MYCVAStory

8 hours ago, ThenNow said:

I’m also very curious to learn the TCC’s view, since they have not yet signed on. At these numbers, if this is global, we’ve gone from $6100 to about $9000. WooHoo. Phhhtttt. I believe in our TCC and pray for a better outcome than this.

We'll all have to be careful about the "headlines" when they appear after some sort of deal has been struck.  This has a LOT of nuances but the media will take some amount, divide it by 82-85,000 victims and the sum will become the headline "BSA settles with Victims, Each to receive X."  It's so much more complex.  The funding that goes into any trust will come from not only the BSA/LCs but also COs and INSURERS.  The insurers don't seem interested in a global settlement TODAY and won't roll over easily or quickly until they must.  A LOT of the TCC's work right now must be wrapped up in the construction of all the processes that will continue after the BSA emerges.  Then, it becomes a balancing act of gaining funds in a timely manner and avoiding an unnecessary litigation circus.  We should actually be heartened that the TCC isn't feeding into any media feeding frenzy to make its points.  This is billions of dollars at play and playing cards VERY close to the vest is a lot better than mistakenly allowing someone a peek because you said too much.  That said, it IS agonizing for all victims and hopes are so easily dashed.  Anyone who has lived in a State where every year legislation to change Statutes of Limitations never made it out of committee knows the pain when hopes are dashed.  Victims, whether they consider themselves survivors or on the road to survivorship are some of the strongest people on the planet.  If the insurers believe this is a group that will roll over easily then it will be a Trust's duty after it takes the baton from the TCC and Coalition to make it clear that the insurers may be grossly underestimating the fight and resolve of this group.   Remember,   "Justice delayed is justice denied."  If only this was about justice.    Alas, it isn't, it's bankruptcy so it's business.  The BSA made that choice for all victims when it filed.

31 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

Here's to better days soon.

And for now, that means the BSA is the responsible party for having/filing a confirmable plan.  If it wants out of bankruptcy on the schedule it already communicated then perhaps a plan will be filed in the next day or two.

7 hours ago, ThenNow said:

Anyone have any 'what's the skinny' mediation info on the down low?

It's probably pretty safe to assume that to a certain extent "No news is good news."  This is the largest bankruptcy related to sexual abuse in history.  Factor in CO's, LC's, future claimants, and the largest piece of the equation the insurers and the complexity is great.  Every victim had hopes for the parties with financial exposure to be lining up checkbook in hand.  That quickly vanished.  So now it's a lot of sweating the details and everyone should all be reminded that if it's a BSA-only or BSA and LC-only settlement then the litigation against insurers will continue for potentially a long time since time is on their side.  Welcome to the bankruptcy process.  As well, welcome to the speed of the judicial process.  Even those victims in States that were statute-friendly would be seeing their cases crawling through covid-impacted courts.  So for many this process that's crawling along will still result in faster resolution or any sort of resolution at all if the abuse occurred in a statute unfriendly State.  The TCC has reluctantly reminded claimants that this is "business"  and wishes it weren't so.   Safe to assume that the lack of updates and hearings means there's some sort of progress.  For victims waiting for any sort of resolution after decades of hopes on hold it's understandably hard to be patient.  Here's to better days soon.

3 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Yes, which is why I'm very interested to see if TCC/FCR (maybe Coalition?) adds into the ballot packet a statement to the effect of "This in our opinion is the best BSA can offer." or even something as far as "We encourage a yes vote."

The TCC has stated that it fully expects to have a statement included in any packet related to a vote.  This is pretty standard bankruptcy procedure.  I would assume that it will make its position well known and available for viewing as well.  Remember though that in cases of this size victim attorneys often vote on behalf of their clients since they represent them and it's the client's responsibility to cast his/her vote separately or in consultation with the attorney if represented.  

I spoke a little too soon.  The TCC Town Hall meeting Thursday has been postponed.  Given the mediation and court date ongoing/upcoming it's probably safe to assume that there's enough in flux for the TCC to wait until there's something more definite to report.

In case you don't have anything to do Thursday night, a reminder from the TCCBSA.COM website:

NOTICE OF VIRTUAL TOWN HALL MEETINGS HOSTED BY THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF BOY SCOUT ABUSE SURVIVORS

The next TCC Town Hall will be held on Thursday, June 10, 2021, at 5pm PDT/8pm EDT. 

Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/87519715926 (no registration required)

or

Join by phone: 888-788-0099, meeting id 875 1971 5926

To be discussed:

• Status of Boy Scouts disclosure statement
• Status of negotiations with the Boy Scouts, local councils, chartered organizations, and insurers
• Other motions pending before the bankruptcy court
• The plan confirmation process

FYI, add another State to the list of those that are opening "Windows" for lawsuits to proceed: https://katv.com/news/local/arkansas-law-to-benefit-sexual-abuse-cases-against-boy-scouts-of-america

This is why Councils in States where there's no legal path forward for victims at the moment should be fighting hard for a permanent injunction and not play the "it doesn't apply to me so why should I have to pay" game.  In discussion for a long time, Louisiana was used as a State where the laws would NEVER change.  Well, not so much and now 1,350 BSA claimants, if they are 21-55 have a litigation path if a permanent injunction is nor a part of any agreement.  Tick-tock States where the laws are still prohibitive.

13 minutes ago, DavidLeeLambert said:

(@MYCVAStory , feel free to correct me if the $6,000 was just the TCC's estimate of the artwork, oil-and-gas leases, and cash.) 

That's basically correct but it doesn't matter.  It included the sum of all values on artwork.  The artwork, which is made up of Rockwells and a lot of other artists has MAJOR issues.  First, any time you dump a lot of an artist on the market you decrease the value because of the increased supply.  If you hold it off the market and sell gradually then you incur storage and selling fees.  The best solution is to sell it all to one collector.  The problem then is that it will be at a significant discount.  Oh, and the value of Rockwells, right now as you can imagine they are declining if there's a significant Boy Scout component because they are "tainted" by all of this.  So, cash is king and realistic valuations on artwork, leases, and potentially camps is queen.  Apologies for the misogyny.

21 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

In any such scenario,  the victims attorneys have to in effect argue to their clients that they should take the offer ($7000? $8000?) because there is nothing left for BSA to give. That means the Coalition I guess? But even then, getting to 2/3rds? I just don't know.

While it is of great concern to many on this forum, and for obvious yet different reasons, the BSA and LC assets are only one piece of the pie and probably the smallest.  The biggest is the insurers.  Claimants will have to consider the "whole" pie.

7 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

Flashing lights ... we may be close here...

Remember, attorneys hate the courtroom because of the unpredictability.  A continuance may only mean "We don't need you right now Judge."

34 minutes ago, Muttsy said:

Hard to imagine the Coalition lawyers settling out without the official committee.

There's an old saying, "Friends are people who hate the same people."  How ironic it would be if one of the best things the BSA has done for survivors to this point is try to stonewall both groups representing those survivors and in so doing bring those groups closer and their demands higher due to the new-found unity.

1 hour ago, Eagle1993 said:

From what I have read, the rumor is the TCC is not being included in the negotiations.  Essentially, the BSA has collected a group of claimant representatives >50% and is working with them on a settlement.  There may be some truth as the Coalition agreed to delay the hearing but the TCC objected. 

Does anyone know if the TCC is actively part of the current mediation or are the being excluded?

Absolutely not true.  As I understand and have full confidence in its validity, The TCC's professionals and State court counsels have been in Chicago, TCC present via Zoom.  All have been fully participating along with other mediation parties and will tomorrow as well.  Beyond the court date Friday if it occurs the TCC has a  regularly scheduled Town Hall meeting next Thursday to update survivors and interested parties.  Link will be posted at TCCBSA.COM

Perhaps with the hearing scheduled to resume on Monday,  a lot of business pending, and with the Judge imploring the parties to continue negotiating, that this is an opportunity for that to happen via more mediation next week and the hearing continued to a later date.  That's a win-win if anything comes out of it and lets the judge avoid an exclusivity decision until the BSA gets one last shot to find some agreements...or not.

1 hour ago, johnsch322 said:

So I looked up my LC it has over 17M in net assets as of now I am the only claimant. I am in California as is the LC.  I would think they would have to pony up a big chunk now or a larger chunk later. thoughts?

Please remember that the "Local Council" data field was one of the most frequently left blank on the proof of claim form.  Those not in scouting for long or the abuse happened long ago have found it difficult to recall what Council they were in at the time.  As well, the proof of claim form was intended to be a "placeholder" if you will with the expectation being that there would be opportunity and demand for more validating information prior to any award determination.  The TCC has said repeatedly that it advocates for a robust validation plan and on that single item it is in full agreement with the insurers.   Every Council, especially those in areas where there was higher than average transient populations, should expect their number of claims to increase.  Should attorneys have done more digging to determine the Council?  Perhaps but for many that don't understand scouting and the mergers and eliminations of Councils it wasn't easy.  Again, the inclusion of the local council was not required at time of filing because of the expectation that there would be time for amendment and additional data requested.  So, 39,177 claims had unknown/missing local council data.  Expect EVERY council's number of claims to increase.  Data is found at the TCCBSA.COM website.

