CynicalScouter

That's what they need to explain to the judge. The burden is on the DEBTOR (in this case BSA) in a bankruptcy to account for ALL its financial doings. PROVE it has not been repaid. And yet, rather than allowing a federal judge to review the books on the Summit loans, they are fighting it tooth and claw. What is BSA afraid of? That a federal judge is going to perhaps look at this, realize this is a shell game of fake debt and fraudulent notes, and a) end the bankruptcy (look up the principle of "unclean hands") and b) start making criminal referrals to the U.S. Attorney for Delaware?

I see. 84,000 sexual abuse victims, and yet you remain 100% convinced BSA executives can do no wrong? Never hid information? By the way, as came out in the Oregon and other cases, there were actual written documents indicating BSA officials knew about the sexual abuse and did NOTHING to slow it down or stop it. As Reagan said: trust, but verify. If BSA wants to be believed that they are not playing fraud games with the JP Morgan note, then produce the books to the federal judge. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

That's exactly what they did, per the filings made when BSA announced the deal they struck with JP Morgan back on March 1. As I read it, BSA basically has to just pay interest-only for 2 years AND BSA has to get a $42.8 million loan from the BSA Foundation with a second lien by the BSA Foundation against Arrow, WV.

Yep. Again, BSA is doing everything it can to NOT have the TCC and the bankruptcy judge look at the books on Summit and is literally spending tens if not hundreds of thousands in legal fees/billable hours to keep the TCC and the judge from seeing the books. The only question I have is how much is 1) because the financial documents and loans associated with this boondoggle are fraudulent and 2) because Summit has been such a money pit that it would shock the conscious/enrage people. Is that a 50/50 split? 70/30? Etc.

I still cannot get over this. I mean, all that the BSA has to do is turn over some financial statements regarding Summit to the court and TCC for review as to whether or not the JP Morgan note is legitimate or not. I remain convinced it is either a) fraudulent or b) legit but would show that Summit is such a massive sink hole of money that it would be a shocking embarrassment. And based on the latest news reports, it is likely BOTH. Boy Scouts Say Tort Claimants Can't Challenge $350M Note So, there's the fraud. Now, here's the embarrassing sink hole of money. Let that sink in for a second. BSA is claiming that, with respect to Summit $350 million (promissory note) - $42.8 (Summit's value) = $307.2 million in improvements and equity. Everyone, boys and girls, raise your hands if you really, really thing that there are $300+ million in improvements and equity in Summit right now. Anyone? Yeah, so as I said: a double scoop. Fraud AND gross financial mismanagement/sending money down a sink hole. But BSA's prepared to spend tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) to be absolutely sure that nether the federal judge NOR the sexual abuse victims EVER get a chance to look at the books on this one. And yet people will sit here and continue to defend BSA, unquestioningly, unequivocally, and without hesitation. BSA can do no wrong. I mean, put aside the sexual abuse claims here for a second, doesn't anyone find it ridiculously suspicious they are going out of their way to NOT allow this information out? I mean, for those of you who donated and made money, or had your children make money for this (my kids stood in the shivering cold on more than one occasion selling overpriced popcorn), doesn't it concern you in the least that Summit is this much of a disaster?

It always amazes me that people do this. Yes, the law has its own jargon and uses language among lawyers that is, from an external perspective, utter gibberish. And yet doctors and other professions have their own arcane language. Don't hear a peep about that. Moreover, law is much more complex and varied. If, to take the medical example, if I were to say "obstruction of the superior vena cava" that has a certain, precise, scientific meaning. Law, however, usually does not use preciseness because it cannot. Our much vaunted U.S. Constitution is an utter mess in this regard. Consider: Nowhere is there a precise, scientific definition for, pretty much, any of those words (what the heck are included in "effects"? And what is "unreasonable"?) So, in the absence of clear, specific, scientific language of particular phenomena, you get, words, words, words.

