Chapter 11 Announced - Part 4 Revised Plan

[Eagle1993]

9 hours ago, SiouxRanger said:

In effect, National is saying, "We filed a plan that leaves you out in the cold, and we are willing to concede a little, but, if you don't take what we offer, well, time is short..."

 

I actually think National would love the COs to be part of the plan.  The problem ... name 1 CO that has ever had to pay a settlement due to a sex abuse case brought against the BSA?  There could be a case or two ... but I haven't found any.  The big cases were paid out by National, LCs and possibly insurance carriers.

So, I'm sure the COs are saying ... why do we have to pay anything?  The BSA owned the program and process around volunteers and provided liability coverage.  

I'm sure the TCC/claimants have no desire to let the COs off the hook for $0 in payment.  While they haven't paid (or paid much) in the past, there is nothing stopping future lawsuits against the COs.  Oh, and now that there is no BSA, no LC and limited insurance ... the CO will be there, alone, defending themselves in these lawsuits.  They could lose and lose big.

This is a very tough spot for the COs.  I'm sure they are looking for BSA to pitch in more $$ to cover them.  They will likely have to pitch in $ as well.  While I believe the BSA would love to include the COs, they also know they have time limitations in negotiations and limited assets they are willing to part with. 

So ... that is why mediation continues.  Could the LCs pitch in more plus some payment directly from COs to provide coverage?  Is there any other clever solution?

I really think if there is a solution, the Catholic & Methodist Churches will continue.  They truly believe it is God's work to help youth and scouting.  The only way I see them leave is if the financial impact/risk to their entire work is put at risk for this one program.  If they leave, BSA can provide facility use agreements, but I think the impact would be large and damaging.

[ThenNow]

1 hour ago, Eagle1993 said:

This is a very tough spot for the COs.  I'm sure they are looking for BSA to pitch in more $$ to cover them.  They will likely have to pitch in $ as well.  While I believe the BSA would love to include the COs, they also know they have time limitations in negotiations and limited assets they are willing to part with.

Yes, it is. Ideologically, relationally and financially.

Question: How many types of COs are there and what are the “baskets” of those groups? (That’s kind of a trick question.) Talking about the Catholic and Methodist Ad Hoc Committees represented by a single firm is a relatively manageable wrangle and negotiation, but what of all the other dangling participles? Is there a group of COs so removed from direct involvement and insulated by (per you guys) some LC’s mantra that, “All is well! B’ness as usual that they’re just oblivious? How do you even discuss this with COs that aren’t discretely subject to batching by national organization or affiliation of some kind? Blanket requests for contribution? Hire AVA Law Group to do an ad campaign, complete with call centers and people to sign your commitment to contribute? 

As to LCs putting in more, and I know there were intense negotiations, but why are they being allowed to make their 1/3 of assets contribution based on BSA numbers and not the BRG dashboards? Whatever happened to those by the way? Are they now among the stacks in the Doe Library with the first editions and antiquities collections? Sealed in a vault? While I’m at it, where are those promised Troop rosters? What’s so hard? Post them on your Fb and Instagram pages. Maybe do a little TikTok dance video for the big reveal. Or, file them with the court and not under seal. That should work. 

Edited August 19, 2021 by ThenNow

[Eagle94-A1]

Why would a former CO believe a BSA Facility Use Agreement would protect them  when the Charter Agreements  they have signed and the promises that were made to them are not being upheld now?

 

[mrjohns2]

56 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

 

Why would a former CO believe a BSA Facility Use Agreement would protect them  when the Charter Agreements  they have signed and the promises that were made to them are not being upheld now?

 

If I were a former CO, I wouldn’t sign the Facility Use Agreement. I would just treat the unit like any other outside group and have the unit sign MY facility use agreement.  

[CynicalScouter]

15 hours ago, ThenNow said:

What if the RSA is rejected for any or all of the seemingly innumerable reasons stated?

As I read it, the rejection of the RSA by the court voids it automatically.

More specifically, the RSA "Automatically terminates" on August 27 if it is not approved by the court before the "RSA Deadline".

