Podcasts about ad hoc committee

JP Lyninger is a proud JCPS graduate of Dupont Manual High School, as well as the University of Louisville. J.P. Lyninger has spent much of his time Fighting for a better Louisville at protests against police violence, anti-war rallies, direct actions, and standing in solidarity with workers on picket lines. JP is a long-time activist and organizer. In 2022, he served as campaign manager for Shelby Park resident Robert LeVertis Bell's campaign for State Representative. Later that year, JP managed Access For All KY's “No On 2” campaign, working in coalition with other campaigns to successfully defeat Amendment 2's permanent ban on abortion access in Kentucky. JP Lyninger is an active and engaged member of the local chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America. While currently a rank-and-file member of the chapter, he has previously held various leadership offices, including three terms as chapter Co-Chair. JP Lyninger is currently a member of the Louisville Metro Council representing District 6. JP ran for Metro Council because he knows a better world is possible. Louisville needs big changes to reverse economic and racial inequality. Louisville needs leaders ready to fight for the working class against budgets that prioritize tax deals for wealthy real estate developers over public transportation and basic infrastructure. JP is ready to fight with you for District 6, and for the needs of the working class across our city. In 2025, he serves as a member of the Ad Hoc Committee on Efficiencies of Boards & Commissions, Budget, Government Oversight/Audit & Appointments, and Parks & Sustainability Committees.

In this episode of The Lake Forest Podcast, we sit down with Regina Etherton, the Vice President of the Lake Forest Caucus and the incoming President, to break down:✅ The controversy surrounding the Bylaws changes!✅ What REALLY happened with the Ad Hoc Committee?✅ Why does the Caucus President hand-pick their successor?✅ Should the leadership selection process be more democratic?✅ Does the Caucus need a steady fundraising strategy?✅ How does the Caucus define a "conflict of interest"?

Ted Smyth, Chair of the Clinton Institute for American Studies in UCD and a member of the Ad Hoc Committee to Protect the Good Friday Agreement, and Sinn Féin Senator Conor Murphy

The Minority in Parliament has formally requested the removal of Emmanuel Bedzrah as Chairman of the Ad-Hoc Committee investigating recent disruptions during a sitting of the Appointments Committee.

