Chapter 11 announced

[malraux]

8 minutes ago, MattR said:

Well, that just stuck a pin in my friend's argument

It’s makes it less likely for the court to do so, but not impossible. I’m not a lawyer but my understanding is that the court is able to make pretty big changes if it feels it is justified. But even there, as I said, I would imagine the court might say to sell off one of the bases, but even then philmont would be the last. 

think of the current loan like this: it’s a way for one creditor to say dibs on a particular asset. Yes the court can say no but then has to also deal with that creditor arguing that they really should have dibs. 

[PACAN]

@carebear3895

This needs to be said:

LOCAL COUNCILS ARE LEGALLY AND FINANCIALLY INDEPENDENT FROM THE NATIONAL COUNCIL. 

The Chapter 11 financial restructuring will not affect your local scouting experience. 

 

A little disingenuous .   While "separate"  there is a cause and effect here.   Let's see what the restructuring looks like and how much affect on council ops there is.  Guilt by association will effect councils membership and fundraising as in the long term properties going to seed.  A number of National Scout shops will likely close.  Any hint of a council sending any funds to national for the victims fund will not go well.   If you are talking about our troops ability to go on a hike this weekend, then there is no affect.  JMHO

 

I appreciate your insight from the internal side.   The rest of us are guessing due to the top secret nature of the professional community and executive boards.

•  

[carebear3895]

51 minutes ago, MattR said:

and given that we have scout executives on this forum,

PROMOTION!!!!  

[desertrat77]

19 minutes ago, PACAN said:

@carebear3895

I appreciate your insight from the internal side.   The rest of us are guessing due to the top secret nature of the professional community and executive boards.

•  

I concur.  @carebear3895, thanks for all you do, every day, for scouting.  I too appreciate your perspective and good humor.  As PACAN said, we're guessing what goes on in the pro and exec community.  The professional tiers above DE seem closed to almost everyone but a chosen few.

 

[desertrat77]

I'm a bit mystified by the rosy outlook on the concept that "councils are separate from national, so it's business as usual for the councils."

Won't councils be next on the list to face legal action?  How big is the legal budget of most councils?

[carebear3895]

1 minute ago, desertrat77 said:

I concur.  @carebear3895, thanks for all you do, every day, for scouting.  I too appreciate your perspective and good humor.  As PACAN said, we're guessing what goes on in the pro and exec community.  The professional tiers above DE seem closed to almost everyone but a chosen few.

 

I appreciate it, thank you. I'm actually pretty candid like this out in the field too. I find being open with Volunteers and being able to poke fun at myself as a Professional is a great way to build relationships. Like you, I hate the "need to know" culture in the BSA

[ParkMan]

47 minutes ago, malraux said:

It’s makes it less likely for the court to do so, but not impossible. I’m not a lawyer but my understanding is that the court is able to make pretty big changes if it feels it is justified. But even there, as I said, I would imagine the court might say to sell off one of the bases, but even then philmont would be the last. 

think of the current loan like this: it’s a way for one creditor to say dibs on a particular asset. Yes the court can say no but then has to also deal with that creditor arguing that they really should have dibs. 

This is the jist of my thinking too.  

Unless this has already been negotiated and all parties has agreed, then all this is likely to be argued in bankruptcy court.  As such, the creditors are going to argue to include as many assets as possible.  The BSA on the other hand is going to argue to include as few as possible.

It's without doubt that there are technically legal structures in place that we hope will be enough to isolate different entities - councils and Philmont most specifically.  However, once this gets into the hands of of the courts I expect things will be interpreted.  I would not be surprised to see one decision in bankruptcy court which will then be appealed and appealed.  I could honestly see this go to the Supreme court as we discussing the intersection point of multiple issues.  Yes, councils are legally separate, but they were established for the purpose of Scouting and the national organization has significant control over them.  So, are they really independent?  Myself I would argue yes, but I have to expect creditors to at least try.  How cut and dry this is I'm not so sure.

[dkurtenbach]

2 minutes ago, desertrat77 said:

I'm a bit mystified by the rosy outlook on the concept that "councils are separate from national, so it's business as usual for the councils."

Won't councils be next on the list to face legal action?  How big is the legal budget of most councils?

I read somewhere that councils and chartered organizations have already been sued along with BSA National, which the claimants would want to do whenever possible.  It appears that part of National's plan is to have one bucket of money available for all claims against all BSA organizational defendants.  Of course, the attorneys for the claimants will want that bucket to be as large as possible, so I expect that they will push for contributions from councils.

[tnmule20]

This from the Washington Post today:

A key question will be whether the Boy Scouts of America will be able to protect the assets of the local councils, which own camps and properties in prime real estate throughout the country. The local councils are incorporated separately but hold 70 percent of the Boy Scouts’ wealth, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis.

Pfau and other lawyers bringing abuse lawsuits against the Boy Scouts said they were skeptical the organization would be able to shield the local councils.

