Chapter 11 announced - Part 3 - BSA's Toggle Plan

[CynicalScouter]

3 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

Any idea how long ago these statements were made?

Article is dated June 12, but who knows when the reporter spoke to them.

[fred8033]

On 6/11/2021 at 6:20 PM, ThenNow said:

As in, they “know” practically, but not technically? The way I read both excerpts from old Charter agreements and cases, the COs signed up to be the responsible party on the ground with each Unit. The breadth of their responsibilities seemed pretty inclusive. As I said, what was demonstrated in my Scouting experienced looked nothing like what I have seen described in the documents. Am I understanding you correctly?

Current events demonstrate the importance of having documents match reality.  

Yes.  The charter org agreement did not match expectations.  Now, it's an issue.  The COs knew.  The unit leaders knew.  The councils knew.  BSA knew.  Most parents knew.  ... Maybe less involved parents didn't think about it, but anyone attending committee meetings or campouts quickly saw a lack of CO involvement.  Those signing just didn't think the CO had the level of responsibility now attributed to it.  ... The charter agreement was more a promotional tool to increase CO involvement and not really a contract describing responsibilities.  

Now it's being used to argue a higher level of involvement and responsibility than was expected.  So, it's important to have documents match reality.  It's why I'm suggesting our CO move to a facility use agreement instead of a charter org agreement.  

I'm just asserting current legal attributions don't match what people were expecting.  

 

[MattR]

14 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

Article is dated June 12, but who knows when the reporter spoke to them.

And how do we know it's an article? Please delineate other's content. It doesn't have to be real rigorous with citations and all, but at least use some quotes. It helps readers. 

[CynicalScouter]

6 minutes ago, MattR said:

And how do we know it's an article

Because I linked to it from a news source (Buffalo News) and cut and paste verbatim the quotes from the council leaders (subhead: What local councils say)? https://buffalonews.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/boy-scout-bankruptcy-may-cost-wny-councils-but-no-one-knows-how-much/article_423b0c22-c95c-11eb-9f7a-6baef6e7c10a.html

[ThenNow]

5 hours ago, fred8033 said:

The charter agreement was more a promotional tool to increase CO involvement and not really a contract describing responsibilities.  

Would you explain what you mean by this, please? How was the agreement a promo tool, given that it was an agreement? I'm not poking, just asking to understand how it was perceived by all the parties.

5 hours ago, fred8033 said:

Now it's being used to argue a higher level of involvement and responsibility than was expected. 

Yeah. To your point, if if the words on the page say something different than what you're being told or what someone "expects," better opt not to sign or modify the language. Famous last words: "It's not that important. Just sign it. We all know what we mean. No one cares about these anyway. They just go in drawer somewhere..."

[CynicalScouter]

15 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

"It's not that important. Just sign it. We all know what we mean. No one cares about these anyway. They just go in drawer somewhere..."

This, times literally several billion. COs that were told, or felt, they were just signing something annually for giggles are in for a very rude awakening. But there are levels to this:

1) LDS. They operated BSA units directly and operationally as subunits of their church. Responsibility goes all the way to the top, which is why lawsuits against scout abuse in LDS units include "Corporation Of The President Of The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints" as well as "Corporation Of The Presiding Bishop Of The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints" in their suits.

2) Smaller collectives. The Methodist Churches are appearing together as an ad hoc group. Several dioceses are appearing on behalf of themselves/their parishes, but not the VFW or other national groups.

3) Individual units. So, to take a random example, my local district has units chartered by a Methodist church (90+ years), a Lutheran church (10-15?), and a Catholic church (10-15?). The Methodist church to my knowledge has no abuse allegations against, neither do the others. But if they did, would they even know what is happening to them? The Methodist unit would be covered by the ad hoc group maybe but that's a guess. That's where, when they talk about CO contributions, it is going to be forever to parse out individual Rotary clubs, VFW halls, etc.

That's why I thought it notable last week/week before when the mediators report indicated "a chartered organization" was part of the mediation. Reading between the lines I guessed that had to mean the LDS Church.

Edited June 14, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[ThenNow]

1 hour ago, CynicalScouter said:

That's why I thought it notable last week/week before when the mediators report indicated "a chartered organization" was part of the mediation.

Thanks.

When I brought up the Catholic churches waaay back when, someone was quick to say the case is on the radar of most Dioceses. Still not sure of that. Perhaps that poster knows a good bit more than my small morsels. I don't understand why RCC and the Methodist churches wouldn't have pressed harder to be at the table. Again, I don't know fer nuttin. 

Edited June 14, 2021 by ThenNow

[qwazse]

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

Would you explain what you mean by this, please? How was the agreement a promo tool, given that it was an agreement? I'm not poking, just asking to understand how it was perceived by all the parties. ...

In terms of promotion, charter certificates were often framed and placed on an institution's wall. It was (and for many organizations, continues to be) an honor to host a scout unit. Many people found out about scouting because they saw scouts doing good works in their building. Where I grew up, the scout's meeting times were in the church bulletin. Chartering a scout unit was (and continues to be) one way of showing you are doing good in your community.

