Eagle1993

56 minutes ago, T2Eagle said:

My totally uninformed guess, is that the current plan, with maybe some slight non-monetary tweaks that come out of mediation, gets approved.  Mostly because no other alternative seems viable.

The issue is that the Judge cannot invent/modify laws because there is no other alternate plan.  There is always options of National only or consensual nondebtor releases.  

She was clear that she will evaluate statuary aspects of the plan, releases and injunctions.  She previously said she had concerns and marked up sections.  DOJ was clear that this plan is non confirmable ... it violates law.  TCC has also been clear it violates law. 

The changes could be substantial and impact settlement amounts.  

While possible, I find it highly unlikley the current plan is approved.  I do look forward to seeing the update later this week (perhaps in the form of a RSA).

Note that even if TCC & most claimants join in (for example, Purdue had 95%) there is risk with including nonconsensual nondebtor releases.  The only way to avoid fully is making them consensual.  Otherwise, this will be risky (which may be necessary).

Really good input.  I am very concerned about the debt load that BSA will face post bankruptcy that will continue to drive costs higher.  

In my school district, I attended the Girl Scout recruiting event for my daughter when she was in K5.

• Cost - $25 ... no unit fee.  When the council person was asked about fees, they said they are MUCH cheaper than Cub Scouts and everyone laughed (this was before the more recent BSA fee increases)
• Uniform Cost - $20
• Patches ... very cheap
• Fundraising ... they ask but no requirement to sell cookies (easy to sell)
• Minimum to start $45
• Volunteer requests .. only to help your grade, no "pack or committee type roles, only 2 parents needed"

Now BSA approaching a Cub Scout

• $25 New member fee
• $72 for following year + $18 for remaining year ($90)
• $50 Pack fee
• $7 Council Fee
• ~$40 Uniform Cost
• Fundraising ... ask to sell popcorn, no requirement (not too bad to sell, but much tougher than cookies)
• Oh ... and surprise fundraising ... FOS request
• More volunteer overhead (committee, COR, Pack) ... some benefit but also more overhead
• Minimum to start $212

Unfortunately, the volunteer overhead and increasing costs will hurt Cub Scout recruiting vs past efforts.  Now, I do think a great national voice (think Bear Grills) that could generate natural excitement in scouting could help ... but has been absent from BSA for decades.

With Cub Scouts not keeping up, Scouts BSA will start declining as well.  As numbers decline and debt is high, fees will continue to rise.  To me, that is the death spiral for BSA.

How to avoid this?  

#1 ... Clarify mission, aims, etc.  What role does scouting fill in the 21st century.  Do parents and society agree that is a need.  Personally, I think BSA's mission is good, but they need to really be introspective and agree.  This could go from uniform through STEM.  Evaluate it all.

#2 ... Cut EVERYTHING that doesn't fit that mission.  Spin off or end projects/side gigs, etc. that do not align to that mission.

#3 ... Hire young, energetic leaders at the National Level that are active, communicate well at various forms of media, etc.  Generate a national excitement in scouting and the values it provides.

#4 ... Cut overhead costs aggressively.  Merge councils, consolidate IT, etc.  

#5 ... Spend MORE in areas that directly touch units.

#6 ... Invest in volunteers.  Free training.  Go after the 18 - 30 year olds (before they are parents) .. have them lead Packs, Troops, etc.

#7 ... Be aggressive on directing scouts to "good units" and help strengthen them vs just adding more units.

I'm sure there are many others.  BSA can thrive; however, I am a bit pessimistic based on our current state and National leaders.  

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

How to avoid getting Purdued? Increase the “accept” vote tally and get more money from third-party non-debtors. 

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/bankruptcy-law/sacklers-states-near-bigger-purdue-pharma-opioid-settlement

I didn't get the sense that the amount of money was the issue.  The issue is that if there is nothing in bankruptcy code that specifically allows nonconsensual releases of non debtors.  There is also a constitutional question (Article I courts vs Article 3 courts).

My understanding and will definitely welcome input.