Watch Download File

1UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISIONIn re:INTRUM AB, et al.,1Debtors.Chapter 11Case No. 24-90575 (CML)(Jointly Administered)NOTICE OF APPEALPursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a) and Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure 8002 and 8003,notice is hereby given that the Ad Hoc Committee of holders of 2025 notes issued by Intrum AB(the “AHC”) hereby appeals to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texasfrom (i) the Order Denying Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule ofBankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (ECF No. 262) (the “Motion to Dismiss Order”) and (ii) theOrder (I) Approving Disclosure Statement and (II) Confirming Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11Plan of Intrum AB and Its Affiliated Debtor (Further Technical Modifications) (ECF No. 263) (the“Confirmation Order”). A copy of the Motion to Dismiss Order is attached as Exhibit A and acopy of the Confirmation Order is attached as Exhibit B. Additionally, the transcript of theBankruptcy Court's oral ruling accompanying the Motion to Dismiss Order and ConfirmationOrder (ECF No. 275) is attached as Exhibit C.Below are the names of all parties to this appeal and their respective counsel:1 The Debtors in these Chapter 11 Cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors'service address in these Chapter 11 Cases is 801 Travis Street, Ste 2101, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 62I. APPELLANTA. Name of Appellant:The members of the AHC include:Boundary Creek Master Fund LP; CF INT Holdings Designated Activity Company; CaiusCapital Master Fund; Diameter Master Fund LP; Diameter Dislocation Master Fund II LP; FirTree Credit Opportunity Master Fund, LP; MAP 204 Segregated Portfolio, a segregated portfolioof LMA SPC; Star V Partners LLC; and TQ Master Fund LP.Attorneys for the AHC:QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLPChristopher D. Porter (SBN 24070437)Joanna D. Caytas (SBN 24127230)Melanie A. Guzman (SBN 24117175)Cameron M. Kelly (SBN 24120936)700 Louisiana Street, Suite 3900Houston, TX 77002Telephone: (713) 221-7000Facsimile: (713) 221-7100Email: chrisporter@quinnemanuel.comjoannacaytas@quinnemanuel.commelanieguzman@quinnemanuel.comcameronkelly@quinnemanuel.com-and-Benjamin I. Finestone (admitted pro hac vice)Sascha N. Rand (admitted pro hac vice)Katherine A. Scherling (admitted pro hac vice)295 5th AvenueNew York, New York 10016Telephone: (212) 849-7000Facsimile: (212) 849-7100Email: benjaminfinestone@quinnemanuel.comsascharand@quinnemanuel.comkatescherling@quinnemanuel.comB. Positions of appellant in the adversary proceeding or bankruptcy case that isthe subject of this appeal:CreditorsCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 2 of 63II. THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPEALA. Judgment, order, or decree appealed from:The Order Denying Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule ofBankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (ECF No. 262); the Order (I) Approving Disclosure Statementand (II) Confirming Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Intrum AB and Its Affiliated Debtor(Further Technical Modifications) (ECF No. 263); and the December 31, 2024 Transcript of OralRuling Before the Honorable Christopher M. Lopez United States Bankruptcy Court Judge (ECFNo. 275).B. The date on which the judgment, order, or decree was entered:The Motion to Dismiss Order and the Confirmation Order were entered on December 31,2024. The Court issued its oral ruling accompanying the Motion to Dismiss Order and theConfirmation Order on December 31, 2024.III. OTHER PARTIES TO THIS APPEALIntrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLCMILBANK LLPDennis F. Dunne (admitted pro hac vice)Jaimie Fedell (admitted pro hac vice)55 Hudson YardsNew York, NY 10001Telephone: (212) 530-5000Facsimile: (212) 530-5219Email: ddunne@milbank.comjfedell@milbank.com–and–Andrew M. Leblanc (admitted pro hac vice)Melanie Westover Yanez (admitted pro hac vice)1850 K Street, NW, Suite 1100Washington, DC 20006Telephone: (202) 835-7500Facsimile: (202) 263-7586Email: aleblanc@milbank.commwyanez@milbank.com–and–PORTER HEDGES LLPJohn F. Higgins (SBN 09597500)Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 3 of 64Eric D. Wade (SBN 00794802)M. Shane Johnson (SBN 24083263)1000 Main Street, 36th FloorHouston TX 77002Telephone: (713) 226-6000Facsimile: (713) 226-6248Email: jhiggins@porterhedges.comewade@porterhedges.comsjohnson@porterhedges.comIV. OTHER PARTIES THAT MAY HAVE AN INTEREST IN THIS APPEALThe following chart lists certain parties that are not parties to this appeal, but that may havean interest in the outcome of the case. These parties should be served with notice of this appealby the Debtors who are aware of their identities and best positioned to provide notice.All Other Creditors of the Debtors, Including, But Not Limited To:• Certain funds and accounts managed by BlackRock Investment Management (UK)Limited or its affiliates;• Capital Four;• Davidson Kempner European Partners, LLP;• Intermediate Capital Managers Limited;• Mandatum Asset Management Ltd;• H.I.G. Capital, LLC;• Spiltan Hograntefond; Spiltan Rantefond Sverige; and Spiltan Aktiefond Stabil;• The RCF SteerCo Group;• Swedbank AB (publ).Any Holder of Stock of the Debtors• Any holder of stock of the Debtors, including their successors and assigns.Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 4 of 65Respectfully submitted this 13th day of January, 2025.QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &SULLIVAN, LLP/s/ Christopher D. PorterChristopher D. Porter (SBN 24070437)Joanna D. Caytas (SBN 24127230)Melanie A. Guzman (SBN 24117175)Cameron M. Kelly (SBN 24120936)700 Louisiana Street, Suite 3900Houston, TX 77002Telephone: (713) 221-7000Facsimile: (713) 221-7100Email: chrisporter@quinnemanuel.comjoannacaytas@quinnemanuel.commelanieguzman@quinnemanuel.comcameronkelly@quinnemanuel.com-and-Benjamin I. Finestone (admitted pro hac vice)Sascha N. Rand (admitted pro hac vice)Katherine A. Scherling (admitted pro hac vice)295 5th AvenueNew York, New York 10016Telephone: (212) 849-7000Facsimile: (212) 849-7100Email: benjaminfinestone@quinnemanuel.comsascharand@quinnemanuel.comkatescherling@quinnemanuel.comCOUNSEL FOR THE AD HOC COMMITTEE OFINTRUM AB 2025 NOTEHOLDERSCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 5 of 6CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEI, Christopher D. Porter, hereby certify that on the 13th day of January, 2025, a copy ofthe foregoing document has been served via the Electronic Case Filing System for the UnitedStates Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas./s/ Christopher D. PorterBy: Christopher D. PorterCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 6 of 6EXHIBIT ACase 24-90575 Document 296-1 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 31IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISION)In re: ) Chapter 11)Intrum AB, et al.,1 ) Case No. 24-90575 (CML)))Jointly AdministeredDebtors. ))ORDER DENYING MOTION OF THE AD HOCCOMMITTEE OF HOLDERS OF INTRUM AB NOTES DUE 2025TO DISMISS CHAPTER 11 CASES PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. § 1112(B) ANDFEDERAL RULE OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE 1017(F)(1)(Related to Docket No. 27)This matter, having come before the Court upon the Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee ofHolders of Intrum AB Notes Due 2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §1112(b) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) [Docket No. 27] (the “Motion toDismiss”); and this Court having considered the Debtors' Objection to the Motion of the Ad HocCommittee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due 2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (the “Objection”) andany other responses or objections to the Motion to Dismiss; and this Court having jurisdiction overthis matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334 and the Amended Standing Order; and this Court havingfound that this is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2); and this Court having foundthat it may enter a final order consistent with Article III of the United States Constitution; and thisCourt having found that the relief requested in the Objection is in the best interests of the Debtors'1 The Debtors in these Chapter 11 Cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors' serviceaddress in these Chapter 11 Cases is 801 Travis Street, STE 2101, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.United States Bankruptcy CourtSouthern District of TexasENTEREDDecember 31, 2024Nathan Ochsner, ClerkCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29662-1 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 2 o of f2 32estates; and this Court having found that the Debtors' notice of the Objection and opportunity fora hearing on the Motion to Dismiss and Objection were appropriate and no other notice need beprovided; and this Court having reviewed the Motion to Dismiss and Objection and havingheard the statements in support of the relief requested therein at a hearing before this Court; andthis Court having determined that the legal and factual bases set forth in the Objectionestablish just cause for the relief granted herein; and upon all of the proceedings had beforethis Court; and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor, it is HEREBYORDERED THAT:1. The Motion to Dismiss is Denied for the reasons stated at the December 31, 2024 hearing.2. This Court retains exclusive jurisdiction and exclusive venue with respect to allmatters arising from or related to the implementation, interpretation, and enforcement of this Order.DAeucegmubste 0r 23,1 2, 0210294CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29662-1 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 3 o of f2 3EXHIBIT BCase 24-90575 Document 296-2 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 135IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISION)In re: ) Chapter 11)Intrum AB et al.,1 ) Case No. 24-90575 (CML)))(Jointly Administered)Debtors. ))ORDER (I) APPROVINGDISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND(II) CONFIRMING JOINT PREPACKAGED CHAPTER 11PLAN OF INTRUM AB AND ITS AFFILIATEDDEBTOR (FURTHER TECHNICAL MODIFICATIONS)The above-captioned debtors and debtors in possession (collectively, the“Debtors”), having:a. entered into that certain Lock-Up Agreement, dated as of July 10, 2024 (asamended and restated on August 15, 2024, and as further modified,supplemented, or otherwise amended from time to time in accordance with itsterms, the “the Lock-Up Agreement”) and that certain Backstop Agreement,dated as of July 10, 2024, (as amended and restated on November 15, 2024 andas further modified, supplemented, or otherwise amended from time to time inaccordance with its terms), setting out the terms of the backstop commitmentsprovided by the Backstop Providers to backstop the entirety of the issuance ofNew Money Notes (as may be further amended, restated, amended and restated,modified or supplemented from time to time in accordance with the termsthereof, the “Backstop Agreement”) which set forth the terms of a consensualfinancial restructuring of the Debtors;b. commenced, on October 17, 2024, a prepetition solicitation (the “Solicitation”)of votes on the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of IntrumAB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (asthe same may be further amended, modified and supplemented from time totime, the “Plan”), by causing the transmittal, through their solicitation andballoting agent, Kroll Restructuring Administration LLC (“Kroll”), to theholders of Claims entitled to vote on the Plan of, among other things: (i) the1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors' serviceaddress in these chapter 11 cases is 801 Travis Street, STE 2102, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.United States Bankruptcy CourtSouthern District of TexasENTEREDDecember 31, 2024Nathan Ochsner, ClerkCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 2 o of f1 133452Plan, (ii) the Disclosure Statement for Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate (as the same may befurther amended, modified and supplemented from time to time, the“Disclosure Statement”), and (iii) the Ballots and Master Ballot to vote on thePlan (the “Ballots”), (iv) the Affidavit of Service of Solicitation Materials[Docket No. 7];c. commenced on November 15, 2024 (the “Petition Date”), these chapter 11 cases(these “Chapter 11 Cases”) by filing voluntary petitions in the United StatesBankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas (the “Bankruptcy Court”or the “Court”) for relief under chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code(the “Bankruptcy Code”);d. Filed on November 15, 2024, the Affidavit of Service of Solicitation Materials[Docket No. 7] (the “Solicitation Affidavit”);e. Filed, on November 16, 2024 the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code (Technical Modifications) [Docket No. 16] and theDisclosure Statement for Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Intrum AB andits Debtor Affiliate [Docket No. 17];f. Filed on November 16, 2024, the Declaration of Andrés Rubio in Support of ofthe Debtors' Chapter 11 Petitions and First Day Motions [Docket No. 14] (the“First Day Declaration”);g. Filed on November 17, 2024, the Declaration of Alex Orchowski of KrollRestructuring Administration LLC Regarding the Solicitation of Votes andTabulation of Ballots Case on the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code [Docket No. 18] (the “Voting Declaration,” andtogether with the Plan, the Disclosure Statement, the Ballots, and theSolicitation Affidavit, the “Solicitation Materials”);h. obtained, on November 19, 2024, the Order(I) Scheduling a Combined Hearingon (A) Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement and (B) Confirmation of the Plan,(II) Approving Solicitation Procedures and Form and Manner of Notice ofCommencement, Combined Hearing, and Objection Deadline, (III) FixingDeadline to Object to Disclosure Statement and Plan, (IV) Conditionally (A)Directing the United States Trustee Not to Convene Section 341 Meeting ofCreditors and (B) Waiving Requirement to File Statements of Financial Affairsand Schedules of Assets and Liabilities, and (V) Granting Related Relief[Docket No. 71] (the “Scheduling Order”), which, among other things: (i)approved the prepetition solicitation and voting procedures, including theConfirmation Schedule (as defined therein); (ii) conditionally approved theDisclosure Statement and its use in the Solicitation; and (iii) scheduled theCombined Hearing on December 16, 2024, at 1:00 p.m. (prevailing CentralCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 3 o of f1 133453Time) to consider the final approval of the Disclosure Statement and theconfirmation of the Plan (the “Combined Hearing”);i. served, through Kroll, on November 20, 2025, on all known holders of Claimsand Interests, the U.S. Trustee and certain other parties in interest, the Noticeof: (I) Commencement of Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Cases; (II) Hearing on theDisclosure Statement and Confirmation of the Plan, and (III) Certain ObjectionDeadlines (the “Combined Hearing Notice”) as evidence by the Affidavit ofService [Docket No. 160];j. caused, on November 25 and 27, 2024, the Combined Hearing Notice to bepublished in the New York Times (national and international editions) and theFinancial Times (international edition), as evidenced by the Certificate ofPublication [Docket No. 148];k. Filed and served, on December 10, 2024, the Plan Supplement for the Debtors'Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization [Docket 165];l. Filed on December 10, 2024, the Declaration of Jeffrey Kopa in Support ofConfirmation of the Joint Prepackaged Plan of Reorganization of Intrum ABand its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code [DocketNo. 155];m. Filed on December 14, 2024, the:i. Debtors' Memorandum of Law in Support of an Order: (I) Approving, on aFinal Basis, Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement; (II) Confirming theJoint Prepackaged Plan of Reorganization; and (III) Granting Related Relief[Docket No. 190] (the “Confirmation Brief”);ii. Declaration of Andrés Rubio in Support of Confirmation of the JointPrepackaged Plan of Reorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate.[Docket No. 189] (the “Confirmation Declaration”); andiii. Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of Intrum AB and itsDebtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (FurtherTechnical Modifications) [Docket No. 191];n. Filed on December 18, 2024, the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code (Further Technical Modifications) [Docket No. 223];CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 3 4 o of f1 133454WHEREAS, the Court having, among other things:a. set December 12, 2024, at 4:00 p.m. (prevailing Central Time) as the deadlinefor Filing objection to the adequacy of the Disclosure Statement and/orConfirmation2 of the Plan (the “Objection Deadline”);b. held, on December 16, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. (prevailing Central Time) [andcontinuing through December 17, 2024], the Combined Hearing;c. heard the statements, arguments, and any objections made at the CombinedHearing;d. reviewed the Disclosure Statement, the Plan, the Ballots, the Plan Supplement,the Confirmation Brief, the Confirmation Declaration, the SolicitationAffidavit, and the Voting Declaration;e. overruled (i) any and all objections to approval of the Disclosure Statement, thePlan, and Confirmation, except as otherwise stated or indicated on the record,and (ii) all statements and reservations of rights not consensually resolved orwithdrawn, unless otherwise indicated; andf. reviewed and taken judicial notice of all the papers and pleadings Filed(including any objections, statement, joinders, reservations of rights and otherresponses), all orders entered, and all evidence proffered or adduced and allarguments made at the hearings held before the Court during the pendency ofthese cases;NOW, THEREFORE, it appearing to the Bankruptcy Court that notice of theCombined Hearing and the opportunity for any party in interest to object to the DisclosureStatement and the Plan having been adequate and appropriate as to all parties affected or to beaffected by the Plan and the transactions contemplated thereby, and the legal and factual bases setforth in the documents Filed in support of approval of the Disclosure Statement and Confirmationand other evidence presented at the Combined Hearing establish just cause for the relief grantedherein; and after due deliberation thereon and good cause appearing therefor, the BankruptcyCourt makes and issues the following findings of fact and conclusions of law, and orders for thereasons stated on the record at the December 31, 2024 ruling on plan confirmation;2 Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein have meanings given to them in the Plan and/or theDisclosure Statement. The rules of interpretation set forth in Article I.B of the Plan apply to this CombinedOrder.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 4 5 o of f1 133455I. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAWIT IS HEREBY FOUND AND DETERMINED THAT:A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.1. The findings and conclusions set forth herein and in the record of theCombined Hearing constitute the Bankruptcy Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law underRule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as made applicable herein by Bankruptcy Rules7052 and 9014. To the extent any of the following conclusions of law constitute findings of fact,or vice versa, they are adopted as such.B. Jurisdiction, Venue, Core Proceeding.2. This Court has jurisdiction over these Chapter 11 Cases pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 1334. Venue of these proceedings and the Chapter 11 Cases in this district is properpursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409. This is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 157(b)(2) and this Court may enter a final order hereon under Article III of the United StatesConstitution.C. Eligibility for Relief.3. The Debtors were and continue to be entities eligible for relief under section109 of the Bankruptcy Code and the Debtors were and continue to be proper proponents of thePlan under section 1121(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.D. Commencement and Joint Administration of the Chapter 11 Cases.4. On the Petition Date, the Debtors commenced the Chapter 11 Cases. OnNovember 18, 2024, the Court entered an order [Docket No. 51] authorizing the jointadministration of the Chapter 11 Case in accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 1015(b). The Debtorshave operated their businesses and managed their properties as debtors in possession pursuant toCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 5 6 o of f1 133456sections 1107(a) and 1108 of the Bankruptcy Code. No trustee, examiner, or statutory committeehas been appointed in these Chapter 11 Cases.E. Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement.5. The Disclosure Statement and the exhibits contained therein (i) containssufficient information of a kind necessary to satisfy the disclosure requirements of applicablenonbankruptcy laws, rules and regulations, including the Securities Act; and (ii) contains“adequate information” as such term is defined in section 1125(a)(1) and used in section1126(b)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code, with respect to the Debtors, the Plan and the transactionscontemplated therein. The Filing of the Disclosure Statement satisfied Bankruptcy Rule 3016(b).The injunction, release, and exculpation provisions in the Plan and the Disclosure Statementdescribe, in bold font and with specific and conspicuous language, all acts to be enjoined andidentify the Entities that will be subject to the injunction, thereby satisfying Bankruptcy Rule3016(c).F. Solicitation.6. As described in and evidenced by the Voting Declaration, the Solicitationand the transmittal and service of the Solicitation Materials were: (i) timely, adequate, appropriate,and sufficient under the circumstances; and (ii) in compliance with sections 1125(g) and 1126(b)of the Bankruptcy Code, Bankruptcy Rules 3017 and 3018, the applicable Local Bankruptcy Rules,the Scheduling Order and all applicable nonbankruptcy rules, laws, and regulations applicable tothe Solicitation, including the registration requirements under the Securities Act. The SolicitationMaterials, including the Ballots and the Opt Out Form (as defined below), adequately informedthe holders of Claims entitled to vote on the Plan of the procedures and deadline for completingand submitting the Ballots.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 6 7 o of f1 1334577. The Debtors served the Combined Hearing Notice on the entire creditormatrix and served the Opt Out Form on all Non-Voting Classes. The Combined Hearing Noticeadequately informed Holders of Claims or Interests of critical information regarding voting on (ifapplicable) and objecting to the Plan, including deadlines and the inclusion of release, exculpation,and injunction provisions in the Plan, and adequately summarized the terms of the Third-PartyRelease. Further, because the form enabling stakeholders to opt out of the Third-Party Release (the“Opt Out Form”) was included in both the Ballots and the Opt Out Form, every known stakeholder,including unimpaired creditors was provided with the means by which the stakeholders could optout of the Third-Party Release. No further notice is required. The period for voting on the Planprovided a reasonable and sufficient period of time and the manner of such solicitation was anappropriate process allowing for such holders to make an informed decision.G. Tabulation.8. As described in and evidenced by the Voting Declaration, (i) the holders ofClaims in Class 3 (RCF Claims) and Class 5 (Notes Claims) are Impaired under the Plan(collectively, the “Voting Classes”) and have voted to accept the Plan in the numbers and amountsrequired by section 1126 of the Bankruptcy Code, and (ii) no Class that was entitled to vote on thePlan voted to reject the Plan. All procedures used to tabulate the votes on the Plan were in goodfaith, fair, reasonable, and conducted in accordance with the applicable provisions of theBankruptcy Code, the Bankruptcy Rules, the Local Rules, the Disclosure Statement, theScheduling Order, and all other applicable nonbankruptcy laws, rules, and regulations.H. Plan Supplement.9. On December 10, 2024, the Debtors Filed the Plan Supplement with theCourt. The Plan Supplement (including as subsequently modified, supplemented, or otherwiseCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 7 8 o of f1 133458amended pursuant to a filing with the Court), complies with the terms of the Plan, and the Debtorsprovided good and proper notice of the filing in accordance with the Bankruptcy Code, theBankruptcy Rules, the Scheduling Order, and the facts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases.All documents included in the Plan Supplement are integral to, part of, and incorporated byreference into the Plan. No other or further notice is or will be required with respect to the PlanSupplement. Subject to the terms of the Plan and the Lock-Up Agreement, and only consistenttherewith, the Debtors reserve the right to alter, amend, update, or modify the Plan Supplementand any of the documents contained therein or related thereto, in accordance with the Plan, on orbefore the Effective Date.I. Modifications to the Plan.10. Pursuant to section 1127 of the Bankruptcy Code, the modifications to thePlan described or set forth in this Combined Order constitute technical or clarifying changes,changes with respect to particular Claims by agreement with holders of such Claims, ormodifications that do not otherwise materially and adversely affect or change the treatment of anyother Claim or Interest under the Plan. These modifications are consistent with the disclosurespreviously made pursuant to the Disclosure Statement and Solicitation Materials, and notice ofthese modifications was adequate and appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the Chapter11 Cases. In accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 3019, these modifications do not require additionaldisclosure under section 1125 of the Bankruptcy Code or the resolicitation of votes under section1126 of the Bankruptcy Code, and they do not require that holders of Claims or Interests beafforded an opportunity to change previously cast acceptances or rejections of the Plan.Accordingly, the Plan is properly before this Court and all votes cast with respect to the Plan priorto such modification shall be binding and shall apply with respect to the Plan.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 8 9 o of f1 133459J. Objections Overruled.11. Any resolution or disposition of objections to Confirmation explained orotherwise ruled upon by the Court on the record at the Confirmation Hearing is herebyincorporated by reference. All unresolved objections, statements, joinders, informal objections,and reservations of rights are hereby overruled on the merits.K. Burden of Proof.12. The Debtors, as proponents of the Plan, have met their burden of provingthe elements of sections 1129(a) and 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code by a preponderance of theevidence, the applicable evidentiary standard for Confirmation. Further, the Debtors have proventhe elements of sections 1129(a) and 1129(b) by clear and convincing evidence. Each witness whotestified on behalf of the Debtors in connection with the Confirmation Hearing was credible,reliable, and qualified to testify as to the topics addressed in his testimony.L. Compliance with the Requirements of Section 1129 of the BankruptcyCode.13. The Plan complies with all applicable provisions of section 1129 of theBankruptcy Code as follows:a. Section 1129(a)(1) – Compliance of the Plan with Applicable Provisions of theBankruptcy Code.14. The Plan complies with all applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code,including sections 1122 and 1123, as required by section 1129(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code.i. Section 1122 and 1123(a)(1) – Proper Classification.15. The classification of Claims and Interests under the Plan is proper under theBankruptcy Code. In accordance with sections 1122(a) and 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code,Article III of the Plan provides for the separate classification of Claims and Interests at each Debtorinto Classes, based on differences in the legal nature or priority of such Claims and Interests (otherCaCsaes e2 42-49-09507557 5 D oDcoucmumenetn 2t 9266-32 FFiilleedd iinn TTXXSSBB oonn 1021//3113//2245 PPaaggee 91 0o fo 1f 3143510than Administrative Claims, Professional Fee Claims, and Priority Tax Claims, which areaddressed in Article II of the Plan and Unimpaired, and are not required to be designated asseparate Classes in accordance with section 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code). Valid business,factual, and legal reasons exist for the separate classification of the various Classes of Claims andInterests created under the Plan, the classifications were not implemented for any improperpurpose, and the creation of such Classes does not unfairly discriminate between or among holdersof Claims or Interests.16. In accordance with section 1122(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, each Class ofClaims or Interests contains only Claims or Interests substantially similar to the other Claims orInterests within that Class. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of sections 1122(a),1122(b), and 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Codeii. Section 1123(a)(2) – Specifications of Unimpaired Classes.17. Article III of the Plan specifies that Claims and Interests in the classesdeemed to accept the Plan are Unimpaired under the Plan. Holders of Intercompany Claims andIntercompany Interests are either Unimpaired and conclusively presumed to have accepted thePlan, or are Impaired and deemed to reject (the “Deemed Rejecting Classes”) the Plan, and, ineither event, are not entitled to vote to accept or reject the Plan. In addition, Article II of the Planspecifies that Administrative Claims and Priority Tax Claims are Unimpaired, although the Plandoes not classify these Claims. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1123(a)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 101 o of f1 1334511iii. Section 1123(a)(3) – Specification of Treatment of Voting Classes18. Article III.B of the Plan specifies the treatment of each Voting Class underthe Plan – namely, Class 3 and Class 5. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1123(a)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code.iv. Section 1123(a)(4) – No Discrimination.19. Article III of the Plan provides the same treatment to each Claim or Interestin any particular Class, as the case may be, unless the holder of a particular Claim or Interest hasagreed to a less favorable treatment with respect to such Claim or Interest. Accordingly, the Plansatisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code.v. Section 1123(a)(5) – Adequate Means for Plan Implementation.20. The Plan and the various documents included in the Plan Supplementprovide adequate and proper means for the Plan's execution and implementation, including: (a)the general settlement of Claims and Interests; (b) the restructuring of the Debtors' balance sheetand other financial transactions provided for by the Plan; (c) the consummation of the transactionscontemplated by the Plan, the Lock-Up Agreement, the Restructuring Implementation Deed andthe Agreed Steps Plan and other documents Filed as part of the Plan Supplement; (d) the issuanceof Exchange Notes, the New Money Notes, and the Noteholder Ordinary Shares pursuant to thePlan; (e) the amendment of the Intercreditor Agreement; (f) the amendment of the FacilityAgreement; (g) the amendment of the Senior Secured Term Loan Agreement; (h) theconsummation of the Rights Offering in accordance with the Plan, Rights Offering Documentsand the Lock-Up Agreement; (i) the granting of all Liens and security interests granted orconfirmed (as applicable) pursuant to, or in connection with, the Facility Agreement, the ExchangeNotes Indenture, the New Money Notes Indenture, the amended Intercreditor Agreement and theCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 112 o of f1 1334512Senior Secured Term Loan Agreement pursuant to the New Security Documents (including anyLiens and security interests granted or confirmed (as applicable) on the Reorganized Debtors'assets); (j) the vesting of the assets of the Debtors' Estates in the Reorganized Debtors; (k) theconsummation of the corporate reorganization contemplated by the Plan, the Lock-Up Agreement,the Agreed Steps Plan and the Master Reorganization Agreement (as defined in the RestructuringImplementation Deed); and (l) the execution, delivery, filing, or recording of all contracts,instruments, releases, and other agreements or documents in furtherance of the Plan. Accordingly,the Plan satisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Codevi. Section 1123(a)(6) – Non-Voting Equity Securities.21. The Company's organizational documents in accordance with the SwedishCompanies Act, Ch. 4, Sec 5 and the Plan prohibit the issuance of non-voting securities as of theEffective Date to the extent required to comply with section 1123(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code.Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code.vii. Section 1123(a)(7) – Directors, Officers, and Trustees.22. The manner of selection of any officer, director, or trustee (or any successorto and such officer, director, or trustee) of the Reorganized Debtors will be determined inaccordance with the existing organizational documents, which is consistent with the interests ofcreditors and equity holders and with public policy. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies therequirements of section 1123(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code.b. Section 1123(b) – Discretionary Contents of the Plan23. The Plan contains various provisions that may be construed as discretionarybut not necessary for Confirmation under the Bankruptcy Code. Any such discretionary provisionCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 123 o of f1 1334513complies with section 1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and is not inconsistent with the applicableprovisions of the Bankruptcy Code. Thus, the Plan satisfies section 1123(b).i. Section 1123(b)(1) – Impairment/Unimpairment of Any Class of Claims orInterests24. Article III of the Plan impairs or leaves unimpaired, as the case may be,each Class of Claims or Interests, as contemplated by section 1123(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code.ii. Section 1123(b)(2) – Assumption and Rejection of Executory Contracts andUnexpired Leases25. Article V of the Plan provides for the assumption of the Debtors' ExecutoryContracts and Unexpired Leases as of the Effective Date unless such Executory Contract orUnexpired Lease: (a) is identified on the Rejected Executory Contract and Unexpired Lease List;(b) has been previously rejected by a Final Order; (c) is the subject of a motion to reject ExecutoryContracts or Unexpired Leases that is pending on the Confirmation Date; or (4) is subject to amotion to reject an Executory Contract or Unexpired Lease pursuant to which the requestedeffective date of such rejection is after the Effective Date. Thus, the Plan satisfies section1123(b)(2).iii. Compromise and Settlement26. In accordance with section 1123(b)(3)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code andBankruptcy Rule 9019, and in consideration for the distributions and other benefits provided underthe Plan, the provisions of the Plan constitute a good-faith compromise of all Claims, Interests,and controversies relating to the contractual, legal, and subordination rights that all holders ofClaims or Interests may have with respect to any Allowed Claim or Interest or any distribution tobe made on account of such Allowed Claim or Interest. Such compromise and settlement is theproduct of extensive arm's-length, good faith negotiations that, in addition to the Plan, resulted inCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 134 o of f1 1334514the execution of the Lock-Up Agreement, which represents a fair and reasonable compromise ofall Claims, Interests, and controversies and entry into which represented a sound exercise of theDebtors' business judgment. Such compromise and settlement is fair, equitable, and reasonableand in the best interests of the Debtors and their Estates.27. The releases of the Debtors' directors and officers are an integral componentof the settlements and compromises embodied in the Plan. The Debtors' directors and officers: (a)made a substantial and valuable contribution to the Debtors' restructuring, including extensive preandpost-Petition Date negotiations with stakeholder groups, and ensured the uninterruptedoperation of the Debtors' businesses during the Chapter 11 Cases; (b) invested significant timeand effort to make the restructuring a success and maximize the value of the Debtors' businessesin a challenging operating environment; (c) attended and, in certain instances, testified atdepositions and Court hearings; (d) attended and participated in numerous stakeholder meetings,management meetings, and board meetings related to the restructuring; (e) are entitled toindemnification from the Debtors under applicable non-bankruptcy law, organizationaldocuments, and agreements; (f) invested significant time and effort in the preparation of the Lock-Up Agreement, the Plan, Disclosure Statement, all supporting analyses, and the numerous otherpleadings Filed in the Chapter 11 Cases, thereby ensuring the smooth administration of the Chapter11 Cases; and (g) are entitled to all other benefits under any employment contracts existing as ofthe Petition Date. Litigation by the Debtors or other Releasing Parties against the Debtors'directors and officers would be a distraction to the Debtors' business and restructuring and woulddecrease rather than increase the value of the estates. The releases of the Debtors' directors andofficers contained in the Plan have the consent of the Debtors and the Releasing Parties and are inthe best interests of the estates.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 145 o of f1 1334515iv. Debtor Release28. The releases of claims and Causes of Action by the Debtors, ReorganizedDebtors, and their Estates described in Article VIII.C of the Plan in accordance with section1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code (the “Debtor Release”) represent a valid exercise of the Debtors'business judgment under Bankruptcy Rule 9019. The Debtors' or the Reorganized Debtors' pursuitof any such claims against the Released Parties is not in the best interests of the Estates' variousconstituencies because the costs involved would outweigh any potential benefit from pursuingsuch claims. The Debtor Release is fair and equitable and complies with the absolute priority rule.29. The Debtor Release is (a) an integral part of the Plan, and a component ofthe comprehensive settlement implemented under the Plan; (b) in exchange for the good andvaluable consideration provided by the Released Parties; (c) a good faith settlement andcompromise of the claims and Causes of Action released by the Debtor Release; (d) materiallybeneficial to, and in the best interests of, the Debtors, their Estates, and their stakeholders, and isimportant to the overall objectives of the Plan to finally resolve certain Claims among or againstcertain parties in interest in the Chapter 11 Cases; (e) fair, equitable, and reasonable; (f) given andmade after due notice and opportunity for hearing; and (g) a bar to any Debtor asserting any claimor Cause of Action released by the Debtor Release against any of the Released Parties. Theprobability of success in litigation with respect to the released claims and Causes of Action, whenweighed against the costs, supports the Debtor Release. With respect to each of these potentialCauses of Action, the parties could assert colorable defenses and the probability of success isuncertain. The Debtors' or the Reorganized Debtors' pursuit of any such claims or Causes ofAction against the Released Parties is not in the best interests of the Estates or the Debtors' variousCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 156 o of f1 1334516constituencies because the costs involved would likely outweigh any potential benefit frompursuing such claims or Causes of Action30. Holders of Claims and Interests entitled to vote have overwhelmingly votedin favor of the Plan, including the Debtor Release. The Plan, including the Debtor Release, wasnegotiated before and after the Petition Date by sophisticated parties represented by able counseland advisors, including the Consenting Creditors. The Debtor Release is therefore the result of ahard fought and arm's-length negotiation process conducted in good faith.31. The Debtor Release appropriately offers protection to parties thatparticipated in the Debtors' restructuring process, including the Consenting Creditors, whoseparticipation in the Chapter 11 Cases is critical to the Debtors' successful emergence frombankruptcy. Specifically, the Released Parties, including the Consenting Creditors, madesignificant concessions and contributions to the Chapter 11 Cases, including, entering into theLock-Up Agreement and related agreements, supporting the Plan and the Chapter 11 Cases, andwaiving or agreeing to impair substantial rights and Claims against the Debtors under the Plan (aspart of the compromises composing the settlement underlying the revised Plan) in order tofacilitate a consensual reorganization and the Debtors' emergence from chapter 11. The DebtorRelease for the Debtors' directors and officers is appropriate because the Debtors' directors andofficers share an identity of interest with the Debtors and, as previously stated, supported and madesubstantial contributions to the success of the Plan, the Chapter 11 Cases, and operation of theDebtors' business during the Chapter 11 Cases, actively participated in meetings, negotiations, andimplementation during the Chapter 11 Cases, and have provided other valuable consideration tothe Debtors to facilitate the Debtors' successful reorganization and continued operation.