1) RSA 1.0 says the RSA automatically terminates "if...(ii) the RSA Approval Order is not entered  on  or  before the RSA Deadline" defined in RSA 1.0 as July 28, 2021.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/1d5f346b-47b8-43d3-b4cf-4a0393aa8256_5466.pdf

2) RSA 2.0 redefines the RSA Deadline as August 27, 2021

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/ebb2c5f5-b7ba-4976-827b-ced854f51e1e_5813.pdf

Thus, if the court on August 19 rejects the RSA, then barring something odd (like a successful motion to reconsider) the RSA terminates on August 27 for failure to get an Approval Order entered.

 

Edited August 19, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[Eagle1993]

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

Question: How many types of COs are there and what are the “baskets” of those groups? (That’s kind of a trick question.) Talking about the Catholic and Methodist Ad Hoc Committees represented by a single firm is a relatively manageable wrangle and negotiation, but what of all the other dangling participles? Is there a group of COs so removed from direct involvement and insulated by (per you guys) some LC’s mantra that, “All is well! B’ness as usual that they’re just oblivious? How do you even discuss this with COs that aren’t discretely subject to batching by national organization or affiliation of some kind? Blanket requests for contribution? Hire AVA Law Group to do an ad campaign, complete with call centers and people to sign your commitment to contribute?

The big group is religious, followed by fraternal organizations then misc (PTOs, fire departments, etc.). I think the LDS, Methodist, Catholic, VFW, Knights of Columbus seem to be participating in the mediation.  What happens to the VFWs, Moose, Lions Clubs, Kiwanis, PTOs, etc. who don't participate?  Who knows?  Many of them are dying off anyway and probably have almost no assets and limited insurance coverage ... so probably not a big target for lawsuits.  I know our CO seems to be hand to mouth and perhaps has <$10K in the bank with no buildings and likely crappy insurance.  If someone sues them, they couldn't even afford a lawyer ... though no law firm would ever sue if they knew the recovery would be so low. That is probably true for many other COs ... outside the big churches.

Overall ... good question as the LC portion gives all LCs coverage.  I tend to think the CO portion would only cover the COs that pay in.

 

[fred8033]

32 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

If I were a former CO, I wouldn’t sign the Facility Use Agreement. I would just treat the unit like any other outside group and have the unit sign MY facility use agreement.  

Good point.   Many organizations allow outside groups to use their facilities.  This may be a situation where the CO is better off not signing anything.  Even signing the facility use agreement then introduces questions of involvement / responsibility in potentially bad situations.  

As a former long term COR, I really have never seen any benefit to the CO to sign either of these documents.  It was signed as good will and helping out the scouting unit.  The CO never had a driving need for a signed agreement.

[fred8033]

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

Yes, it is. Ideologically, relationally and financially.

Question: How many types of COs are there and what are the “baskets” of those groups? (That’s kind of a trick question.) Talking about the Catholic and Methodist Ad Hoc Committees represented by a single firm is a relatively manageable wrangle and negotiation, but what of all the other dangling participles?

@ThenNow ... Is it a real "grouping" for Catholic / Methodist Ad Hoc Committees?  The ad-hoc committees can have one law firm, but the units are chartered by the individual parishes and arch-diocese.   I thought I saw the arch-diocese had their own lawyers and had often filed their own claims / case filings in this bankruptcy.   So, ad-hoc committees might help with consistent advise to their members, but it's still just advice.  Individual members might have different needs / different views.  

[CynicalScouter]

6 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Even signing the facility use agreement then introduces questions of involvement / responsibility in potentially bad situations.  

True, but then again I think of the classic example of use of the fellowship/parish hall that rents out to, say, weddings.

If the bride slips and falls and files a claim against the church for the warped flooring (just bear with me a second), the facilities use agreement she signed for use of the space will have liability and other information in it to protect the church's interests in terms of liability.

I cannot imagine a situation where a church will allow what is now for all intents and purposes an OUTSIDE group (BSA) to come in and use their facilities absent SOME kind of facilities use agreement again in case little Johnnie or Jane Scout does a slip and fall.

Now, as noted previously, I would suspect some of these COs are going to insist using their OWN facilities use agreements especially after having been burned by the BSA. But, from what I read, the current BSA facilities use agreement was put together with a lot of input from COs, in particular the Methodist churches, late last fall. So, who knows, it may likely be case-by-case: United Methodist Church A will insist on their own form, UMC B will simply throw the unit out, while UMC C will use the BSA form. Etc.