In terms of the constitution, the Supreme Court is the only federal court established by the Constitution.  Based on the Constitutional Convention, the SC determined that Congress can establish courts under Article III with judicial powers and Article I with legislative powers (regulatory).  Bankruptcy courts fall under Article I.  Their judges are not lifetime appointments (vs Article III which are lifetime).  One concern raised is that Article I courts cannot take on Article III duties.  So, when non debtors get non consensual releases, an Article I court is abusing their constitutional authority over Article III courts.  This part will likely go to the Supreme Court.  

The other aspect of Purdue, which apparently is the bigger deal, is that since there is no statutory basis for a bankruptcy court to approve a release of such claims.  Basically, bankruptcy courts cannot invent the ability to include powers they were not given.

It sounds like the 3rd circuit believes the constitutional powers are there but haven't ruled on the statutory issue.  I guess I wonder if the real issue is that if someone rejects the plan, they should still have the right to sue non debtors (so the plan is only for individuals who accept it).

Some, perhaps including the DOJ, seemed to think this is a waste of time.  It definitely seems like they are headed to plan confirmation.  If the plan changes greatly, I expect it will have to go out to vote again.  

In terms of beating a dead horse ... the reality is that the judge has not really ruled on any element of the plan.  So, the plan is not dead and her rulings will help (hopefully) provide more guidance to get to a plan that can be confirmed.

Given how long each vote will take (and the expense) I expect BSA and others would like the next plan to be approved ... they don't want to keep iterating.

Just now, ThenNow said:

It was a joint statement approved by the mediator, all parties and read into the record without commentary from other parties or questions from JLSS. 

Including the TCC?  The sides were so far apart on financials and structure of the plan.

Looks like I missed a key update.  Sounds like we may see an updated plan later this week.  Will be interesting if it is a tweak (like $100M more) or a more significant change.

Boy Scouts lawyer touts ‘significant progress’ towards sex-abuse settlement | Reuters

A lot of back and forth on discovery & depositions today.  I wasn't following too closely; however, I listened closely to the judge & DOJ.

1) DOJ rep said that they have no opinion on the back and forth as in reality the plan is going to fail anyway.  He went on a bit, but afterward the judge said thank you and no one said anything else.  I was a bit surprised how confident he was that this plan is dead.

2) The judge said she has multiple jobs to do during confirmation.  That includes the settlement, the releases and the channeling injunctions.  Each of those have different statues they must meet.  

BSA lawyers wanted to know how many days in a row they could meet for planning purposes.  It sounds like they are planning into March.

My takeaway ... everyone knows this plan is going to fail; however, how it fails is going to be key.  She could indicate the channeling injunctions are the issue or perhaps some aspect of the releases, etc.  

She stated again, she is not going to delay any dates going forward.  She needs to make rulings to allow the various parties to get to a final plan. - My opinion on why she is not allowing any movement on dates/timelines.

I was expecting someone to speak up with the DOJ made that statement, but all I saw were a few grim faces and a thank you.

I think it will depend on what they do post bankruptcy more than what they do during bankruptcy.  If they don't change course and keep going down their current path, I expect they back in bankruptcy court in 5-10 years and they will lose most of their properties.  I don't see them fading away fully ever, but they could become a very small group <0.5% of all youth and perhaps <1% of boys.

2 minutes ago, DuctTape said:

 Thus, I recommend using wood fire whenever possible and legal. 

Yes, propane camping gas, which is mostly butane. 

Agreed ... but typically at Klondike our time (and number of fire areas) are typically limited.  Traditionally we haven't been able to have fires outside of 1 fire pit (with 3-4 patrols total).

We do have adults handle the white gas stoves.

"We are staring down a confirmation hearing with no final settlement agreements." - TCC

Judge said thank you.... interesting.

Feb 22 will be full day, Feb 23 will break at 1, Feb 24 full, Feb 28 already has conflict ... so no hearing the 28th.  Attempting to understand how many days in a row they can go.  Given # of witnesses listed, need to know if they are all going to be called.  

DOJ - no position on motion.  However, DOJ says all of today assumes plan will be confirmed and it will not.

Break in hearing (I missed the first 50 mins or so and am only partially listening.

There are dogs barking, people talking now in the background.  Sounds like a "good dog".  Now a baby crying.  

Clearly CO's have been concerned that their insurance is protected.  They have other non scouting risks they need that insurance for.  The insurance companies likely want to say it is being used without openly saying it is ...

