Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 6/24/2021 at 3:59 PM, RememberSchiff said:

Hard to believe these camps need yet another appraisal to be sold.  :confused:

The underlying conditions and assumptions established by the customer when an appraisal is contracted can have a significant impact on the resulting value, so needing a new appraisal doesn't surprise me much.  In particular if someone orders a valuation of the property "based upon the current occupancy" the value might be very different if the property was appraised according to it's "highest and best use". 

The estimated "time on market" is also a big factor.  A mortgage appraisal may well require an appraisal based upon a marketing time of only a 6-12 months when a more normal time for a highly specialized property like a camp is probably 2-4 years.  So if you are looking for maximum "Fair Market Value" an appraisal that recognizes the 2-4 year time-frame may be needed.

On 6/27/2021 at 9:45 AM, gpurlee said:

One of my concerns is that many councils may see this as a wonderful opportunity to rid themselves of the expense of inherited and unwanted camps under the guise of the bankruptcy.  Selling a beloved Scout camp is a sure way to stir up a firestorm among Scouters and donors. Now councils can say "the courts made us do it" and shift the blame. I am skeptical that every last dollar will go into the settlement trust.  

I actually think that in some cases, this would be a very good thing.  My understanding is that there are a fair number of camps out there that are either underutilized or severely in need of modernization and upgrades.  If a council can use this as a way to get say 2 out of 5 camps sold, meet their settlement obligation and then use some leftover funds (along with the absence of expenses from 2 camps) to modernize the remaining 3, I think the end result will be a positive.

1 hour ago, fred8033 said:

The only good is ... with BSA bankruptcy moving forward ... so does an end to past liabilities.  That is a very good thing.  

As for scouts, there is absolutely no reason we can't camp in county, state and national parks.  Our troop has done it repeatedly.  Group sites.  Individual sites.  You have to modify your behavior, but there is no reason that you can't. 

The real loss is for bigger events:  summer camps, etc.  Even then, we've run our own summer camp before at group sites.  

Perhaps the biggest impact will be state parks will need to build more "group sites" as youth groups like scouting start reserving more.  

You can camp in local, state and national parks, but there's no getting away from the fact that "Summer Camp" is hugely important for scout retention, particularly in the first few years of Scouting.  It offers a fairly unique collection of experiences that would be hard to find for individual troops camping independently.  Where else would you find sailboats, canoes, rifle ranges, shotgun ranges, Ropes courses, ATVs, wilderness training, archery and crafting all in one location?

Also, most of the parks around me are actually trying to get away from "group" sites as much as possible.  Even well behaved groups can be awfully hard on a small area. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 231
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

@skepticand @CynicalScouter let's just drop it right now.  

Part of the problem, too, is that we are trying to create these country-club type experiences for people.  Swimming pools, air conditioning, hot showers and flush toilets, climbing towers, ATV program

They are not human shields, they are youth being served a high quality program. Please stop with the baiting of using comparisons. Victims on this site have stated that it is painful to see tho

Posted Images

Some of these camps would be great additions to a county park system! People like outdoor weeding venues, family reunions, fishing ponds, hiking trails, etc. For what it costs to build a new public building and parking lot, some of the camps would be a real bargain and community asset.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RobertCalifornia said:

Some of these camps would be great additions to a county park system! People like outdoor weeding venues

Really? You're welcome to weed in my backyard any time. I have a great crop of bind weed and some nice thistle. Oh, and lots of mint.

  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

While browsing thru Zillow I noticed a house/meeting hall being sold by the local Boy Scouts in Eureka California. 

It looks like a council office and store.

https://www.humboldtlistings.com/idx/1007-Wood-Street-Eureka-CA-95501-mls_259440/?SavedSearch=20140710193939388326000000&PropertyType=A&pg=1&OrderBy=-ModificationTimestamp&p=y&n=y

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was talking with another local Scouter who had the idea of selling our council shop and office building as an alternative, or in addition to, selling one of the two camps.  I think this is a good idea -- it should be easy enough to get a small retail space to rent cheaply (or even donated?) for a scout shop, and many people can work remotely.  There is also a small museum that could be packed up or relocated to one of the Scout camps.

Once a camp is gone, it is gone forever.  

I would be willing to see our Council take on debt (or ideally, pick up donors?) to save our two camps.  Or, I think we need to save our nicest, most cub friendly camp because recruiting matters!  Start with where the little guys and girls have the most fun and then send the big guys and girls out for adventures that are further away, if need be. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, WisconsinMomma said:

I was talking with another local Scouter who had the idea of selling our council shop and office building as an alternative, or in addition to, selling one of the two camps. 

The key is going to be how much does your Council owe? It may be the only financial way to make the numbers work is for one camp to be sold.

The other factor is that some of the camps sales have absolutely nothing to do with the bankruptcy payments. The fact is, BSA's local camp system was developed and built over the years based on membership levels in the 3-4 million range (1960-1980). Even before COVID and LDS leaving that was down to 2 million. Today it is closer to 700,000 and BSA's best case scenario is that it doesn't come back above 1 million until 2025.

So, how do LCs operate a camp system based on 25-33% (at best) of the scouts it had when the camp system was developed?

That's where the TCC came in and started in its estimate to try and see how utilized the camps were and how much they were really, really needed.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WisconsinMomma said:

I was talking with another local Scouter who had the idea of selling our council shop and office building as an alternative, or in addition to, selling one of the two camps.

Since our camps are within our council boundaries, why not have them take up office space at camp? Improve the infrastructure a bit and consolidate efforts. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, WisconsinMomma said:

I think we need to save our nicest, most cub friendly camp because recruiting matters!  Start with where the little guys and girls have the most fun and then send the big guys and girls out for adventures that are further away, if need be. 

that's an interesting view, and I think you might be right, that it's more important to have a camp that hooks Cubs than one that hooks older scouts.  I suspect that is not the most common thinking.  Emotionally, most adults have their fondest memories and closest associations with scouting being their summer camp, and so folks fight hardest to keep those.

But you don't get to make those memories if you don't get through Cubs and make it to Scouts BSA.  Yeah, probably best to keep the closer in, most developed, Cub friendly camps, even if it means having to go a distance later for summer camp.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, T2Eagle said:

that's an interesting view, and I think you might be right, that it's more important to have a camp that hooks Cubs than one that hooks older scouts.  I suspect that is not the most common thinking.  Emotionally, most adults have their fondest memories and closest associations with scouting being their summer camp, and so folks fight hardest to keep those.

But you don't get to make those memories if you don't get through Cubs and make it to Scouts BSA.  Yeah, probably best to keep the closer in, most developed, Cub friendly camps, even if it means having to go a distance later for summer camp.

It makes sense but on the other hand it's complicated by the loss of up to 80% of Cub membership in some places during Covid. Cub level camp is also easier to stage in a park because it is mostly day camp. 

 

Just now, WisconsinMomma said:

I also wonder if two councils could collaborate to keep a camp open.  Our non-council camp is in a wealthy county in the council-next-door's area.  

That is the sad aspect of what is happening. There should have been a national assessment of camp properties and opportunities like the one you suggest proposed. There are Councils near us who have multiple different camps within minutes of each other in the same general area. They are probably each going to fight to hold on to their marquee camps, but it doesn't make sense. One should probably go so that a camp in another area with no camps survives. 

  • Upvote 1
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...