Chapter 11 announced - Part 3 - BSA's Toggle Plan

[ThenNow]

13 minutes ago, RobertCalifornia said:

I enjoy the different opinions and the lessons about our legal system.

Welcome to DORU! (Different Opinions R Us)

[ThenNow]

1 hour ago, RobertCalifornia said:

The BSA has basically dragged me into this mess....file a claim by 5pm on Nov. 16 or be forgotten.

I want to echo this, which is an echo of my echo of my echo...

Something that doesn't seem to be understood is that many of us were bumping along in life, doing our level best to stay positive and productive on this side of a dirt nap. Then, out of the blue, here comes the BSA exploding the past in our face and plopping it on our lap, inviting us to tell our story and file a claim "or be forgotten." Their motive wasn't to help or compensate us. Let's be honest. It was to get this gorilla off their back so they can move on. I don't know if the impact and magnitude of what happened when each of us learned of the call for claims is fully appreciated by many. Some say we should just leave it lay and walk away. Some who say that are survivors and I completely respect their decision. But for me, I simply could not do that when there is some chance to obtain a measure of recompense to benefit my family. Again, I'm not looking for miracle soul surgery or a magic wand to "make it all better." Ain't my game or expectation. I was invited. I considered the invite. I counseled with my wife and therapist. I decided to step up and dredge up my story, documenting the details and the damage. And, as you said, "Here we are."

[yknot]

27 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

I want to echo this, which is an echo of my echo of my echo...

Something that doesn't seem to be understood is that many of us were bumping along in life, doing our level best to stay positive and productive on this side of a dirt nap. Then, out of the blue, here comes the BSA exploding the past in our face and plopping it on our lap, inviting us to tell our story and file a claim "or be forgotten." Their motive wasn't to help or compensate us. Let's be honest. It was to get this gorilla off their back so they can move on. I don't know if the impact and magnitude of what happened when each of us learned of the call for claims is fully appreciated by many. Some say we should just leave it lay and walk away. Some who say that are survivors and I completely respect their decision. But for me, I simply could not do that when there is some chance to obtain a measure of recompense to benefit my family. Again, I'm not looking for miracle soul surgery or a magic wand to "make it all better." Ain't my game or expectation. I was invited. I considered the invite. I counseled with my wife and therapist. I decided to step up and dredge up my story, documenting the details and the damage. And, as you said, "Here we are."

I think it's also important to point out that it seems like the people who are posting about this on this forum or are mostly lurking but popping in from time to time are... the relative success stories, if that would be the correct term? They were somehow able to function and hold jobs despite needing therapy and experiencing bleak episodes in their lives. The people who are not on here weighing in and likely not even included in the 83,000 claims are the ones who were largely lost. The ones who committed suicide, or turned around and became abusers themselves because that is a common sequelae of abuse. The ones who wound up on drugs or in jail or who went back and murdered their accused abuser later in life, destroying their own lives in the process. We've all seen those media reports. I think excessive anger or impatience or lack of understanding directed at victims is un scout like. I hope a way out of this can be figured out, but it can't be at the expense of doing what's right by people who were permanently damaged. They deserve some meaningful recompense. Not $102 billion, because it doesn't exist, but it seems clear the needle has to move up into the several billions. If BSA is serious about surviving, it will put something painful but realistic and meaningful on the table sooner rather than later. 

[Eagle1993]

26 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Their motive wasn't to help or compensate us. Let's be honest. It was to get this gorilla off their back so they can move on.

There were various threads leading up to bankruptcy.  It has been a long road.  

