Jump to content
Cburkhardt

Major Changes Announced -- Councils Impacted

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

or the GSUSA ….

True, I didn't think of that!

Wouldn't that be the ultimate capper?

Edited by desertrat77
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, carebear3895 said:

My guess are council paid membership programs. I.E. scoutreach, restoring the village, etc. 

STEM Scouts, LFL, Scoutreach eg.  Everything not CS, BS, V.   

Wonder how some councils can continue to fund these programs?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, desertrat77 said:

If everything gets liquidated, I could foresee a wealthy individual who is anti-BSA buying the Eagle Scout TM.  Then they'd hold on to it, not using it themselves, and but granting anyone else the right to use it either.

How much would any of you think this is worth??

My guess...starting bid $5 million

https://trademarkangel.com/can-i-buy-someone-elses-trademark/

 

https://trademarkangel.com/why-is-a-trademark-watch-important/

 

http://licensingbsa.org/trademarks/

Edited by InquisitiveScouter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sentinel947 said:

I've got no problem with the FOS campaign. Like any other charities I support a value transparency in what my donation goes to. In my council, I feel good about what FOS is used for.  With the bankruptcy, money collected for other purposes may go towards the settlement. 

It's a catch 22. I stop contributing, it hurts council programs today. I keep contributing, the money possibly goes to a settlement fund, and not the purposes I had intended. 

It's doubtful that any FOS money ends up going towards a settlement in any meaningful way.  In the vast majority of councils FOS is part of the current operating budget, it comes in and goes out the same year.  What's going to go into the settlement is endowments and sales of real property.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, T2Eagle said:

It's doubtful that any FOS money ends up going towards a settlement in any meaningful way.  In the vast majority of councils FOS is part of the current operating budget, it comes in and goes out the same year.  What's going to go into the settlement is endowments and sales of real property.

Money is fungible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, PACAN said:

Wonder how some councils can continue to fund these programs?

From what I know about things like United Way, they often don’t want to give “Scouts” money. These programs are the types that are easier to get grants for. So, the councils that continue them, probably get money just for them. 
 

I assumed when they said “a structure for council programs” or what ever, they meant that a council could start, or continue, a program that wasn’t offered nationally. I believe, right now, they can’t have a council specific ScoutReach or STEM program. It has to be from the menu of national programs. There is no mechanism for a homebrew style setup. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/21/2020 at 10:33 AM, T2Eagle said:

I'm still a bit confused as to how so much of the council assets can be brought into this.  The councils are separate legal entities, domiciled in their own states; that's a hard vale to pierce.  

Council assets are already at risk because it is not just BSA National that has been sued by abuse victims.  Many, many councils have also been sued (as have chartered organizations) because the abuse took place in those councils, in their camps, and in units chartered by them.  BSA's plan is to bring all claims against all BSA entities and partners together in one place and have one uniform process for compensating victims.  If the councils that have already been sued don't voluntarily participate in a global resolution of abuse claims now as part of BSA National's bankruptcy, they will eventually have to litigate or settle the claims against them council by council, and may have to declare their own bankruptcies.  There are some councils that have not been sued as yet, so they may be reluctant to voluntarily donate assets to the central compensation fund.  But you can bet that plaintiffs' lawyers are actively searching for abuse victims in all of the councils that haven't been sued yet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched the recording of the Wednesday General Session, which can be found at https://nam.scouting.org/.  The real meat is the summary by Chair Elect Dan Ownby, about 11 minutes long starting at about 48 minutes into the recording.  Some excerpts:

  •  BSA will emerge from the bankruptcy "with the mission intact."
  •  However, we will have to deliver the mission "with far fewer resources."
  •  One of the six issues looked at by select committees developing strategy:  "Are the BSA programs aligned with today's young people?"
  •  Although "the mission has not changed . . . [quoting Abraham Lincoln] 'we must think anew and act anew' . . . we must change."
  • "Our organization will be barely recognizable to someone who labored with us ten years ago."  (I think this was in reference to the organizational structure rather than the organization overall, but I'm not certain.)
  •  "Some sacred cows will be sacrificed."
  •  "If we don't change, we may get run over by the circumstances and not be here in five years."
  •  "[P]reserving useful traditions . . . we must pivot from valuing the past . . . invest[ing] resources in those programs that our customers most value, allowing others to be cut from the vine." 
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From that video, Dan Ownby, the new Chair?, stated that last July 2019, the National Executive Committee commissioned executive teams (10 members each) to deliberate on one of "six key areas" to "secure the future" that effort was called "Project Churchill" addressed.

Time 50:00 "the six key areas"

1. How do we keep young people safe?

2. Are the BSA programs aligned with today's youth people?

3. Is the National Council effectively identifying and communicating with their stakeholders?

4. Do we have the most effective organizational structure?

5. Are there changes that will make the National Council more effective?

6. How do we build a solid financial path for the future?

Each executive committee was to fact-find and deliver recommendations by June, 2020.

