Jump to content

Chapter 11 announced - Part 3 - BSA's Toggle Plan


Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, qwazse said:

I’m not sure what’s in it for BSA. Will the dollar amount of the settlement be lowered if they provide a plan?

What's in if for BSA? My goodness, how about fewer children raped? How's that? Is that good enough for you or BSA?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Forums work well in many ways, but it is probably not the best way to discuss the difficult feelings of this bankruptcy while also discussing the impact to child sex abuse survivors.  However, there a

The mental fallout from my abuse was mostly dormant prior to the current lawsuit. It would still torment me in idle moments. Or at night sometimes when I lay in bed trying not to blame myself after so

I would like to not lock the thread but we seem to be in a rut that we need to get out of before any progress can be made. Here are some observations that might help. First, human dignity is the

Posted Images

7 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

The plan will not be approved without changes to BSA's youth protection.  The TCC was clear, they need at minimum, the amount from BSA as if they were liquidated + the YPT changes and release of all IVF (redactions as appropriate).

The current BSA Youth Protection Training took a few years to design, write, and implement using the nation's top experts in children and youth abuse.  It is considered by an exemplar.  Not certain how much better it can be designed after following the instructions of the nation's best.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

the amount from BSA as if they were liquidated

And here's where the "when" comes in. Total liquidated value of BSA is $1.4 billion. I am still not clear how quickly the BSA could pay out. $400 million now, and $100 million a year, every year, for the next decade?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There has been some discussions about BSA restricted assets and questions about a "trial" regarding these.    This seems to be captured under a docket labeled Adversary 21-50032 (TCC Identified Property Action).

https://cases.omniagentsolutions.com/documents?clientid=CsgAAncz%2b6Yclmvv9%2fq5CGybTGevZSjdVimQq9zQutqmTPHesk4PZDyfOOLxIiIwZjXomPlMZCo%3d&tagid=1250

This covers the following topics where BSA says the assets are restricted:

  • Bank Account Cash - $39.9M
  • LC Collateral - $62.8M
  • General Investments - $81M
  • Order of the Arrow - $7.4M
  • Philmont, Northern Tier Sea Base - $63.3M
  • Donor Restricted Pledges Receivables - $76.6M
  • Misc Summit Assets - $6M
  • Gift Annuity - $8.1M
  • Note Receivable from Arrow WV - $345M

All of these were considered restricted by the BSA.  You can review the back & forth in the docket.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, vol_scouter said:

The current BSA Youth Protection Training took a few years to design, write, and implement using the nation's top experts in children and youth abuse. 

Since YPT was put into place, almost 11000 scouts have been sexually abused.

There's always room for improvement. BSA needs to that through its collective corporate heads.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Eagle1993 said:

There has been some discussions about BSA restricted assets and questions about a "trial" regarding these.    This seems to be captured under a docket labeled Adversary 21-50032 (TCC Identified Property Action).

https://cases.omniagentsolutions.com/documents?clientid=CsgAAncz%2b6Yclmvv9%2fq5CGybTGevZSjdVimQq9zQutqmTPHesk4PZDyfOOLxIiIwZjXomPlMZCo%3d&tagid=1250

This covers the following topics where BSA says the assets are restricted:

  • Bank Account Cash - $39.9M
  • LC Collateral - $62.8M
  • General Investments - $81M
  • Order of the Arrow - $7.4M
  • Philmont, Northern Tier Sea Base - $63.3M
  • Donor Restricted Pledges Receivables - $76.6M
  • Misc Summit Assets - $6M
  • Gift Annuity - $8.1M
  • Note Receivable from Arrow WV - $345M

All of these were considered restricted by the BSA.  You can review the back & forth in the docket.

Part of the problem is going to be if BSA "co-mingled" funds. Take, for example, the Order of Arrow. How much of that is donations directed to OA (which may or may not be restricted) and how much of it is money BSA shoved into to protect it (which would not be).

