Eagle1993

I expect in many areas, school will utilize virtual learning full or part time through the fall and possibly spring. It is very possible the cases continue to grow and restrictions could return this fall and winter. I'm looking at summer camp as simply an oasis in the middle of the pandemic. Get the scouts out of the house and provide them an opportunity to do some scouting with their patrol & Troop. Yes, it is not traditional summer camp, but we haven't camped since Klondike (February) and due to local rules would struggle to do so this summer. We've lost out on multiple backpacking overnights, a couple of camp outs, a white water kayaking trip and 2 crews to Philmont. The fall camporee was already cancelled and I have a bad feeling about Klondike. We attempted to setup other camping trips but state parks are not an option. In addition to summer camp, we are working to quickly get an short trip to BWCA to make up for Philmont. My ASM was down on our summer camp plans as well, but I emphasized that he should look at what is being offered vs what is not. This maybe one of our last opportunity to camp until next spring or summer.

I'm not arguing for removing the statue in this case, but toppling statues is a long known symbolic move to show the end of an era. I think there is a difference between statues in a museum (focus on art, history) vs out in public parks and squares (which adds sense of honor and reverence). I'm not sure how many Hitler, Saddam Hussain or Stalin statues are or should be floating around in public parks. You can find Nazi flags in museums but I haven't seen many on display in public parks. For now, it seems like a good idea to take it out of public to protect it (otherwise it could be vandalized/destroyed). Longer term I think it should return to a public place as I haven't seen anything about B-P that would mean we shouldn't continue to honor his life.

Also, suits against councils are held off until November 16. However, the councils will have to share financial details with BSA to share with creditors if they want the stay. https://spectrumlocalnews.com/tx/san-antonio/news/2020/06/09/suits-remain-halted--mediation-eyed-in-boy-scouts-bankruptcy

Mediator team now set. Kevin J. Carey … Timothy Gallagher and Paul Finn on the mediation panel, with Judge Silverstein ruling out one of the Boy Scouts' choices to serve on the panel as a group of insurers raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest involving his selection. "What we are looking for is true neutrality," Judge Silverstein said. ... The Boy Scouts have 275 sex abuse claims pending against the parent organization as well as more than 1,000 additional claims against nondebtor local scouting councils and individual charter organizations that are in various stages of review, according to the Boy Scouts' first-day declaration Read more at: https://www.law360.com/articles/1280789/ex-del-bankruptcy-judge-to-join-boy-scouts-mediation-panel?copied=1

We are headed there as well (Week 3) and have 22 scouts attending. While I prefer their standard program, its great they are finding a way to get scouts out of the house, have aquatics and shooting sports options while reducing some Covid-19 risks. We held a meeting with our scouts and so far no one has changed their plans to attend. I expect this will be the year of partial MBs but almost anything will be an improvement over looking at more zoom call video feeds. https://threefirescouncil.org/programs-2/camp-freeland-leslie/

Bankruptcy courts can see through these maneuvers if they are simply meant to protect assets from bankruptcy. https://www.wisn.com/article/court-milwaukee-archdiocese-cemetery-trust-fund-not-off-limits-in-bankruptcy-case/6325780#

I would agree, just found it interesting that BSA's prior arguments in courts are being used against them in this case. I think this is why mediation has a chance. The plaintiff lawyers realize they will probably lose this argument, so their alternate option will be going state by state and suing every individual council. If they can settle all at once, it could be a higher return on their investment. Now, that assumes councils pony up and the BSA can offer a large payout. If BSA's offer is too small, then the lawyers will pull as many assets as possible from National and then go state by state over the next 5 - 10 years suing councils into bankruptcy.

Agreed, but an open Philmont would have generated positive cash for BSA. Now that cash flow is gone, I'm concerned they will access debt against it or worse case sell it. Hopefully not.

Given that Philmont is now the only closed BSA HA base, and BSA needs cash immediately, do they sell it off this fall? I hope not … but I'm' starting to get a bit concerned thinking that 2019 may have been the last year of Philmont Treks. Edit: Or perhaps, my optimistic thought, they can just exercise lines of credit against Philmont to get cash.

