Eagle1993

BSA just released their new plan. I figure that its a good time to lock this topic and start a new, part 3, Chapter 11 discussion. Hopefully it will keep these large threads manageable.

We lost all of our 6th graders due to Covid this year. Many of our early outdoor activities were cancelled and we had to go to Zoom as all of our typically meeting locations cancelled reservations. Getting new scouts excited about Scouts BSA is tough in a Covid year. I started following up with their parents this spring and there is some general excitement/interest in returning this coming fall. I pushed a bit about going to summer camp, but many of the kids just want to hang with their close friends in town as they haven't been able to do that for a year. I think a lot of kids are just depressed and/or burnt out on zoom. Hopefully after a reset summer, kids & parents will be looking to reengage in the fall. If your 12 year old is having a rough start, he is not alone. If this was my son's first year in Scouts BSA, I'm not sure he would be sticking with it. The only reason I see the older scouts sticking through is they know what normal looks like (so they are waiting for the reset) + some are working on some merit badges. This has been a really tough year, hopefully as we get back to a bit of normal soon.

I expect the TCC will go after all unrestricted assets that National owns. They have already signaled that includes Philmont & Summit. The BSA lead lawyer told the AP they expect litigation will be required to determine the outcome of some aspects of the plan. HABs are the big target/asset National has ... the courts will decide if they stay with the BSA or are sold off.

Hikes, EBORs, camps, COHs even Troop Meetings are all a great cure to doom scrolling through the Chapter 11 thread(s). Great to hear the good news!

Partially ... what he wants (and some other lawyers per their submissions) is the following. 1) Continue to reject all plans from National BSA. By doing this, you essentially force National into Chapter 7 as they have no other path to exit bankruptcy. 2) When National BSA goes Chapter 7, argue that since there is no entity left to renew charters of local councils, every local council charter is not renewed. Per LC agreements, if a charter is not renewed, all assets from the local councils go to National and are then part of the Chapter 7. The result is the complete and total liquidation of the entire BSA. I see 0% chance this will happen but I think this is what some lawyers are hoping for.

Given that BSA is now saying (in the media & court documents) if the grand bargain fails, councils will likely go bankrupt, I think they realize and are admitting those claims are likely worthless.

I have no idea what those internal conversations are, but this is a VERY tough sell to councils. 1) For councils with high likelihood of bankruptcy if this fails ... they will still debate what is restricted vs unrestricted assets. Having them turn over their friends of scouting funds, most of their camps, etc. with out a court order will be nearly impossible. 2) For councils that believe they are at a low likelihood of bankruptcy/lawsuits ... why would they want to part with key camps or endowments? I think attempting to have a grand bargain is nearly impossible. I think National would love a deal that includes councils/COs ... but unless a court rules against an entity or that an asset is unrestricted, its hard to give up the amount needed voluntarily.

Agreed. The HA bases are the major asset National has available. Most of this seems like a waste of time until a judge rules on their status. We are well over a year into bankruptcy and we have yet to be to see any judge rule on the bases. It’s time to get that moving.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/886060_2577.pdf This one has an interesting footnote (new plan coming in 36 hours or less): New plan will be a toggle plan ... from what I can see, the BSA believes that plan (which appears to drop the protection of LCs and COs) will be a worse outcome form claimants than their other proposal. However, it does seem like they may be offering that plan as well... we will see.

Did they announce any replacement strategy? Are the looking to limit sub-committees to the territory level only? I'm curious how they are transitioning from National - Region - Area - Council to National - Territory - Council for both professional and volunteer staff/committees.

I would expect the TCC and the future claims rep are not willing to bet on future payments from BSA. It seems like it would be best from all parties to arrive at a final number, write the check and move on. For future claims, my understanding is that there would be a bucket of money that would pay out for those claims not submitted by the bankruptcy filing deadline. I tend to agree with @David CO that parents and donors (and I expect COs) will want to have a hard line in the sand that future dues, fees, fundraising are all going 100% to the current youth activities and not past sins. I believe the message being sent right now is that fees and donations are protected, but there is definitely doubt that BSA is able to shield current incoming revenue from the bankruptcy until the bankruptcy is concluded.