I'm recalling the trick that the archdiocese of Milwaukee tried to pull.

There, when the Archdiocese got sued for sexual abuse, they played a shell game (there, transferring money to a "cemetery fund" called the Cemetery Perpetual Care Trust) and tried to claim it was 100% restricted.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals smacked down that shell game in March 2015.

By August 2015, the Archdiocese was forced to settle with the abuse victims. And guess where some of the money came from? You guessed it: the Cemetery Perpetual Care Trust.

I am wondering, and I bet TCC is wondering as well, how much as shell gamed.

Summit to be sure, but what else?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Since YPT was put into place, almost 11000 scouts have been sexually abused.

There's always room for improvement. BSA needs to that through its collective corporate heads.

The new version was just rolled out in the last few years so it is not 11,000.  Whereas there is often room for improvement, there can be diminishing ways to improve.  The BSA is using the best guidance available.  The changes are likely small.

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

The BSA is using the best guidance available.  The changes are likely small.

Considering the shoddy way that the modern BSA is treating victims of sexual abuse (low balling them at $6000) I think BSA still doesn't take sexual abuse seriously.

I really, really like the idea of an independent monitor appointed by the court to put the screws to BSA over YPT.

Full disclosure of the IV files with redactions (time for BSA to come completely clean).

BSA needs to take sexual abuse and its role in it seriously OR have a court appointed monitor do it for them up to and including the authority to remove BSA officials and volunteers.

No more playing games, BSA.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CynicalScouter said:

Considering the shoddy way that the modern BSA is treating victims of sexual abuse (low balling them at $6000) I think BSA still doesn't take sexual abuse seriously.

I really, really like the idea of an independent monitor appointed by the court to put the screws to BSA over YPT.

Full disclosure of the IV files with redactions (time for BSA to come completely clean).

BSA needs to take sexual abuse and its role in it seriously OR have a court appointed monitor do it for them up to and including the authority to remove BSA officials and volunteers.

No more playing games, BSA.

If the independent monitor assumes the liability, then it is a great idea.  If the monitor is merely dictatorial but has no liability, then it is a horrible idea.

The ineligible volunteer files needs to be nationalized by the CDC for all youth groups to prevent pedophiles and ephebophiles out of all youth serving organizations.  It could serve like a criminal background check where someone who is thought to be dangerous is kept out of youth serving organizations (YSOs) but they are not defamed or slandered through unproven accusations.

The councils and local volunteers must be the local police to remove suspicious individuals from Scouting.  The national office cannot evaluate the local units - it is a local responsibility.  National needs hold local volunteers and professionals responsible though how I do not know right now.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

The new version was just rolled out in the last few years so it is not 11,000.  Whereas there is often room for improvement, there can be diminishing ways to improve.  The BSA is using the best guidance available.  The changes are likely small.

Which begs the question on the minds of every victim, if an organization was developed today that essentially said "we're doing the best we can but some of you will be raped and abused and scarred for life" would we allow it?  Would Congress give it a "charter?"  Would we not as a society say "That isn't good enough."  This isn't a call to abolish the BSA.  Rather, it's a call to do ALL it can for victims NOW and ALL it can to abolish ALL abuse moving forward.  If the best guidance available isn't working, and there is evidence that it isn't, then new guidance and EVERY effort, expert, and study of what happened needs to be made.  I suspect the TCC, on behalf of ALL victims, isn't going to be satisfied with minor tweaks.  Let's all hope that isn't the case.  Ultimately the future of the BSA is going to rely short-term on it convincing a new generation of parents that their children are NOT at danger.

  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

the independent monitor assumes the liability, then it is a great idea.  If the monitor is merely dictatorial but has no liability, then it is a horrible idea.

Generally court appointed independent monitors area appointed by the court to ensure the offending entity (BSA) does not reoffend and complied with any court ordered remediation.

If BSA decides the monitor it can be held in contempt and if push comes to shove (depending on how it is written) start removing BSA officers.

