Chapter 11 announced - Part 2 (after the big slow)

[Eagle1993]

30 minutes ago, T2Eagle said:

For those in the non revival states it's a lot more complicated.  There are several hundred claims attributable to my council (I forget the exact number), but my understanding is none of them are current, and for what may be within the current SOL we're insured and have reserves.  So any contribution we make is for the purposes of a) hedging against a future change in the law, b) a desire to do the right thing for folks who were injured, and c) a contribution to the well being of scouting nationwide because we believe scouting should be available to all American youth not just parochially.

To me, that is why the BSA should be open book and show how much each council will contribute.  If the low/no contributions are all coming from councils that are at low risk, perhaps that is acceptable.  Or, perhaps, those councils are left out of the settlement.  That way, the TCC is not removing future claims from councils with no payment in return.   I'm not sure if that is an option, but I think you hit the real issue in this case which may be why a settlement is extremely difficult if it includes protection for all councils.

[ThenNow]

50 minutes ago, T2Eagle said:

For those in the non revival states it's a lot more complicated.  There are several hundred claims attributable to my council (I forget the exact number), but my understanding is none of them are current, and for what may be within the current SOL we're insured and have reserves.  So any contribution we make is for the purposes of a) hedging against a future change in the law, b) a desire to do the right thing for folks who were injured, and c) a contribution to the well being of scouting nationwide because we believe scouting should be available to all American youth not just parochially.

I appreciate the commitment to be part of compensating  survivors through a global solution. As I've droned on about, I was surprised at the fractured position and voice from the Councils and BSA. Parochial is the perfect word. I know I was naive, but as a Scout I thought it was all for one, one for all. Top to bottom. Side to side. In retrospect, I mixed us up with the Mousekateers, I suppose. 

Edited April 5, 2021 by ThenNow

[Sentinel947]

11 hours ago, ThenNow said:

In the midst of it all, I found this interesting.

https://www.lanereport.com/139744/2021/03/nky-boy-scouts-chapter-lands-1-million-for-eagle-lodge/

That's my council. It'd been in the works for a while. They've been talking about doing this since at least 2012. The timing is unfortunate, but perhaps it will increase the value of the property if/when it has to be sold. 

[RememberSchiff]

I moved the last 20 hours of bankruptcy related content from Chapter 11 - announced which is now locked to start this new topic.

Please stay on topic. Thanks,

RS

@MattR  @John-in-KC

 

[Eagle1993]

Quote

 

This summer is the fortieth anniversary of the International Indian Treaty Conference at Many Point and perhaps we should join again. Certainly, the issues have not changed, and the camp is a scant 30 miles from the Enbridge Line 3 Pipeline. We will have to do a bit of coordinating, however, as this summer, in July of 2021, the Many Point Scout Camp will mark a 75th Anniversary and celebrate scouting. One can only hope that in this moment, they will also begin a new relationship with the Anishinaabe on whose land they camp.

Boy Scout land holdings are important, not only to Boy Scouts but to the people of Pine Point. And, nationally, Boy Scout land holdings represent a tangible asset which may be lost in bankruptcy court. That’s one of the reasons we are concerned.

 

https://thecirclenews.org/environment/the-boy-scouts-land-grabs-sexual-abuse-and-bankruptcy/

Native American News and Arts article ... a bit of everything ... but a big point that if Boy Scout Camps that were native lands have to be sold, they should be given back to Native people.  Example camp listed above.

[ThenNow]

29 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

https://thecirclenews.org/environment/the-boy-scouts-land-grabs-sexual-abuse-and-bankruptcy/

Native American News and Arts article ... a bit of everything ... but a big point that if Boy Scout Camps that were native lands have to be sold, they should be given back to Native people.  Example camp listed above.

Extremely interesting and well written piece. I would love to know the details of the land transfers, whether valid acquisition or dispossession, to whatever degree. I can only imagine how many camp properties have similar histories.  

[ThenNow]

16 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

To me, that is why the BSA should be open book and show how much each council will contribute.  If the low/no contributions are all coming from councils that are at low risk, perhaps that is acceptable.  Or, perhaps, those councils are left out of the settlement.  That way, the TCC is not removing future claims from councils with no payment in return.   I'm not sure if that is an option, but I think you hit the real issue in this case which may be why a settlement is extremely difficult if it includes protection for all councils.

From the outset, it's been my understanding that the BSA has been adamant that all LCs must be released at the end of the (bankruptcy) day. 

[fred8033]

@ThenNow wrote ... "I'm also baffled by the lack of strategic organizational, financial and risk management planning. With the number or high-level attorneys and professionals associated with the organization, what were they thinking? Also, what were they doing? This goes to YPT, too. (DavidCO - please don't get your waterboard.) This is personal and corporate tax, estate and legacy planning 101. Maybe 201. Put stuff in trust. Create holding companies. Install distance and buffer entities. Protect and sequester assets. Don't commingle. It sounds complicated, but it's not so much so that an organization like the BSA couldn't have a poop sheet to tell LCs how to do what...years ago. Just sayin'. They brought this on themselves with denial and a good deal of arrogance, imho. That relates to the asset scramble and the abuse cases. Fast and loose."

