Major Change in Chartered Organization Relationship

[5thGenTexan]

Saw this posted on the FB today....   

it was recorded, but I do not believe it has been posted yet. It’s not good for the units though. ALL of your assets have to be transferred to the local council. And you will be provided with an EIN number to create a new bank account with your councils information

We have a committee member currently serving as Treasurer who also works in the Council office.  They said on Tuesday night they may not be able to be Treasurer any longer as it would be a conflict of interest.  That statement makes a lot more sense now.

 

[MikeS72]

22 hours ago, 5thGenTexan said:

email I just got from the SE.   Its all very "clear"

 

 

It was made pretty clear during the webinar last night that there will be no variations of the affiliation agreement from council to council or unit to unit.  As far as I understood what was presented the UMC local church and the unit can enter into this affiliation agreement with the local council taking ownership of the unit and it's assest or the unit can seek another charter organization and request a facilities use agreement.

They said that they expect to sent out a link to everyone who was registered for the webinar in about a week or so with the recording of the proceedings and a FAQ answering questions that were posted last night.

[PACAN]

All that follows is JMHO. UMC units will need to make a hard decision.  I'd like to see the FAQs.  They will not likely get any help from their church.  I have no say in the matter but it's unfortunate that the church didn't seem to have the scouts best interest in giving the BSA control over their parishioners sons/daughters scouting experience.

Some smaller units will try and get their scouts into other units.  Some larger ones with longevity will decide if they can find another sponsor.    If any move to BSA control, I hope they move over with minimal resources since LC will "take over their assets."   Like was stated before, units that folded took their treasury, divided by the number in the troop and gave the money to each of them.  They also gave away much of their equipment to other units.

 

I wish them all well. 

 

[yknot]

1 hour ago, PACAN said:

  I have no say in the matter but it's unfortunate that the church didn't seem to have the scouts best interest in giving the BSA control over their parishioners sons/daughters scouting experience.

 

 

I watched the webinar too and to me it seemed clear that the UMC had understandable liability concerns about "owning" units for the BSA. They are certainly willing to continue a role as affiliates, which is something less than a CO relationship but more than a facilities use agreement. The UMC, like many community based organizations, is facing some of the same challenges as BSA -- membership in a steady decline and consistently falling revenues. I've seen some big Methodist churches that have healthy congregations and balance sheets, but most of the ones in my region are failing and hanging on by a thread. They are taking sensible steps that allow their congregations to continue to support scouting in some way but minimizes their exposure. One of the most interesting aspects of the discussion last night was a very brief mention by the insurance expert about the "hard" insurance market for organizations that are involved in or support youth activities. He pointed out that high risk activities with high loss exposure, like scouting, are facing rate increases and coverage reductions. That obviously, and logically, factored into the UMC perspective.  

[SiouxRanger]

3 hours ago, yknot said:

They are taking sensible steps that allow their congregations to continue to support scouting in some way but minimizes their exposure. One of the most interesting aspects of the discussion last night was a very brief mention by the insurance expert about the "hard" insurance market for organizations that are involved in or support youth activities. He pointed out that high risk activities with high loss exposure, like scouting, are facing rate increases and coverage reductions.

And these words foretell the end of BSA Scouting.

No insurance for all the risks-no Scouting.

[ThenNow]

 

15 hours ago, MikeS72 said:

It was made pretty clear during the webinar last night that there will be no variations of the affiliation agreement from council to council or unit to unit.  As far as I understood what was presented the UMC local church and the unit can enter into this affiliation agreement with the local council taking ownership of the unit and it's assest or the unit can seek another charter organization and request a facilities use agreement.

A long tenured Scouter and UMC member invited me to watch. A question or statement was made about Units moving to an Elks Club or the like. Bishop Schol (member of the Ad Hoc Committee and UMC representative to mediation) gave a pained answer, expressing hope that congregations and units would not part ways and they would continue to "serve youth with Scouting ministries." Based on my tracking of the chat and Q&A, that's an empty hope, in terms of everyone taking this new path.

11 hours ago, PACAN said:

I have no say in the matter but it's unfortunate that the church didn't seem to have the scouts best interest in giving the BSA control over their parishioners sons/daughters scouting experience.

