Eagle1993

We recently had a camp out where there were no activities planned during the day. Just camp and figure it out. During the day, the scouts went on a hike, bike ride and had fun in camp. When we asked the adults at the next meeting how the outing went, another leader who was present complained that we didn’t have enough activities. This was from someone with no youth scouting experience. The PLC liked the outing and had no concerns or complaints… they had fun. Many adults seem to think that if you don’t have an agenda of activities and advancement then the outing wasn’t fully useful.

BSA didn't allow gay scouts until 2013 .. so I have a hard time understanding how they were PC for 20 years.

Kosnoff will try and drag this out if possible. Could he appeal the discovery ruling?

They realize this is probably the last major opportunity to kick around and the BSA. Given that TL prohibits gays I would never let my son join nor would he want to (just as I would never support any organization that would exclude people based on race).

I think it could. LCs, as a whole, are contributing $600M. That is 1/3 of their net unrestricted assets. We are already seeing LCs planning on possibly selling what they claimed as restricted assets to fund the $600M. I expect if all LCs had look back windows, their payout would be much closer to 2/3 or 3/4 of their net unrestricted assets … probably another $600M or so. I would hate to see that, but there are many LCs claiming no camp sales will be required for them to fund the settlement… so their seem to have assets they are not forced to sell right now. I think the question is … are claimants better off rejecting this deal and fighting for a larger LC contribution or accepting what has been offered. If most claimants are only seeing <$10K total do they think there isn’t much to lose by rejecting the deal? We will see…

Just heard from a council… they have to sell all of their camps to cover the cost. Not official yet, so I’m holding out hope. Another council is selling their offices and camps and will purchase a cheap warehouse where they plan to have a permanent PWD track, climbing wall and a area for indoor tent camping. This next month is about to get real rough as we see the impact of $650M. It will be especially rough knowing that HA bases were protected while LC camps are being discarded left and right.

Some law firms coming out against the plan. Kosnoff Tweeted it is DOA, claimants will reject it. I don’t think it really means it is dead, but they are looking for a lot more info in the coming documents. I think this just shows that we may not be 100% closed on a deal yet. https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/07/02/boy-scouts-settlement-abuse-victims/

I found this interesting... So, the way I read this, if any local council or organized BSA is sued by a claimant, the trust will be responsible to cover the costs and losses of the LC/BSA.

Actually LCs did increase as they are taking in a $100M note. (iii) a $100 million interest-bearing variable-payment obligation note (the “DST Note”) issued by a Delaware statutory trust on as soon as practicable after the Effective Date.

I expect nearly 100% accept, so I wouldn’t be surprised if that $600M is closer to the final actual number. The limited rumors I have heard (probably fourth hand) is that the LC yes/no to the settlement is along the lines “BSA is going to make them an offer they can’t refuse.” Yes, a LC can refuse the offer, but good luck to the SE or that council in the future. Perhaps it isn’t that bad, but the pressure is definitely on.

Each LC was given a $ amount. My guess is that if 100% of LCs sign on it will be well north of $500M. The $500M is the minimum number (probably assuming x% decline). TCC may know which LCs have already said yes.

Insurance company pre-emptive request to cancel July 20 hearing. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/67a7e046-be35-4050-bd0c-ccdbc228bfc2_5461.pdf

The document is 40GB with 39GB of "please, please, please" followed by "vote for this".

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