Eagle1993

That seems like a pretty big step forward. It brings the settlement trust to $1.2B+.

My Troop has two crews headed to Philmont this year, and we are considering HA options for 2022 and 2023. Given the risks in bankruptcy, I think we should be looking at non BSA properties (just to be safe). We have gone to BWCA, kayaked to Apostle Islands and canoed in the Wisconsin River as our non BSA owned high adventure trips in the past. Do you have other recommendations? I've pieced together some from past postings but thought I would see if there are ideas I am missing.

Looks like it may be stripped out when texting photos unless they used iMessage.

Looks like the LDS, BSA and Insurance companies sat around a campfire today and filed their objections to the estimation request in unison. I'm curious if any other church files and objection or if JP Morgan steps into this arena at all. These are all essentially the same (at least as far as I can see). They are asking the court to reject TCC's request to estimate their claim. LDS objection https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/886539_2610.pdf BSA's objection https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/886555_2612.pdf Various Insurance Companies Objection https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/886551_2611.pdf Another group of Insurance Companies Objection https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/886563_2613.pdf Another Insurance Companies Objection https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/886565_2614.pdf

LDS Church with a strong message to the court ... stop the estimation request from the TCC. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/886539_2610.pdf This document is less than 20 pages so a fairly quick read. It appears the LDS Church is heavily involved in the mediation process but has not yet agreed to any contribution to the Settlement Trust. They raise a lot of objections to the estimation process as it would essentially pull in non Debtors (COs & LCs) into a bankruptcy they are not required to be part of (as they did not file Chapter 11). They believe a true/faire estimation process would take several years of discovery and weeks of trials followed by time for the decision and appeals (in other words, not within the timeframe of the bankruptcy). These are my takeaways, I'm sure you have others. I found the small peaks into the mediation process interesting (LDS is involved and they are helping to provide information to the mediators).

I actually agree with you that in the BSA today, the CO is the organization responsible for the unit and they should be vetting leaders. They should be interviewing them, ensuring they are trained, etc. However, I expect that rarely happens. The problem is that many COs are barely present. In my area, 40% of COs are churches, 22% are PTOs (PTOs have been dropping units left/right), 20% are fraternal groups, 10% are "Friends of...", 8% are odd balls (barber shop, doctor's office, fire station, etc.). Many units struggle to find their COR to approve the adult leader application and recharter let alone taking a more active role. If BSA starts saying COs need their own YPT and more vetting, I expect the 60% non church COs in my area to drop units nearly immediately and many churches may follow. I know in my case, the CO has no building (so cannot provide a meeting space) and the COR has been pretty much non existent the last 4-5 years. We go through a new COR & IH every year ... no consistency or involvement. This year, we actually have a COR that is long time member of the CO and seems somewhat interested ... but is still fairly absent. The CO model may be collapsing and COs are looking for less responsibility not more (the New Orleans' Catholic units are the recent example). BSA will likely have to shoulder more responsibility going forward and admit the CO oversight is failing in most (not all) cases.

Just stepping in quickly on this topic as clearly this has tentacles into many aspects of the BSA. While the issues are complex and difficult to clearly communicate in a forum, no one here condones or blames the scouts/children that were abused. The abuse was horrific and has life long consequences. The abusers and anyone who did not act appropriately to protect the scouts/children should be held accountable. What is being debated is what legal/moral/financial liability the organization should have from this abuse. That is not an easy topic to debate given the nature of the crimes. There is a lot of grey area here and when we are discussing losses of camps (or changes to the core program) it is tough on many of us as we see a threat to an organization that has positively shaped ours and countless youth lives. Heck, the first man who walked on the moon brought a world scouting patch with him and he talked to the National Jambo as he was on his way to the moon. So, as there are these back and forths, I hope everyone knows we are not attempting to diminish the crimes that occurred or the life long impact to those children. We are debating the impact to today's program, resources and children and what each Scouter believes is appropriate. If there are concerns with any posting, you can send it to the moderators for review. We will do our best with this tough topic.

@PIETROPon behalf of the scouter.com moderators, welcome.

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2012/10/boy_scout_perversion_files_off.html For a background on why were are here in bankruptcy, this case is likely the one many will point to. One question I would have is on a case by case bases ... who knew what & when and how quickly did they act. That should determine liability regardless of any systemic issue. The second question ... should the BSA have recognized, through their massive file system and decades of reports, that there was an epidemic of sex abusers within the BSA ranks. Should they have seen that simply removing and keeping leaders removed, after the fact, was no longer sufficient. If they should have realized there was an epidemic of sex abuse, then I agree they are liable for ALL cases. I think many claimants would state that BSA should have realized they had a systemic problem and fixed it proactively (perhaps we better vetting, random checks, etc.). So ... my question ... did the leaders within BSA know (or should have known), at some point, that they had a problem but the solutions were too painful so they didn't implement change? To me, that is the $10B question. If that answer is yes, then we deserve the losses. Unfortunately, our court system isn't great at working these out at a reasonable cost, so we are in bankruptcy. All we are left to settle on is how much & when.

I certainly hope they remain on public display. It seems like rich people like to have at least some of their collections circulate in public museums. Note that the bankruptcy settlement gives ownership of the art to the settlement trust not the money from the sale. They can decide when and how to sell the collection.

