CynicalScouter

Because all three AIS firms claim they all three jointly represent all 16,000. That number has been used by Kosnoff to claim HE represents 16,000. Etc.

They are complaining about children being sexually abused. And statistically speaking (not just in BSA, but in general) you interacted with sexually abused children as a CO and teacher. You just didn't know it because of the shame and pain associated with it. That does NOT mean it did not happen.

Here's the problem. AIS consists of 3 law firms. Kosnoff Law, PLLC AVA Law Group, Inc. Eisenberg, Rothweiler, Winkler, Eisenberg & Jeck, P.C. Rothweiler is 100% Coalition. Kosnoff and AVA are not. As a result, you get this. So, non-Coalition, AIS abuse victims = 12,000. So, Coalition, AIS abuse victims = 3054.

And not letting me see.

So Ankura was pretty obvious why without even having to look: how did they come up with 11,000 future abuse claimants/$5 billion? But the Arrow WV subpoena was interesting. Some of it is the same demands they are sending to everyone (any/all documents about abuse, how BSA made the deals, etc.) but they are also trying to figure out how precisely the JP Morgan agreement was reached. Remember that at one point the TCC and others were demanding the exact documents about the loan to shelter Summit Bechtel and how it appeared to be a shell game. I along with others pointed this out and th

It depends on what the victims are hearing in their other ear, so to speak. Those represented by counsel, especially counsel that are part of the Coalition, are going to hear "I, as your lawyer, am recommending you approve the deal." The question is whether or not victims are going to go against the direct advice of their own personal attorneys. That's a major TBD.

If anyone wants to give notes from the TCC Townhall (or we can wait for video tomorrow)?

Net Cash Flow Before Endowment Contributions Funding Sources (Endowment Contributions) Total Ending Unrestricted Cash Balance - BSA Unrestricted Endowment Balance Unrestricted RBT Balance Total Estimated Ending Unrestricted Liquidity - BSA 2/7/2020 $14,114,000 $0 $114,868,000 $53,804,000 $65,283,000

BSA operating report https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/d6efad20-6268-4028-b79c-41973a37cb27_6448.pdf The endowment is gone, zeroed out. They have not raided the retirement benefit trust but that looks like it is next (66 million) Total Ending Unrestricted Liquidity - BSA 142,414,000 Total Ending Unrestricted Cash Balance - BSA 75,881,000

Just based on the Menninger incident where it was shown that BSA hid from its own health and safety committee about the prevalence of sexual abuse, I'd say yep. When Menninger then went into deposition and under oath said "There is a greater threat to Scouts of drowning and loss of life from accidents than there is from sexual abuse by a Scoutmaster" I would say yep. A lie. Defend BSA's actions all you want. I won't.

And the newest version is out https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/23973daa-dbb2-40ff-b031-05f390ea1f6c_6443.pdf Century is going to still be upset that the mention of the Coalition fees are still in.

And where is the BSA data? Oh right, it isn't there because BSA continues to hide, hide, hide. If BSA has nothing to hide, then it will happily report annually the number of total incidents and (better still) by Council, type, and results. It isn't there because BSA is being forced as part of the bankruptcy and the TCC to actual start to disclose info and stop hiding.

Then it should have no problems with having a truly INDEPENDENT Monitor come in for at least 3 years. You are right. The incidence happened: and then BSA lied to their very own internal reviewers about the problem. BSA lied. It hid. It willfully deceived. It will pay and pay and pay. And BSA has proven it can NOT be left to monitor itself. When it has done so, it has failed miserably. "By dealing with these cases as a series of unrelated events rather than as a pattern, the Boy Scouts of America was behaving just like Carl: minimizing, rationalizing, assuring itse

I'm sorry, what? Annual reporting is not an "actual improvement"? Insisting on have an outside reviewer/monitor is not "actual improvement"? The TCC is not out here to try and fix the world or "all youth organization(s)." It is trying to help ensure that the sexual abuse they suffered IN SCOUTS does not have to OTHER SCOUTS and that SCOUTING starts to take sexual abuse seriously and report it annually.