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 167 o of f1 133451732. The scope of the Debtor Release is appropriately tailored under the factsand circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases. In light of, among other things, the value provided bythe Released Parties to the Debtors' Estates and the critical nature of the Debtor Release to thePlan, the Debtor Release is appropriate.v. Release by Holders of Claims and Interests33. The release by the Releasing Parties (the “Third-Party Release”), set forthin Article VIII.D of the Plan, is an essential provision of the Plan. The Third-Party Release is: (a)consensual as to those Releasing Parties that did not specifically and timely object or properly optout from the Third-Party Release; (b) within the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 1334; (c) in exchange for the good and valuable consideration provided by theReleased Parties; (d) a good faith settlement and compromise of the claims and Causes of Actionreleased by the Third-Party Release; (e) materially beneficial to, and in the best interests of, theDebtors, their Estates, and their stakeholders, and is important to the overall objectives of the Planto finally resolve certain Claims among or against certain parties in interest in the Chapter 11Cases; (f) fair, equitable, and reasonable; (g) given and made after due notice and opportunity forhearing; (h) appropriately narrow in scope given that it expressly excludes, among other things,any Cause of Action that is judicially determined by a Final Order to have constituted actual fraud,willful misconduct, or gross negligence; (i) a bar to any of the Releasing Parties asserting anyclaim or Cause of Action released by the Third-Party Release against any of the Released Parties;and (j) consistent with sections 105, 524, 1123, 1129, and 1141 and other applicable provisions ofthe Bankruptcy Code.34. The Third-Party Release is an integral part of the agreement embodied inthe Plan among the relevant parties in interest. Like the Debtor Release, the Third-Party ReleaseCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 178 o of f1 1334518facilitated participation in both the Debtors' Plan and the chapter 11 process generally. The Third-Party Release is instrumental to the Plan and was critical in incentivizing parties to support thePlan and preventing significant and time-consuming litigation regarding the parties' respectiverights and interests. The Third-Party Release was a core negotiation point in connection with thePlan and instrumental in developing the Plan that maximized value for all of the Debtors'stakeholders and kept the Debtors intact as a going concern. As such, the Third-Party Releaseappropriately offers certain protections to parties who constructively participated in the Debtors'restructuring process—including the Consenting Creditors (as set forth above)—by, among otherthings, facilitating the negotiation and consummation of the Plan, supporting the Plan and, in thecase of the Backstop Providers, committing to provide new capital to facilitate the Debtors'emergence from chapter 11. Specifically, the Notes Ad Hoc Group proposed and negotiated thepari passu transaction that is the basis of the restructuring proposed under the Plan and provideda much-needed deleveraging to the Debtors' business while taking a discount on their Claims (inexchange for other consideration).35. Furthermore, the Third-Party Release is consensual as to all parties ininterest, including all Releasing Parties, and such parties in interest were provided notice of thechapter 11 proceedings, the Plan, the deadline to object to confirmation of the Plan, and theCombined Hearing and were properly informed that all holders of Claims against or Interests inthe Debtors that did not file an objection with the Court in the Chapter 11 Cases that included anexpress objection to the inclusion of such holder as a Releasing Party under the provisionscontained in Article VIII of the Plan would be deemed to have expressly, unconditionally,generally, individually, and collectively consented to the release and discharge of all claims andCauses of Action against the Debtors and the Released Parties. Additionally, the release provisionsCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 189 o of f1 1334519of the Plan were conspicuous, emphasized with boldface type in the Plan, the DisclosureStatement, the Ballots, and the applicable notices. Except as set forth in the Plan, all ReleasingParties were properly informed that unless they (a) checked the “opt out” box on the applicableBallot or opt-out form and returned the same in advance of the Voting Deadline, as applicable, or(b) timely Filed an objection to the releases contained in the Plan that was not resolved beforeentry of this Confirmation Order, they would be deemed to have expressly consented to the releaseof all Claims and Causes of Action against the Released Parties.36. The Ballots sent to all holders of Claims and Interests entitled to vote, aswell as the notice of the Combined Hearing sent to all known parties in interest (including thosenot entitled to vote on the Plan), unambiguously provided in bold letters that the Third-PartyRelease was contained in the Plan.37. The scope of the Third-Party Release is appropriately tailored under thefacts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases, and parties in interest received due and adequatenotice of the Third-Party Release. Among other things, the Plan provides appropriate and specificdisclosure with respect to the claims and Causes of Action that are subject to the Third-PartyRelease, and no other disclosure is necessary. The Debtors, as evidenced by the VotingDeclaration and Certificate of Publication, including by providing actual notice to all knownparties in interest, including all known holders of Claims against, and Interests in, any Debtor andpublishing notice in international and national publications for the benefit of unknown parties ininterest, provided sufficient notice of the Third-Party Release, and no further or other notice isnecessary. The Third-Party Release is designed to provide finality for the Debtors, theReorganized Debtors and the Released Parties regarding the parties' respective obligations underthe Plan. For the avoidance of doubt, and notwithstanding anything to the contrary, anyparty who timely opted-out of the Third-Party Release is not bound by the Third-PartyRelease.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 290 o of f1 133452038. The Third-Party Release is specific in language, integral to the Plan, andgiven for substantial consideration. The Releasing Parties were given due and adequate notice ofthe Third-Party Release, and thus the Third-Party Release is consensual under controllingprecedent as to those Releasing Parties that did not specifically and timely object. In light of,among other things, the value provided by the Released Parties to the Debtors' Estates and theconsensual and critical nature of the Third-Party Release to the Plan, the Third-Party Release isappropriatevi. Exculpation.39. The exculpation described in Article VIII.E of the Plan (the “Exculpation”)is appropriate under applicable law, including In re Highland Capital Mgmt., L.P., 48 F. 4th 419(5th Cir. 2022), because it was supported by proper evidence, proposed in good faith, wasformulated following extensive good-faith, arm's-length negotiations with key constituents, and isappropriately limited in scope.40. No Entity or Person may commence or continue any action, employ anyprocess, or take any other act to pursue, collect, recover or offset any Claim, Interest, debt,obligation, or Cause of Action relating or reasonably likely to relate to any act or commission inconnection with, relating to, or arising out of a Covered Matter (including one that alleges theactual fraud, gross negligence, or willful misconduct of a Covered Entity), unless expresslyauthorized by the Bankruptcy Court after (1) it determines, after a notice and a hearing, such Claim,Interest, debt, obligation, or Cause of Action is colorable and (2) it specifically authorizes suchEntity or Person to bring such Claim or Cause of Action. The Bankruptcy Court shall have soleand exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether any such Claim, Interest, debt, obligation or Causeof Action is colorable and, only to the extent legally permissible and as provided for in Article XI,CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 201 o of f1 1334521shall have jurisdiction to adjudicate such underlying colorable Claim, Interest, debt, obligation, orCause of Action.vii. Injunction.41. The injunction provisions set forth in Article VIII.F of the Plan are essentialto the Plan and are necessary to implement the Plan and to preserve and enforce the discharge,Debtor Release, the Third-Party Release, and the Exculpation provisions in Article VIII of thePlan. The injunction provisions are appropriately tailored to achieve those purposes.viii. Preservation of Claims and Causes of Action.42. Article IV.L of the Plan appropriately provides for the preservation by theDebtors of certain Causes of Action in accordance with section 1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code.Causes of Action not released by the Debtors or exculpated under the Plan will be retained by theReorganized Debtors as provided by the Plan. The Plan is sufficiently specific with respect to theCauses of Action to be retained by the Debtors, and the Plan and Plan Supplement providemeaningful disclosure with respect to the potential Causes of Action that the Debtors may retain,and all parties in interest received adequate notice with respect to such retained Causes of Action.The provisions regarding Causes of Action in the Plan are appropriate and in the best interests ofthe Debtors, their respective Estates, and holders of Claims or Interests. For the avoidance of anydoubt, Causes of Action released or exculpated under the Plan will not be retained by theReorganized Debtors.c. Section 1123(d) – Cure of Defaults43. Article V.D of the Plan provides for the satisfaction of Cure Claimsassociated with each Executory Contract and Unexpired Lease to be assumed in accordance withsection 365(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code. Any monetary defaults under each assumed ExecutoryCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 212 o of f1 1334522Contract or Unexpired Lease shall be satisfied, pursuant to section 365(b)(1) of the BankruptcyCode, by payment of the default amount in Cash on the Effective Date, subject to the limitationsdescribed in Article V.D of the Plan, or on such other terms as the parties to such ExecutoryContracts or Unexpired Leases may otherwise agree. Any Disputed Cure Amounts will bedetermined in accordance with the procedures set forth in Article V.D of the Plan, and applicablebankruptcy and nonbankruptcy law. As such, the Plan provides that the Debtors will Cure, orprovide adequate assurance that the Debtors will promptly Cure, defaults with respect to assumedExecutory Contracts and Unexpired Leases in accordance with section 365(b)(1) of theBankruptcy Code. Thus, the Plan complies with section 1123(d) of the Bankruptcy Code.d. Section 1129(a)(2) – Compliance of the Debtors and Others with the ApplicableProvisions of the Bankruptcy Code.44. The Debtors, as proponents of the Plan, have complied with all applicableprovisions of the Bankruptcy Code as required by section 1129(a)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code,including sections 1122, 1123, 1124, 1125, 1126, and 1128, and Bankruptcy Rules 3017, 3018,and 3019.e. Section 1129(a)(3) – Proposal of Plan in Good Faith.45. The Debtors have proposed the Plan in good faith, in accordance with theBankruptcy Code requirements, and not by any means forbidden by law. In determining that thePlan has been proposed in good faith, the Court has examined the totality of the circumstancesfiling of the Chapter 11 Cases, including the formation of Intrum AB of Texas LLC (“IntrumTexas”), the Plan itself, and the process leading to its formulation. The Debtors' good faith isevident from the facts and record of the Chapter 11 Cases, the Disclosure Statement, and the recordof the Combined Hearing and other proceedings held in the Chapter 11 CasesCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 223 o of f1 133452346. The Plan (including the Plan Supplement and all other documents necessaryto effectuate the Plan) is the product of good faith, arm's-length negotiations by and among theDebtors, the Debtors' directors and officers and the Debtors' key stakeholders, including theConsenting Creditors and each of their respective professionals. The Plan itself and the processleading to its formulation provide independent evidence of the Debtors' and such other parties'good faith, serve the public interest, and assure fair treatment of holders of Claims or Interests.Consistent with the overriding purpose of chapter 11, the Debtors Filed the Chapter 11 Cases withthe belief that the Debtors were in need of reorganization and the Plan was negotiated and proposedwith the intention of accomplishing a successful reorganization and maximizing stakeholder value,and for no ulterior purpose. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1129(a)(3) of the BankruptcyCode are satisfied.f. Section 1129(a)(4) – Court Approval of Certain Payments as Reasonable.47. Any payment made or to be made by the Debtors, or by a person issuingsecurities or acquiring property under the Plan, for services or costs and expenses in connectionwith the Chapter 11 Cases, or in connection with the Plan and incident to the Chapter 11 Cases,has been approved by, or is subject to the approval of, the Court as reasonable. Accordingly, thePlan satisfies the requirements of section 1129(a)(4).g. Section 1129(a)(5)—Disclosure of Directors and Officers and Consistency with theInterests of Creditors and Public Policy.48. The identities of or process for appointment of the Reorganized Debtors'directors and officers proposed to serve after the Effective Date were disclosed in the PlanSupplement in advance of the Combined Hearing. Accordingly, the Debtors have satisfied therequirements of section 1129(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 234 o of f1 1334524h. Section 1129(a)(6)—Rate Changes.49. The Plan does not contain any rate changes subject to the jurisdiction of anygovernmental regulatory commission and therefore will not require governmental regulatoryapproval. Therefore, section 1129(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code does not apply to the Plan.i. Section 1129(a)(7)—Best Interests of Holders of Claims and Interests.50. The liquidation analysis attached as Exhibit D to the Disclosure Statementand the other evidence in support of the Plan that was proffered or adduced at the CombinedHearing, and the facts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases are (a) reasonable, persuasive,credible, and accurate as of the dates such analysis or evidence was prepared, presented orproffered; (b) utilize reasonable and appropriate methodologies and assumptions; (c) have not beencontroverted by other evidence; and (d) establish that each holder of Allowed Claims or Interestsin each Class will recover as much or more value under the Plan on account of such Claim orInterest, as of the Effective Date, than the amount such holder would receive if the Debtors wereliquidated on the Effective Date under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code or has accepted the Plan.As a result, the Debtors have demonstrated that the Plan is in the best interests of their creditorsand equity holders and the requirements of section 1129(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code are satisfied.j. Section 1129(a)(8)—Conclusive Presumption of Acceptance by UnimpairedClasses; Acceptance of the Plan by Certain Voting Classes.51. The classes deemed to accept the Plan are Unimpaired under the Plan andare deemed to have accepted the Plan pursuant to section 1126(f) of the Bankruptcy Code. EachVoting Class voted to accept the Plan. For the avoidance of doubt, however, even if section1129(a)(8) has not been satisfied with respect to all of the Debtors, the Plan is confirmable becausethe Plan does not discriminate unfairly and is fair and equitable with respect to the Voting Classesand thus satisfies section 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code with respect to such Classes as describedCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 245 o of f1 1334525further below. As a result, the requirements of section 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code are alsosatisfied.k. Section 1129(a)(9)—Treatment of Claims Entitled to Priority Pursuant to Section507(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.52. The treatment of Administrative Claims, Professional Fee Claims, andPriority Tax Claims under Article II of the Plan satisfies the requirements of, and complies in allrespects with, section 1129(a)(9) of the Bankruptcy Code.l. Section 1129(a)(10)—Acceptance by at Least One Voting Class.53. As set forth in the Voting Declaration, all Voting Classes overwhelminglyvoted to accept the Plan. As such, there is at least one Voting Class that has accepted the Plan,determined without including any acceptance of the Plan by any insider (as defined by theBankruptcy Code), for each Debtor. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1129(a)(10) of theBankruptcy Code are satisfied.m. Section 1129(a)(11)—Feasibility of the Plan.54. The Plan satisfies section 1129(a)(11) of the Bankruptcy Code. Thefinancial projections attached to the Disclosure Statement as Exhibit D and the other evidencesupporting the Plan proffered or adduced by the Debtors at or before the Combined Hearing: (a)is reasonable, persuasive, credible, and accurate as of the dates such evidence was prepared,presented, or proffered; (b) utilize reasonable and appropriate methodologies and assumptions; (c)has not been controverted by other persuasive evidence; (d) establishes that the Plan is feasibleand Confirmation of the Plan is not likely to be followed by liquidation or the need for furtherfinancial reorganization; (e) establishes that the Debtors will have sufficient funds available tomeet their obligations under the Plan and in the ordinary course of business—including sufficientamounts of Cash to reasonably ensure payment of Allowed Claims that will receive CashCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 256 o of f1 1334526distributions pursuant to the terms of the Plan and other Cash payments required under the Plan;and (f) establishes that the Debtors or the Reorganized Debtors, as applicable, will have thefinancial wherewithal to pay any Claims that accrue, become payable, or are allowed by FinalOrder following the Effective Date. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1129(a)(11) of the Bankruptcy Code.n. Section 1129(a)(12)—Payment of Statutory Fees.55. Article XII.C of the Plan provides that all fees payable pursuant to section1930(a) of the Judicial Code, as determined by the Court at the Confirmation Hearing inaccordance with section 1128 of the Bankruptcy Code, will be paid by each of the applicableReorganized Debtors for each quarter (including any fraction of a quarter) until the Chapter 11Cases are converted, dismissed, or closed, whichever occurs first. Accordingly, the Plan satisfiesthe requirements of section 1129(a)(12) of the Bankruptcy Code.o. Section 1129(a)(13)—Retiree Benefits.56. Pursuant to section 1129(a)(13) of the Bankruptcy Code, and as provided inArticle IV.K of the Plan, the Reorganized Debtors will continue to pay all obligations on accountof retiree benefits (as such term is used in section 1114 of the Bankruptcy Code) on and after theEffective Date in accordance with applicable law. As a result, the requirements of section1129(a)(13) of the Bankruptcy Code are satisfied.p. Sections 1129(a)(14), (15), and (16)—Domestic Support Obligations, Individuals,and Nonprofit Corporations.57. The Debtors do not owe any domestic support obligations, are notindividuals, and are not nonprofit corporations. Therefore, sections 1129(a)(14), 1129(a)(15), and1129(a)(16) of the Bankruptcy Code do not apply to the Chapter 11 Cases.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 267 o of f1 1334527q. Section 1129(b)—Confirmation of the Plan Over Nonacceptance of VotingClasses.58. No Classes rejected the Plan, and section 1129(b) is not applicable here,but even if it were, the Plan may be confirmed pursuant to section 1129(b)(1) of the BankruptcyCode because the Plan is fair and equitable with respect to the Deemed Rejecting Classes. ThePlan has been proposed in good faith, is reasonable, and meets the requirements and all VotingClasses have voted to accept the Plan. The treatment of Intercompany Claims and IntercompanyInterests under the Plan provides for administrative convenience does not constitute a distributionunder the Plan on account of suc