Not surprised given the rules in New Mexico. Two crews were going from our Troop. Probably mixed feelings as several were worried about travel.

He also did the BP Oil Spill and many, many others. I would think he would be a good choice and has a lot of experience setting up a process on how to determine what each individual gets out of the victims fund. He also helped in the NY Archdiocese Sex Abuse fund … https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/65-n-y-archdiocese-sex-abuse-vics-apply-compensation-article-1.2917953

My question is how will the BSA generate enough cash to pay without selling off some or all HA bases? Settlements in the Catholic Church for sex abuse range from $300K per plaintiff to >$1M per. Given est. 4,000 plaintiffs that would be at least $1.2B … before any other costs (resolving other debts, etc.). Where is the BSA going to get at least $1.2B? Expect the lawyers to push for far more. I would be extremely sad but I don't see many paths that avoid selling off High Adventure bases (all of them). Perhaps they do sell Philmont to an independent trust as mentioned above who provides full market value to the victims fund. Then that trust charges trek fees to help pay down the debt generated + costs + improvements. Similar questions for other HA bases.

100% True … plus, we put 2 per canoe and I've been told Northern Tier is 3 per canoe. We just go with local outfitters.

It's good to see that they are giving us early notice through 2022. I expect councils, summer camp and High Adventure bases (that remain) will jack up their fees as well. One would think the charges would be a bit reversed (ie, new scouts, a $25 discount). New scouts are already buying uniforms, books, patches, etc... so adding an additional fee for them doesn't make sense.

I was able to follow a link and find that you can register Rover in MyScouting… interesting.

There has been a lot of discussion on various BSA groups about ending all youth programs at 18 (OA, Venturing, Sea Scouts). One part of the discussion is the thought that BSA will be reintroducing Rover Scouts. In fact, several individuals have stated that councils have already started pilots (example below … their Facebook page started ~January 2019). https://tidewaterbsa.com/districts/rovers/ It sounds like Rover Scouts are common internationally and seem to provide a lot of leadership for those scouting organizations. Does any know how Rover scouts tie into units or are they completely separate groups. Just wondering how they functional in the international scout organizations as I do believe we have simply ignored scouts (outside of a few examples) once they turn 18 and simply hope they return once they have kids in scouting age. So, if true, this seems like a great idea if implemented well.

Even high adventure can be done at a lower cost when not through BSA (which I think uses it as a profit center). When we go to BWCA we never go through Northern Tier (too expensive). The good news is that our insurance rates should drop a ton after bankruptcy. With no assets left, the lawyers would have nothing to sue to obtain. Will we see fees drop back down with the reduction in insurance costs?

Interesting quotes from the USA article. Councils are already selling camp land and expect that to accelerate due to Covid-19 In a statement, Boy Scouts said that it is aware of the concerns but that the councils must balance their assets with other financial obligations. "This has come into even greater focus due to the wide-ranging impacts of the global pandemic and social distancing measures. In these unprecedented times, councils may need to take prudent measures to monetize their assets in order to preserve the mission of Scouting," the statement said. At least one Plaintiff lawyers seems convinced they will get to the councils through National Paul Mones, who represents about 400 survivors, said he successfully argued in various state courts that Boy Scouts made clear in the landmark Supreme Court case Boy Scouts of America v. Dale that it had explicit control over the approval of scoutmasters and assistant scoutmasters and thus local organizations. “The Boy Scouts of America without a doubt controls the councils,” Mones said. “There are a sufficient number of courts that have said there is that control there because if you can control the sexual orientation of the scoutmaster, you control the Boy Scouts.” The mediation will be critical and hopefully they can come to an agreement while still preserving the core of BSA.

@DuctTape You are probably correct. One of the quotes "Now, I believe the majority of Americans don't want to go camping. It just isn't fun." This is form The hiking one is interesting. Many of our scouts did indicate they were not fans of hiking, including one of our scouts going to Philmont. I looked at him a bit odd after he told me hiking was his least favorite activity. I then asked … aren't you registered to go to Philmont … you realize they are not going to drive you down those trails? He smiled and said … well, I like Philmont hiking, but not our Troop hiking. Made me think that if Troops have scouts who don't like camping, it could be the type of camping they offer.

