes National." ("Resume the follies which had so nearly cost them their life.") Apparently, National resists any meaningful oversight of abuse claims. And why would that be? (Carson-Downton Abbey. "Well let's move on." Same Carson.) NO, with National, we cannot and will not "move on." We should NOT merely "move on." We should Stand And Demand. If National is unwilling to take reasonable measures to protect children, then reasonable measures should be imposed upon it. The "Youth Protection" program is a huge step forward. BUT if there is no independent monitoring of claims and independent evaluation of the effectiveness of the BSA Youth Protection Program, and a mechanism to suggest refinements, the fox is again in charge of the hen house. And, frankly, the "hen house" is a bankruptcy courtroom. Nice work, if you can keep your job. If no abuse claim reform with independent monitoring, all us are just back in the same fog National enjoyed for nearly a century. Which brought National, and thousands of children, now adults, to a reckoning, of sorts, in Bankruptcy Court. Just reflect on the hundreds of old newspaper photos showing a troop marching down Main Street, flags waving, scouts smiling. And imagine that in the shadows of the crowd, if the abused scout even attended, or several them , wishing they could march with their friends and enjoy the moment but who shrunk back, compelled to contrive forced explanations to their parents on why they lost interest in scouting, though craving to "belong," and denied that experience for reasons they could not tell anyone. Trustworthy.

I can's say as I understand you. Could you explain? Thanks.

Yeah. Things measurable by physical count, attendees, easy. But how does measure commitment of soul-loyalty?

It will not be anything like we are accustomed to recognize.

Exactly. "Lunch at school is great!"

I figured the LC contributions would need to double. Maybe a bad bet on my part. The LC contribution is pathetic.

Yep. A third to a tenth of their actual liability? My guess as to the range of their exposure. Save your company $3.2 billion, get a designated parking space.

It depends entirely on whether this objection has been subject to a hearing on the merits. If no hearing on the merits of the objection for 2 years, it is still live. Passage of time does not weaken legal arguments or the significance of legal truths. If it did, our Constitution may well have been supplanted by a limited warranty from Montgomery Wards.

This is English? "Tom gets 6 marbles, Al, and his brother Art, if the wind is from the Northwest, on the third Tuesday of July, get 5 marbles going to the brother who has the best of three Rock-Paper-Scissors match..., otherwise, those marbles go to..."

I don't think that the financial carnage is over. The judge may end up having to choose which organization the judge leaves hanging-BSA or Catholic Church, or...??? I also suspect that even if the LC's get a third party discharge, if any major defendant is left facing state court suits, the LC's and BSA, though no longer liable for damages due to discharge, will still have to respond to subpoenas in state court cases as occurrence witnesses, endure discovery, etc. All the while incurring defense costs. "Death by a thousand cuts." I think that BSA and the LC's only avoid the role of witnesses if all the major potential defendant groups are discharged. I also wonder if the LC contributions are going to be increased. Per the TCC council analyses, though some councils are barely hanging on as it is (and likely facing death by merger) others are flush. It will be interesting to learn who blinked first. Just some thoughts and questions. No answers here, sadly.

Having 3 sons and having attended at least half their summer camps for the full week, and the rest for half a week, and 4 Philmont treks, Scouting is not inexpensive. It is a very expensive program and requiring a huge weekly time commitment certainly if one gets drawn into District or Council level work. I grew up in the program having an older brother who earned Eagle and went on a Philmont trek. Scouting was all I wanted to be involved in, and wanted my sons to participate in, and I participated with them-virtually every campout but 2 or 3. I did not watch them from the stands for an hour as a spectator, I sat on a stump in the rain and shared their experiences and taught them how to cope as a participant and mentor. It was clear that the time allotted to me, as a parent, to "pour myself into them" was limited and that the best place to do that was by involving them in Scouting and by me participating fully in their activities. And I did. Not hovering, but there, mostly at a distance, but there were many "Teachable Moments" which I used. Perhaps annoyingly so, but not burdensomely so. One Eagle Scout in his speech at his Eagle Court of Honor mentioned that "Mr. SiouxRanger would always talk to us about history, scout skills, nature-birds, plants, and knots...during our rides to campouts, and such, and how it was tiring. Well, perhaps. Let the record reflect that that Eagle Scout got to about 7 months before 18 showing no interest in attaining Eagle, and was missing a number of merit badges not having made progress for half a year. At one troop meeting he announced that he wanted to earn Eagle. "Well, you need to call me and make an appointment and we will work through the merit badges, but I am not calling you to push or cajole. And he did call, and he worked diligently and he earned his Eagle. Every Sunday for months we worked for 3 or 4 hours. A scout of a single parent family of mixed race. No one was in his corner but me. I don't regret a cent of cost or a minute not spent anywhere else where I would not be with my sons and mentoring them and their friends. Isn't this what Scouting is about?