I’ve been debating this in our Troop as well. I think masks for shorter outdoor gatherings are pretty easy requirement to comply with but I’m concerned about masks at summer camp within our site. We did it last year and wearing masks for 12 hours straight, day after day, in the hot/rainy conditions at camp was a bit much. We ended up strictly enforced masks outside our site and when cooking within the Patrol camp, but were lax outside those settings. We are still discussing how to handle this summer. In our town, 78% of eligible people have recipients their first dose, so I expect high vaccination rates by camp.

This makes me angry. Are the BSA lawyers simply looking to suck the organization dry. The judge needs to do something more than sternly scolding everyone to work harder. BSA lawyers look to have completely ignore the judge’s comments. If BSA disappears, it might be partially due to her ineptitude.

METHODIST CHURCH 3,443 BAPTIST CHURCH 2,774 CATHOLIC CHURCH 2,280 LATTER‐DAY SAINTS 2,236 PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH 1,470 LUTHERAN CHURCH 1,198 EPISCOPAL CHURCH 503 These are the top 5 COs identified by # of claims. Now, I expect these numbers to grow and change a bit as many scouts probably do not even know the CO for their unit. As lawyers are able to obtain roster data from LCs, I expect CO impacts to clarify more. Note that there are individual churches listed throughout the CO list.

I think the judge has to rule on that; however, her last hearing she said the plan wasn't ready. Insurance companies just filed paperwork to delay the April 29 hearing ... it appears they are stating there must be at least 28 days for review, before a plan can be approved for a vote. Given the plan is not ready (per the judge) even now, there is no way April 29 hearing can proceed as previously stated. Note that even though the insurance companies & TCC are both stating the plan is garbage, my guess is that is likely all they agree on.

There is a lot in this document. I tried to highlight a few key areas I thought were interesting. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/885873_2566.pdf It appears that the mediation last week was almost worthless. The TCC's analysis is showing the LC contribution is substantially lower than what they believe they can pay Almost no agreement on payments from any insurance companies Two major religious institutions have been part of the mediations, but have not offered anything as part of the mediation. Major decisions (estimation of damages from district court, decision on HA bases and if they are available for the settlement, JP Morgan debt) must be decided before a plan can even be considered. Based on the above, the judge should reject the plan. There is a lot more in the document, but those were my major takeaways. I think there is a hearing next week. I'll be interested to see what the judge says. I know she raised concern over the spending on the case, but she hasn't taken much action to force closure. Perhaps she can remove the exclusivity clause and allow the TCC to offer a plan. I would expect she could rule on the LCs and HA bases (or at least set hearings and close out on these open decisions). I'll reference this article again. Sometimes you simply need to get decisions made within courtrooms before a settlement can be reached. I certainly hope she starts expediting any decisions within her control. https://mediatbankry.com/2016/05/05/dont-let-this-happen-to-you-milwaukee-archdiocese-bankruptcy-part-three-the-in-court-slugfest/

I'll do my best to explain what I have seen in this thread, so hopefully I don't misconstrue the message. The one thing I would say about @ThenNow is that it does seem that he cares about the BSA and sees the value of the program. He has mentioned how impressed he is by what he sees from many of the comments .... volunteers who spend much if not most of their free time working to provide children an experience that is unique and provides life long value. That said, he was sexually abused in the worst way by his Scoutmaster. No one within the BSA prevented it or took action (as far as he can tell). I think its good for us to hear from victims that don't simply say lets eliminate the BSA. It doesn't mean you or anyone has to agree with everything or anything said, but it's not bad to hear the message. Now there are victims out there that are simply saying end the BSA. I would agree with you that there is no point for them to join our forums. @ThenNow doesn't seem to be in that group.

If the goal is 0 Covid, we will never do anything. I don't think that should be the goal. The goal should be to ensure our healthcare system is not overrun and that we don't see massive death. If we follow "science" we know that the vaccines are highly effective and are effective vs the variants. A surge and massive death is not going to happen regardless of what we do this summer (based on everything known today). Ramp up vaccines and work on expanding testing to find hot spots ... otherwise we should be reopening. By this summer, I expect every adult who is at any sort of risk has had a chance at the vaccine. Kids are far less at risk for serious complications with Covid. It's time to get them back to their activities.