Recently posted to a scouting FB group, a letter from a lawfirm representing some of the abuse victims. I was unaware of the mediation set for next week. To our clients: We apologize for the lack of a recent update. The judge recently delayed ruling on the Boy Scouts proposed plan and disclosure statement until May 19th. The Boy Scouts, in the meantime, filed two key documents. First, it filed a revised disclosure statement in which it provided additional details about a proposed settlement and trust. Second, it filed a revised plan of re-organization that contained two options: 1) A BSA-only settlement; 2) a globally proposed settlement. We expect the plan to be further revised in the future. If it remains in this form (with two choices), you will have the option to vote in favor of one option or another or against both option. A BSA-only settlement is difficult for all involved because it would only recover approximately $150 million from the BSA and leave the remaining litigation to return to individual cases in state court to proceed against Local Councils and sponsoring organizations. This means, essentially, that victims would recover very little initially but also that Local Councils, Charter Organizations, and insurance companies would be left to defend tens of thousands of lawsuits. We believe BSA filed this option to use as leverage to obtain more contribution from Councils and insurance companies. The second option - a “global option” - indicated that Local Councils would contribute $425 million towards a settlement and BSA would contribute approximately $150 million towards a settlement. It would also assign all insurance rights (which are valuable and range in the billions) to a Trust for further insurance litigation. It is likely that many insurance companies will settle and contribute to the victim fund. It is also likely that some will hold out, requiring litigation. We will be objecting to the Boy Scouts disclosure statement because we believe it lacks many details necessary for victims to make a decision about whether to vote in favor of or against BSA’s proposed plan. For example, the current disclosure statement has no information about how much money a specific Local Council is contributing to the settlement. The parties are all still working very hard towards a resolution. The Tort Claimants Committee - a Committee we participate in extensively as counsel for one of its members - sent demands to many insurance companies in the last month. You may have heard about a BSA settlement with The Hartford insurance company in the amount of $650 million. We believe this grossly undervalues Hartford’s liability and will be objecting to this settlement. We expect Hartford will increase its offer. We know it is hard to wait for a resolution in this case. We expect that the voting on the plan will occur late this summer. Whether the parties can reach a global resolution of the bankruptcy by then remains to be seen. Finally, the parties have scheduled three additional days of mediation next week in New York. We can provide you with a further update after that mediation.

This is the other message about this forum: these are matters that directly impact scouts (sold camps, fees going up, councils in distress) and there is literally no other forum to get this info. BSA National cannot breath a word because, well, their lawyers are telling them (wisely) to a) shut up and b) keep shutting up. Your Local Council, both professionals and volunteers, are either a) unaware of what is going on or b) being advised that if they are told things (like by, say, the Ad Hoc Committee of Local Councils) they too fall into the "shut up and keep shutting up" group. The BSA subreddit gets some things sometimes, but the moderators have effectively forbidden any conversations about the bankruptcy. The FB groups, and I belong to several, simply devolve into "hate the lawyers, BSA did nothing wrong!" rant fests and contain random guesses of people who haven't read a single pleading, they just know a) the abuse victims (outside of maybe 1 or 2) are all liars b) all lawyers are evil and c) BSA can do no wrong.

To be clear, I've made it clear from the start that I do think BSA has done positive things. They opted for bankruptcy. I know many people who think that was stupid and BSA should have fought these abuse suits, one at a time, for decades. BSA is to be commended for at least paying lip service to the idea that, regardless of statute of limitations, they want to help abused scouts. HOW MUCH they want to help is TBD. I actually support the decision of Mosby et al to remain silent at a time when people here and elsewhere have criticized them for that. The more BSA officials talk about the bankruptcy OTHER THAN THROUGH THEIR LAWYERS, the worse it can be. I firmly believe and have said that the Guide to Safe Scouting makes perfect sense in light of the fact that 90-99% of it can traced back to lawsuits filed against BSA National, LCs, and/or units. Now, that said I can remember sitting and watching BSA National officials state at the NAM and elsewhere, unequivocally and in no uncertain terms, that the bankruptcy would NOT have ANY impact on local councils and their assets. And local councils relaying that message to units and local donors/funders. I knew at the time that there was NO way National could make that kind of promise and that they were either a) naive b) stupid or c) deliberately lying. Now, with council after council selling camps, the truth comes out. I absolutely 100% believe that BSA is being less than honest and forthcoming with its financials with respect to the abuse victims and IN PARTICULAR Summit/Arrow, WV and the...interesting financing used, plus its refusal to allow the judge or other parties to examine their financial records on this. I absolutely 100% believe that BSA (and the judge and others) have let this drag out way, way too long without addressing the big questions, including but not limited to, whether LCs are mere appendages of National for purposes of assets. That's not entire BSA's fault, there's plenty of blame to go around. So, I'm sorry. But I refuse to play the sycophant and assume that everything BSA tells me is 100% truth (or Truth). My sons remain in Scouts, BSA. They are in the troop as am I. I've been involved since they were Cubs. I want to see BSA survive. But unless it starts to step up now, or literally in the next few weeks (money runs out in August or September) and starts to offer more to these sexual abuse victims that $6000 and a "we are sorry", they aren't going to survive. You, of course, are free and welcome to accept whatever BSA National tells you at face value, unquestionably and without a moment hesitation or thought. But keep in mind: 84,000 sexual abuse victims and their families put similar blind, unquestioning faith in BSA National, local councils, and COs to ensure their sons were not raped. That didn't turn out so well.