Will be interesting to see what the judge decides.

Very upset lawyer today from Roman Catholic Church.  Basically, they are saying insurers are using their (the church's) policies to pay for the settlement.  He said ... just say they are not being used and they are fine and insurance companies are refusing to say that.  

Also, several insurance companies said the term sheets of their settlements are not final due to movement in mediation.  They can't be specific on changes.

Insurers stated it is unclear on number of chartered orgs involved.  Range is from 40,000 to 100,000 organizations.

One other point that I didn't see mentioned.  Propane performance degrades a lot as temps drop below 20F.  We typically use white gas stoves for Klondike.  However, we found a trick where you heat a pot of water on a white gas stove (not boiling, just warm).  Then, place your propane tank(s) in that pot to use the other stoves.  It works, but we found just using white gas easier (and probably a bit safer) than putting tanks of propane in warm water.

To be fair, I think only 1 person really has a good understanding of what is about to happen ... and she does not work for the BSA.  BSA, TCC, and other lawyers may have some guesses where this is headed and they are probably well informed.  I expect the Ad Hoc committee is probably updated.

Now, as you go further out, less and less is known.  Perhaps a few senior leaders of each council are updated, but even then, what they are told is probably limited.  

So, what is known outside a very limited group isn't much.  There is a proposed plan.  If it is approved as is, then councils are protected.  If it is not, then who knows.  If I had a claim against a council, I would file a lawsuit now just in case the bankruptcy falls through (or perhaps hoping it falls through).

We will know a LOT more in late Feb/March. 

If brought up during FOS, I would deflect to the DE (who will likely deflect upwards).

Personally, I plan to contribute again.  Yes, there is a fair chance my contribution this year may go to lawyers or payouts, but I've spent money on worse things.

Already a lot of great tips.  A few more.

1) Go to the bathroom before going to bed.  If you end up waking up as you have to go to the bathroom, just head out and deal with it.  Yes, you will get cold for a short time, but your body will use energy holding it in otherwise.

2) This was mentioned and is really key.  We tell our scouts to completely change their clothes before going to bed.   They may be moist with sweat otherwise, so changing into dry clothes is key.

3) Pack clothing in large zip lock bags ... to keep them dry.

4) Open up boots/laces as they may freeze overnight.  Once you put your foot in and lace them back up, they will warm up.  Also, protect them from snow (don't keep them outside).

Finally, we tell scouts to not worry about light packing.  We don't do backpack camping in 0 degree weather.  (Some Troops may, but we stick to car camping).  So, pack heavy, bring a lot of socks, gloves and hats.  Bring good boots (not tennis shoes).  Don't wear jeans.  

Klondike is our Troop's favorite activity ... it is great if you are prepared.

1 hour ago, vol_scouter said:

Some councils might be beyond resuscitation, especially after they pay into the trust (should that happen).  In general, I think that the energy should be around making existing councils better rather than the contentious process of mergers.  

There is definitely a balance. Too large of a council, you lose connection with the variety of areas you serve.  Too small of a council, you cannot have sufficient staff to specialize in all the areas councils are expected to function (program, camps, fundraising, training, HR/legal, etc.

Given the massive debt and severe financial distress BSA (and councils) are facing post bankruptcy, I think the only way to survival is mergers.  Having a bunch of financially weak councils with camps falling into disrepair, lack of programs, limited money for PR/recruiting, etc. will lead to collapse.  

I think large councils while keeping local districts would be the right mix.  It will allow pooling of resources centrally to manage back office items (such as HR/IT) efficiently while still ensuring program offerings meet local scouts.

BSA can encourage this by increasing the fee it charges councils to charter.  If they start charging $50K or $100K per council per year (to help pay off their own massive debt), councils will naturally seek out mergers to spread that fee across more scouts. 

In my state, there are 3 GSUSA councils but 10 BSA councils.  You can tell the difference in terms of PR, marketing, IT, media, camps, programs, etc.  My daughter has far more options presented to her from GSUSA than my son in BSA.  The website, registration tools, camp guides, camp offerings are better in GSUSA than BSA in my area.  GSUSA is far from perfect, but I have seen the other side of council size and see some significant benefits.