Send us a textDr. Nahid Bhadelia, MD, MALD is a board-certified infectious diseases physician who is the Founding Director of BU Center on Emerging Infectious Diseases ( https://www.bu.edu/ceid/about-the-center/team/nahid-bhadelia-md-mald/ ) as well an Associate Professor at the BU School of Medicine. She served the Senior Policy Advisor for Global COVID-19 Response for the White House COVID-19 Response Team in 2022-2023, where she coordinated the interagency programs for global COVID-19 vaccine donations from the United States and was the policy lead for Project NextGen, $5B HHS program aimed at developing next generation vaccines and treatments for pandemic prone coronaviruses. She also served as the interim Testing Coordinator for the White House MPOX Response Team. She is the Director and co-founder of Biothreats Emergence, Analysis and Communications Network (BEACON), an open source outbreak surveillance program. Between 2011-2021, Dr. Bhadelia helped develop and then served as the medical director of the Special Pathogens Unit (SPU) at Boston Medical Center, a medical unit designed to care for patients with highly communicable diseases, and a state designated Ebola Treatment Center. She was previously an associate director for BU's maximum containment research program, the National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratories. She has provided direct patient care and been part of outbreak response and medical countermeasures research during multiple Ebola virus disease outbreaks in West and East Africa between 2014-2019. She was the clinical lead for a DoD-funded viral hemorrhagic fever clinical research unit in Uganda, entitled Joint Mobile Emerging Disease Intervention Clinical Capability (JMEDICC) program between 2017 and 2022. Currently, she is a co-director of Fogarty funded, BU-University of Liberia Emerging and Epidemic Viruses Research training program. She was a member of the World Health Organization(WHO)'s Technical Advisory Group on Universal Health and Preparedness Review (UHPR).  She currently serves as a member of the National Academies Forum on Microbial Threats and previously served as the chair of the National Academies Workshop Committee for Potential Research Priorities to Inform Readiness and Response to Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A (H5N1) and member of the Ad Hoc Committee on Current State of Research, Development, and Stockpiling of Smallpox Medical Countermeasures.Dr. Bhadelia's research focuses on operational global health security and pandemic preparedness, including medical countermeasure evaluation and clinical care for emerging infections, diagnostics evaluation and positioning, infection control policy development, and healthcare worker training. She has health system response experience with pathogens such as H1N1, Zika, Lassa fever, Marburg virus disease, and COVID-19 at the state, national, and global levels. #NahidBhadelia #BostonUniversity #CenterOnEmergingInfectiousDiseases #HIV #EmergingInfections #Policy #Preparedness #HealthSecurity #SpecialPathogensUnit #BSL4 #Ebola #HotZones #DataScience #DiseaseSurveillance #OneHealth #H1N1 #Zika #LassaFever #MarburgVirus #Covid #InfectiousDiseases #Outbreaks #Zoonoses #Epidemics #Pandemics #ProgressPotentialAndPossibilities #IraPastor #Podcast #Podcaster #ViralPodcast #STEM #Innovation #Technology #Science #ResearchSupport the show