"We did not do this in a bubble." Interviewed the Key 3 of 50 councils, all Regions, and half of the Areas,as well as members of the National Cabinet and half of the Executive Board members , also another online survey was done of 1000 or more volunteers and professionals... "and you know what we all have very similar thoughts on change. Some approach it differently, but we are more aligned than opposed." The Executive Committee is all aligned with the set of changes.

Time 56:00 The Changes: (previously revealed on forum)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dkurtenbach said:

I watched the recording of the Wednesday General Session, which can be found at https://nam.scouting.org/.  The real meat is the summary by Chair Elect Dan Ownby, about 11 minutes long starting at about 48 minutes into the recording.  Some excerpts:

  •  BSA will emerge from the bankruptcy "with the mission intact."
  •  However, we will have to deliver the mission "with far fewer resources."
  •  One of the six issues looked at by select committees developing strategy:  "Are the BSA programs aligned with today's young people?"
  •  Although "the mission has not changed . . . [quoting Abraham Lincoln] 'we must think anew and act anew' . . . we must change."
  • "Our organization will be barely recognizable to someone who labored with us ten years ago."  (I think this was in reference to the organizational structure rather than the organization overall, but I'm not certain.)
  •  "Some sacred cows will be sacrificed."
  •  "If we don't change, we may get run over by the circumstances and not be here in five years."
  •  "[P]reserving useful traditions . . . we must pivot from valuing the past . . . invest[ing] resources in those programs that our customers most value, allowing others to be cut from the vine." 

Thanks for the great summary!

A few reflections:

- "Are the BSA programs aligned with today's young people?"  I believe this is the line of thinking, in the late 60s, that led to the Improved Scouting Program.  Instead of making necessary changes that still complimented the BSA's traditions and primary draw (outdoors), they tried to get clever and threw out the baby, the bathwater, and the tub.  They didn't "stick to the knitting."  It was a new organization that matched the their vision and catered to their vanity.  So we ended up with a revamped BSA that didn't interest youth, and worse yet, alienated many dedicated scouters--who left the in droves.

I hope I'm wrong, but it seems that the pros may concoct another scheme that bears little resemblance to true scouting.  It will probably look a lot like what we are seeing now because of The Virus:  lots of Zoom time, badge collection, and backyard camping.    Low risk, easy to do.  The PR I see and read from councils and national is mostly breathless praise for this Virtual Scouting, supposedly a temporary measure.

- "Far few resources...sacred cows will be sacrificed...."  = Adios, Philmont.  It's been good to know you.  Probably Sea Base and Northern Tier too.

Edited by desertrat77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RememberSchiff said:

From that video, Dan Ownby, the new Chair?, stated that last July 2019, the National Executive Committee commissioned executive teams (10 members each) to deliberate on one of "six key areas" to "secure the future" that effort was called "Project Churchill" addressed.

Time 50:00 "the six key areas"

1. How do we keep young people safe?

2. Are the BSA programs aligned with today's youth people?

3. Is the National Council effectively identifying and communicating with their stakeholders?

4. Do we have the most effective organizational structure?

5. Are there changes that will make the National Council more effective?

6. How do we build a solid financial path for the future?

Each executive committee was to fact-find and deliver recommendations by June, 2020.

"We did not do this in a bubble." Interviewed the Key 3 of 50 councils, all Regions, and half of the Areas,as well as members of the National Cabinet and half of the Executive Board members , also another online survey was done of 1000 or more volunteers and professionals... "and you know what we all have very similar thoughts on change. Some approach it differently, but we are more aligned than opposed." The Executive Committee is all aligned with the set of changes.

Time 56:00 The Changes: (previously revealed on forum)

Thank you RS!

A thousand surveys?  Doesn't sound like much.  And it was probably another "ask your buddy" group-think special.

"...the National Executive Committee commissioned executive teams (10 members each) to deliberate on one of "six key areas" to "secure the future" that effort was called "Project Churchill" addressed."

I'd like to know who sat on these committees.  If they were all pros or highly-place volunteers, I don't have much hope for the results.  If the BSA was serious about this initiative, it would have brought in independent business and civic leaders who have no stake in or connection with the BSA. 

 

Edited by desertrat77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, desertrat77 said:

 

I'd like to know who sat on these committees.  If they were all pros or highly-place volunteers, I don't have much hope for the results.  If the BSA was serious about this initiative, it would have brought in independent business and civic leaders who had no stake or connection with the BSA. 

He described the make up in the video.  I heard gold tabs.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, desertrat77 said:

Far few resources...sacred cows will be sacrificed...."  = Adios, Philmont.  It's been good to know you.  Probably Sea Base and Northern Tier too.

Question is, who is buying?  Can surrounding ranches sell enough more cattle to finance the land acquisition?  Or outfit enough more BWCAW crews to buy the extra bases?  Sea Base is easier for me to see a purchaser.  This will be a fire sale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...