Chapter 11 Announced - Part 6 - Plan 5.0/TCC Plan TBD

[Eagle1993]

More information coming.  I’m not sure if the $100M more from LC and BSA is contingent on releasing COs. 
 

As reflected in the Century and Chubb Companies Term Sheet, the Parties have also agreed to an additional contribution from the BSA and Local Councils on behalf of Chartered Organizations, which consists of: which consists of: (i) an additional $40 million contribution to the Settlement Trust, made up of an additional $15 million contribution from the Local Councils (in addition to the $500 million current cash and property contributions under the Fifth Amended Plan) and an increase of the DST Note from $100 to $125 million; and (ii) an additional payment of up to $100 million from the BSA and Local Councils attributable to growth in BSA membership over the coming years on account of Chartered Organizations’ continued sponsorship of Scouting units.


https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/4ad6b793-5040-43fa-8ab6-0c4a1ed44f18_7741.pdf

[1980Scouter]

Are we still on track for the TCC to release all the LC dashboards that will tell what they think is fair contribution by LC's?

This could be a game changer if they can get the word out that you can get a significant increase from LC's as they have the assets if you back a TCC plan.

The insurance settlements are peanuts of what they should be and I think people will see that. TCC I am sure has an insurance amount in mind that is significantly higher than offered. 

 

[vol_scouter]

1 hour ago, 1980Scouter said:

Are we still on track for the TCC to release all the LC dashboards that will tell what they think is fair contribution by LC's?

This could be a game changer if they can get the word out that you can get a significant increase from LC's as they have the assets if you back a TCC plan.

The insurance settlements are peanuts of what they should be and I think people will see that. TCC I am sure has an insurance amount in mind that is significantly higher than offered. 

 

The numbers that the TCC has suggested will likely not be approved by the local councils.  The numbers are far too high and makes other options more viable.  My personal opinion is that what the claimants will actually see in their bank accounts will likely be about the same or less than is being offered.

[Eagle1970]

Meanwhile, announced tonight is that Nassar's 500 victims will share a $380M settlement, while some BSA victims on the low end of the range may receive $1000, which these days is a trip or two to the grocery store.  Wow.

[vol_scouter]

5 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

Meanwhile, announced tonight is that Nassar's 500 victims will share a $380M settlement, while some BSA victims on the low end of the range may receive $1000, which these days is a trip or two to the grocery store.  Wow.

Far easier to compensate 500 than 82,500.  The entire BSA cannot provide the amount of money that many claimants feel would be fair.  

[MYCVAStory]

1 minute ago, vol_scouter said:

Far easier to compensate 500 than 82,500.  The entire BSA cannot provide the amount of money that many claimants feel would be fair.  

True.  THAT is why the insurers are so critical and the Hartford deal such a sin.  The USAG Nasser settlement is largely being paid for by insurers.  For perspective, average settlement is approximately $760 Thousand.  BSA average settlement, not so much....

[Eagle1970]

I really hope they validate the claims, at least to a reasonable degree before dolling out what money there is.

[SiouxRanger]

1 hour ago, vol_scouter said:

The numbers that the TCC has suggested will likely not be approved by the local councils.  The numbers are far too high and makes other options more viable.  My personal opinion is that what the claimants will actually see in their bank accounts will likely be about the same or less than is being offered.

I am not giving up on a failure of Plan 5 and the TCC having its say at the table with the added clout of a failed vote on National's Plan.

I am not sure I understand how the LC's have a say in the amount of their contribution, considering:

1.  Scout Executives are beholden to National for their career advancement, not to the local council, so Scout Executives have little reason not to toe the line with National's demands.

2.  If National collapses and liquidates, of what benefit is it to a local council to decline to pay what National dictates if that refusal leads to the lost of its parent?

[vol_scouter]

6 minutes ago, SiouxRanger said:

I am not giving up on a failure of Plan 5 and the TCC having its say at the table with the added clout of a failed vote on National's Plan.

I am not sure I understand how the LC's have a say in the amount of their contribution, considering:

1.  Scout Executives are beholden to National for their career advancement, not to the local council, so Scout Executives have little reason not to toe the line with National's demands.

2.  If National collapses and liquidates, of what benefit is it to a local council to decline to pay what National dictates if that refusal leads to the lost of its parent?

The Local Councils are independent charitable corporations that are controlled by their executive boards.  The contributions were determined by representatives of the ~250 local councils to meet the total that national needed.  The boards will make the final decisions - not the Scout executives.

