Eagle1993

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2012/10/boy_scout_perversion_files_off.html

For a background on why were are here in bankruptcy, this case is likely the one many will point to.

One question I would have is on a case by case bases ... who knew what & when and how quickly did they act.  That should determine liability regardless of any systemic issue.

The second question ... should the BSA have recognized, through their massive file system and decades of reports, that there was an epidemic of sex abusers within the BSA ranks.  Should they have seen that simply removing and keeping leaders removed, after the fact, was no longer sufficient.  If they should have realized there was an epidemic of sex abuse, then I agree they are liable for ALL cases.  I think many claimants would state that BSA should have realized they had a systemic problem and fixed it proactively (perhaps we better vetting, random checks, etc.).  So ... my question ... did the leaders within BSA know (or should have known), at some point, that they had a problem but the solutions were too painful so they didn't implement change?  To me, that is the $10B question.  If that answer is yes, then we deserve the losses.

Unfortunately, our court system isn't great at working these out at a reasonable cost, so we are in bankruptcy.  All we are left to settle on is how much & when.  

I certainly hope they remain on public display.  It seems like rich people like to have at least some of their collections circulate in public museums.  Note that the bankruptcy settlement gives ownership of the art to the settlement trust not the money from the sale.  They can decide when and how to sell the collection.

Updated Plan (which includes the Toggle Plan)

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/886292_2594.pdf

Redline Document

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/886294_2595.pdf

BSA just released their new plan.  I figure that its a good time to lock this topic and start a new, part 3, Chapter 11 discussion.  Hopefully it will keep these large threads manageable.  

On 4/11/2021 at 7:32 AM, WisconsinMomma said:

My husband is the Scoutmaster now an I am an assistant Scoutmaster.  I am a lazy ASM so far and am still working on getting up to speed, and I am Mom first. I have other obligations and do not make all the meetings, etc.  But what I can give is a set of extra hands at outings.  I have enough background from Cub Scouts and Wood Badge to know a bit.  Out of our three kids, one likes Scouts and is doing well.  The other two are struggling and I wonder if we should let them go.  But the oldest is a Life Scout who could make Eagle if he works hard in the next 1.75 years.  The young one is 12 and has had his early Scouting very disrupted by Covid.  Our first two real in person outings have been cold and rainy.   Long days.  The first one was 12 hours, outside! No real shelter except an open picnic shelter and vehicles.  (I am trying to influence this.)   Yesterday was 8 hours outside and it was better but cold and rainy.  But we are starting to offer an outdoorsprogram again.  The Zoom meetings have been hard.   We are going to summer camp -- HUZZAH!  

But my two reluctant Scouts?  Middle one was elected ASPL and I think he has upped his interest with a leadership position, TBH. 

We lost all of our 6th graders due to Covid this year.  Many of our early outdoor activities were cancelled and we had to go to Zoom as all of our typically meeting locations cancelled reservations.  Getting new scouts excited about Scouts BSA is tough in a Covid year.  I started following up with their parents this spring and there is some general excitement/interest in returning this coming fall.  I pushed a bit about going to summer camp, but many of the kids just want to hang with their close friends in town as they haven't been able to do that for a year.  I think a lot of kids are just depressed and/or burnt out on zoom.

Hopefully after a reset summer, kids & parents will be looking to reengage in the fall.  If your 12 year old is having a rough start, he is not alone.  If this was my son's first year in Scouts BSA, I'm not sure he would be sticking with it.  The only reason I see the older scouts sticking through is they know what normal looks like (so they are waiting for the reset) + some are working on some merit badges.  

This has been a really tough year, hopefully as we get back to a bit of normal soon.

33 minutes ago, 1980Scouter said:

If the lawsuit is just over National, would they still not go after HAB's? 

I expect the TCC will go after all unrestricted assets that National owns.  They have already signaled that includes Philmont & Summit.  The BSA lead lawyer told the AP they expect litigation will be required to determine the outcome of some aspects of the plan.  HABs are the big target/asset National has ... the courts will decide if they stay with the BSA or are sold off. 

Hikes, EBORs, camps, COHs even Troop Meetings are all a great cure to doom scrolling through the Chapter 11 thread(s).  Great to hear the good news!