BSA's lawyers told the court August was the out-of-cash date.

This is the key. There is a TON at the BSA and LC level of "this asset is restricted" and when asked to demonstrate how/why, the answer is "because we said so." That is not how this is going to work.

Right, this is what frankly confuses me. TCC/FCR is simply asking that JP Morgan and/or BSA produce documents showing that in fact there is a valid debt/lien/note against Arrow, WV and or its sole asset (Summit) and that the debt/lien/note was not entered into fraudulently. This is easily solved with a PDF of the note agreement and a PDF of the last/latest financial statement sent to the parties with a CC to the judge. They could even redact things like the account numbers so the people cannot access that (Rule 5.2). Bing, bang, boom. Done. Instead we get thousands (tens of thousands) of BSA dollars spent trying to keep the exact financial status of Arrow, WV/Summit secret from the abuse victims and the judge. And I am simply left to wonder: why?

In a bankruptcy, the burden is on the debtor (BSA) to demonstrate it is operating openly and honestly regarding its finances. BSA is deliberately trying to hide information about the precise status of Summit, the debt for Summit/Arrow, WV, and where all the money went. I suspect it is one of two things: 1) SOME money went to pay down Summit/Arrow, WV debt. SOME. Where the rest went? Let's see the financials. That is ALL the sexual abuse victims are asking for. 2) The theory @Eagle1993just mentioned: ALL the money went to pay down Summit/Arrow, WV and has proven to be an unmitigated financial disaster that BSA does not want known. Theory #2 actually weighs in FAVOR of BSA being (half) honest: YES indeed ALL that money went to pay down Summit/Arrow, WV debt...but Summit is underwater/negative equity. Either way, neither is a valid (legal) excuse for withholding this information from the sexual abuse victims and/or a federal judge.

I believe money went to pay for something. Money went somewhere. What I don't believe is anything BSA is saying about where the money went and what the real status of Summit is. As I said: 1 hour and a PDF bank statement reviewed by the judge would fix this entire problem. Or do you not trust federal judges to look at a bank statement? You'll just think and believe whatever BSA tells you to think and believe at this point? And after all this, you just believe whatever you are told? Don't question BSA. Don't doubt BSA. Do what BSA tells you. Think what BSA tells you to think. When an organization goes this far out of its way to refuse to release a simple bank statement for external review by a federal judge, you still trust BSA? Still believe BSA? Seriously? I can. The lawyers know the MINUTE that BSA is forced to turn over the financial documents related to the JP Morgan/Summit claim to the judge, the shell game is over. If these lawyers are smart they know that the ONLY way to keep the shell game going is to never, EVER let the judge see the financial statements. The second she does, it is over. She can (and likely would) terminate the bankruptcy or side entirely in favor of the sexual abuse victims. Remember: the burden is on BSA (as debtor) to PROVE their financial statements are valid and accurate. The fact that they are hiding this is no doubt getting the judge's attention. She's going to start to wonder why, if BSA is so honest, it won't turn over the financial statements to her.

Really? According to who? BSA? You've seen evidence and documents to this effect? That's is ALL that the sexual abuse victims are asking for from BSA. PROVE there is a real debt. PROVE where those payments have been going. PROVE that the loan is real. And BSA won't answer. Instead, they object to the sexual abuse victims even asking the question/having a judge review the documents. This REEKS of shell game. And it wouldn't be the first time. Read up on how when the Archdiocese of Milwaukee diocese got sued for sexual abuse, they played a shell game (there, transferring money to a "cemetery fund" called the Cemetery Perpetual Care Trust). The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals smacked down that shell game in March 2015. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/10/us/wisconsin-cemetery-fund-not-protected-from-creditors.html By August 2015, the Archdiocese was forced to settle with the abuse victims. And guess where some of the money came from? You guessed it: the Cemetery Perpetual Care Trust. https://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2015/08/04/archdiocese-of-milwaukee-reaches-21m-settlement.html

That's laughable. Again, 1 hour and a PDF printout would prove this is a valid debt and not a shell game. The fact that they are spending THOUSANDS in lawyers fees fighting the sexual abuse victims from even being able to SEE these purported debt documents tells me all I need to know.