I found a posting on Talk About Scouting Facebook page about this slide from the National Annual Meeting. The summary is similar to what I have heard directly from our scouts. What shocked me was the many contributors who stated their scouts disliked camping. Someone mentioned that on Eagle BORs he heard STEM as the leading answer. Others mentioned that their scouts "get their 20 nights in" then never camp again. Then this quote came up. The BSA needs to figure out what our youth DO NEED TO SURVIVE and to get ahead in TODAY'S world. They need computer literacy, math, science, programming. We need scouts with essential "survival skills" going into the 21st century. What do our youth in 50 years, or in 100 years need to know? Youth do need outdoor outings. But many youth live in the city, and camping is a foreign concept to them. City folks can go to museums to identify plants and animals, etc. Our youth need to know how to navigate bus routes and subway systems. Do I live in a completely different BSA universe? My scouts love camping. Kids that don't enjoy camping don't join my Troop … they find other activities. I will not run an after school program that tells kids how to tour a museum...

$7M in advertising seems like a lot … when was the last time National spent $7M on advertising? This fall is going to be rough.

I think this is probably the biggest one, especially given that most of the discussion at National will be about financials. That said, I am in a decent size council that has no Scout BSA summer camp. Our scout numbers dropped much faster than surrounding areas after they sold off the only camp we had and we have yet to recover. FOS numbers dropped and as a unit we have had discussions if we should direct our FOS donations to the council (out of state) that hosts the camp we go to. When there is redundancy, I agree that selling off an underutilized camp probably makes sense. However, councils should be careful about selling off their only camp.

I definitely agree that simply duplicating GSUSA system is not ideal and there are issues if BSA executives can simply generate units (scoutreach & fake numbers). However, I will say that I think my local GSUSA employees have a better idea of what girls & parents want than BSA. Why? Because GSUSA has more direct involvement in recruitment and leadership of units. When parents ask the GSUSA employee (directly) how much it costs … they have to answer (and FYI, their answer is "not as much as Boy Scouts ha ha ha". When camps were too far away, GSUSA employees knew as they are more directly involved with the units and created a bussing system. My council assumes COs are taking care of this (but they and we know they are not). So, their executives spend more time on FOS/popcorn and less on recruiting and leader development. Therefore, each unit is on its own with its current set of leaders and will live and die by that leadership. Councils get out of touch on what is important (as technically they don't own the units, don't recruit, don't find leaders, don't track leader training, etc.). Eventually, they make serious mistakes like selling our one BSA summer camp because there are other camps at other councils. and the "CORs didn't object". @Cburkhardt brings up several valid points as there are unit to unit culture variety that must be balanced and BSA ownership of units could kill that. However, the current CO system is broken for many units and I hope they think of creative solutions.

There are Girl Scout troops in my area who do not sell cookies and their leaders are not dismissed. There have been BSA unit leaders dismissed for "non compliance".

As a unit leader, why should I be driving the active engagement from the CO? Shouldn't that by the CO & COR's role? Our unit leaders have enough to do with managing a unit let alone trying to train the CO on how to be a CO. Our CO has no building. They provide $0 to us. They don't help find leaders. We have been attempting to get a solid COR with no success. The only decent COR we had was also our DE which caused issues. No one from their club wants to be a COR. I agree they don't want to be involved in day-to-day running of the unit … but the fact is they are barely aware that we exist other when we help at their fundraiser. Basically, we ended up with them because our PTO dropped us in the 1990s. We became a friend of unit there but that was risky so a leader at our current CO said they would be willing to sign our charter. If the CO model was working well, organizations would be contacting the BSA to setup and charter units. Every CO would have their COR really own the unit. Instead, most unit leaders are hunting for COs they can convince to take on their charter. Unit leaders are tracking down their barely existent COR and IH to get signatures on a charter app. I have never met my IH as my DE still helps me get his approval. At that point, why even bother with the CO model? I know there are good ones out there, but they seem few and far between. Getting back on topic of sacred cows ... I would kill the CO … or at least allow a hybrid model. Essentially allow the BSA council to be the CO of units. For those units with COs, they can follow the current model. I understand that could impact how COR voting is counted, but at this point I think we have bigger issues to deal with.