There is no “liability” other than BSA’s if it tries to defy the court appointed monitor.

Time for BSA to start taking this seriously or someone is going to do it for them on behalf of and with the authority of a federal court.

If you call someone appointed by the court to make BSA get serious about YP “dictatorial”, oh well.

Edited by CynicalScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

Which begs the question on the minds of every victim, if an organization was developed today that essentially said "we're doing the best we can but some of you will be raped and abused and scarred for life" would we allow it?  Would Congress give it a "charter?" 

Unfortunately you are seeing and living the nightmare that many in BSA and the forum consider children sexually abused just the cost of having BSA. A cost the children abused must pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

Which begs the question on the minds of every victim, if an organization was developed today that essentially said "we're doing the best we can but some of you will be raped and abused and scarred for life" would we allow it?  Would Congress give it a "charter?"  Would we not as a society say "That isn't good enough."  This isn't a call to abolish the BSA.  Rather, it's a call to do ALL it can for victims NOW and ALL it can to abolish ALL abuse moving forward.  If the best guidance available isn't working, and there is evidence that it isn't, then new guidance and EVERY effort, expert, and study of what happened needs to be made.  I suspect the TCC, on behalf of ALL victims, isn't going to be satisfied with minor tweaks.  Let's all hope that isn't the case.  Ultimately the future of the BSA is going to rely short-term on it convincing a new generation of parents that their children are NOT at danger.

I understand your first comments and have thought about it long and hard.  It has made me question my involvement with Scouting.

It is my belief that there is no youth serving organization that can be formed where the incidence of child sexual abuse (CSA) is zero.  CSA occurs in the home so if an organization existed that only allowed any contact between youth and adults was by parents, I believe that some children will be abused.

How do we get that number to be as low as humanly possible?  The parents must be primarily responsible for what happens to their children.  They must be vigilant and questioning of each and every person around their children.  They must have a little suspicion about anyone interacting with their children.  They must be involved with their children's activities and attend much of what they are doing.

When a mother takes a child to a troop meeting and she is told, perhaps very politely, that she is not really welcome, then she should recover her child immediately and the council should be notified.  If the council does not remove the leader in question assuming that the story can be reasonably substantiated, then it should be disciplined by the national council.

Parents are the key to lowering the rates to the number occurring in the homes that is outside of this realm to address.  Until YSOs can share the responsibilities of youth protection between all concerned - professionals, volunteers, and parents, the minimum cannot be reached.  That is my belief.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

How do we get that number to be as low as humanly possible?

Open, honest reporting.

  1. No more secret perversion files.
  2. Aggregated data reported by council (X number of occurrence of YP violations in the last year)
  3. Placement of an INDEPENDENT court-appointed monitor to ensure BSA compliance

That's just the start. I'm sure the TCC will come up with more/better than I.

But BSA running around cheering "We have the #1 YP program!" is useless to me, given that their credibly in this area is at or near zero.

Edited by CynicalScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Open, honest reporting.

  1. No more secret perversion files.
  2. Aggregated data reported by council (X number of occurrence of YP violations in the last year)
  3. Placement of an INDEPENDENT court-appointed monitor to ensure BSA compliance

That's just the start. I'm sure the TCC will come up with more/better than I.

But BSA running around cheering "We have to #1 YP program!" is useless to me, given that their credibly in this area is at or near zero.

 

Do open Ineligible Volunteer Files (IVF) mean listed by name?  If not, by identifiers such as council?  So who will defend the lawsuits by people defamed by accusations that have not been proven?  Who will defend the lawsuits from people placed in the IVF because they were accused of theft of funds from a unit or the council bu.t were defamed by being associated with the IVF?

How will the monitor improve upon the nation's experts?

Clearly, we all want to see no child harmed in Scouting, it is a challenging goal.  I do not agree with 1 and 3 but do number 2.  

It goes without saying that all Scouters wish to see no further abuse.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...