CynicalScouter

The point is however the National charters these LCs, sets the Rules and Regulations and is the receiver for any/all assets should the LC disband. National reserves the right under the Charter and Rules and Regulations to audit, restrict, and direct LCs at National's will or whim The plaintiffs argument is that given the above, that LCs are NOT independent (although they may exercise a great deal of autonomy). Let's see what the judge says.

The timetable for any federal judicial decision is "when the judge or panel of judges is darn good and ready." Not one moment before. Not one moment after.

Philmont did, yes. I can recall seeing an appearance sheet and notice.

It is the same (or similar) reason why I think LCs didn't turn over information: some of these "restricted" assets are "we just don't want to give it up".

Yes. UNLESS they pay into whatever Settlement Trust plan is set up as part of the bankrptucy, the LCs get sued so do the COS. BUT that only occurs in states that lifted or extended the statute of limitations. That is why so many LCs are fighting this (I think) is that they do not look at this as "there are 1,000 claims against my council". but as "there are 1,000 claims THAT ARE TIME BARRED against my council, so why should I pay a dime?" The answer (from a purely legal perspective) is if that state legislature ever decides to reopen the statute of limitations, that council is covered. I do not know all the inner-workings of my Council Key-3, but they have always spoken as if they plan to pay into the settlement I suspect for this very reason: you are "Buying" your LC's security from future lawsuits for sexual abuse pre-January 2020. That said, I can see LCs simply rolling the dice and taking their chances as well.

And this was just 2020 (first year of major LDS impact) 2021 charter year data (units rechartering in late fall 2020 to December 2020) is going to reflect the COVID hits and be a disaster. I'm betting Cubs go below 1 million.

Yes, unrestricted money is much more difficult to work with. For example, let say someone donates and puts on a requirement that is be used EXCLUSIVELY for Varsity Teams. Now on paper people say "Council's rolling in money!" when in fact all that money is tied to Varsity Teams. And what happens when Varsity Teams cease to exist? Or there is a POT of money and only 1 Team left? Then you get into a messy area of law called cy pres where you have to go to court and convince a judge to bend "Varsity Teams" to mean...something else? I mean people want to fund THEIR pet project/THEIR pet program vs. general overhead.

Both. It is both core and it is restricted.

Yeah, BSA's basic claim is that of the $667 million in "restricted assets" over half is Summit Becthel. Let's see how long that lasts. So you got to give up YOUR camp but the Summit is off limits.

Well for those who wanted Mosby to speak, that's all he is going to say. For now.

Last month I would have bet BSA out of bankruptcy by August, a shell of its former self in terms of assets. But this, where they literally put up (practically) nothing? This ends post-August in liquidation AND possibly some councils getting dragged down for the ride right after with their own Chapter 7s. EDIT: Why? Because a) I just cannot see getting 66% of the abuse victims class agreeing to this. and b) some LCs kicking and screaming they won't participate.

I also wonder if the court will kick the can down the road: sure there may have been shady claims, but we'll leave it for the Fund Trustee to figure this mess out?

Abbreviated version: We insurers hate it. The abuse claimants (or at least their lawyers) hate it. General public hates it. The only parties that appear to like it are JPMorgan Chase and BSA and we really don't care if JPMorgan Chase likes it or not because they are not a "significant" party to the case. So this sounds like it is going to go well.

The Congressional Research Service did a write-up on this several years ago. In short, the Congressional Charter is looked on as an award and an item from a bygone era. Nowadays there's a semi-firm rule AGAINST issuing new congressional charters, as the CRS report notes (Ending Charters—Maybe). The idea is that these are meant to be independent PRIVATE entities that happen to get their business license from Congress and not, say, your state's secretary of state corporations division (where most entities are incorporated). That said, Congress did try to yank the BSA Congressional Charter in 2000 for the Dale case (refusing to allow homosexual adult leaders in). That effort failed. Kosnoff has asked for years for Congressional hearings on the BSA and Congress has just as consistently said no, that as far as they are concerned the Congressional Charter is, in effect, meaningless in terms of Congressional oversight. BSA is not a government entity. It is not a quasi-government entity. As for champions in Congress, think optics. Right now, all the public knows is 95,000 sexual abuse claims against BSA. No one is going to rush in to be BSA's salvation or to try and protect BSA assets (which will then almost certainly be spun as BSA and the bad politician trying to deprive sexual abuse victims of what is due to them). Once the bankruptcy ends and the new, "rebranded" BSA comes out, maybe. But not now.