When it comes to actually pursuing CO's, it seems that there will be no one-size-fits-all. A CO could be a group of parents who coalesced to form "Friends of Pack ABC." It's difficult to say what you could sue them for if no victim comes forward from that unit. How would they be liable for abuse that happened in another unit? Would any personal coverage they may have apply to this? A denomination, on the other hand, may have liability coverage. I would not be surprised if it traces back to the same insurers who backed BSA's coverage. The appeal for their funds would take a much different form.

[CynicalScouter]

12 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Still not sure of that.

It is, and several dioceses have intervened. BUT part of this is figuring out that the Dioceses are not about to come in like the Methodists and LDS did as a unified front (Methodists) or a single entity (LDS). Each diocese will decide for itself if it is worth it to come in now or to wait and see what happens.

[ThenNow]

31 minutes ago, qwazse said:

It's difficult to say what you could sue them for if no victim comes forward from that unit.

I realize this is not in the universe of the data set, but I'm curious if "we" will ever know how the claims break out all the way down to the Unit level. 

Note: I realize the BSA has proposed a multiplier be applied to claims where an abuser perpetrated against more than one Scout. That will at least signal some sense of a number to those of us who don't know how many he violated in our Unit. I know there have to be at least 6 in mine.

Edited June 14, 2021 by ThenNow

[ThenNow]

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

I realize this is not in the universe of the data set, but I'm curious if "we" will ever know how the claims break out all the way down to the Unit level. 

Note: I realize the BSA has proposed a multiplier be applied to claims where an abuser perpetrated against more than one Scout. That will at least signal some sense of a number to those of us who don't know how many he violated in our Unit. I know there have to be at least 6 in mine.

Ha. Looks like a did a fair amount of "realizing" this morning. Must of been the new brand of coffee. I'll drink a few additional cups tomorrow and see if I can ascend to epiphanies.  

[Eagle1993]

2 hours ago, ThenNow said:

I realize this is not in the universe of the data set, but I'm curious if "we" will ever know how the claims break out all the way down to the Unit level. 

 

It could depend if they show by individual CO.  While there are large groups of COs, typically each local CO is a single unit (for example, xyz Elks Club would mean 1 unit).  

Kosnoff is making it clear that in addition to national BSA, local councils and insurance companies, he is looking at suing the BSA legal team for malpractice (I guess that they spent too much and some of the fees should go into the trust) AND every CO he can.  He just mentioned ... "large and small churches, civic orgs, VFWs, Elks, Eagles, PTA's ad infintum."

So ... if this is shown at the individual CO level, that essentially gives you the unit look as well. 

[fred8033]

5 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

This, times literally several billion. COs that were told, or felt, they were just signing something annually for giggles are in for a very rude awakening. But there are levels to this:

1) LDS. They operated BSA units directly and operationally as subunits of their church. Responsibility goes all the way to the top, which is why lawsuits against scout abuse in LDS units include "Corporation Of The President Of The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints" as well as "Corporation Of The Presiding Bishop Of The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints" in their suits.

2) Smaller collectives. The Methodist Churches are appearing together as an ad hoc group. Several dioceses are appearing on behalf of themselves/their parishes, but not the VFW or other national groups.

3) Individual units. So, to take a random example, my local district has units chartered by a Methodist church (90+ years), a Lutheran church (10-15?), and a Catholic church (10-15?). The Methodist church to my knowledge has no abuse allegations against, neither do the others. But if they did, would they even know what is happening to them? The Methodist unit would be covered by the ad hoc group maybe but that's a guess. That's where, when they talk about CO contributions, it is going to be forever to parse out individual Rotary clubs, VFW halls, etc.

That's why I thought it notable last week/week before when the mediators report indicated "a chartered organization" was part of the mediation. Reading between the lines I guessed that had to mean the LDS Church.

Per #1  LDS always had a special and unique relationship with scouting.  It almost needs to be discussed separately.  

Per #2  Smaller collectives ... I've never really seen that.  I don't think it exists.  From what I've seen ... outside LDS ... I've not seen any hint of a faith based national org that knows which churches (or school districts or elementary schools) host scouting units.  ... if anything, national level faith oriented scouting groups were more about disseminating info and providing options for faith specific pursuits. "if your church hosts a scouting unit, consider *******"

Per #3   Yep.

[ThenNow]

2 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

It could depend if they show by individual CO.  While there are large groups of COs, typically each local CO is a single unit (for example, xyz Elks Club would mean 1 unit).  

Trying to get my head around how anyone will wrangle that many COs at any macro level, when doing it with several hundred LCs has been the cat roping rodeo of the decade. 

[yknot]

3 hours ago, ThenNow said:

Trying to get my head around how anyone will wrangle that many COs at any macro level, when doing it with several hundred LCs has been the cat roping rodeo of the decade. 

I have wondered that as well. However, while many COs are poor, many are rich so I guess it would be worth it to drill down to that level in the long run. But that would take so much time.