• Pre 1990s, its clear that some in BSA leadership (it appears to be primarily National, but some LCs) actively hid cases of sexual abuse.  There are now many quotes from BSA leaders (and other individuals including the Boys club) indicating that BSA hid abuse.  This set the stage for what is happening now.
• BSA has seen a slow decline of participants since a 1990s surge.
• 2000 - 2018 ... BSA fought in court and public over gay/transgender youth & gay/transgender leaders.  They managed to tick off both sides, causing COs to drop, donations to drop and likely further membership drops. 
• Some time in the +2015 range ... LDS likely informed BSA they were leaving (taking away a ton of funding & members)
• BSA adds girls to mixed response ... again, transition not handled well within ranks.  Some girls joined, some long time members dropped.  In the end, it wasn't a huge surge of members to cover the LDS loss.
• Since 2017 or so, BSA indicating the SOL changes and lookback windows could cause financial damage if insurance companies don't cover all loses.
• 2017 - 2020 various law changes on lookback (major one was New Jersey as that was National HQ of BSA for many years and opened up the waterfall of cases).
• Jan 1, 2020 LDS leaves BSA
• Feb 2020 BSA declares bankruptcy
• March 2020 Covid toll begins
• Summer 2020 BSA was ordered to fund a massive advertising campaign to reach 95% of males within the required age groups.  Per WSJ, some investment funds began funding groups to find claimants.
• Nothing happened in court since. (Well it seems like nothing).

If BSA didn't enter in bankruptcy in Feb 2020, they would have spent most of their money on lawyers defending the first round of several hundred lawsuits.  After losing a few of those cases, they would have wiped away the rest of their cash/value.  Most claimants would have received nothing.

I think BSA did want to create a settlement fund to ensure a broad group of abused could get some compensation (vs only the first few who won lawsuits).  I also agree that they wanted this to be behind them as well.  They didn't predict Covid nor 84,000 claims ... that pretty much destroyed any plans they had.  I don't think they had bad intent.  I really do think they though bankruptcy would be the best answer.  

In the meantime, most of us operate our units with little impact (at this point) from bankruptcy ... other than possibly the fee increases.  If Covid wasn't hitting, I expect they year would have been fairly normal.  I do expect the future may get a bit rough for operating BSA units.

[ThenNow]

1 hour ago, yknot said:

the relative success stories, if that would be the correct term? They were somehow able to function and hold jobs despite needing therapy and experiencing bleak episodes in their lives. The people who are not on here weighing in and likely not even included in the 83,000 claims are the ones who were largely lost. The ones who committed suicide...The ones who wound up on drugs or in jail or who went back and murdered their accused abuser later in life, destroying their own lives in the process. We've all seen those media reports.

One thing from me, after more publicly thanking you for this. Thank you. Sincerely. "There, but for the grace of God, go I." 

 

49 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

If BSA didn't enter in bankruptcy in Feb 2020, they would have spent most of their money on lawyers defending the first round of several hundred lawsuits.  After losing a few of those cases, they would have wiped away the rest of their cash/value.  Most claimants would have received nothing.

I think BSA did want to create a settlement fund to ensure a broad group of abused could get some compensation (vs only the first few who won lawsuits).  I also agree that they wanted this to be behind them as well.  They didn't predict Covid nor 84,000 claims ... that pretty much destroyed any plans they had.  I don't think they had bad intent.  I really do think they though bankruptcy would be the best answer.  

I appreciate this entire post. Good reflection and background for me.

I can see your point in both paragraphs. Of course, none of this can be seen as "voluntary," per se. That's not your point and I get it. As I also said a few times, I agree that this was obviously not what they expected. Still, they should've braced themselves better, given some of the widely known research and their own internal data. Men don't come forward easily or early and they had to know that. The inability to pivot and turn into the solution appears to be a giant hurdle. 

Edited May 5, 2021 by ThenNow
Oops.

[CynicalScouter]

5 minutes ago, yknot said:

If BSA is serious about surviving, it will put something painful but realistic and meaningful on the table sooner rather than later. 

And the LCs will be right behind, or else.

[MYCVAStory]

In reply to questions, regarding yesterday's Zoom call where all the LCs were invited, the following is "public" information because it was discussed during the presentation and not part of any mediation confidentiality:

1) Which councils sat in and who from the council was there? There is a giant bit of difference between the professional Scout Exec sitting in and, say, the volunteer Council President or General Counsel, for example.