Until a decision is made about HA bases, legal status of LCs and an estimate of the abuse claims, the proposals and voting should stop. I'm surprised we are 14 months into this and we have yet to have a single court rule on these critical aspects of the bankruptcy.

Updated Plan (which includes the Toggle Plan) https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/886292_2594.pdf Redline Document https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/886294_2595.pdf

BSA just released their new plan. I figure that its a good time to lock this topic and start a new, part 3, Chapter 11 discussion. Hopefully it will keep these large threads manageable.

We lost all of our 6th graders due to Covid this year. Many of our early outdoor activities were cancelled and we had to go to Zoom as all of our typically meeting locations cancelled reservations. Getting new scouts excited about Scouts BSA is tough in a Covid year. I started following up with their parents this spring and there is some general excitement/interest in returning this coming fall. I pushed a bit about going to summer camp, but many of the kids just want to hang with their close friends in town as they haven't been able to do that for a year. I think a lot of kids are just depressed and/or burnt out on zoom. Hopefully after a reset summer, kids & parents will be looking to reengage in the fall. If your 12 year old is having a rough start, he is not alone. If this was my son's first year in Scouts BSA, I'm not sure he would be sticking with it. The only reason I see the older scouts sticking through is they know what normal looks like (so they are waiting for the reset) + some are working on some merit badges. This has been a really tough year, hopefully as we get back to a bit of normal soon.

I expect the TCC will go after all unrestricted assets that National owns. They have already signaled that includes Philmont & Summit. The BSA lead lawyer told the AP they expect litigation will be required to determine the outcome of some aspects of the plan. HABs are the big target/asset National has ... the courts will decide if they stay with the BSA or are sold off.

Hikes, EBORs, camps, COHs even Troop Meetings are all a great cure to doom scrolling through the Chapter 11 thread(s). Great to hear the good news!

Partially ... what he wants (and some other lawyers per their submissions) is the following. 1) Continue to reject all plans from National BSA. By doing this, you essentially force National into Chapter 7 as they have no other path to exit bankruptcy. 2) When National BSA goes Chapter 7, argue that since there is no entity left to renew charters of local councils, every local council charter is not renewed. Per LC agreements, if a charter is not renewed, all assets from the local councils go to National and are then part of the Chapter 7. The result is the complete and total liquidation of the entire BSA. I see 0% chance this will happen but I think this is what some lawyers are hoping for.

Given that BSA is now saying (in the media & court documents) if the grand bargain fails, councils will likely go bankrupt, I think they realize and are admitting those claims are likely worthless.

I have no idea what those internal conversations are, but this is a VERY tough sell to councils. 1) For councils with high likelihood of bankruptcy if this fails ... they will still debate what is restricted vs unrestricted assets. Having them turn over their friends of scouting funds, most of their camps, etc. with out a court order will be nearly impossible. 2) For councils that believe they are at a low likelihood of bankruptcy/lawsuits ... why would they want to part with key camps or endowments? I think attempting to have a grand bargain is nearly impossible. I think National would love a deal that includes councils/COs ... but unless a court rules against an entity or that an asset is unrestricted, its hard to give up the amount needed voluntarily.

Agreed. The HA bases are the major asset National has available. Most of this seems like a waste of time until a judge rules on their status. We are well over a year into bankruptcy and we have yet to be to see any judge rule on the bases. It’s time to get that moving.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/886060_2577.pdf This one has an interesting footnote (new plan coming in 36 hours or less): New plan will be a toggle plan ... from what I can see, the BSA believes that plan (which appears to drop the protection of LCs and COs) will be a worse outcome form claimants than their other proposal. However, it does seem like they may be offering that plan as well... we will see.

Did they announce any replacement strategy? Are the looking to limit sub-committees to the territory level only? I'm curious how they are transitioning from National - Region - Area - Council to National - Territory - Council for both professional and volunteer staff/committees.

I would expect the TCC and the future claims rep are not willing to bet on future payments from BSA. It seems like it would be best from all parties to arrive at a final number, write the check and move on. For future claims, my understanding is that there would be a bucket of money that would pay out for those claims not submitted by the bankruptcy filing deadline. I tend to agree with @David CO that parents and donors (and I expect COs) will want to have a hard line in the sand that future dues, fees, fundraising are all going 100% to the current youth activities and not past sins. I believe the message being sent right now is that fees and donations are protected, but there is definitely doubt that BSA is able to shield current incoming revenue from the bankruptcy until the bankruptcy is concluded.

I’ve been debating this in our Troop as well. I think masks for shorter outdoor gatherings are pretty easy requirement to comply with but I’m concerned about masks at summer camp within our site. We did it last year and wearing masks for 12 hours straight, day after day, in the hot/rainy conditions at camp was a bit much. We ended up strictly enforced masks outside our site and when cooking within the Patrol camp, but were lax outside those settings. We are still discussing how to handle this summer. In our town, 78% of eligible people have recipients their first dose, so I expect high vaccination rates by camp.

This makes me angry. Are the BSA lawyers simply looking to suck the organization dry. The judge needs to do something more than sternly scolding everyone to work harder. BSA lawyers look to have completely ignore the judge’s comments. If BSA disappears, it might be partially due to her ineptitude.