FYI, this was already scheduled to continue to next Monday to address everything on the agenda.

6 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

This is per BSA numbers.  This also assumes >$1B goes to the Pension Fund ... which I know is being debated.

"Debated" is certainly correct.  But all good debates should rely upon facts.  The TCC in its most recent objection below addressed the whole threat of the Pension being taken over by the PBGC and shed some light on its actual state.  It also hired its own professionals who focus on pension plan administration in bankruptcies.  If victims suspect that the BSA is using its "pension plan" as a place to place assets that should be used to address victim compensation they have good reason to feel that way.  See below:

vii. The Disclosure Statement Does Not Contain
Adequate Information Regarding the Pension Plans
79. The Disclosure Statement does not provide any meaningful information
regarding the Boy Scouts’ pension obligations other than describing a standard separation of the
Settlement Trust from the Pension Plan: “The Settlement Trust shall not have any liability to any
Person on account of the Pension Plan, including liability as a member of a “Controlled Group”
as defined in 29 U.S.C. § 1301(a)(14)(A) or on any other basis whatsoever.”
80. The Disclosure Statement should disclose that the Boy Scouts’ Retirement Plan
(the “Retirement Plan”) is currently overfunded – about $86 million overfunded as of February
1, 2021, according to Willis Towers Watson (the Retirement Plan’s Enrolled Actuary). The
primary drivers of the overfunded position are:
 Better than expected historical investment returns.
 Conservative funding of the Retirement Plan, including a voluntary $60 million
contribution made by the Boy Scouts in two instalments (April and May of
2019).
 The full freezing of the Retirement Plan effective August of 2020, which
eliminated any future accruals of benefits under the Retirement Plan.
81. The Retirement Plan liabilities are currently discounted at the gross expected rate
of return on assets (6.5%). Based on the Enrolled Actuary’s best estimate of future plan
experience (as certified annually in the Schedule SB of Form 5500, filed with the IRS), no
future contributions are expected to be required. If, in the aggregate, actuarial assumptions are
met going forward, the plan’s overfunding is expected to grow modestly over time from the
current level of ~$86 million.
82. The Boy Scouts have implemented a new Retirement Contribution Policy for
itself and the Local Councils, set at 12% of payroll effective February 1, 2021. After paying for
administrative expenses and the matching contribution in the 401(k) plan, the Boy Scouts intend
to contribute the residual amount into the Retirement Plan, which is estimated be more than $25
million annually from the Boy Scouts and Local Councils. If this approach is followed, the
Retirement Plan overfunding is expected to grow to $264 million by 2026 and $500 million by
2031, per Willis Towers Watson, the Boy Scouts’ own Enrolled Actuary. The overfunding
cannot be used for any purpose other than paying retirement benefits, PBGC premiums and
certain Plan-related administrative expenses.
83. The liquidation analysis further provides that “[u]nder a chapter 7 liquidation,
moreover, it is likely that the BSA’s defined benefit pension plan would be terminated and the
Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation (the “PBGC”) would pursue its Claim of approximately
$1.1 billion against all members of the controlled group, which are jointly and severally liable
for such amounts and include the Related Non-Debtor Entities. The Boy Scouts expect that
under section 4068(a) of ERISA, the PBGC would successfully assert a lien arising as of the
termination date against each member of the controlled group in an amount not to exceed 30%
of the “collective net worth” of all members of the controlled group combined.
84. However, for any member of the controlled group that has filed for bankruptcy
prior to the termination, the automatic stay will generally prevent perfection of any lien under
ERISA. The PBGC’s claim could therefore be asserted jointly and severally against each
member of the controlled group in the full amount of the approximately $1.1 billion claim,
provided that the PBGC’s claim, to the extent not secured by a lien under ERISA, would likely
be treated as a general unsecured claim. The Liquidation Analysis assumes that the lien on
Related Non-Debtor Entity assets would represent 30% of Liquidation Proceeds remaining for
the Boy Scouts and Related Non-Debtor Entities combined after wind down costs and secured
debt, if any.
85. Under a chapter 7 liquidation, it is extremely unlikely that the Boy Scouts’
Retirement Plan would be terminated because there is no reason to do so. As described above,
the Retirement Plan is fully funded on an ongoing basis, it has no current contribution
requirements, and there is potentially a large body of sponsors (the Local Councils) who could
assume the Retirement Plan in the Boy Scouts’ absence. The Tort Claimants’ Committee is not
aware of any precedent for the PBGC involuntarily terminating a plan under such
circumstances.
86. In sum, the Boy Scouts are attempting to use the pension as a way to shield cash
that can otherwise be used to pay the claims of childhood sexual abuse survivors. Over the next
five years, the Boy Scouts project that more than $25 million will be contributed each year for
the next five years towards the Retirement Plan when any such contribution is wholly
unnecessary. The Disclosure Statement and the Liquidation analysis fail to adequately disclose
the foregoing.
 

