A District Court judge issued a decision on Wednesday to dismiss the lawsuit against the Inland Northwest Council of Boy Scouts, which had aimed to halt the proposed exchange of a historic Boy Scout camp for a new one and a $2.5 million endowment.

Judge John Luster's decision deemed there is no charitable trust requiring that Camp Easton remain a camp forever, which allows the INC to pursue a land exchange that would turn the property over to a luxury developer.

"The dismissal of the lawsuit clears the way for the (INC) executive board to do what it's supposed to do, look at what's best for the youth and what's going to provide the strongest programs," said Tim McCandless, INC scout executive.

The plaintiffs behind the suit, including two boy scouts, a charitable foundation and nonprofit Camp Easton Forever, Inc., had requested the court issue an injunction preventing the sale or transfer of Camp Easton, under the argument that the land was preserved in a charitable trust.

Luster's decision states that plaintiffs Camp Easton Forever, Inc., and the two boy scouts lacked standing to file the suit.

They did not face "immediate or threatened injury" as a result of a transfer or sale, which is required for standing, Luster pointed out.

Sale or trade of Camp Easton "is at best a generalized grievance," he wrote, noting there is no asserted loss of money or property for members of Camp Easton Forever.

The group members wouldn't be injured any more than camp neighbors and former camp donors, "if the sale or land trade is an injury at all," the judge stated.

He also noted that though the plaintiffs presented scouts Daniel and Matthew Edwards as representatives of scouts as a whole, the plaintiffs did not certify the boys as representatives of a putative class.

As a result, the boys also have no standing to proceed, Luster deemed.

He also found there is no charitable trust for the camp.

F.W. Fitze, the donor of the original camp property, did reveal his intention in a 1929 meeting for the land to be used in perpetuity as a scout camp, Luster acknowledged, according to the meeting minutes.

But "nowhere in the deed is a trust mentioned," Luster wrote.

The minutes are barred from being considered as evidence, he stated, by the doctrine of merger. Also, Fitze did not sign the minutes.

The deed only transfers fee simple title to the Idaho Panhandle Council of Boy Scouts.

"This language is unambiguous, and not subject to more than one reasonable interpretation," Luster wrote. "The deed is silent as to any other agreement of the parties."

Luster also found the unjust enrichment claim from charitable foundation Shikar Safari Club is barred, and that its fraud claim is not supported.

The organization had joined the lawsuit because it recently donated $45,000 in grant money for improvements to the current Camp Easton, without INC indicating a potential land exchange.

"The plaintiffs provided no evidence in support of their claim on each of the elements of fraud," Luster wrote.

Attorney Jeff Crandall, representing Camp Easton Forever, said the plaintiffs and their legal representatives will review the decision before choosing whether to appeal.

"It's unfortunate for this community, because it's not what the Fitzes intended when they donated the property," Crandall said of Luster's decision. "I think the community should be outraged."

Arizona developer Discovery Land Company has proposed acquiring the Camp Easton property on Lake Coeur d'Alene from the INC, in exchange for purchasing property at Sunup Bay, building a new camp there and providing a $2.5 million endowment for maintenance of camps.

McCandless confirmed that after investigating Discovery's background and current status, the INC will proceed with discussing the terms for a new camp.

"We wouldn't continue to go into discussions at this point if we didn't think they were fully capable of doing everything that's being proposed," McCandless said.