I certain get the risk/exposure motivation here, but I don't understand how affiliation will engender "connection" with the heartbeat of the unit. Is the congregation the primary pool for leaders from which the LC will "select and approve" unit leaders? Most people, especially volunteers, don't favor complexity. When it gets too hard to decipher, volunteerism declines. I'm ignorant, but my role as an objective ignoramus can be beneficial. 

11 hours ago, PACAN said:

If any move to BSA control, I hope they move over with minimal resources since LC will "take over their assets."

The question was asked in the Q&A about how this structure could be proposed without outlining the way in which assets are transferred, how they will be held (sequestered?), managed, requested and made available. It sounds nice to say, "It's fine, son. Your camping gear, bike, toys and piggy bank will no longer be in mom and dad's room, rather uncle Blinkie's garage. It'll be fine. They'll be there when you need them. Not to worry." What kind of transfer or deposit takes place without some framework guidelines, especially if there has been any history or mismanagement, misappropriation, commingling or confusion? That seems like a big "Whoops! Didn't think of dat!" Just my view. 

9 hours ago, yknot said:

One of the most interesting aspects of the discussion last night was a very brief mention by the insurance expert about the "hard" insurance market for organizations that are involved in or support youth activities. He pointed out that high risk activities with high loss exposure, like scouting, are facing rate increases and coverage reductions.

The insurance market has been hard for at least five years. It's not simply YSOs or high risk enterprises. Before he went to law school, my oldest son was in insurance. He managed a large farm and ranch book of business in TX. It was the same story. Same for healthcare. Those are the two I know pretty well, but my wife's work touches all aspects of coverage and I've heard her talk about the "hard market" for a good five years, for sure. Just a footnote.

[1980Scouter]

Does anyone know what is going on with the Catholic Church and their future with Scouting?

I know some dioceses ended the relationship but not all. I would think there will be a national guidance issued.

 

[MikeS72]

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

The question was asked in the Q&A about how this structure could be proposed without outlining the way in which assets are transferred, how they will be held (sequestered?), managed, requested and made available.

We will see exactly what the information we get from council will say in relation to unit assets, but my initial thought is that it will not be much different than it is now with the charter organization being the technical owner of those assets.  Just means that instead of a troop trailer being registered in the CO's name it will be registered in the name of the local council.  While we will have to wait a few days for word on exactly how this will work, I cannot picture anyone being told that they must turn equipment in to be held by the council.  Think of the logistical nightmare of a council trying to store hundreds of trailers and thousands of tents, chuck boxes, etc.  Not to mention checking those items back out to units.  They would need several new full time employees just to begin to cope with things.

39 minutes ago, 1980Scouter said:

Does anyone know what is going on with the Catholic Church and their future with Scouting?

I know some dioceses ended the relationship but not all. I would think there will be a national guidance issued.

My hope is that they will see this model and work to offer a similar affiliate agreement rather than simply telling units that have a long tenure with their parish to go away.

 

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

Based on my tracking of the chat and Q&A, that's an empty hope, in terms of everyone taking this new path.

I am sure that some UMC chartered units will try to find a new CO, and I wish them luck in doing so if that is what they feel is best for their scouts.

Having read through the affiliation agreement I don't really see much of a change in day to day operations other than the fact that unit assets will belong to the council rather than the CO and that units will have to make changes to bank accounts using the council EIN rather than the CO's.

[PACAN]

@1980Scouter  The Catholic Church through the National Catholic Committee on Scouting continues to support the chartering of scout units (both Boys and Girls) in individual dioceses and parishes.  Of course they are free to choose not to or not to continue to charter.

 

@MikeS72  There is the assets question.   Will the individual UMC still allow storage of gear they don't control on their property?  Will that stuff be insured by the church?  If the trailer hits a car in the parking lot, do you sue the council?  Will be BSA as the sponsor rent a u-store it place for each unit they inherit.   Some units not only have trailers but some have their own motorboating and cabins.  On the cash side, LCs are at least 30 days in paying bills.  How does that work for unit expenses?  Collect the fees for campout food, deposit it with the council and send them the bill from the grocery store?   O the humanity!