 The Sarasota County Commission has $15 million to allocate for job training in the wake of Hurricane Ian. Some commissioners were ready to give it all to the Suncoast Builders Association. The West Coast Black Theater Troupe took a creative approach to getting out the vote with a presentation of a one-woman show called “The Fannie Lou Hamer Story.” Democrat Derek Reich is once again challenging Republican Fiona McFarland for the District 73 seat in the Florida House. He thinks he has a better chance this time around.  The Sarasota City Commission gathered for a special meeting to discuss the Downtown Master Plan, and how to bring fresh ideas to the table through an Ad Hoc Committee. With strong opinions and a clear call for collaboration, the debate was anything but routine.  Perhaps surprisingly, the Sarasota County Commission on Wednesday passed up a chance to increase density on Siesta Key.

Watch Download File

Watch Download File

Dr. Sandie Morgan is joined by Ioana Bauer as the two discuss the important role that cyber-security plays in preventing sexual exploitation. Ioana Bauer Ioana Bauer completed her anti-human trafficking certificate through Vanguard University. She has been a leader in Romania since 2010 in eradicating human trafficking. She has helped pilot survivor engagement projects nationally, internationally through the UN, and through the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Ioana Bauer has impacted policy and legislation, leading an initiative in Romania to remove the statute of limitations for the crime of creating online Child Sexual Abuse materials. She's spearheaded a new award winning protection model compass geared at preventing and identifying trafficking for Ukrainian refugees. Ioana Bauer has been active in the area of protecting human rights and dignity since 2005, and, since 2010, she has dedicated her efforts to addressing human trafficking by leading and shaping prevention activities, developing materials on the issue and conducting capacity building activities. Ioana is an Ashoka Fellow, a 2020 Resilience Fellow with GITOC, and is recognized as one of the women leaders advancing the UN SDGs globally. Key Points The Ad Hoc Committee's International Convention on Countering the Use of Information and Communications Technologies for Criminal Purposes has faced challenges in reaching a consensus among countries because of the tension between privacy and human rights. It is because online and off-line identities and lives have become increasingly interconnected, that a convention like the Ad Hoc Committee's is necessary; to look into how this interconnectedness impacts children and vulnerable groups. Survivor voices should be heard and present in spaces like the convention, as they are directly impacted by the issues being discussed, negotiated, and decided on. Takedown mechanisms often re-traumatize survivors, putting them through a lengthy process that does not ensure takedown.  Resources Ad Hoc Committee to Elaborate a Comprehensive International Convention on Countering the Use of Information and Communications Technologies for Criminal Purposes United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime  eLiberare eLiberare Position Paper We Protect: Global Threat Assessment 2023 Episode 304 – European Perspectives, with Ioana Bauer Episode 282 – Crisis Prevention of Ukraine Refugee Trafficking, with Ioana Bauer Transcript Sandra Morgan 0:14 Welcome to the Ending Human Trafficking Podcast here at Vanguard University's Global Center for Women and Justice in Orange County, California. This is episode #322 with Ioana Bauer, The Intersection of Cyber Security and Sexual Exploitation. My name is Dr. Sandie Morgan. This is the show where we empower you to study the issues, be a voice, and make a difference in ending human trafficking. Today, we are going to have a conversation about keeping our communities, our families, our children, safe online. Ioana, it's great to be here, and I've been following your work on the Ad Hoc Committee to Elaborate a Comprehensive International Convention on Countering the Use of Information and Communications Technologies, I have to take a breath, for Criminal Purposes in hopes to reach consensus for a global framework to address cyber dependent criminality. Now this is happening in the space created by the United Nations Office for Drugs and Crime, and it's especially significant in our spaces where we work with those who have been sexually exploited, particularly in online spaces, sextortion, pornography, all of those aspects. We talk about that right here in Orange County at Vanguard University, and we discuss the issues around sextortion. Even here, we have cases where our local youth have been exploited by traffickers on other continents, in Africa, in the Middle East, in South America, so this is a global issue.

Clinical Education: Meet the Minimum but do the Maximum Presented by: Pam Holland, MA-CCC/S, BCS-S Members link to the course quiz: https://medslpcollective.com/courses/clinical-education-meet-the-minimum-but-do-the-maximum-replay-webinar/ 0.2 ASHA CEUs / 2 PDHs Available.  SUPERVISION AND CLINICAL INSTRUCTION REQUIREMENT FOR ASHA.  To get ASHA CEUS/ PDHs for this course, you can join the MedSLP Collective Membership here: https://medslpcollective.com/invite After this webinar, you will be able to… List the requirements for clinical education beginning January 1, 2020. Describe supervision principles across all levels of supervisees (graduate student, clinical fellow, Speech Language Pathology-Assistant, and experienced professional). Describe the nine (9) building blocks of supervision into their supervisory practice. Identify their own competencies for Clinical Education Agenda: 0 – 15 minutes – Welcome and Introductions 15 – 30 minutes – Ad Hoc Committee and 2020 Requirements 30 – 60 minutes – Building Blocks for Supervision 60 – 80 minutes – Levels of Supervision 80 – 100 minutes – Self-evaluation and Resources 100 – 120 minutes – Time for Questions Speaker Information and Disclosures FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: Pam Holland will receive an honorarium for this webinar from the Medical SLP Collective. NON-FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: No relevant non-financial disclosures. The post WEBINAR: Clinical Education: Meet the Minimum but do the Maximum appeared first on The MedSLP Collective Podcast.

बिहार में लोकसभा चुनाव के लिए NDA में सीटों का बंटवारा हो गया, चुनाव आयोग ने लोकसभा चुनाव की घोषणा के दो दिन बाद आज पश्चिम बंगाल के DGP के अलावा 6 राज्यों के गृह सचिव को हटा दिया, यूपी के पूर्व कैबिनेट मंत्री आजम खान को MP/MLA कोर्ट ने आज रामपुर के चर्चित डूंगरपुर मामले में 7 साल जेल की सजा सुनाई, इंफोसिस के को-फाउंडर नारायण मूर्ति ने अपने 4 महीने के पोते एकाग्र रोहन मूर्ति को ₹240 करोड़ मूल्य के शेयर्स गिफ्ट किए हैं, भारतीय ओलंपिक संघ ने भारतीय कुश्ती महासंघ के निलंबन हटने और उसे पूर्ण प्रशासनिक नियंत्रण मिलने के बाद कुश्ती की Ad Hoc Committee को भंग कर दिया, रात 9 बजे तक की बड़ी ख़बरें सुनिए 5 मिनट पॉडकास्ट में

This is Matt Reustle. Today we are releasing a bonus episode of Breakdowns. While we typically love to cover businesses, this was an interesting opportunity to cover a special situation around a business. And in this case, the FTX bankruptcy.  I was joined by Erin Broderick, Head of U.S. Cross-Border Restructuring & Insolvency at Eversheds Sutherland. Erin represents the Ad Hoc Committee of Non-U.S. customers for FTX, giving her a front-row and hands-on seat to everything that's unfolded at FTX since they entered Chapter 11 in November of 2022. We cover the basics around bankruptcy proceedings, using FTX as a lens in comparison to other restructurings. Please enjoy this bankruptcy breakdown on FTX.  For the full show notes, transcript, and links to the best content to learn more, check out the episode page here. ----- This episode is brought to you by Tegus, the go-to destination for bold investing. The investment research platform trusted by 95% of the top 20 global private equity firms just got even better. Building on their solid reputation for expert insights, Tegus has expanded to become the first true all-in-one research platform. The new Tegus makes diligence faster, easier, and more convenient than ever before. Your Tegus license gives you access to over 70,000 expert transcripts, more than 4,000 fully drivable financial models, and exclusive datasets like company management checks, industry KPIs, hard-to-find non-GAAP data, and more. Tegus is the fastest way to learn about a public or private company and the most cost-effective way to conduct investment research — now all under one roof. Learn more and get your free trial at tegus.com/patrick. ----- Business Breakdowns is a property of Colossus, LLC. For more episodes of Business Breakdowns, visit joincolossus.com/episodes. Stay up to date on all our podcasts by signing up to Colossus Weekly, our quick dive every Sunday highlighting the top business and investing concepts from our podcasts and the best of what we read that week. Sign up here. Follow us on Twitter: @JoinColossus | @patrick_oshag | @zbfuss | @ReustleMatt | @domcooke Editing and post-production work for this episode was provided by The Podcast Consultant (https://thepodcastconsultant.com). Show Notes (00:00:00) Welcome to Business Breakdowns (00:03:31) First Question - Understanding Bankruptcy Proceedings (00:04:15) The FTX Bankruptcy Case (00:05:19) The Role of Chapter 11 and Chapter 7 in Bankruptcy (00:05:52) The Challenges of Restructuring FTX (00:08:18) The Role of Customers in the FTX Case (00:12:16) Complexities of Tracing and Identifying Assets (00:22:10) The Role of Secondary Hedge Funds (00:27:05) The Issue of Dollarization of Claims (00:32:35) The Process of Uncovering Assets (00:36:39) Proposed Recovery Plan for FTX (00:45:21) Upcoming Timeline For FTX To Exit Bankruptcy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