Good question.  Those involved with scouting should ask their Council Exec.  The attendance was huge.

2) While I believe they went through "in great detail" the AGGREGATED council finances, I wonder if/when TCC was willing to share the SPECIFIC council finances of 200+ councils. There's no way that was done in 2 hours. Did TCC have documents they would be willing to share? Did share? Nothing would please me more than to see THAT number and compare/contrast vs. what councils have in their IRS 990s, for example. NOT to say that the LCs are lying, but for example LCs might be valuing properties based on depreciated value (for tax purposes, entirely reasonable and legal) whereas TCC is valuing properties based on current resale value.

The TCC and its financial professionals with BRG have completed in-depth analyses of EVERY Council to include appraisals of property, membership levels and trends, available cash, restricted and unrestricted assets, expense and revenue per scout, and a great deal more.  This was a product of TCC access to BSA and LC finances via internal systems.  Because some of this information is confidential to Councils specific Council assets were not shared in the meeting.  Examples for redacted Councils were presented as examples.  The TCC said it was trying to determine ho best to get ALL Council dashboards into the hands of local councils.    As well, graphical mapping showing Council properties, overlap, and because the TCC was challenged to do so, the properties that could be contributed to a trust while those retained would serve capacity needs.  990's were not used.  This was IN-DEPTH financial analysis and Council Volunteers might find it illuminating.  Of note, the financial professionals showed what each Council was able to contribute to a settlement and STILL remain at investment grade credit rating.

3) Why did BSA not want the TCC to directly communicate with the LCs?

This meeting was used to address the financial profiles and how they were completed.  The TCC stated it is willing to communicate directly with any LC.

4) Why did BSA not want the LCs to directly communicate with the TCC?

Ask the BSA.  The TCC's lead attorney started by saying that the Q&A feature would be used.  His on-site partner then announced that he had asked for it to be used and was just told that was denied.

 

 

 

[CynicalScouter]

9 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

This was a product of TCC access to BSA and LC finances via internal systems.  Because some of this information is confidential to Councils specific Council assets were not shared in the meeting. 

And that to me is fine. I mean, I get that some of this is confidential data.

9 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

This was IN-DEPTH financial analysis and Council Volunteers might find it illuminating.  Of note, the financial professionals showed what each Council was able to contribute to a settlement and STILL remain at investment grade credit rating.

I put the odds of any council allowing volunteers (other than the Council Key-3) to see this information at precisely 0%

Thank you for this. It has been EXTREMELY helpful

Edited May 6, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[CynicalScouter]

10 hours ago, MYCVAStory said:

There is no recording.  Your question should go to your Council Exec with the request that he share the TCC's analysis of your Council.

There is simply no way any Council Exec is going to share this info. None.

[T2Eagle]

13 hours ago, MYCVAStory said:

At 3:00PM EST yesterday all LCs had the opportunity to sit in on a two-hour presentation by the TCC professionals and its Financial consultants BRG discussing in great detail its analysis of all Council finances.  The TCC is providing Councils with their individual analyses.

Of note, this was NOT a part of the mediation schedule subject to confidentiality so this can be shared.  And, read into this what you want but the TCC stated that it asked that the Q&A feature be turned on by the BSA so the TCC could take questions and interact with the LCs .  The BSA was hosting the meeting and it refused. 

I don't think I understand what this is about.  What would be the value added by TCC or BRG?  What would they be telling councils that councils don't already know?

Assuming a median level of competence, each council knows what its assets are worth.  I suppose maybe a different metric on the real estate value of a camp might produce a significantly different valuation, but that seems like it would be an outlier.  My council has a few decent size endowment funds, their value can be known to the penny at any given time.  We also own two camps; any competent real estate appraiser is going to give you a valuation on them that's going to be no more than 5-10% different any from any other appraiser. 

So what was the purpose of this?

