Eagle1993

Here is the Cub Scout carve out: Cub Scout Programs (Overnight): Cub Scout parents or legal guardians taking part in an overnight program with their own child are not required to register as leaders but must review the BSA’s Barriers to Abuse with a unit leader before the activity. Cub Scout youth can only attend with and must be supervised by their own parent or legal guardian at all times, or a registered adult member of the BSA who is attending with their child. A registered leader must be present at any time the parent or legal guardian is with other youth members other than their own

Agreed. It was hard enough to copy over the primary language. I recommend reviewing the entire document.

I think this has been discussed enough here. In addition, we actually now have the updated YPT proposal in a different thread, so shutting this one down to prevent confusion.

Based on my read, the LC contribution remains unchanged, other than this: Contributing Chartered Organization Settlement Contribution shall no longer result in the Other Chartered Organizations becoming Contributing Chartered Organizations under the Plan. The $15 million cash component of the Supplemental LC Contribution and the $25 million increase in the DST Note shall both be reallocated and become the consideration given for the extension of the preliminary injunction. The $100 million Settlement Growth Payment from the BSA and Local Councils shall facilitate the protections to certai

FYI ... I created a separate topic about YPT changes as those could drive a lot of discussions. SCOUTER Forum

I thought this deserved a dedicated topic. See changes below. Note that this is a long post, but wanted to include all of the changes as they are extensive. Non-Monetary Commitments. The BSA will not compromise the safety of our youth, volunteers, and employees. We are all responsible and must hold each other accountable to provide a safe environment for all participants. Safety is a value that must be taught and reinforced at every opportunity and nothing is more important than protecting our Scouts from abuse. BSA is dedicated to becoming the Gold Standard in abuse prevention. Because

The Roman Catholic Church was very upset during the past couple of hearings. The UMC and LDS didn't sign onto this updated plan. I'll have to read this more later, but I think the BSA had to make a decision. Save national & LCs and allow COs to get hit harder than the initial plan. I would not be surprised to see many COs leave the program. BSA should get ready for a new way to charter units. Just my guess after reading through this once and seeing the Roman Catholic Church committee lawyer at a hearing. To be fair, there is still a path for COs to settle, but it involves th

Prof. Jacoby (@melissabjacoby) / Twitter has a tweet thread about this update. Basically, there are still non-consensual non debtor releases. She concludes: That is the big question. It is key that Zalkin & TCC are on board, and it should push acceptance to >>75%. However, major hurdles to clear and I don't think many if any of the Trustee's objections have been addressed.

If a claimant goes through the neutral party analysis, the assign away their rights to sue a CO and it looks like the trust can then sue that CO and its insurance company. I'll need to read this 12 times to even start to understand it .... but it really appears that COs, who are liable, could have their insurance pulled in. I can see why they did not sign on. Note that if a CO rejects this plan, it appears they lose protection even post 1976 ... but still reading through this.

BSA, TCC, FCR, Coalition, Ad Hoc LC Committee, Pfau/Zalkin reached agreement on this term sheet. Please note that the CO Committees were not listed. Other state court counsels also agree. Link Here Pfau/Zalkin & state court counsels will attempt to get their clients to change votes from Reject to Accept. Changes to many sections (note this is current list/understanding, will clarify more in comments): Definition of abuse claim and addition of a new "mixed claim" where mixed claims are claims of abuse in and out of scouting against an entity. Update to Trust Di

Locking to start update topic. New topic here: SCOUTER Forum

TCC just filed an objection under seal. Based on the title it is about the value of abuse claims.

I wouldn't. They said this was signed in 1991. It was probably paper and put away in a filing cabinet. The individuals who were involved are likely dead or long retired. BSA has been pretty clear as to restricted vs unrestricted property. My guess is that this is a surprise. Also, the objectors could be wrong.

I was at Klondike this past weekend and am extremely pessimistic about our future. The energy I see across Troops and patrols is dying. The number of participants down ... Flat to our Covid one. Our Troop had 3 patrols, most had 2 or 1. Girls seem to be on the decline... only 1 full girl patrol and they are all getting old. I know recruiting went well vs Covid, but many Troops seem to be barely holding on. My Troop of 44 only had 2 scouts camp overnight. More were signed up but had adults present drive them home for various reasons. 3 years ago we had 35 camp out. 3 years a

It's late on the 9th. No objections from the TCC or any updates really from mediation parties. The only mediation party that objected is the Roman Catholic Church. No updated plan. Status conference in about 40 hours.

There appears to be two points. The copyright and the actual paintings. It would be interesting if the agreement clearly stated dual ownership of the paintings vs just the copyright to reprint.

More objections are coming in. Sounds like they are due in 15 mins. a6eadea4-101c-4c41-b171-e4659b3d8f08_8748.pdf (omniagentsolutions.com) I found the above interesting. This is a claim that BSA does not own the Norman Rockwell artwork and therefore, cannot give it to the trust.

I doubt it. BSA only would mean a few hundred million in the trust vs billions. Now could it be where only some LCs and COs are covered ... Sure. It may go that way, but probably only as part of a cramdown. BSA had said they would have an update on the docket last week. As of this morning... Silence. Today is the day the TCC must submit their objection. So, I think expect we will see something from the BSA today (plus the hearing is Friday). My only thought is that they are working through the US Trustee's objections be to see what they can address in the update.

BSA entered bankruptcy in order to ensure it can survive long term while addressing debts that exceed their ability to pay. That is why any organization would enter bankruptcy. I agree there is a chance BSA wasted a ton of money on legal fees. As of the end of December they spent $150M on this case. If they are not able to get the nondebtor releases, that is in part due to timing (Purdue pharma came in late), in part due to the loose nature of the laws, in part due to their legal team (perhaps) and in part due to the Judge. I think there will be plenty of blame to go around. I am

The Guam objection was interesting as one of the rules is basically you need the non debtors to be included in the plan as it is critical to the bankruptcy exit plan. They pointed out that the BSA already created a toggle plan that shows they can emerge without any non debtors included so it is not critical and therefore why are non debtors even here? While the TCC may settle, there are many groups with very strong state cases against COs and in some cases LCs. I don't see them accepting anything that allows non debtors to be included (unless they give a ton of money and it is directed

The US Trustee opened up their objection with a statement that they know this is complex and a difficult situation. They know everyone was working hard on a resolution including debtors and insurance companies. However, they need to object. It reminded me a bit of the ending of Old Yeller ... it was their responsibility to recommend stopping the plan. After reading most of the obection. Overall the DOJ/US Trustee states: Non Debtor releases not allowed by constitution Non debtor releases only allowed for asbestos in bankruptcy law (if they wanted them for other groups, Con

Agreed. The will probably dump a placeholder like Zuckerman just in case.

In Zukerman's objection they state the BSA gave email permission to submit objections until Feb 7 at 4pm. They also state the TCC has been given permission to submit their objection as late as Feb 9. They said the delay is due to updates to the plan that should capture more claimants including possibly the TCC. Zuckerman isn't included in mediation so they said they have no idea what the changes are and put in the objection as a placeholder.

Ah ... clarity. The deadline was extended now until Feb 7 at 4PM for some parties. TCC was granted an extension until Feb 9th.