Eagle1993

3. Require changes to how the payouts will be calculated. Lower the peak for some, increase the baseline for others. I tend to agree that this will be the max $ out of the BSA, but I could see an argument that if you want the majority to vote for it, and most are looking at 1% of their claim being paid out, they may reject the deal. So, it could be claimant lawyers arguing with TCC over the Trust payout calculations.

I do wonder if you don't sign on the settlement, would you have the option of suing the LC (and their insurance company) in the future if SOL lookback windows change. For now, you could vote against the deal unless they change the payout percentages.

They must know it is being submitted today. Does a RSA mean there is a "general" agreement on a plan that can be submitted for a vote (at least between BSA, Ad Hoc Council Committee, TCC and the Coalition))?

We have far too many councils given our numbers. GSUSA has more scouts and half the number of councils. What to reduce overhead costs… merge councils. Keep districts relatively untouched. I would love to see a 1 to 15 or 1 to 25 ratio between SEs and DEs. Right now it seems like we have too many SEs and not enough DEs.

To me, the test of this is if states change SOL windows in the future and then someone sues their LC which did not go bankrupt. How can the National Bankruptcy shield litigation of an LC that did not go through a bankruptcy procedure when laws in that state change? If I were a victim, I would probably not take a low settlement amount and reserve my right to sue the LC directly in the future (and their insurance company) pending any SOL change. I think this is where the US Bankruptcy Trustee is questioning the structure of the entire deal (that includes coverage for LCs).

They are in Ch11 .. nothing is optimal. They said they would be out of cash and may have to liquidate if they don't exit by end of summer. Take a look at the cash flow again. They only lost $1.76M in cash before the $20M (last year they lost over $5M and had far less bankruptcy expenses ... so they are managing cash better in 2021 than 2020). They have $72M cash right now. In 2020 they burned through $42M in June - August ... lets assume the same cash burn. Leaves them with $30M in September with no further transfers from their endowment. In 2020 they were actually ok on cash September through end of year (and that was a bad year for registrations). I have a hard time seeing them burn $72M+ in cash June - August.

Short summary ... they will NOT run out of cash by September, or October or even early 2022. I think they are showing $3.16M of income from HA bases; however, it is not clear the expenses.

https://apnews.com/article/only-on-ap-health-coronavirus-pandemic-7afeb2667df0a391de3be67b38495972

Program ran like normal, which was good No cohorts or group requirements Same experience. Though, some scouts liked the cohort model from last year as it kept our Troop together all week. Some changes to food service, but not onerous We patrol cook, so only impact was the elimination of 2 camp wide meals. The camp was somewhat short staffed Main challenge was college aged Scouts as colleges had reduced tuitions for the summer Also pay challenges with other businesses paying more and jobs plentiful Same as was a nearby camp. We also heard that many tourist areas are not getting the short term immigrant labor they did in past summers (partially due to Covid and impact on US consulates). So, the tourist areas are hiring high school kids with better pay than camps. Some private camps increased their pay substantially. Talked with leaders and most (like our unit) felt the virtual meetings were not a good replacement to move Scouting along Agreed and had similar conversations. I do expect virtual merit badge clinics may remain. All seemed to have found a way to meet during the pandemic and with CO's shut down NOTE - none mentioned (including our unit) of any district or council proactive leadership on this All units seemed to have lost some newer Scouts during the crossover and shutdown of Mar 2020 - June 2020, most have reached out to those Scouts but not much traction We did as well. They fall into two groups. Young crossovers & limited engaged scouts (scouts that would attend 1-2 events per year). Many units are concerned for the health of the Cub Packs they work with Some not meeting Some are down 50% Will be an issue on progression of youth in the program next several years Universal concern ... we just talked about this last night with our adult leaders. We plan to start recruiting kids outside of Packs this fall to help increase our younger ranks. We had a pretty long discussion and seemed to agree that there are kids out there that either did not join Cub Scouts or may have dropped and do not realize what Scouts BSA offers. We have counted on Packs for years, but that may run into trouble. Camp has a leader dinner on Thursday, would have been good to have SE there acknowledging the struggle is real with COVID and bankruptcy Maybe acknowledging the future is charted but not 100% Maybe thank the leaders not only for being at camp but also for in fact still being in Scouting and still working to bring the promise of Scouting to youth A missed opportunity though not unexpected as the Senior Professionals on the Council seem to have a disdain for the lowly unit leaders The Council President and Scout Executive from the council attended the dinner. They thanked us and said they would answer questions about the sale of the camp. The property was in decent shape despite not much use for the last year Scouts had a great time 100% true for us as well. Good to hear and a great break from a tough 2020 ... looking forward to the fall.

What is typical first year percentage?