Edited May 6, 2021 by T2Eagle

[fred8033]

4 hours ago, MYCVAStory said:

... regarding yesterday's Zoom call where all the LCs were invited, ...

Dumb question ... By the TCC inviting the LCs directly and beginning direct discussions with LCs, isn't that TCC effectively acknowledging the LCs as separate entities ?   ...  incorporated separately ... paying taxes separately ... owning property separately  ...  now beginning to negotiate with TCC separately?  

Further, doesn't it create evidence that BSA doesn't control the council leadership?   (presidents, scout execs, etc?)   ... council leaders negotiating directly with TCC ...  choosing to opt in or opt out of a larger settlement ...   That lack of control is further evidence that councils are separate legal entities. 

TCC direct negotiations with councils subverts the claim that councils are liable in a BSA national bankruptcy.   Sure councils can be individual liable and sued individually, but I don't see how TCC talking to councils directly helps in a larger settlement of the BSA national bankruptcy.

 

Edited May 6, 2021 by fred8033

[TAHAWK]

Didn't Greater New York Council openly refuse to follow  BSA policy when that policy excluded gay persoons?

[fred8033]

8 hours ago, ThenNow said:

... BSA exploding the past in our face and plopping it on our lap, inviting us to tell our story and file a claim "or be forgotten." ...

We've debated till our faces are blue about BSA being at fault for past abuses.  

Sadly, we're of different opinion here too.  I can't blame BSA causing further harm by legally pursing bankruptcy. 

Society is foolish to think that revisiting these sins of the past ever heals the present.  Even more foolish to think that any financial compensation corrects for damages.  Blame the legislatures who extended liability from decades ago.  Blame advocates who think that's a good idea to muck rake the past.  Blame lawyers chasing ambulances.  Blame empty promises saying you will get significantly compensated.  Sadly, BSA is just taking the best legal course in a very ugly situation.  

Sadly, some will get extremely rich based on this, but it won't be the victims.  Even then, there are so many lawyers now involved I fear the individual lawyer award for most lawyers will only be several million.  A few head partners and equity owners will earn tens of millions or more.  The real profit will be in showing the highest legal expenses (after markup) and getting directly paid those expenses separate than a share of the summary award.  

I remember the months of TV infomercials about abuse.  Every time I saw on run, I was thinking about the airtime in the markets.  Those infomercials had to cost tens of millions to run.   ( many markets, many channels, etc) ... Someone had to finance these.  To get financing, they had to be darn sure there would be a big pay day.  ... When that happens, you can be darn sure someone has a financial motivation.  It's not oout of the good of their heart.  

I have a friend that always says to watch out for anything free because free will surely cost you a lot.  I'd say the same is true here.  Watch out for anyone that says you will be significantly compensated.  People don't do that unless they are going to get rich doing it.

[Eagle1993]

5 hours ago, fred8033 said:

That lack of control is further evidence that councils are separate legal entities. 

I don’t know the TCC opinion about this, but it seems most law firms filing objections over the offer are taking a different legal path.

1) BSA must provide at least the amount to the settlement trust as if National goes chapter 7.

2) If national goes chapter 7, there is no national BSA to renew local council charters.

3) If a local council charter isn’t renewed, then per the terms of their initial charter, 100% of their assets must be given to National BSA. 

4) So the liquidation offer must be the liquidation of the entire BSA.

It would help if the judge rules on this theory.

Edited May 6, 2021 by Eagle1993
Typo

[Eagle1993]

5 hours ago, fred8033 said:

Every time I saw on run, I was thinking about the airtime in the markets.  Those infomercials had to cost tens of millions to run.   ( many markets, many channels, etc) ... Someone had to finance these.  To get financing, they had to be darn sure there would be a big pay day.

A big part of the funding came from the BSA.  They had to spend $6.8M on those ads.  However, I believe you are correct that other funding came in as well.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/boy-scouts-launch-ads-on-how-abuse-victims-can-seek-money/2020/09/01/276a0688-ec84-11ea-bd08-1b10132b458f_story.html