Minor updates to plan

df1f7288-a10b-4167-94ec-63699a871e04_8567.pdf (omniagentsolutions.com)

The interesting section is where councils have changed contributions (look at the blackline).  For example, Denver is now contributing $6M of cash vs a $6M property.  Other councils lowered cash and added property (Heart of New England, Northeast Illinois, etc.).

The reality is that BSA has far too many councils.   Just as they restructured regions and areas they will need to cut councils down.  
 

I have no issue paying a SE a large amount if he/she does a great job and grow scouting in their area.  I get emails from several different councils.  From the program offerings to the user experience of the message parents see vastly different versions of BSA.  Hopefully when there are mergers, BSA identifies the well run councils and has them take over some of their neighbors. 

7 minutes ago, 1980Scouter said:

If they need another year to get through this, have LC's kick in just enough to keep them going. LC's (most) have the money.

National will:

1. Never declare Chapter 7
2. Never sell Philmont, Summit or major trademarks

Outside of that, I see everything else on the table.  So, yes, I could see National sending out a "request" to create a LC wide note to help fund National if needed. 

However, I think even this will be avoided.  Their artwork alone would probably get them until mid 2023.  

One point that keeps coming up in the bankruptcy is BSA's financial situation.  BSA lawyers have recently stated they may need to start selling assets (oil leases, art work, etc.) to keep going.  These threats have been made from time to time.

I took a look at the financials posted since the beginning of bankruptcy and below is the total net unrestricted liquidity BSA lists. 

So, when will BSA run into trouble.

• $66M of these assets appear to be retirement benefits that are invested.  While unrestricted, I don't think BSA can really touch those to keep operating.
• I believe BSA is saying they need at least $30M to operate.  That probably allows them to deal with the cash flow changes during the year.
• So, lets assume BSA does not want to drop below $100M of net liquidity and if they do, they would need to look at selling assets to build up their liquidity.  

One pattern I have seen is that BSA liquidity is fairly stable between August and May and drops substantially between May and August.

See below in terms of asset changes ($M).  As you can see, $77M of loss between May and August of 2020 and 2021 and $15M of loss for the other 12 months since bankruptcy.  

So ... based on this, when will BSA hit that $100M limit?

Well ... they were at $142M in August 2021.  Let's assume they lose that $16M again so May 2022 they will be at $126M.  After that ... BSA starts running into trouble.  Why?  Those next three months BSA will see major negative cash flow.  If 2022 is similar to 2021, they would end up in August 2022 at ~$94M ($66M of that is retirement).

My guess ... if BSA does not see a clear line of site of bankruptcy exit by ~June ... they will need to start selling some assets.  

Another hearing scheduled, Feb 1.

42aeca4c-d1b6-462c-b8ba-bcd220071581_8487.pdf (omniagentsolutions.com)

This is BSA vs Roman Catholic Church & Century vs Roman Catholic Church (Ad Hoc Committee).

Basically, disagreements on deposition requests.

Just now, MYCVAStory said:

The article is over four years old.  While it hints at her feelings re third-party releases it's a hint at the bankruptcy landscape THEN.  Recent decisions invalidating third-party releases and anticipated appeals moving higher and higher suggest that she would have reason for different feelings now.  As well, she did say from teh bench that her Millenium decision should NOT be taken to apply to this case necessarily.

I was looking for that quote ... but yes, a lawyer quoted her Millenium decision and she said something like "don't quote me to me".  She also said her Millenium was different than what she will need to rule on in this case. 

She has a history of approving non-debtors and approved this RSA.  On the flip side the other district decisions have come out since the RSA + she has made comments about concerns, markups and how Millenium doesn't fully apply here.  

At least with the hearing, we will know where she stands with respect to the plan and objections.  She mentioned speed is critical right now in this case, so I expect her to clear the way to Feb 22.  Even if the current plan is not confirmed it should help get everyone on the same page where changes are required and the process to get it confirmed.

2 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

How do you define “best”?

I guess the few times I listened in to hearings, seeing them on the docket or deposition (that Kosnoff released) I was impressed by their firm.  They were the only one to join the TCC to ask for a status hearing.  Patterson is a great lawyer and expert on bankruptcy.