Jump to content

Chapter 11 Announced - Part 7 - Plan 5.0 - Voting/Confirmation


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 436
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

As the time that a vote total approaches, I encourage everyone to repeat the Scout Oath and Law several times to remind us how to treat one another.  There are victims here who wish for the plan

I just finished reading Bates' report.  Now I have a headache.  It's well-written, but a bunch of spin.  So we're too old to deserve a decent settlement?  While I get the sol issue, if a suit is valid

66% is the threshold for a bankruptcy.  However, WSJ was reporting even BSA admitted they needed 75% which they didn't reach.  There are two issues that the 73% causes. One will be with Silverste

Posted Images

We are back to the wishful speculations and refusal to see the larger realities.  Most councils have struggled for years to keep above water, and some had those "old resources", but they passed and are in the past, as most families chose to NOT continue any real largess.  On this forum, the loss of camps has been an ongoing complaint.  Part of it may be lack of use/attendance; some may be poor maintenance over time; and some is simply time itself and encrouchment of the once distant communities around them.  Natural disasters are not something for which it is possible to plan, only try to make camps as sturdy and fire resistent as possible.  And, due to some of these factors, even if some unexpected money comes into a picture, the needs are generally more than the amount in many cases.  In our case, not only is the only remaining active camp still in need of millions to make up for deferred maintenance, but the council office, which is a historical building, needs a huge amount to make it useable throughout.  Not only dealing with aged building issues, but also the historical elements.  Much of the properties held by councils, as has been discussed, may have special legal fiats on them from the donors.  Location often makes the property a target, and too often it is lost because of that.  And then the service options it once offered need to be duplicated, but at more modern expense levels.  

     Back to one of my favorite words.  Balance.  It is an important factor in most larger issues dealing with people and the societal changes.  JMHO of course.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another note to those that haven't refreshed their browsers, I split off  sub thread about council financing so go there if you want to continue it.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a reminder where we are in terms of schedule.  The TCC asked to have a status hearing Jan 12 or sometime soon but so far no response from the JSS.

I think the big date will be January 17th.  Perhaps Omni made some major errors that could swing the vote %.  I wonder if the judge will wait until January 17th, see the final voting report and then utilize a status hearing to provide tea leaves as to where this plan stands.  

 

  • Dec 29       Deadline to serve discovery on voting, settlements
  • Jan 4           Preliminary voting report
  • Jan 5          Rebuttal expert reports due
  • Jan 7           Deadline to serve responses/objections to voting/settlement discovery
  • Jan 14         Document production regarding voting/settlement due
  • Jan 17         Final voting report deadline
  • Jan 28         Deposition of expert witness & fact witnesses due
  • Jan 31         Deadline to identify trial witnesses
  • Feb 4          Plan objection deadline
  • Feb 10         Deadline to exchange depositions designations and file motions
  • Feb 14        Confirmation brief/plan reply deadline
  • Feb 15        Deadline to exchange deposition couter-designations
  • Feb 17        Deadline to submit joint pretial order, witness/exhibit lists, options to motions, etc
  • Feb 18        Final pretrial conference
  • Feb 22        Confirmation hearing
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

The TCC asked to have a status hearing Jan 12 or sometime soon but so far no response from the JSS.

Anyone have any new inclining whether yea or nay on this request? I recognize the vote tally may be in flux, but I tend to think a significant swing is less likely than others have opined. As we all do, I hate waiting given the gravity of the moment. Doing my share of prayerful intercession for this to get a move on. "Hear us,  your honor and speak from on high. I will give you a nice, fat Starbucks gift card to keep you in Venti lattes." Is that a bribe to a judicial officer? Rats. Sir SiouxCity, might be time for the robes of supplication to come off the shelf?

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Anyone have any new inclining whether yea or nay on this request? I recognize the vote tally may be in flux, but I tend to think a significant swing is less likely than others have opined. As we all do, I hate waiting given the gravity of the moment. Doing my share of prayerful intercession for this to get a move on. "Hear us,  your honor and speak from on high. I will give you a nice, fat Starbucks gift card to keep you in Venti lattes." Is that a bribe to a judicial officer? Rats. Sir SiouxCity, might be time for the robes of supplication to come off the shelf?

I have not seen anything on the docket yet. 