[CynicalScouter]

12 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

 I thought I saw the arch-diocese had their own lawyers and had often filed their own claims / case filings in this bankruptcy.   So, ad-hoc committees might help with consistent advise to their members, but it's still just advice.  Individual members might have different needs / different views

Correct, however SO FAR other than the dioceses which are in bankruptcy themselves and therefore have unique needs (Guam) most of the dioceses and archdioceses have filed joinders to the Ad Hoc Committee's briefs.

Moreover, because Catholic Mutual Relief Society of America serves as an insurance plan for MANY churches in the United States and Canada and is part of the Ad Hoc Committee, the closest thing that the dioceses of the U.S. have to an "umbrella" organization is now in the mix.

Quote

Catholic Mutual is a non-profit corporation established in 1889 that operates as a self-protection fund of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States and Canada. In this role, Catholic Mutual issues certificates of coverage to members that provide them with coverage for certain property and casualty risks. Catholic Mutual counts 112 of the 195 United States Catholic archdioceses and dioceses among its members. Those Catholic archdioceses and dioceses in turn have parishes, schools and other catholic organizations within their geographical boundaries that are  Chartered  Organizations  that  sponsor  scouting  activities  and  that  participate  in  coverage against abuse claims under certificates issued by Catholic Mutual.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/7a62ffb7-ae7b-44d5-9355-e497ca133d02_5421.pdf

So really, while each individual diocese/archdiocese has its own interest, because Catholic Mutual covers so many of them as their insurer, Catholic Mutual can speak in a (somewhat) authoritative way.

Edited August 19, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[fred8033]

4 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Correct, however SO FAR other than the dioceses which are in bankruptcy themselves and therefore have unique needs (Guam) most of the dioceses and archdioceses have filed joinders to the Ad Hoc Committee's briefs.

Moreover, because Catholic Mutual Relief Society of America serves as an insurance plan for ALL churches in the United States and Canada and is part of the Ad Hoc Committee, the closest thing that the dioceses of the U.S. have to an "umbrella" organization is now in the mix.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/7a62ffb7-ae7b-44d5-9355-e497ca133d02_5421.pdf

So really, while each individual diocese/archdiocese has its own interest, because Catholic Mutual covers so many of them as their insurer, Catholic Mutual can speak in a (somewhat) authoritative way.

"insurance plan for ALL churches" ... a leading one, but I did not think all.  They don't represent "all". ... 134 of 485 diocese (arch and non-arch ... not sure on exact numbers ... just a quick search) ...   I was thinking the archdiocese of Boston versus Denver might have different needs as they had very different member bases and incidents.  The bigger decision factor might be the individual cash reserves of the individual diocese / archdiocese / parishes. 

[ThenNow]

18 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

@ThenNow ... Is it a real "grouping" for Catholic / Methodist Ad Hoc Committees?  The ad-hoc committees can have one law firm, but the units are chartered by the individual parishes and arch-diocese.   I thought I saw the arch-diocese had their own lawyers and had often filed their own claims / case filings in this bankruptcy.   So, ad-hoc committees might help with consistent advise to their members, but it's still just advice.  Individual members might have different needs / different views.  

I’ve not seen the breakdown in their objections, and etc. May have missed it, though. I just see counsel to the respective committees and to the combined Ad Hoc Committee, Potter, Anderson & Carroon in Wilmington, DE.

[fred8033]

People might not realize this.   I cringe re-reading my old posts.  I'm often doing current real work and revising these hobby posts.  I cringe when I see typos.  advise versus advice.  argh. 

[CynicalScouter]

3 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

"insurance plan for ALL churches" ... a leading one, but I did not think all.  They don't represent "all"

Yep and as soon as I posted it I edited to to "MOST"

[ThenNow]

2 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

"insurance plan for ALL churches" ... a leading one, but I did not think all.  They don't represent "all". ... 134 of 485 diocese (arch and non-arch ... not sure on exact numbers ... just a quick search) ... 

For example, it appears my Diocese is not insured by Catholic Mutual. In fact, I contacted them to confirm, but have yet to receive a response. Since I didn’t receive the filed notice of CM being granted “permitted party” access to POCs that implicate Catholic COs, I assume it is not. If my Diocese is insured by CM, I want to be on their radar and know they’re digging around in my POC.