24 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Which is what Kosnoff wants.

Partially ... what he wants (and some other lawyers per their submissions) is the following.

1) Continue to reject all plans from National BSA.  By doing this, you essentially force National into Chapter 7 as they have no other path to exit bankruptcy.

2) When National BSA goes Chapter 7, argue that since there is no entity left to renew charters of local councils, every local council charter is not renewed.  Per LC agreements, if a charter is not renewed, all assets from the local councils go to National and are then part of the Chapter 7.

The result is the complete and total liquidation of the entire BSA.  I see 0% chance this will happen but I think this is what some lawyers are hoping for.

2 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

I am not a lawyer, so this is a honest question.

If LCs and COs did NOT file claims against the BSA prior to the November 2020 deadline, then the LCs and COs are completely on their own and cannot sue BSA for breach of contract, or whatever legal term it would be, for not honoring the agreements in the charter agreements from all these years?

My understanding is part of the charter fees everyone paid was to protect the CO and LC from lawsuits just like this.

Given that BSA is now saying (in the media & court documents) if the grand bargain fails, councils will likely go bankrupt,  I think they realize and are admitting those claims are likely worthless.

15 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

From my view, and it’s a relative outsider view, they’re throwing everyone but themselves under the bus to get outta Dodge with what they can’t bear to lose.

I have no idea what those internal conversations are, but this is a VERY tough sell to councils.  

1) For councils with high likelihood of bankruptcy if this fails ... they will still debate what is restricted vs unrestricted assets.  Having them turn over their friends of scouting funds, most of their camps, etc. with out a court order will be nearly impossible.

2) For councils that believe they are at a low likelihood of bankruptcy/lawsuits ... why would they want to part with key camps or endowments?

I think attempting to have a grand bargain is nearly impossible.  I think National would love a deal that includes councils/COs ... but unless a court rules against an entity or that an asset is unrestricted, its hard to give up the amount needed voluntarily.

32 minutes ago, T2Eagle said:

Interesting procedural arguments.   Doesn't move the ball down the field at all.

Agreed.  The HA bases are the major asset National has available. Most of this seems like a waste of time until a judge rules on their status.  We are well over a year into bankruptcy and we have yet to be to see any judge rule on the bases.  It’s time to get that moving. 

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/886060_2577.pdf

This one has an interesting footnote (new plan coming in 36 hours or less):

Quote

The Debtors intend to file the Second Amended Plan described herein within the next thirty-six (36) hours unless they reach a resolution as a result of ongoing negotiations with creditors and insurers. The Debtors reserve their rights to file a plan of reorganization on terms that differ from the terms of the Second Amended Plan described herein.

New plan will be a toggle plan ... from what I can see, the BSA believes that plan (which appears to drop the protection of LCs and COs) will be a worse outcome form claimants than their other proposal.  However, it does seem like they may be offering that plan as well... we will see.

Quote

BSA Toggle Plan will afford the Debtors the necessary flexibility to emerge from bankruptcy on their required timeline even if they fail to obtain approval of a global resolution due to lack of creditor support or otherwise.

Quote

The Debtors should be permitted to fully exhaust all avenues for achieving that objective, to the fullest extent permitted under section 1121(d)(2), before survivors are forced to accept the suboptimal outcome that the TCC is advocating: de minimis recoveries from the Debtors’ limited assets and the right to pursue nondebtor defendants in the tort system—and likely into bankruptcy courts across the country as Local Councils confront a tidal wave of abuse lawsuits.

Did they announce any replacement strategy?  Are the looking to limit sub-committees to the territory level only?  I'm curious how they are transitioning from National - Region - Area - Council to National - Territory - Council for both professional and volunteer staff/committees.  

52 minutes ago, David CO said:

To make that work, you would need to have a scouting public who is willing to pay in perpetuity.  I don't think the parents and donors are collectively willing to do that.  They'll quit.

 

I would expect the TCC and the future claims rep are not willing to bet on future payments from BSA.  It seems like it would be best from all parties to arrive at a final number, write the check and move on.  