1 hour ago, johnsch322 said:

This is also the week the TCC is supposed to give the BSA a plan to give to each individual local council on their assets and what they need to (in the TCC's opinion) to contribute.  According to the TCC it will leave each council with two years of operating cash so they will be able to survive.  It will also include what each individual LC's potential exposure is.

These are anticipated to be transmitted on Thursday.  My understanding is that there was a delay to insure that a process was in place to guarantee that they would be received by local councils.

28 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

The new version was just rolled out in the last few years so it is not 11,000.  Whereas there is often room for improvement, there can be diminishing ways to improve.  The BSA is using the best guidance available.  The changes are likely small.

Which begs the question on the minds of every victim, if an organization was developed today that essentially said "we're doing the best we can but some of you will be raped and abused and scarred for life" would we allow it?  Would Congress give it a "charter?"  Would we not as a society say "That isn't good enough."  This isn't a call to abolish the BSA.  Rather, it's a call to do ALL it can for victims NOW and ALL it can to abolish ALL abuse moving forward.  If the best guidance available isn't working, and there is evidence that it isn't, then new guidance and EVERY effort, expert, and study of what happened needs to be made.  I suspect the TCC, on behalf of ALL victims, isn't going to be satisfied with minor tweaks.  Let's all hope that isn't the case.  Ultimately the future of the BSA is going to rely short-term on it convincing a new generation of parents that their children are NOT at danger.

33 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

This was what I was expecting, but I'm not clear is it

1. Someone who comes in one time to re-write YP and then leaves
2. A semi-permanent fixture (like a consent decree compliance monitor) who monitors BSA's compliance for a set period of time
3. Both?

It isn't the TCC's job to revise the BSA's YPT program, it's the BSA's.  The fact that the BSA has offered NOTHING to this point while acknowledging and apologizing for past abuse speaks volumes.  Safe to assume this is the TCC's way of saying "DO SOMETHING."  That said, the TCC has also stated that the monetary issues are foremost for now and until they are resolved other issues won't be used as bargaining chips needlessly.  Only then will YPT and IV Files come to the forefront.

Just a reminder...in an hour:

NOTICE OF VIRTUAL TOWN HALL MEETINGS HOSTED BY THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF BOY SCOUT ABUSE SURVIVORS

The next TCC Town Hall will be held on Thursday, May 13, 2021, at 5pm PDT/8pm EDT. 

Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/87088314462

3 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

• TCC is out for maximums. 75%+ of council assets.
• Claimants can now gauge. If the TCC thinks that the LC can give up 75% of assets, but the LC says it can only give up 25%, that's one thing. But if the TCC says 75% and the LC says 70%? Is that enough to vote yes for the plan?

The TCC in the meeting last week with the Local Councils (outside of mediation confidentiality) discussed at length how the financial analysis of every Council was individual and intended to allow the Council's credit rating to remain at investment grade AFTER each contributes to the settlement.  As the example in the objection shows, this was a VERY deep dive into each Council.  There was no baseline for contributions across all Councils.  It was independent and done to demonstrate what Councils were able to afford given their significant claim exposure.

6 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

Things to look forward to for this week

1) TCC's objection to the BSA's disclosure statement. I expect it to be frankly anti-climactic. We all know at this point most of the points. BSA is still not disclosing precisely how much the LCs will contribute, how much the insurance companies will contribute, etc.

2) Agenda! What, precisely, is on the agenda in terms of motion practice for the May 17 hearing.

3) Three days of mediation in New York.

4) TCC will have a townhall call May 13.

I have a hunch the TCC's objection will focus upon the issues of greatest import to the court.  Perhaps the TCC will address the BSA's contention that the pension plan needs funding or the PBGC will step in?  What about on the other hand if the pension fund is actually in good shape or even over-funded?  Also, the formal mediation in New York was last week and not this week.

Just a reminder, the TCC's objection to the BSA's disclosure statement is Monday.  This is the TCC's opportunity to take issue with specific items the BSA has raised as serious concerns such as its pension plan obligations.  Should be interesting reading after the weekend.