Suggest Councils that should be Combined

[Cburkhardt]

Dekurtenbach:  I think the 319 postings that attracted over 10,000 views on Reorganization issues these past four weeks show that there is much agreement with what you have said.  It is really a matter of how to make those kind of things happen during the course of a 2 or 3 year period during which the BSA will be undergoing tremendous change -- some forced by the bankruptcy.  What would you do this spring to move us in the direction of the priorities you state?  Some urge a wait and see approach and others believe a proactive effort to share thoughts and effect accompanying structural change is merited.  Where do you stand?  Maybe you could discuss your local circumstances as an example.

[RememberSchiff]

Some earlier MIchigan Crossroads topics

 

Edited February 27, 2020 by RememberSchiff

[dkurtenbach]

The shape of any merger or other reorganization will depend in large part on the shape of the eventual bankruptcy settlement:  Will sexual abuse victims agree to a comprehensive resolution process that brings in all claims against councils, chartered organizations, and other Scouting-related entities in addition to claims against BSA National?  To get there will require substantial financial contributions from councils.  If they can't get there, BSA National's bankruptcy may be resolved (eventually), but victims will be in litigation with councils and other entities for years to come, with numerous council bankruptcies.  Nothing will happen quickly; this is one of the most complex bankruptcies that this nation has ever seen.  In two to  three years, the lawyers will just be getting warmed up.  Even in the best circumstances that can be reasonably anticipated, strenuous litigation about every aspect will likely continue for three to five years before a claims resolution process is finally agreed on; then it will take another three to five years to fund the settlement and litigate individual claims and the size of individual recoveries.  The parties may agree in the interim to some council property sales, with proceeds to go into trust pending final settlement, as councils try to cut costs in preparation for whatever will be coming.

For the most part, that will all be distant and largely irrelevant to units.  Councils and districts will make every effort to insulate day-to-day local Scouting from the mess, except for increasing fees -- which is really just status quo anyway.  There won't be any significant program changes.  And in the meantime, membership will continue to decline.

My priorities are a fantasy, and here's why:  The bankruptcy stemming from sexual abuse claims from the past, that creates a financial crisis, doesn't teach BSA or its leaders anything about offering a program that youth and families want to join.  It doesn't teach them anything about the content and execution of BSA programs at the local level and what that should look like when the bankruptcy dust settles.  The bankruptcy is certainly a big problem, but membership decline is BSA's real crisis and BSA isn't going to do anything about it -- either because they are too preoccupied with the bankruptcy or (as I think) because they gave up on it long ago.

 

[PACAN]

@Cburkhardt   I think all of us really appreciate your efforts in getting these (slightly) different thought provoking topics posted regarding the current issues.  My question is do you have a contact at national who has any influence on affecting any changes to the topics who you can bundle these postings and send to?  Thanks.

 

[desertrat77]

41 minutes ago, dkurtenbach said:

The shape of any merger or other reorganization will depend in large part on the shape of the eventual bankruptcy settlement:  Will sexual abuse victims agree to a comprehensive resolution process that brings in all claims against councils, chartered organizations, and other Scouting-related entities in addition to claims against BSA National?  To get there will require substantial financial contributions from councils.  If they can't get there, BSA National's bankruptcy may be resolved (eventually), but victims will be in litigation with councils and other entities for years to come, with numerous council bankruptcies.  Nothing will happen quickly; this is one of the most complex bankruptcies that this nation has ever seen.  In two to  three years, the lawyers will just be getting warmed up.  Even in the best circumstances that can be reasonably anticipated, strenuous litigation about every aspect will likely continue for three to five years before a claims resolution process is finally agreed on; then it will take another three to five years to fund the settlement and litigate individual claims and the size of individual recoveries.  The parties may agree in the interim to some council property sales, with proceeds to go into trust pending final settlement, as councils try to cut costs in preparation for whatever will be coming.

For the most part, that will all be distant and largely irrelevant to units.  Councils and districts will make every effort to insulate day-to-day local Scouting from the mess, except for increasing fees -- which is really just status quo anyway.  There won't be any significant program changes.  And in the meantime, membership will continue to decline.

My priorities are a fantasy, and here's why:  The bankruptcy stemming from sexual abuse claims from the past, that creates a financial crisis, doesn't teach BSA or its leaders anything about offering a program that youth and families want to join.  It doesn't teach them anything about the content and execution of BSA programs at the local level and what that should look like when the bankruptcy dust settles.  The bankruptcy is certainly a big problem, but membership decline is BSA's real crisis and BSA isn't going to do anything about it -- either because they are too preoccupied with the bankruptcy or (as I think) because they gave up on it long ago.