  Clement is joined by Jane Duncan, a Professor of digital society at the University of Glasgow; Stefanie Fick from OUTA and Jerome Maake, Parliament's chairperson of the Ad Hoc Committee on the general intelligence laws amendment bill about the proposed new regulations relating to state security.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

NOTE: This interview first aired last summer, before the October 7 attacks on Israel by Hamas.Maebe A Girl is currently serving as Treasurer and At-Large Representative for the Silver Lake Neighborhood Council in Los Angeles. Upon her election in 2019, she became the first drag queen elected to public office in the United States. Maebe is responsible for forming the Silver Lake LGBTQIA Advocates Committee -the first queer-focused committee in the Los Angeles Neighborhood Council system. She is also co-founder of the LGBTQ+ Alliance of Los Angeles Neighborhood Councils, which is recognized as the first city-backed initiative for the LGBTQ+ Community in the City of Los Angeles. On the committee level, Maebe serves as Co-Chair of the Budget & Finance Committee, Co-Chair of the Reimagining Public Safety Committee, and Co-Chair of the Ad-Hoc Committee on Housing and Homelessness for the Silver Lake Neighborhood Council.You can learn more about Maebe here: https://maebeagirlforcongress.org/

The Ad-hoc Committee on the Western Cape Provincial Powers Bill will today hold public hearings into the controversial Bill. The bill seeks to promote the assertion of existing provincial powers whilst also seeking the devolution of some of the national powers. The ANC has called on the public to reject the Bill in its entirety. To further discuss this Elvis Presslin spoke to ANC leader in the Western Cape legislature, Cameron Dugmore and Ivan Meyer, Federal Chairperson of the Democratic Alliance, DA in the Western Cape

Join us in the third episode of our engaging retrospective series as we explore pivotal insights into womxn's health, healthcare, and data. Bethany Corbin leads a compelling discussion, shedding light on crucial considerations for womxn. Tune in now for this thought-provoking conversation. Female reproductive rights in the post-Dobbs era and how you should be mindful of the menstrual tracking apps you are usingThe unjust disparities in navigating the reproductive health landscape for men and womxn Powerful methods for protecting womxn's rights to data privacy and reproductive healthRisks in period and pregnancy tracking apps and what you can do to prevent your data from being monetized  Womxn's health tracking apps that are the most data-hungry and those that have the best data privacy protection Resources mentioned in this episodeSurfshark About Bethany CorbinAs a healthcare innovation and femtech attorney, Bethany is on a mission to help thought-leading companies revolutionize the global womxn's health sector. She founded FemInnovation, which helps transform and disrupt “standard” care delivery for womxn's health through specially tailored legal and educational programs, thought leadership, and advocacy. Bethany is a recognized leader and was named among the Top 200 Trailblazing Leaders in Women's Health and Femtech.Bethany's strategic insights have been featured in top news outlets. She has testified about the importance of data privacy for reproductive health before the Maryland Cybersecurity Council's Ad Hoc Committee on Consumer Privacy. She is an Advisory Board Member for Kisaco Research's Women's Health Innovation conference series. She is also a recipient of the 2023 Champion in Healthcare Award by the Global Health Conferences.Connect with Bethany Website: Femtech Lawyer Podcast: Legally FemtechLinkedIn: Bethany Corbin | FemInnovation Support the show!Want to learn more about us? Visit our website at www.periodtopause.com or send an email to amanda@periodtopause.comFollow us on Instagram: @periodtopauseFollow our Facebook Page: Period to Pause

Founding Partner + Jason Barclay Morris is a graduate of the University of Arizona, College of Law, and a founding partner at the law firm of Withey Morris Baugh, PLC. His past experience includes work as a congressional staff member, and as partner with the Land Use Section for a major Phoenix law firm.Mr. Morris's practice is exclusively in land use, planning and zoning and government relations in Arizona, as well as the Southwest region. His client list includes significant development in every asset class and representation in some of the state's most high-profile land use cases. His clientele includes national homebuilders, multi-family developers, master plan developers, landowners, family offices and Fortune 100 companies. Mr. Morris has also successfully litigated land use cases on behalf of property owners against Arizona municipalities.He served as Chair of the City of Phoenix License Appeals Board and was the District 3 representative to the Maricopa County Transportation Advisory Board. He was also appointed by the Mayor to serve on the City of Phoenix Development Advisory Board. Mr. Morris was past-chair of Valley Partnership's State Legislative Committee. In that capacity, he worked extensively on the Growing Smarter Legislation as well as opposing the Citizen's Growth Management Initiative. He also served as an Ad Hoc Committee-member advising on the combination of the Planning & Development Services Departments at the City of Phoenix. Jason's other honors include recognition as an outstanding community leader by the Phoenix Business Journal's “40 under 40” Issue, and he was honored as one of the “Best of the Bar” by the Arizona Business Journal.Mr. Morris is currently on the Board of Trustees for The University of Denver Sturm College of Law Rocky Mountain Land Use Institute. Additional outside boards and activities include Valley Leadership, Urban Land Institute, ASU Real Estate Council, and the Arizona Town Hall. He also served as President of the Arizona Alliance of Boys & Girls Clubs and is a member of the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation Board of Trustees.Website: www.wmbattorneys.com/LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/jason-barclay-morris-6b687513/Adam Baugh is a Partner at Withey Morris Baugh.LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/adam-baugh/Facebook: www.facebook.com/adam.baugh.10Mac and Bleu is the hot new podcast dedicated to all things related to building Arizona. Topics discussed range from construction, economic development, supply chain, and market segments.Mac & Bleu also includes diversity in construction, local politics affecting construction, women in construction, construction technology, and more.The host JJ Levenske of Bleuwave have their finger on the pulse of the people building Arizona.The show brings in the brightest minds in their perspective positions and industries and JJ has the unique ability to touch on the subject matter that you want to hear.If you want to know who's building Arizona, tune in and subscribe to Mac and Bleu today!___________________________________________________________________________________JJ Levenske is a seasoned construction executive with over 30 years of experience in the commercial and industrial sectors.From pre-construction services to complex quality controls and close-outs, he brings a commitment to delivering the highest levels of professionalism and customer service.

In this episode of the Dover Download podcast, Deputy City Manager Christopher Parker chats with Deputy Mayor Dennis Shanahan and the City of Dover's Environmental Projects Manager Gretchen Young about the city's efforts to establish a stormwater utility. They discuss how stormwater is currently managed and funded in Dover, as well as the need for a dedicated funding source to improve stormwater infrastructure and flood resilience. This week's guests also discuss what a stormwater utility is and how it would assess fees based on impervious surface area to more equitably distribute costs. They outline the recommendation of the Ad-Hoc Committee for Stormwater and Flood Resilience to create a utility and the ongoing process of developing a potential ordinance to establish it. Also discussed are the benefits of improving water quality, credits for on-site stormwater management, and increasing public outreach and education. In This Week in Dover History, we explore the enigmatic life of a Civil War veteran whose melodies once resonated through Dover's streets.

Today on American Indian Airwaves, a renewed effort towards seeking freedom for international, political Indigenous prisoner Leonard Peltier, who since 1977 wrongfully continues serving two consecutive life sentences in a federal penitentiary despite ongoing severe health issues, plus more here on American Indian Airwaves. Leonard Peltier is from the Anishnaabe and Lakota Nations and was unjustly convicted in 1977 for aiding and abetting in the deaths of two FBI agents in a June 26, 1975. The shootout happened on the Pine Ridge reservation in Oglala County, SD and was between the FBI and members of the American Indian Movement who were defending the Oglala community at their request. Three American Indian Movement activist were charged at the time including Leonard Peltier, yet the two other co-defendants, Robert Robideau and Darrelle “Dino” Butler were acquitted by reason of self-defense. Peltier was later extradited from Canada under questionable circumstances was tried separately and his trial was replete with prosecutorial misconduct, falsified testimony, fabricated evidence, and even the autopsy presented to the jury was done by an examiner who had never seen the bodies of the two agents, plus more. Our guests for the hour are Our other guest is Mia Feroleta is the publisher of New Observations Magazine and recently served as the authorized representative of the Oglala Sioux nation is helping negotiate the repatriation of 131 ancestors, cultural patrimony, and sacred items that were stolen from the Wounded Knee Massacre of 1890. Guests: Paullette Dauteuil-Robideau, former Co-chair (2010-2012) of International Leonard Pelteir Defense Committee (ILPDC), was the National Secretary (2012-2014) of the National Jericho movement, is a board member of the ad hoc committee to Free Leonard Peltier Now! campaign, and the former wife/companion of A.I.M. activist Robert Robideau. https://www.freeleonardpeltiernow.org Mia Feroleto is the publisher of New Observations magazine. Last year, Mia served as the authorized representative of the Oglala Sioux Tribe and negotiated the return of 131 artifacts stolen from the Wounded Knee Massacre site. They had been held in the collection of a small library/museum in Barre, Massachusetts for over 100 years. New Observations published an entire issue on Wounded Knee. New Observations latest issue is dedicated to political prisoners including Leonard Peltier. Mai also serves as a member of the board of Leonard's Ad Hoc Committee. Archived programs can be heard on Soundcloud at: https://soundcloud.com/burntswamp American Indian Airwaves streams on over ten podcasting platforms such as Amazon Music, Apple Podcast, Audible, Backtracks.fm, Gaana, Google Podcast, Fyyd, iHeart Media, Player.fm, Podbay.fm, Podcast Republic, SoundCloud, Spotify, Stitcher, Tunein, YouTube, and more. American Indian Airwaves is an all-volunteer collective and Native American public affairs program that broadcast weekly on KPFK FM 90.7 Los Angeles, CA, Thursdays, from 7:00pm to 8:00pm.