“That is wishful thinking, because in every Boy Scout case we file, the local councils are named,” along with the local sponsoring organizations, such as churches or schools, Pfau said. Many of these institutions could be implicated in the claims, making for an even more complicated bankruptcy case, said Pfau, who specializes in representing victims in abuse cases against institutions such as the Boy Scouts and Catholic dioceses.

[HashTagScouts]

5 minutes ago, desertrat77 said:

I'm a bit mystified by the rosy outlook on the concept that "councils are separate from national, so it's business as usual for the councils."

Won't councils be next on the list to face legal action?  How big is the legal budget of most councils?

The decision by National is most definitely intended to throw themselves on the sword here, and be a shield to keep councils and COs as protected as possible.  Are their councils already involved in legal action? Undoubtedly.  I know a lot of people are upset today that the BSA has tarnished the image and the youth with this decision- simply because they see it as a cop out to staying the course as an organization, that though flawed, was viewed as a moral organization fighting to instill moral character into the youth we serve and is now hiding in the court to avoid paying victims.     

[JoeBob]

I'm curious as to the relative value of the 4 HA bases. 

Northern Tier is a medium sized outpost.  Not a lot of real estate.  BSA does not own the Boundary Waters.  (Sorry lawyers.)

I can guess that Seabase would have about the same value as Northern Tier, for the same reasons.

Bechtel, because of the mortgage , may be a negative.  Especially since BSA paid more than the land was actually worth.  

But Philmont...  That is acreage.  Who wouldn't want to retire to the 'Tooth of Time' retirement community, where age really bites?

Edited February 18, 2020 by JoeBob

[David CO]

4 hours ago, Beccachap said:

I'll be all sorts of bitter if my dysfunctional council that we've all but eliminated from our lives demands a fee from us next year. Do we have to charter with the council in our zip code, or can we charter with any council? 

You have to charter with the council in your geographic area.  Bitter?  Yep, that's exactly where I'm at.  We haven't participated at council for over 5 years.  Yet they are still going to charge us a tax for all the services we don't use and don't want.  It's maddening.

Edited February 18, 2020 by David CO

[Jameson76]

12 minutes ago, JoeBob said:

I'm curious as to the relative value of the 4 HA bases. 

Northern Tier is a medium sized outpost.  Not a lot of real estate.  BSA does not own the Boundary Waters.  (Sorry lawyers.)

I can guess that Seabase would have about the same value as Northern Tier, for the same reasons.

Bechtel, because of the mortgage , may be a negative.  Especially since BSA paid more than the land was actually worth.  

But Philmont...  That is acreage.  Who wouldn't want to retire to the 'Tooth of Time' retirement community, where age really bites?

It's in the annual report, but too lazy to look it up.  Way way down in the financials.  Philmont is the main cash value. 

Summit only needs like 50,000 attendees annually to get out of the red

[desertrat77]

16 minutes ago, JoeBob said:

I'm curious as to the relative value of the 4 HA bases. 

Northern Tier is a medium sized outpost.  Not a lot of real estate.  BSA does not own the Boundary Waters.  (Sorry lawyers.)

I can guess that Seabase would have about the same value as Northern Tier, for the same reasons.

Bechtel, because of the mortgage , may be a negative.  Especially since BSA paid more than the land was actually worth.  

But Philmont...  That is acreage.  Who wouldn't want to retire to the 'Tooth of Time' retirement community, where age really bites?

Joe Bob, I think Philmont would be toughest to lose, and the very property the legal and banking folks will go after first.  About 214 square miles of prime wilderness.  I just don't see any creditor, attorney or judge excepting it from the long, expensive legal battle ahead. 

As for Summit, I'm on board with the suggestion someone (sorry I forgot who) made earlier:  National should have to relocate all of their headquarters and personnel to the Summit.  Sell everything in Irving TX, pack the UHaul, and start driving NE.  If Summit is indeed as special as advertised, it should be a positive move.

Edited February 18, 2020 by desertrat77

[ParkMan]

42 minutes ago, HashTagScouts said:

I know a lot of people are upset today that the BSA has tarnished the image and the youth with this decision- simply because they see it as a cop out to staying the course as an organization, that though flawed, was viewed as a moral organization fighting to instill moral character into the youth we serve and is now hiding in the court to avoid paying victims.     

I can understand the sentiment though it's really just looking at the problem through rose-colored glasses.  Here's how I understand it:

1. The BSA hasn't been compensating victims - insurance companies have.  The BSA & lawyers are involved in lawsuits, but eventually it's the insurance companies that pay.  The insurance companies turn around and charge the BSA premiums for this coverage.  That coverage is becoming prohibitively expensive now.
2. It's wonderful to think that the BSA is sitting on a large pot of money which can be used to compensate victims - but it's not the case.  What happens is that the lawsuits result in insurance increases that are then passed along to new members through increased fees to the kids of today.

Today's bankruptcy filing is the BSA saying that this system is no longer supportable.  

To me the real moral question is:

Should the youth of today pay higher fees to Scouting to compensate victims of abuse that happened many years ago?