I have always paid full price for my attendance at summer camp not being interested in scouts and their families paying my way. And I am self-employed, and the sole income producer in my business, and it costs me not only the camp fee, but also all my office overhead, and loss of all billable time for a week. About $5,000 a week.

Ah ha! That explains a lot. I cannot imagine any attorney, at any time, under any conditions, recommending that a client not file an objection by the due date unless the "deal is inked." For if the perceived deal falls through, the time to object has passed and client has lost its right to object. I can not imagine that any attorney in this particular case would consider the "deal inked" unless it is the Judge's ink on an Order confirming the Plan, or whatever Plan comes out of mediation. I would expect the TCC to file an objection simply to preserve its ability to object if things fall through. The TCC can always withdraw its objection if things work out to its satisfaction.

The Plan as put to a vote, or as changed so far to date, or are additional Plan changes anticipated? And why no objection by the TCC? Also relying on a prior objection, or does this signal an agreement of some sort?

And the meaning is?

Councils appear to be independently, state-chartered not for profit corporations. I do not believe that they operate totally independently from National. I believe that National dictates major decisions to the Scout Executives and they advise the council president and executive committee of the executive board, and the Council moves in lock-step with National. Apparently, ALL of the local councils agreed to pay the settlement contribution determined by National. Maybe there were battles behind the scene, but 100% agreement? In an organization with so many moving parts?

My small council is already large donor, prominent corporate leader controlled. And they have not a clue. One cannot appreciate the importance of tradition unless one is part of that tradition.

Are Council financial statements prepared in compliance with GAAP? Anybody seen council financial statements prepared in compliance with GAAP? I have not.

Well, the local councils are in a horrible situation, just now with National STILL HERE, so if National goes away...? And National DECREES to local councils, does not "ask."

So, you challenge someone in an adult beverage facility to "Step out into the alley," and get the worst of it. Mulligans are for golf courses, not alleys. Bankruptcies are alleys.

I do not understand your comment. BSA has no PR problem over child sexual abuse? Or something else? BSA filed a bankruptcy over child sexual abuse cases. That is a PR problem to me of monumental significance. And that is likely true, but does not take into account that BSA actively accumulated and sequestered all documents pertaining to alleged child sexual abuse. So, that the 3 G's were public issues, it is clear that BSA worked actively to conceal the biggest, existential threat to BSA; child sexual abuse. Had BSA not concealed the child sexual abuse claims, it would have likely been THE TOPIC OF DISCUSSION and the 3 G's would have faded into the mists.

I checked-National Supply does not offer Scarlet Letters. Not uniform approved.

Nobody cares. Sell. They ARE threats. I do not know anyone who responds with sympathy to threats. Threats raise hackles. BSA National, before filing bankruptcy, had the absolute BEST data on the number of abuse cases alleged against unit leaders, scout youth, local councils, chartering organizations, and so on. And all the details thereof-National insisted that all council files on abuse cases were sent to National. And BSA National, in light of, or in reliance on, that knowledge, filed a Chapter 11 reorganization in bankruptcy. BSA National lit the fuse on the bankruptcy rocket. "They" being National? Well, my understanding is that National does not "ask" Scout Executives. National "directs." Probably subtly, but if a Scout Executive does not follow National's "company line" that Scout Executive does not get promoted-his/her career stagnates or crashes. Consider, that 238 councils, more or less, all fell in line to contribute to the Settlement Trust the amount that National set as the local councils' contributions. And why was that so? "Local Councils are independent corporations," says National. Who believes that? If local councils are truly "volunteer run" and independent, in order to obtain a 100% council compliance with National's Settlement Trust contribution "request," a majority of the board members on each and every council board would have to vote to approve the "contribution." I do not know the specifics, but I know the process and can make reasonable assumptions and inferences from the limited information available. So, what likely happened, is that the Scout Executive advised the Council President that National had set their council's contribution and the Executive Committee (a subset of the Executive Board-much smaller) approved the contribution amount. The full Council Board, many there for resume building, just went along, or perhaps were only told after the event. Or never told. National abhors nothing more that its lack of control. Like the lead bird in a flock of starlings, when National turns, the whole flock turns in unison.

I don't quite know if this fits in here, an important lesson to me back then, so, nevertheless.. During a very stressful scouting time, we had a committee and during meetings, a scouter I considered very astute, upon hearing a comment (likely that he did not agree with) would say: "Could you say that again? I'd like to understand you." A gentle way to suggest a moderation or even an intensification of the speaker's view. Or, at least to elicit specifics with which to take issue. With respect to your post, quoting the post you take issue with would be helpful to those of us who don't follow day-to-day. I'd really like to understand your post.