I've never watched a bankruptcy so I'm not sure if judges typically ignore requests like this, really looking at the debtor to run the show.  Perhaps she thinks ... if the debtor wants to spend the next 5 weeks spending money on a plan that will fail, that is their call.  OR ... perhaps she is going to say 66% was her target, this was very complex, minor tweaks plan & approve it?

My best guess (based on no experience in this area) is that she wants to avoid any debate about preliminary vs final vote.  We are only 6 days away from seeing the final vote.  So, she may sign the order and set a status hearing sometime mid next week if the vote remains ~73-74%.  That way, she could order sides back to mediation after getting a clear/final vote tally.  Could you imagine if she essentially killed the plan/held up progress this week, only to see Omni come out next week with 85% approval.  So, perhaps she is just being cautious until the final vote.  Just a hunch....

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

So, perhaps she is just being cautious until the final vote.  Just a hunch....

Yes, it’s called “wishful thinking.” 
If anything, the vote accept percentage drops further. The 3500 quickpay elections drop it down to 70%. 
 

As AC/DC put it: “Its a long way to the top if you want to rock and roll.”

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to risk reposting this here, though it appears elsewhere on a newly created thread. I would appreciate being allowed to say this on one of the most active threads. It means a lot to me and is relevant to all things BSA Chapter 11 as concerns Scouters and survivors engaged in conversation. My previous post reads thusly:

"I have said this before but not for a good while. I'll repeat it now. I (we?) greatly value this forum, platform and conversation. I continue to be grateful for the outlet, even on the occasions I feel somewhat less than resoundingly welcomed. I know when I abruptly came out of lurking and chimed in many moons ago, I interrupted your Scouter conversation. In the overwhelming majority of cases, you have sidled up to listen, heard with an ear to understand and are willing to engage productively. Yes. It's hard for you and hard for us. I resist saying harder, but some will allow me to imply as much."

Edited by RememberSchiff
Moderator RS added link to that new thread created for you.
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

I'm going to risk reposting this here, though it appears elsewhere on a newly created thread. I would appreciate being allowed to say this on one of the most active forums. It means a lot to me and is relevant to all things BSA Chapter 11 as concerns Scouters and survivors engaged in conversation. My previous post reads thusly:

"I have said this before but not for a good while. I'll repeat it now. I (we?) greatly value this forum, platform and conversation. I continue to be grateful for the outlet, even on the occasions I feel somewhat less than resoundingly welcomed. I know when I abruptly came out of lurking and chimed in many moons ago, I interrupted your Scouter conversation. In the overwhelming majority of cases, you have sidled up to listen, heard with an ear to understand and are willing to engage productively. Yes. It's hard for you and hard for us. I resist saying harder, but some will allow me to imply as much."

I can understand your frustration.  I have never seen a post that talked about the lifelong benefits of scouting, the joy of scouting or anything of that ilk that was posted in a bankruptcy topic removed and relegated to its own topic.  

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Hopefully, this is on topic, though there are several wondering through these 20 pages.

DEBTORS’ RESPONSE TO THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF TORT CLAIMANTS’ STATUS REPORT RE: SECOND MODIFIED FIFTH AMENDED PLAN

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/87262082-a853-42e8-8cca-b7e120c2836c_8234.pdf

I read that and to me it appears once again the BSA wants to tarnish the TCC and downplay the amount of award that a survivor deserves.

Edited by johnsch322
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, johnsch322 said:

I read that and to me it appears once again the BSA wants to tarnish the TCC and downplay the amount of award that a survivor deserves.

BSA went hard after master ballots.  I think it will be interesting when Omni responses to discovery about what they listed as master vs direct ballots.  I wonder if the direct ballots all came directly from individuals ... or did coalition law firms send them directly as individual ballots to try and allow BSA to reject master ballots?  

To me, a direct ballot was one where an individual either mailed directly or went to Omni's site and filled out the form directly.  If a lawfirm was involved in either (by a lawyer filling out the ballot or sending an individual ballot on behalf of a claimant) ... then there is no difference with a master ballot.

It looks like BSA is going to try and disqualify reject votes by disqualifying some of the master ballots.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

It looks like BSA is going to try and disqualify reject votes by disqualifying some of the master ballots.

I think the biggest stink will come from the e-ballots.  All the feedback from the survivors that received them said it was a disaster.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • MattR locked and unlocked this topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...