For future claims, my understanding is that there would be a bucket of money that would pay out for those claims not submitted by the bankruptcy filing deadline.  

I tend to agree with @David CO that parents and donors (and I expect COs) will want to have a hard line in the sand that future dues, fees, fundraising are all going 100% to the current youth activities and not past sins.  I believe the message being sent right now is that fees and donations are protected, but there is definitely doubt that BSA is able to shield current incoming revenue from the bankruptcy until the bankruptcy is concluded.

I’ve been debating this in our Troop as well. I think masks for shorter outdoor gatherings are pretty easy requirement to comply with but I’m concerned about masks at summer camp within our site.  We did it last year and wearing masks for 12 hours straight, day after day, in the hot/rainy conditions at camp was a bit much.   We ended up strictly enforced masks outside our site and when cooking within the Patrol camp,  but were lax outside those settings.  We are still discussing how to handle this summer. 
 

In our town, 78% of eligible people have recipients their first dose, so I expect high vaccination rates by camp.

30 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Indeed. I’m still trying to decide whether it’s complete incompetence, utter inability or unwillingness to manage the process and their side of the table, or both. I found this a potent excerpt:

C. The Substantive and Statutory Rights of the Parties Cannot Be Trampled to Meet the Debtors’ Preferred Schedule.

27. While adjourning the April 29 Disclosure Statement Hearing may cause some slight delay, any delay is entirely within the control of the Debtors. Likewise, the professional fees incurred by the estate are entirely within the control of the Debtors’ counsel to manage. The Debtors have permitted upwards of 30 professionals to bill the estate at over $1,000 per hour, these accumulated professional fees are not some unforeseen act. Further, the Debtors have refused to implement basic steps to mitigate their fees and costs, such as imposing budget restrictions or shifting to an end-of-case holdback.”

This makes me angry.  Are the BSA lawyers simply looking to suck the organization dry. The judge needs to do something more than sternly scolding everyone to work harder.   BSA lawyers look to have completely ignore the judge’s comments.  If BSA disappears, it might be partially due to her ineptitude.

10 minutes ago, yknot said:

I'm starting to get really worried about the Methodist church. Far as I know, they don't have a lot of property like the Catholic church. 

• METHODIST CHURCH 3,443
• BAPTIST CHURCH 2,774
• CATHOLIC CHURCH 2,280
• LATTER‐DAY SAINTS 2,236
• PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH 1,470
• LUTHERAN CHURCH 1,198
• EPISCOPAL CHURCH 503

These are the top 5 COs identified by # of claims.  Now, I expect these numbers to grow and change a bit as many scouts probably do not even know the CO for their unit.  As lawyers are able to obtain roster data from LCs, I expect CO impacts to clarify more.  Note that there are individual churches listed throughout the CO list.

3 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

The Debtor can still ask for a vote on the Plan?  

I think the judge has to rule on that; however, her last hearing she said the plan wasn't ready.  Insurance companies just filed paperwork to delay the April 29 hearing ... it appears they are stating there must be at least 28 days for review,  before a plan can be approved for a vote.  Given the plan is not ready (per the judge) even now, there is no way April 29 hearing can proceed as previously stated. 

Note that even though the insurance companies & TCC are both stating the plan is garbage, my guess is that is likely all they agree on.

There is a lot in this document.  I tried to highlight a few key areas I thought were interesting.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/885873_2566.pdf

• It appears that the mediation last week was almost worthless.  
• The TCC's analysis is showing the LC contribution is substantially lower than what they believe they can pay
• Almost no agreement on payments from any insurance companies
• Two major religious institutions have been part of the mediations, but have not offered anything as part of the mediation.
• Major decisions (estimation of damages from district court, decision on HA bases and if they are available for the settlement, JP Morgan debt) must be decided before a plan can even be considered.
• Based on the above, the judge should reject the plan.

There is a lot more in the document, but those were my major takeaways.

I think there is a hearing next week.  I'll be interested to see what the judge says.  I know she raised concern over the spending on the case, but she hasn't taken much action to force closure.  Perhaps she can remove the exclusivity clause and allow the TCC to offer a plan.  I would expect she could rule on the LCs and HA bases (or at least set hearings and close out on these open decisions).  