I am not a victim, so I don't want to purport to say what a victim would or would not want BSA to do in the future. As a leader, I want BSA to finally come clean and report the abuse. Stop hiding it. Stop pretending it doesn't exist. Report it. Admit it. My own humble suggesting was something like what colleges and universities have to do through the Clery Act. For example, right now I can pull up data on Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter, Negligent manslaughter, Rape, Fondling, Incest, Statutory rape, Robbery, Aggravated assault, Burglary, Motor vehicle theft, and Arson. I

Did you read the TCC's proposal (which was adopted as part of the RSA and into Plan 5.5.)? It is pretty clear and on this I believe the TCC and Coalition are 100% in agreement on. The BSA has been allowed to handpick their experts, hide information from them (and there's a TRACK RECORD of BSA simply hiding from their hand picked experts data on abuse) etc. This is the current proposal under Plan 5.5. The BSA doesn't get to hand pick its experts anymore to have them parrot back to the BSA "You are perfect just the way you are!" "1. The Debtors shall form a committee (the “Child Protec

The FCR/Coalition has proposed a new revised letter to claimants. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/9e6bec25-c79e-44c4-9305-119362586c17_6441.pdf The FCR/Coalition was forced to change the language about "billions" to "over a billion". Before: It will result in meaningful distributions of billions of dollars in value to survivors following confirmation, without lengthy, expensive and harmful litigation of individual abuse claims. After: It will result in meaningful distributions of over a billion dollars in value (likely more) to survivors followin

ORDER (I) APPROVING THE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND THE FORM AND MANNER OF NOTICE, (II) APPROVING PLAN SOLICITATION AND VOTING PROCEDURES, (III) APPROVING FORMS OF BALLOTS, (IV) APPROVING FORM, MANNER, AND SCOPE OF CONFIRMATION NOTICES, (V) ESTABLISHING CERTAIN DEADLINES IN CONNECTION WITH APPROVAL OF THE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND CONFIRMATION OF THE PLAN, AND (VI) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/beb124f7-e931-4b0c-97cb-006a315622e8_6438.pdf

I'm on record saying as much as well. This becomes a BSA plan with, perhaps even shortly thereafter but most decidedly SEPARATELY, deals for the LCs. But if isn't VERY shortly thereafter, as I noted, at least 20 councils go into bankruptcy (NY, CA, Aloha Council for Hawaii/Guam, etc.)

Century files a "Motion for Clarification" these are rare but not unheard of from where I am at. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/8e85eddf-112e-40bd-aaae-110a882a7974_6435.pdf Century is trying to get at the question of are Coalition fees REALLY TRULY out of the Plan and Solicitation or not? BSA says the fees are still in the Plan. and Century wants a definitive statement, once and for all.

It all depends on if their votes are influential or not. If the plan fails 40% yes - 60% no, then even removing them doesn't get you to 2/3rds yes. It is a harmless error to keep them in. If the plan is accepted 90-10%, then odds are their votes don't matter, so keep them in. If however it is anything in the middle, then it will be a fight at confirmation. There's no need to have that fight NOW.

Net Cash Flow Before Endowment Contributions Funding Sources (Endowment Contributions) Total Ending Unrestricted Cash Balance - BSA Unrestricted Endowment Balance Unrestricted RBT Balance Total Estimated Ending Unrestricted Liquidity - BSA 2/7/2020 $14,114,000 $0 $114,868,000 $53,804,000 $65,283,000 $233,955,000

Retirement Benefits Trust https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/799079_13.pdf

I extremely doubt that the court will allow a speculative statement (there is a plan "being discussed"). I know based on my review that have been times where dueling plans were sent out (vote for Plan 1 or Plan 2) but that time has passed and BSA is going to get its plan out the door to vote before the TCC can get its plan formally before the court. That said, the TCC's letter will likely be amended to include "we have a plan". https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/ccb69c72-6cc4-49ce-9153-1f417e8943fb_6365.pdf Right now, the closest thing they have in that le