 

@dkurtenbach, I concur with one small exception:  despite the best efforts of some councils and districts, I think unit operations will be negatively impacted quite soon.  This will largely be due to the factors you mentioned:  declining numbers, increasing fees, and negative publicity. 

"The bankruptcy is certainly a big problem, but membership decline is BSA's real crisis and BSA isn't going to do anything about it -- either because they are too preoccupied with the bankruptcy or (as I think) because they gave up on it long ago."

That statement is absolutely spot on!  Indeed, the BSA gave up 20 years ago.  Zero effort to shape strategic level dialogue.  Scant communication with, and loyalty to, unit level scouters. 

And with the future of the organization at stake, what do I receive in my email this morning?  Scouting Wire.  Top story:  "All Merit Badges Ranked from Most to Least Popular."  Not a word from Mr. Mosby, aside from the tepid interview he granted a couple weeks ago.

 

[HashTagScouts]

44 minutes ago, desertrat77 said:

And with the future of the organization at stake, what do I receive in my email this morning?  Scouting Wire.  Top story:  "All Merit Badges Ranked from Most to Least Popular."  Not a word from Mr. Mosby, aside from the tepid interview he granted a couple weeks ago.

 

I am myself disappointed that there is no statement, no video of a "fireside chat", or anything from the leadership group.  These horrific things happened, and without taking blame, there most definitely should be an acknowledgement that there are victims out there and that the organization shares a heartfelt regret that any child has been taken advantage of- in or out of Scouting.  Rebuilding the image starts now- we can't wait for the end of a court case for it.  

[Cburkhardt]

PACAN:  I am pretty certain these postings have been closely followed as part of National’s idea-gathering efforts.  The even-handed and serious manner with which postings have been made is a big factor in people being open to these suggestions.  I think the best way to impact what things will look like in the National re-cast is to find credible SEs and Council Presidents who are accepted participants on the national scene and promote your ideas — so they can pass them on.  Then, you need to be ready to Participate in effective ways when the new circumstances begin to impact your geography.  There will need to be a good amount of cooperation and willingness to give up our organizational ways of the past.  Good luck with your activities.

[David CO]

5 hours ago, Cburkhardt said:

 

National withdraw the charters of the four councils, took direct control of properties and started from scratch with new staff and volunteer officers reporting directly to National.  During that time, principal decisions to implement the combination were made, including staff changes, volunteer restructuring and property sales.  

 

Maybe this should not be used as an example, during the bankruptcy proceedings, to demonstrate how councils are separate and independent entities.

 

[PACAN]

Cburkhardt ...

okay.    50% or larger reduction in the number of councils in those states with 10 or more.  CA, GA, NY,  NC, OH, TX, PA using Michigan as the model.   25% reduction in other states.   One council in New England combining 13 into one.  250 councils for 1.5 M scouts (after March) is way too many.

this is made with zero knowledge of the financial status of any councils.

[ParkMan]

Updated proposal based on feedback:

2020 - 1st half:

• National focuses on the national bankruptcy
• National conducts financial reviews of each council in the country.  National identifies councils who are at risk of default due to reductions in membership or reductions in national support

2020 - 2nd half:

• Councils identified as "at risk" develop mitigation plans.  National provides clear goals that must be met by local councils.  National goals prioritize program quality and membership growth.  
• National works with those councils to solve issues not resolvable by the local council.  All options are on the table - including changes to the basic council operations model, council staffing rules, and council mergers.
• National does not force a particular structure on councils.  Councils are free to innovate.
• If national is not satisfied with local plans, they reserve the right to revoke charters and grant to another council.  a.k.a. - force a merger
• National establishes council operations excellence team.  This team is chartered with capturing best practices from local councils and assisting struggling councils.

2021 - 1st half

• Bankruptcy over - national "surveys" the landscape.
• Based on finances and needs from local councils, national determines what the new national can do to best support councils.  This is conveyed to councils.
• Local councils receive this information and generate updated financial analysis.
• Council operations excellence team monitors progress of councils and assists where needed.

2021 - 2nd half

• National and councils jointly monitor execution of council financial risk mitigation plans.
• National council operations excellence team actively promotes best practices based an agenda of quality program and growing membership.

 

Edited February 28, 2020 by ParkMan
typos

[JoeBob]

On 2/27/2020 at 10:14 AM, dkurtenbach said:

And 200+ local councils over 40 years have not solved Scouting's greatest challenge: the ever-continuing decline in membership.  That alone should be sufficient cause for sweeping away the existing council structure and replacing it with a system that recognizes that the future of Scouting rests, as it always has, on the shoulders of unit Scouters -- and gets out of their way.