I agree on this.  Since 1990s, corporations have focused on cleaning up record tracking systems that can be used for legal fishing.  I've seen this personally in one of the companies I was in where a lawsuit was used to open records that then created a cascade of further legal issues.  ...  I was actually surprised that the ineligible volunteer files still existed.  I hugely believe it was a good intention from before society recognized the issues and started having the structures in place.  ... And a good intention to try to block bad volunteers that no one else is flagging as bad.  .... BUT, as shown now, it's also a huge liability that can be pulled into lawsuits for fishing.  ....  I really question the value of tracking 20+ year old incidents.  ...   When BSA adopted external background checks,  BSA should have let the background check system work as designed.  No legal issue?  No background trouble?  Then, it's up to the CO.  Sadly, the ineligible volunteer file probably would be a useful tool.  But it's also a massive liability.

[ThenNow]

30 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

I was actually surprised that the ineligible volunteer files still existed.  I hugely believe it was a good intention from before society recognized the issues and started having the structures in place.  ... And a good intention to try to block bad volunteers that no one else is flagging as bad. 

For what it's worth, I sent a letter to the BSA National and LC identifying my abuser by name and Troop number. I gave them a vague overview of the sexual abuse and my knowledge that I was not his only victim. That was in 2008. As of the filing of my claim last summer, they had no mention of him on any list whatsoever. None. I checked, rechecked, confirmed and reconfirmed that with them. I have a copy of the letter, of course.

Edited April 6, 2021 by ThenNow
Clarification

[fred8033]

15 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

For what it's worth, I sent a letter to the BSA National and LC identifying my abuser by name and Troop number. I gave them a vague overview of the sexual abuse and my knowledge that I was not his only victim. That was in 2008. As of the filing of my claim last summer, they had no mention of him on any list whatsoever. None. I checked, rechecked, confirmed and reconfirmed that with them. I have a copy of the letter, of course.

Sadly, that's probably the right course.  You were notified.  It should have gone to law enforcement at the time of the incident too.  By fellow leaders. By your family.  By someone.  I know there is a huge problem getting anyone even on the peripheral to report.  It's the nature of "oh, that person can't be that bad" or "I don't want to be involved" .or "I'm not sure".  ... Someone ... one of many ... should have reported it to the law.

But once SOLs have lapsed and people have moved on, any organization worth it's salt should purge old records.  

[T2Eagle]

11 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

For what it's worth, I sent a letter to the BSA identifying my abuser by name and Troop number. I gave them a vague overview of the sexual abuse and my knowledge that I was not his only victim. That was in 2008. As of the filing of my claim last summer, they had no mention of him on any list whatsoever. None. I checked, rechecked, confirmed and reconfirmed that with them. I have a copy of the letter, of course.

Out of curiosity, was your abuser still in scouting then?  I'm not sure what anyone could have done with that letter if he wasn't.  The ineligible files, as I understand them, were lists of people BSA or councils had taken some action against.  And I believe they stopped maintaining the lists as such prior to 2008.

[fred8033]

6 minutes ago, T2Eagle said:

... And I believe they stopped maintaining the lists as such prior to 2008.

Interesting point.  I think I've heard about that once before, but I don't remember all the details.  

[ThenNow]

42 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Sadly, that's probably the right course.  You were notified.  It should have gone to law enforcement at the time of the incident too.  By fellow leaders. By your family.  By someone.  I know there is a huge problem getting anyone even on the peripheral to report.  It's the nature of "oh, that person can't be that bad" or "I don't want to be involved" .or "I'm not sure".  ... Someone ... one of many ... should have reported it to the law.

But once SOLs have lapsed and people have moved on, any organization worth it's salt should purge old records.  

I'm not sure I understand. In light of cases and the IVF, you're saying my notice to them was rightly unacknowledged, purged and the name not recorded, either internally or with law enforcement? For clarification, they had no record of notifying law enforcement and neither National nor the LC gave me any indication they had received my letter. I have no reason to believe they did not. As others seem to be set on repeating, "It should have gone to law enforcement (etc.) at the time of the incident too," denies the well-established fact that most men find it nearly impossible to come forward well into their 40's. 

I failed to add, although they told me they had no record of him on any list or of notifying law enforcement, they did not do so last year because I told them I had in 2003.

Edited April 6, 2021 by ThenNow
Missing info and typo

[ThenNow]

11 minutes ago, T2Eagle said:

Out of curiosity, was your abuser still in scouting then?  I'm not sure what anyone could have done with that letter if he wasn't.  The ineligible files, as I understand them, were lists of people BSA or councils had taken some action against.  And I believe they stopped maintaining the lists as such prior to 2008.

I don't know and have not pursued it, other than to request rosters and volunteer history from the LC. There again, no reply whatsoever. CYA, I assumed

Well, that understanding is directly contradictory to what they told me when I emailed and called them last year. In fact, they apologized for not replying to my letter and not having his name on their internal list. The BSA folks I spoke with were the official representatives on such matters in the legal department. I even spoke with the person in charge of that department. Again, perhaps liability and bankruptcy CYA. 

[T2Eagle]

I was specifically referring to the Ineligible Volunteer files that were made public by court order back in 2012.  I'm sure they keep records on members against whom they've taken some action since then.  I'm just not sure how or whether they would keep allegations about someone  that they received years after that person was no longer a part of the organization.

If I understand correctly, you were a scout in the 70s.  Although it's possible, it's unlikely that your abuser remained in the organization for much past that time.  I'm not sure they would have any computerized record of his membership.  So when you sent a letter where would they record it?  Start a new record for him based on the letter?  Try to resurrect a paper file that's likely moldering in a warehouse somewhere?  I genuinely don't know what they would or could have done with it.