I was at CFL ... we started going there after going to LeFeber forever (then that was sold) and hating Long Lake (I know others like it). We were at CFL for 2018 through 2021 and will miss it. The staff and program was great. We had a couple of leaders talk to someone from TFC about the sale of CFL. Basically, it came down to a need to quickly get money and not enough time to make other plans for the camp to live on. CFL was profitable for the council. However, it also had a lot of grandfathered in equipment (toliets, plumbing, etc.) that would eventually need to be replaced and require a large amount of funds. They had a $10M plan to upgrade the camp, adding in a family camp RV park on one side of the lake that would help pay for upgrades (dining hall, toliets, etc.) elsewhere. They had Bay Lakes Council camp director there for our adult leader Steak Dinner. Three Fires have partnered with Bay Lakes Council and Bear Paw Camp AND a council in Kentucky. Those two camps will enhance their patrol cooking next year and will take on CFL's commissary procedures. They will also interview CFL's staff and give them priority for hiring. TFC will be looking to provide coach bus service to both locations next year. (I'm out of Three Harbors Council). I just registered our linked Troops (1 girl, 1 boy) for 1st week next year at Bear Paw, all patrol cooking. I figure it may be a bit choppy but Bear Paw seemed a bit like CFL so we'll try it out. My recommendation is to register soon for 2022. The camps that close will funnel even more Troops to the remaining camps. Prime dates/spots may fill up fast.

Just got back from camp. 30 scouts, 4 full time adults and a sprinkling of others. 300 scouts at camp. Shortages at trading post and of counselors. The camp we attended was already sold due to bankruptcy but was being leased back this summer (for the price of our picnic tables). Closing campfire ceremony was tough… singing a song about returning next year… We visited Ed Bryant as a possible replacement but I wasn’t impressed so I think we are headed to Bear Paw next year. We only do patrol cooking camps and those are getting tough to find. I’d recommend locking in camps early as many will be sold, funneling in scouts to the remaining ones

Us too. Tight timeline to respond. We were told we will know by August. They council was saying there are 19 camps in Wisconsin so no they can probably do with less. Unfortunately every council is saying that and I’m currently at a camp that was sold (in Wisconsin).

And how many rows of knots are appropriate.

https://nypost.com/2021/06/18/boy-scouts-hoping-to-reach-summer-settlement-with-sex-abuse-victims/ No comment from the TCC or Coalition.

A couple of good points I have seen in other online forums. This is not an approved plan. It is simply an updated plan. Kosnoff twitted an hour ago that he is currently reviewing all 387 pages, a lot of changes with new info. Some council connected individual has stated that there is no deal. They went on to say that this is a proposal that they already gone beyond and there is a lot of stuff not being filed yet. This individual has stated that everyone should wait for an official announcement. So ... it perhaps this is something BSA needed to get out to start a clock and get official feedback but it is likely not going to be the final plan.

Looking at the plan, I think the survivors got the lion share of National BSA assets. While National BSA appears to keep their HA bases, they gave up other restricted assets and took on additional debt to do so (including ongoing payments to the Settlement Trust). I think this is pretty risky for National BSA, but it is what it is. At the council side, I think you will have to wait to see the council by council settlement details. It appears that the settlement is about 1/3 of the total unrestricted assets of all councils combined. That said, some councils may be paying nearly 100% of their unrestricted assets (ours is actually looking to sell off restricted assets to pay for the settlement) while others may be escaping given low number of claims/risk. All I know is that every camp in my area that my Troop & Pack have used is now either sold or being considered for sale.

We should know soon. I'm not sure if the status is a detailed look or a % of the total amount.

Cyberchip requires the following: Discuss with your unit leader the acceptable standards and practices for using allowed electronic devices, such as phones and games, at your meetings and other Scouting events. So, it is a unit decision. There is nothing in the Scout Handbook or Troop Leader handbook that I have ever seen that bans cell phones. Our unit allows cell phones for photos (and have for years). We also added the option to use phones for scouting applications (such as looking up merit badge books, info, etc.) and weather reports. It is a tool like a knife, rope, etc. Each unit can have their own policy.

TCC & BSA appear to have reached a comprise over the restricted assets & HA bases. BSA agreed to reduce the minimum amount of unrestricted cash/investments from $75M to $25M. Fund a $80M Note (which has the payment schedule I documented above) So that is how they got to the ~$130M. A loan with a payment schedule and selling off $50M of investments. With this deal, HA bases will remain with BSA. However, BSA will exist more in debt (add $80M to the JPM debt) and with far fewer assets (both at National & LCs).

Ok ... that loan to the settlement trust will be paid annually the total of : $4.5M plus $3.50 for every scout in BSA as of Dec 31 from the prior year $50 for every scout that went to a HA base the prior year $50 for every scout above the initial business plan excluding ScoutReach $150 for every scout going to a HA base above the business plan Hmmm ... this looks to me, that BSA better not grow above their business plan. IF they do, they will be paying a TON to the settlement.

Aggregate

It appears BSA took out a loan from Arrow WV to help pay for the settlement. Local Counicls now must provide $300M is cash and $200M in appraised land. many other changes…

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/75cad6f2-cc34-4b0c-896f-0d26815b1189_5368.pdf

Revised plan have been filed. Good time to start a new topic, see link below.