Late to the topic and trying to digest the entire thread in one sitting.  I completely agree with the second sentiment: BLOW UP THE COUNCILS!  We don't need them.  The only good things that Council ever provided me was a storage space for our district archery equipment (could be much cheaper as a Public Storage space and with better access!) and the Scout Shop (which could be handled better as an online resource with less traffic.)  Camps can be run independently, left to fail, or be replaced by state parks.  The only other things that came out of that hulking real estate cow patty were negative bureaucratic effluent.   

 

On 2/27/2020 at 10:14 AM, dkurtenbach said:

• specially trained escalation point for all issues of member conduct and compliance with BSA policy
• specially trained incident / emergency management point of contact for health and safety issues

These are the only two council services that require a real person.  But if their offices were at the Scout Camp, maybe they would be more sensitive to conditions there.

 

I disagree that 'the ever-continuing decline in membership' is a problem.  I don't follow the premise that bigger is better.  I yearn for a BSA that is half the size in numbers, but still twice the moral beacon of yesteryear.  Many of today's youth are into gaming or sports.  They don't want to be Scouts.  That's okay.  Why should we waste our resources trying to convince them otherwise?  I think we could borrow a line from the USMC: "The few.  The Proud.  The Boy Scouts."

The only benefit from higher enrollment numbers is more dues money to pay bureaucrats' inflated salaries.

[RememberSchiff]

Hmmm maybe @JoeBob has a point about inflated salaries.

https://www.presstelegram.com/2020/02/28/boy-scouts-of-america-weighed-down-by-red-ink-high-pay-for-execs-before-bankruptcy/

[desertrat77]

Powerful article, thanks @RememberSchiff!

Two parts of the article:

"'The local councils are not independent,” said Los Angeles attorney Paul Mones, whose suit against the Boy Scouts of America a decade ago resulted in the release of the “Perversion Files” — details of alleged sexual abuse secretly kept by the Boy Scouts for decades — as well as a $19.9 million verdict for a former Scout who was abused by his Scout leader in the 1980s.

'Even though the local councils have their own corporations, they’re inextricably linked to the national,” Mones said. “The Boy Scouts of America has to approve the troop leaders. The Boy Scouts of America carries the retirement plans. Every year, the local councils have to apply for an annual charter, which is approved by the Boy Scouts of America.

'There’s a real overlap, a significant overlap,” Mones said. “To the extent they allege that they’re separate entities, that remains to be seen."”

and.....

"The Boy Scouts of America’s bankruptcy petition lists assets of at least $1 billion, and liabilities of up to that amount.

"The Scout executives who received large compensation packages are among the creditors standing in line for money.

"'This has been a boondoggle for decades, where insiders pay themselves million-dollar salaries with fabulous pension plans,” said Tim Kosnoff, an attorney also representing abuse victims. “It’s sickening to see. They’re paid more than any other not-for-profit in the country. This is an abusive organization in more ways than one."”

------------------------------

My thoughts: 

- I watched my council's video response to the chapter 11 announcement.  It assured us that things are going to be just ducky, National itself and National's problems are far, far away, the council is independent, solvent, and will always be, and the council would continue to provide the world class service that we unit and district types have grown to know and expect. 

Struck me as pie in the sky then, and even more so now.

- National execs are (were) living high on the hog while victims were seeking recourse, and while the organization itself foundered. 

Hubris.

Well, for the commissioned BSA professionals of Irving TX, the gravy train is over. 

Edited February 29, 2020 by desertrat77

[HashTagScouts]

So much for living the Scout Law... a Scout being thrifty and all.  You make $400k a year- if you want your spouse to travel with you, you pay for it.  Many execs of Fortune 100 companies fly coach.  I will miss a grand total of zero of them.

Edited February 29, 2020 by HashTagScouts

[dkurtenbach]

2 hours ago, JoeBob said:

I disagree that 'the ever-continuing decline in membership' is a problem.  I don't follow the premise that bigger is better.  I yearn for a BSA that is half the size in numbers, but still twice the moral beacon of yesteryear.  Many of today's youth are into gaming or sports.  They don't want to be Scouts.  That's okay.  Why should we waste our resources trying to convince them otherwise?  I think we could borrow a line from the USMC: "The few.  The Proud.  The Boy Scouts."

Well, I guess I look at it a bit differently.  If we have a program that really can change the world for the better, then we have an obligation to get as many people into it as we can.  If it isn't growing, that means one of two things:  Either the program isn't that great after all, or the stewards and guides of the program over the years broke it.  We can't blame the evolution of society for membership decline.  The job of stewards and guides is to maintain the fundamental operating principles of the program while keeping it current and relevant to the changing needs and preferences of our target market.