If national files chapter 7, the local councils are on their own will likely go down the chapter 11 path that enriches attorneys and provides less compensation than claimants believe as we have seen for the BSA.

[MYCVAStory]

9 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

If national files chapter 7, the local councils are on their own will likely go down the chapter 11 path that enriches attorneys and provides less compensation than claimants believe as we have seen for the BSA.

That makes a fuller understanding of LC available assets even more important.  Awaiting what the TCC can share and hopefully soon.  Amazing how the LCs said they had pledged all they could....and now here's another 40 million.  Is that supposed to buy the protection for all chartered organizations?

[SiouxRanger]

20 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

The Local Councils are independent charitable corporations that are controlled by their executive boards.  The contributions were determined by representatives of the ~250 local councils to meet the total that national needed.  The boards will make the final decisions - not the Scout executives.

If national files chapter 7, the local councils are on their own will likely go down the chapter 11 path that enriches attorneys and provides less compensation than claimants believe as we have seen for the BSA.

I was under the perhaps mis-impression that National dictated the amount each council would contribute.  "Representatives of local councils determining the amount each council would pay" seems a recipe for chaos.  "Fine with my council that YOUR council pays "$XXX."  (And this scenario plays out with 250+/- councils?)

My mind flashes to the scene in one of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies where the council of the pirate kings all vote for themselves and the deadlock perpetuates.

Somewhere along all the posts on the many threads, I believe I recall a mention that no one knew how he amount of each council's contribution was derived other than that National set the amount and was unwilling to reveal the algorithm for its determinations.

If you have details, in depth information on the details, I'd be interested.

[vol_scouter]

13 minutes ago, SiouxRanger said:

I was under the perhaps mis-impression that National dictated the amount each council would contribute.  "Representatives of local councils determining the amount each council would pay" seems a recipe for chaos.  "Fine with my council that YOUR council pays "$XXX."  (And this scenario plays out with 250+/- councils?)

My mind flashes to the scene in one of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies where the council of the pirate kings all vote for themselves and the deadlock perpetuates.

Somewhere along all the posts on the many threads, I believe I recall a mention that no one knew how he amount of each council's contribution was derived other than that National set the amount and was unwilling to reveal the algorithm for its determinations.

If you have details, in depth information on the details, I'd be interested.

The representatives of the local councils worked out a formula that took into account size, financial situation, number of claims, and other factors.  The formula has not been released to my knowledge.  It was not promulgated by national.  There has been historically a tension between national and the local councils so the local councils would wish to perform this process independently of national.

[SiouxRanger]

17 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

The representatives of the local councils worked out a formula that took into account size, financial situation, number of claims, and other factors.  The formula has not been released to my knowledge.  It was not promulgated by national.  There has been historically a tension between national and the local councils so the local councils would wish to perform this process independently of national.

Thanks.  This helps to establish in my mind a tad bit of independence of local councils from National.

The mechanism of discussions among the Council representatives remains a mystery to me unless of the 250 or so councils, they selected a small number to form an executive group to formulate the formula.

As to the mystery of the origin of the formula, I recall it was kept confidential, and perhaps the prior poster did not have it right, or I read it wrong.

[Eagle1993]

So… what does this mean.

#1 - I think we will see one of the more entertaining and lively members of each hearing (Tancred Schiavoni) exit stage right.  Century will now want to get out of the way to allow this plan to pass.  
 

#2 - I am highly suspicious of the language about the $100M added as it contains a reference to COs.  LDS offered $240M … is BSA looking to buy out all CO liability with $100M linked to membership numbers?  That needs more info. If it simply a bump up from BSA and LCs that is real movement. 
 

#3 - The $40M adder from LCs seems pretty small, unless combined with the $100M above.  I doubt it makes a difference with the DOJ or TCC so I question why offer it.  
 

Overall, the biggest win for the BSA is they keep Tanc from delaying nearly every hearing.  That is a win for BSA and the Coalition:  I bet the TCC and DOJ still object the proposal.  The coalition will try to get everyone to switch to yes now.  However, they didn’t double the offer as they alluded to on a call. 

I have no idea where this ends, but I think we still have a long road ahead. 

[skeptic]

3 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

Far easier to compensate 500 than 82,500.  The entire BSA cannot provide the amount of money that many claimants feel would be fair.  

Of course, once it all shakes out, that 82,500 is likely to be far less.  I cannot see anything being approved without some vetting, especially with the ones that apparently were just pushed through at th last minute.