Nearly all of the ideas I can think of is at a higher level (in terms of reporting, etc.). If a unit strictly follows today's YP, I cannot think of any real changes that wouldn't simply kill most youth organizations. @qwazse brought up interesting points but I'm not sure how we could change unit level YP policies to address it.

I was hoping this one can be specific on specific recommendations that could improve safety. Those others were more about society. I'm really curious, in today's (and tomorrow's) society what changes can we make to improve safety. There will be specific changes as part of the Chapter 11 settlement. If we are to have scouting, we need scouting to work safely in the society we have today. What does that look like?

To me, all of these should be reported. Reporting shouldn't be reserved for actual crimes, it should be any violation. In EHS, we are expected to report "near misses". Those are then used to improve training & processes. The written communications is a great one. So many times, I receive an email from a scout directly to me with no one on the CC. I immediately respond to that scout + parent + leader and remind them to never email me without an adult. We use Troop Track as it automatically includes parents on all emails (so this only happens when they email me from their personal account). I would be fine if BSA says ... please, go ahead and report every email. It seems crazy, but perhaps if that level of reporting is encouraged, these "minor" issues could identify a systemic breakdown. In my organization, every call to service is considered a complaint. We have a full time team that looks at every complaint to determine hazard (non, minor, serious, critical, etc.). Every complaint that is serious is then investigated by engineering, QA and risk management who then determine root cause, corrective actions (if required) and if our overall system is still at an acceptable risk. These teams process hundreds of thousands of complaints a year. It sounds counter-intuitive, but more reported violations of YPT may actually result in a safer organization. https://www.ehstoday.com/safety/article/21915434/study-encouraging-incident-reporting-leads-to-improved-safety-culture https://www.safeopedia.com/help-me-help-you-10-ways-to-get-employees-to-file-incident-and-near-miss-reports/2/6079

I think in terms of the bankruptcy settlement, a long lasting legacy that is appropriate given the large number of victims, is for the insurance companies involved to agree to fund an independent agency like the IIHS but for youth protection. This could improve safety not only at BSA but all youth serving organizations. (Note: if you would want to discuss what BSA can do to improve youth protection, that could be in the linked topic above.)

I just started a new topic about ideas to improve safety. To me, outside of the camp property loss, is the other major outcome to expect from the bankruptcy.

Ok .. .that Chapter 11 topic drifts a lot, so I thought one area I struggle with is how we can actually reduce abuse in BSA (and youth organizations). I went to websites of BSA, GSUSA, Trail LIfe, 4H, Boys and Girls Club, AYSO and the BSA is the ONLY organization that talks about Youth Protection on their main page. I volunteer for sports teams, GSUSA and BSA ... BSA is the only one that required me to sit through 2 hours of training. These are not complaints, they are just brief comparisons as I am attempting to see what is out there that BSA is not doing. My one thought on how to improve safety comes from industry. In particular, the automotive industry. Over the last decades, cars have become more safe. There is no debate ... a crash that would have killed you 20+ years ago may leave you with minor injuries today. So, how did they do this? Was it lawsuits ... somewhat. Was it standards ... a bit. Was it legislation ... not so much. The number one reason cars are more safe today, is the IIHS. The IIHS is funded by insurance companies who have to pay claims when their drivers are hurt/injured. The IIHS safety ratings help drive insurance rates of cars ... but more than that ... they are public data that tells consumers which cars are safer. Do we need a IIHS for youth organizations? Essentially, an independent body of experts that can review the training, procedures, etc. for all major youth organizations that buy insurance and rate their safety level and have that publicly available. To be clear, each youth organization is not the same. Having a STEM team work on computer code is less dangerous than having a patrol go for a hike in a mountain range. So, it would be good to provide categories just like IIHS does. Think truck, sport car, van, SUV vs Outdoor/scouting, sports teams, STEM. I think, over time, this could improve safety protocols across all youth organizations. Just a thought on something that worked in another industry.

Your post stated "Youth Protection Training protocols used today were enacted" which is what I quoted. I did not re-word a post. We use different protocols today than in 1990. If you stated "when no one on one youth and adult contact started" I would agree. Youth Protection Training protocols are far beyond no one on one contact and two deep leadership. For instance, BSA only recently decided that 18 year olds are not considered adults in terms of Youth Protection Training.