Not really. At this point, BSA is looked upon as a major insurance liability/risk. It just went through a bankruptcy and will wind up costing its insurers at least 1 billion and possibly more in claims. Any insurance company is going to demand high(er) premiums to cover BSA for at least the near future, if not longer.

In 2012, BSA National insurance was $47,977,628 PLUS $20,469,404 in claims (see page 16) for $68,447,032 In 2019, it was $134,789,765 PLUS $85,436,251 in claims (see page 19) for $220,226,016 And the 2020 numbers aren't even out yet. So, yeah having your insurance load TRIPLE in 7 years is going to necessitate some dues increases. And this doesn't even factor in local councils and their insurance, which they are now authorized to have up to $12 in insurance premium fees (in addition to $66 for council activities fee) added on.

This is a two-step process First, the insurance companies are proposing a sampling 1) 1400 claims in which the insurance companies would make document demands 2) 100 claimants would be interviewed/deposed. It isn't clear if that 100 would be a SUBSET of the 1400 or a completely separate group. I believe subset, but I cannot put my finger on the document. Based on this, the insurance companies would be able to estimate how much they would need to pay into a victims fund. Second, the settlement fund would spend the next decade sorting out the rest. After BSA National and the Councils and the insurance companies put in their money in a "Settlement Fund" (see Article IV of the BSA reorganization plan linked) ALL abuse claims would be shifted away from BSA and to the Settlement Fund (Article V, Section M). A Settlement Trustee and Advisory Committee would be set up. The Trustee and Committee would then spend the next few years (I say decade because it could take that long) going through claim by claim. EDIT: Article IV, Section B lays this out. So no, the judge won't settle the Abuse Claims. the Settlement Trustee will

This really does look like "what is the absolute bare minimum we can put in as a plan." Holding $667 million as restricted. Protecting every HA base. and the $300 million from the Councils is "voluntary" and "ask".

First, welcome. Second, yea. This is not a "service to the community". It is troop/unit service. https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2013/05/17/service-hours/

By the way: the judge is still not accepted their plan from August 2020 and the legal fees just keep on running up. https://www.ocregister.com/2021/01/29/usa-gymnastics-is-running-up-millions-in-legal-fees-while-in-bankruptcy/ And not only did that plan not get the 66% needed, it was rejected by at least 512 out of 517. It may have gotten to 100% by the time all was said and done.

Even been amazingly charitable here. $220M from National + $300M from councils = $520M. Then let's say only 25% of the 95,000 claims are deemed valid. That's 23,750 claims vs. $520M. $21,894 per claim. That's the most charitable. But let's go crazy here. Let's say BSA is entirely liquidated. HA bases. HQ. Everything up to and including the office furniture at HQ. $1 billion from National, $300 million from councils. You are still with a mere 23,750 claims looking at only $54,736. There's just no way the math works on this. where you get to 66% of the class UNLESS a) Council assets are tossed in MASSIVELY. b) there are enough victims who are ready to say "I don't want to kill off BSA, therefore I'll take a pittance." Like I said, this is different than I felt 48 hours ago. But I just don't see it surviving now.

1) Does anyone here really, really, think that 66% of the creditor class/subclass (sexual abuse victims) is going to really sign off on this? 2) Does anyone here really, really think that if they cannot get 66% that the judge will issue a "cramdown" and order the class to accept it anyway?

The fact that YP has been good/better lately doesn't negate the claims of the victims from the past. If those claims are valid, they are getting paid out.

BSA National is simply saying that they will attempt to get Councils to "voluntarily" pay in.

Yep. And let's be clear about what it is they are asking for here. In other words, ALL that BSA National is committing to in terms of the LC contribution is an ASK for VOLUNTARY pay-in and that won't be final until JUNE. Talk about dragging this out.