[MikeS72]

1 hour ago, PACAN said:

There is the assets question.   Will the individual UMC still allow storage of gear they don't control on their property?  Will that stuff be insured by the church?  If the trailer hits a car in the parking lot, do you sue the council?  Will be BSA as the sponsor rent a u-store it place for each unit they inherit.   Some units not only have trailers but some have their own motorboating and cabins.  On the cash side, LCs are at least 30 days in paying bills.  How does that work for unit expenses?  Collect the fees for campout food, deposit it with the council and send them the bill from the grocery store?   O the humanity!

On page 3 of the agreement it states "Allow the unit(s) to store a reasonable amount of materials and equipment in a designated area."

On page 4 under the unit responsibilities it states "Reimburse the local council for cost of insuring unit's assets and equipment".  In the same section it states "Follow all local council policies and procedures regarding the management of funds.  For units specific bank accounts, units will submit annual finance report and other reporting as prescribed by the local council".

[MikeS72]

2 hours ago, PACAN said:

The Catholic Church through the National Catholic Committee on Scouting continues to support the chartering of scout units (both Boys and Girls) in individual dioceses and parishes.  Of course they are free to choose not to or not to continue to charter.

Units in our council have been told by the Diocese that they will no longer charter units.  I have seen this happen in a number of other areas as well.  Maybe local councils can re-open discussions with these Diocese using this as agreement as a model.

[PACAN]

#3 sounds great until they decide your reasonable definition is different than theirs.

#4  So the sponsor used to have insurance on the property they owned.  Now the council owns the property as the sponsor and the unit has to pay the council.  What a deal!  The unit will also have to pay the council for the annual audit of their accounts.  What another deal!  Maybe subtract these fees from FOS.

Proofs in the pudding.  Who has the agreement they could PM me?

Catholics....not managed like the UMC.  Dioceses are separate feifdoms.  Pastors have a lot of say on their own Parish's youth ministries.   A number of them dropped units when the gay decision was made and started trail life.

Given the almost 50% reduction in membership, I'm guessing a number of other sponsors have dropped their units as well.  Anyone seen a list of membership/units by sponsor.  Last one I saw was pre LDS. 

[MikeS72]

4 hours ago, PACAN said:

Proofs in the pudding.  Who has the agreement they could PM me?

Just sent it to you.

[GrammaScout]

6 hours ago, PACAN said:

#3 sounds great until they decide your reasonable definition is different than theirs.

#4  So the sponsor used to have insurance on the property they owned.  Now the council owns the property as the sponsor and the unit has to pay the council.  What a deal!  The unit will also have to pay the council for the annual audit of their accounts.  What another deal!  Maybe subtract these fees from FOS.

Proofs in the pudding.  Who has the agreement they could PM me?

Catholics....not managed like the UMC.  Dioceses are separate feifdoms.  Pastors have a lot of say on their own Parish's youth ministries.   A number of them dropped units when the gay decision was made and started trail life.

Given the almost 50% reduction in membership, I'm guessing a number of other sponsors have dropped their units as well.  Anyone seen a list of membership/units by sponsor.  Last one I saw was pre LDS. 

50% reduction in membership?.... You mean in the 'Catholic Church'?

 

[yknot]

13 hours ago, ThenNow said:

The insurance market has been hard for at least five years. It's not simply YSOs or high risk enterprises. Before he went to law school, my oldest son was in insurance. He managed a large farm and ranch book of business in TX. It was the same story. Same for healthcare. Those are the two I know pretty well, but my wife's work touches all aspects of coverage and I've heard her talk about the "hard market" for a good five years, for sure. Just a footnote.

I agree. I've mentioned that here before and often been scoffed at. Pretty much every kind of insurance I've worked with has been tightening for decades but it's gotten particularly bad in the last 10 years or so. There has been a particular change in the youth market though and we are starting to feel it. Apart from the UMC, in the past year we've had several private or commercial youth properties who used to allow scout access say scouts can no longer use their properties due to insurance. Scouts specifically, not other youth organizations. I think scouts may be in danger of becoming the equivalent of a dangerous dog breed in the youth insurance market.