Super! Then why is BSA fighting tooth and claw to NOT get this in front of a judge? All they would have to do, today, now, this instant, is present in court the documentation proving this. They haven't. Instead, they filed an objection to even allowing the sexual abuse victims to put this deal before a judge. Document 2733 https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/79c9867a-f837-49ff-a8ab-562ce6c6dfdc_2733.pdf And not just BSA. JP Morgan has now filed objecting to having a judge look at this as well. Document 2732 https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/48cdda3a-e13e-48de-80ed-a376c6676dd8_2732.pdf It would actually be EASIER to simply produce the debt documents and bank statements. Just produce the debt statements and financial documents to the TCC and be done with it. Instead, BSA is objecting to even having to entertain this effort by the sexual abuse victims. That tells you everything you need to know about this shell game. If this were a true and honest debt and not a shell game with BSA and JP Morgan, it could be settled in 1 hour, a few phone calls, and a PDF printout of the debt documents.

This is the membership death spiral I see in associations. 1) The number of members decline. 2) Boards hike fees to keep income flowing. 3) Now members leave because of the cost. 4) Cuts are made, some substantial, most superficial. 5) Now people leave because they have higher fees (2) and less services (4). Rinse and repeat. Can you pull out? Sure, if you are willing to offer reduced rate benefits. One organization I belong to, for example, targetted the heck out of Early Career Professionals. Literally wined and dined (special reception at annual conference). It worked: those ECPs got hooked, stuck around, and brought friends. BUT the only reason the organization was able to do that was because they were able to take 2-3 years worth of losses. They had enough money in the bank, plus some timely donations, to make it through the bad times. BSA's....not in a position to do that right now.

And Council INSURANCE fee (separate and apart from Council Activities Fee) of $12.

I was told, point blank, that the 2021 and 2022 increases were merely "discussed" and not "approved" by the National Board. Of course, several councils posted the truth in 2020: the fee increases are coming in 2021 and 2022.

Here's the sad, sad part is that National cannot even keep its lies (no other way to put it) straight. Last May, then the $66 increase was announced, several councils ALSO let the cat out of the bag that in fact BSA National was planning to hike fees in 2021 and 2022. Middle Tennessee Council, for example. BSA National went nuts, demanding Councils remove that, and denied that any such increase was approved. They claimed only that it was being "discussed". I will put money on the table that the 2021 and 2022 increases will take place.

No. There are claims vs. lawsuits. Currently, there are over 900 sexual abuse lawsuits pending (meaning someone went into a courthouse, filed papers, and formally started a lawsuit against BSA National, a Local Council, a Chartered Organization, or some combination). There are currently 82,500 claims (roughly). These were documents filed with the bankruptcy court last November that claimed the person was sexually abused as a scout. The idea is that if you have/had ANY claim (prior to February 2020) that BSA owed you ANY money in ANY way, shape, or form, you had until November 2020 to at least get a claim in. That does not mean you'll get money. That does not mean your claim is valid. It just means that if you did NOT put in that claim by November 2020, you waived ANY right to make a claim against BSA National for ANYTHING that took place before February 2020. New York and Hawaii opened/reopened their sexual abuse claim windows, allowing claims that would have normally been beyond the state's statute of limitations to be filed. Expect in the near future to see a lot of New Jersey and North Carolina cases for the same reason. Depends on the context. For example, if the scout was in an LDS unit, then went to a Catholic Church chartered unit in the same council and was abused in both. OR there was overlap (the Catholic Church chartered the unit, the scout went to an LDS summer camp where he was abused, so he sues both). The other is that some people are suing in groups (Sexual Abuse Victims/Plaintiffs 1-7). So they are all suing BSA National, but Plaintiff 1 is suing BSA National + LDS for chartering his unit. Plaintiff 2 BSA National + is suing the Catholic diocese for chartering his unit. Etc. Yes, for example 1) I know I was abused by two people - Scoutmaster Smith and Assistant Scoutmaster someone I can't remember his last name. Later on, as part of the lawsuit, I find out that was Assistant Scoutmaster Jones. 2) Placeholder - I know I was abused by SM Smith and the unit was in XYZ Council, but I don't know/can't remember who the chartered organization was that let SM Smith abuse me. I'm putting this in as a place holder in case as things progress that information comes out.

EXACTLY! This is LITERALLY what they say during the YPT video: is it NOT your job to play investigator. It is your duty to report and let BSA handle it. I really, really do not understand why people are trying to defend/protect this behavior. I really don't.

What on earth are you talking about? Proposition someone for a threesome is most certainly "sexual activity/discourse". I don't know how much clearer this needs to be for you. and

My question is: can they afford to? I know, generally, a lot of councils are really cash strapped now more than ever. This would also require that BSA do a complete 180 on first time joiners. As you may recall last year they imposed, for the first time ever, a joining/initiation fee.