I'll reference this article again.  Sometimes you simply need to get decisions made within courtrooms before a settlement can be reached.  I certainly hope she starts expediting any decisions within her control.

https://mediatbankry.com/2016/05/05/dont-let-this-happen-to-you-milwaukee-archdiocese-bankruptcy-part-three-the-in-court-slugfest/

38 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

What is concerning for summer camp is that 12-19 year olds appear more susceptible to this covid variant. State restrictions are being reinstated for school activities - spring sports, proms,... will summer camps be next?

If the goal is 0 Covid, we will never do anything.  I don't think that should be the goal.  The goal should be to ensure our healthcare system is not overrun and that we don't see massive death.  If we follow "science" we know that the vaccines are highly effective and are effective vs the variants.  A surge and massive death is not going to happen regardless of what we do this summer (based on everything known today).  Ramp up vaccines and work on expanding testing to find hot spots ... otherwise we should be reopening.

By this summer, I expect every adult who is at any sort of risk has had a chance at the vaccine.  Kids are far less at risk for serious complications with Covid.  It's time to get them back to their activities.  

1 minute ago, Eagledad said:

Can it get safer than YP at the unit level? Maybe the changes should be toward reactions to abuse reports. Isn't that what the real complaint is?

 

Nearly all of the ideas I can think of is at a higher level (in terms of reporting, etc.).  If a unit strictly follows today's YP, I cannot think of any real changes that wouldn't simply kill most youth organizations.  @qwazse brought up interesting points but I'm not sure how we could change unit level YP policies to address it.

15 minutes ago, DavidLeeLambert said:

Before we get too far, I should mention that there's already a locked thread and another unlocked thread about substantially the same question.

I was hoping this one can be specific on specific recommendations that could improve safety.  Those others were more about society.  I'm really curious, in today's (and tomorrow's) society what changes can we make to improve safety.  There will be specific changes as part of the Chapter 11 settlement.  If we are to have scouting, we need scouting to work safely in the society we have today.  What does that look like?

2 minutes ago, FaithfulScouter said:

For starters, if our Leaders actually followed YPT we would be in a much better position.  

Youth protection requires two deep leadership.  I've seen Eagle car washes and project days with NO adult leadership. Our District is aware but they don't say anything. 

No one on one contact with Scouts.  I've seen leaders give Scouts rides home in their car ALONE.  

Leaders are not supposed to drink alcohol on trips.  They do, and in fact I know a Leader with a DWI who still drinks on camping trips.

All written communication from a Scout should have another adult copied.  A lot of our adult leaders say 'Don't worry about it'.  

The 72 hour rule for registration is a good one and in fact I always required that if you're going to spend a lot of time with our Scouts than you MUST register and get a background check.  My requirement was NOT well received by some adult leaders and was waved off with 'well why don't you just register EVERYONE?!"

To me, all of these should be reported.  Reporting shouldn't be reserved for actual crimes, it should be any violation.  In EHS, we are expected to report "near misses".  Those are then used to improve training & processes.

The written communications is a great one.  So many times, I receive an email from a scout directly to me with no one on the CC.  I immediately respond to that scout + parent + leader and remind them to never email me without an adult.  We use Troop Track as it automatically includes parents on all emails (so this only happens when they email me from their personal account).

I would be fine if BSA says ... please, go ahead and report every email.  It seems crazy, but perhaps if that level of reporting is encouraged, these "minor" issues could identify a systemic breakdown.  

In my organization, every call to service is considered a complaint.  We have a full time team that looks at every complaint to determine hazard (non, minor, serious, critical, etc.).  Every complaint that is serious is then investigated by engineering, QA and risk management who then determine root cause, corrective actions (if required) and if our overall system is still at an acceptable risk.  These teams process hundreds of thousands of complaints a year.

It sounds counter-intuitive, but more reported violations of YPT may actually result in a safer organization.  

https://www.ehstoday.com/safety/article/21915434/study-encouraging-incident-reporting-leads-to-improved-safety-culture

https://www.safeopedia.com/help-me-help-you-10-ways-to-get-employees-to-file-incident-and-near-miss-reports/2/6079