Summary Steve James (IMDb) joins Andrew (Twitter; LinkedIn) to discuss his new film, A Compassionate Spy. 18-year-old Ted Hall was the youngest physicist working on the Manhattan Project in Los Alamos.  What You'll Learn Intelligence Soviet-American relations during WWII The Manhattan Project and the development of the Atomic Bomb  Motivations for atomic espionage The life and story of Theodore Hall Reflections With great power … comes great responsibility State allegiance vs. personal conscience And much, much more  And… Steve James has been nominated for two Academy Awards: Best Documentary Feature in 2018 for Abacus: Small Enough to Jail, and Best Film Editing in 1995 for Hoop Dreams. Steve is the first Oscar nominee to join us on SpyCast since Robert de Niro sat down with our first host Peter Earnest in 2009!  Quotes of the Week “Ted was young and naive in some ways, but his reasons for what he did were not grounded in fantasy … Whether you support what he did or not, I don't know that the U. S. having the bomb all to itself would have been a great thing, given that we are the only nation to have actually dropped the bomb on anyone, period.” – Steve James. Resources  SURFACE SKIM *Headline Resource*  A Compassionate Spy, Steve James, Magnolia Pictures (2022) Available in select theaters and streaming on August 4th *SpyCasts* Spies: The Epic Intelligence War Between East vs. West with Calder Walton (2023) St. Ermin's Hotel, London – The History of a Legendary Spy Site with Stephen Duffy (2023) Becoming a Russian Intelligence Officer with Janosh Neumann (2022) The Nuclear Doomsday Machine with Sean Maloney on Cold War Emergency Plans (2022) *Beginner Resources* What Was the Manhattan Project?, T. Metcalfe, Scientific American (2023) [Article] U.S.-Russia Nuclear Arms Control (1949-2021), Council on Foreign Relations (n.d.) [Timeline] Theodore Hall: American-born physicist and spy, Encyclopaedia Britannica (n.d.) [Encyclopedia entry] DEEPER DIVE Books Sleeper Agent: The Atomic Spy in America Who Got Away, A. Hagedorn (Simon & Schuster, 2021) The Manhattan Project: The Birth of the Atomic Bomb in the Words of Its Creators, Eyewitnesses, and Historians, C. C. Kelly (Black Dog & Leventhal, 2020)  Atomic Spy: The Dark Lives of Klaus Fuchs, N. T. Greenspan (Penguin Books, 2020) Bombshell: The Secret Story of America's Unknown Atomic Spy Conspiracy, J. Albright & M. Kunstel (Times Books, 1997)  Video Modern Marvels: The Manhattan Project, The History Channel, YouTube (2020)  Science Behind the Atom Bomb, Nuclear Museum, Atomic Heritage Foundation (2013) Primary Sources  Report by the Ad Hoc Committee to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, “Evaluation of Effect on Soviet War Effort Resulting from the Strategic Air Offensive,” National Security Archive (1949) The Evaluation of the Atomic Bomb as a Military Weapon, Harry Truman Presidential Library (1947) A Petition to the President of the United States from Los Alamos Scientists, Harry Truman Presidential Library (1945)  Albert Einstein to Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman Presidential Library (1945) Decision to Maintain Contact with Theodore Hall, National Security Agency (1944) *Wildcard Resource* The development of nuclear weapons not only had a massive impact on history and science – It also inspired new architectural designs and art. Read this Architectural Digest article on the Atomic Age Design and why our brains still register it as “futuristic” 75 years later! 

The Ad Hoc Committee to Nominate a Person for Appointment as Public Protector has shortlisted eight names from 38 nominees. Those nominated include the Acting public protector advocate Kholeka Gcaleka. The interviews will now take place over two days next month. Sakina Kamwendo spoke to SABC news' senior reporter Mercedes Besent... 

Cyril Xaba, Chairperson of the Ad Hoc Committee tasked with nominating a new Public Protector, spoke about the nomination of having narrowed it down to 38 candidates for public protector, the eligibility, and how the nomination process works.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Parliament will consider 38 candidates to succeed suspended Public Protector Advocate Busisiwe Mkhwebane. The Ad Hoc Committee to nominate the next public protector says it has received 70 nominations and applications for the position but 32 nominations were rejected due to nominators failing to comply with the requirements as stipulated in the advertisement. The term of office of Advocate Mkhwebane who is currently fighting her impeachment in parliament - ends in October. For more on this Elvis Presslin spoke to Cyril Xaba, Chairperson of the Ad Hoc Committee to nominate the next public protector

 Advocate Kholeka Gcaleka has gotten the most nominations for the job of the new Public Protector. This is as the ad hoc Committee met this morning to discuss the nominations and applications. The committee has since adopted to publish the list of the nominated individuals for public comment. Ad Hoc Committee chairperson, Cyril Xaba explains.

Today is the last day for the public to submit to Parliament their nominations of suitable candidates for the position of Public Protector. The position will become vacant on the 15th of October when the seven-year term of the currently suspended Public Protector, Advocate Busisiwe Mkhwebane, comes to an end. For more on this Elvis Presslin spoke to Al Jama-ah President Ganief Hendricks, who is also a member of the Ad Hoc Committee to nominate a person for appointment as Public Protector, who has raised concern about the nomination process for the next Public Protector

The Ad-Hoc Committee on African American Disparity is hosting a Juneteenth Mixer in honor of the 2023 Observance of Juneteenth. The Committee works to address barriers that prevent the success of Greensboro's African American residents, and have planned this networking and information to give residents an opportunity to learn more about the commission's activities. With us today is Liz Lennon, the Commissions Administrator for the Human Rights Department here at The City of Greensboro. https://www.greensboro-nc.gov/departments/human-rights/commissions-committees-and-taskforces/ad-hoc-committee-on-african-american-disparity-acaad

Guest: Senior CASAC Researcher Dan Mafora joins John to consider the recent meeting of The Ad Hoc Committee to Nominate a Person for Appointment as Public Protector (PP) that took place to discuss its draft programme as well as the contents of the advert calling for nominations for the next PP.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

06/06/23 Ad Hoc Committee Wind Regulations by City of Lawrence

Bethany Corbin joins Amanda to share her mission of revolutionizing the global womxn's health sector and how female health intersects with law and technology.1. Female reproductive rights in the post-Dobbs era and how using FemTech apps raised concerns and brought about fear2. The unjust disparities in navigating the reproductive health landscape for men and womxn 3. Powerful methods for protecting womxn's rights to data privacy and reproductive health4. Risks in period and pregnancy tracking apps and what you can do to prevent your data from being monetized  5. Womxn's health tracking applications that are the most data-hungry and those which have the best data privacy protection Resources mentioned in this episodeSurfsharkAbout Bethany CorbinAs a healthcare innovation and femtech attorney, Bethany is on a mission to help thought-leading companies revolutionize the global women's health sector. She founded FemInnovation, which helps founders, clinicians, politicians, and advocates transform and disrupt “standard” care delivery for women's health through specially tailored legal and educational programs, thought leadership, and advocacy. Bethany is a recognized leader at the intersection of women's health, law, and technology and was named a Top 200 Trailblazing Leader in Women's Health and Femtech.Her strategic insights have been featured in top news outlets, including Forbes, Fortune, BBC, NPR, Buzzfeed, The Atlantic, VICE, Cosmopolitan, Teen Vogue, and more. Bethany has testified about the importance of data privacy for reproductive health before the Maryland Cybersecurity Council's Ad Hoc Committee on Consumer Privacy. She is an Advisory Board Member for Kisaco Research's Women's Health Innovation conference series. She is also a recipient of the 2023 Champion in Healthcare Award by the Global Health Conferences.Connect with Bethany  Website: Femtech Lawyer  Podcast: Legally Femtech LinkedIn: Bethany Corbin | FemInnovation Support the show! Want to learn more about us? Visit our website at www.periodtopause.com or send an email to amanda@periodtopause.comFollow us on Instagram: @periodtopauseFollow our Facebook Page: Period to Pause

The show: The full interview with bonus material: Earlier this week, the report from the ad hoc committee on short-term rentals in Alnwick-Haldimand Township was officially brought before the planning committee of council. Many delegates and council members spoke about the divisive nature of the issue and the need to get it right. Councillors deferred […] The post Chair of ad hoc committee provides another perspective on short-term rentals in township appeared first on Consider This. Related posts: A-H Township short term rental operators, businesses seek changes to proposed bylaw Proposed changes to short-term rentals in Alnwick-Haldimand coming to council Everything from Grafton arena to housing considered in strategic planning, says mayor

The Democratic Alliance, DA's proposed motion to establish an Ad Hoc Committee to probe Phala Phala has been defeated. Yesterday Members of Parliament voted against the DA's motion for the establishment of an ad-hoc committee to investigate the 2020 burglary at President Cyril Ramaphosa's Phala Phala farm in Limpopo. 204 MPs voted against the motion, while 135 voted in favor of the establishment of the ad-hoc committee. For more on this, Elvis Presslin spoke to DA Chief Whip in Parliament, Siviwe Gwarube

Thinking about pulling your kids from public school? Well, if you live in Illinois, this is the episode for you! Today's guest is Nikki Warren. She, Jenny, and Tina discuss the legal requirements for homeschooling families in Illinois. Referenced in Today's Episode: http://www.il-adhoc.org (Ad Hoc Committee for Illinois Home Education Legal and Legislative Matters) https://www.assistancebynichole.com (Assistance by Nichole) https://www.facebook.com/NikkisCoffeeKlatch (Nikki's Coffee Klatch) https://nikkisthoughtson.blogspot.com (Nikki's Thoughts On) Connect with Tina & Jenny at:  https://www.homeschoolloft.com/ (The Website) https://www.facebook.com/thehomeschoolloft (Facebook) Email If you enjoy the podcast, please leave a positive rating and review!

An urgent broadcast with the Ethnic Studies for Texas Schools Coalition & the Texas Freedom Network to discuss Texas Education. Tony speaks with education leaders, researchers, advocates, and parents regarding the impact this decision has and action plans to apply pressure and move the ethnic studies curriculums forward as this not only affects Mexican American Studies (MAS), but also African American Studies, Asian Asian American Studies and Indigenous / American Indian/Native Studies Courses. Dr. Christopher Carmona - is an Assistant Professor of Creative Writing and the coordinator for Mexican American Studies for the Brownsville Campus of the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley. He is a member of the Ad Hoc Committee for the TX State Board of Education for Mexican American Studies, NACCS Tejas Foco Committee on Implementing Mexican American Studies in PreK-12 Education. Dr. Valerie A. Martínez specializes in 20th Century Mexican American history, U.S. Military and Labor History, and Women's and Gender Studies and a core member of the Ethnic Studies Network of Texas, and the chair of the National Association for Chicana and Chicano Studies Tejas-Foco pre-K – 12 Committee. Dr. Martínez is currently an Assistant Professor of History and History Program Head at Our Lady of the Lake University in San Antonio, Texas. Dr. Lawrence Scott currently serves as an Assistant Professor of Educational Leadership at Texas A&M University-San Antonio. Being the first African American to be Awarded San Antonio Business Journal's 40 Under 40 Man of the Year in 2018, was indicative to Dr. Scott's insatiable passion to make an indelible impact in the lives of others through education. Lily Trieu is the Interim Executive Director of Asian Texans for Justice, a statewide nonprofit with a mission to connect Asian Texans of all identities to meaningful civic action to build personal and political power for future generations. Lily is personally passionate about equity and access to quality education as a means for personal and economic empowerment. Orlando Lara is a critical race and ethnic studies scholar, legal and political anthropologist, cultural organizer, and writer. He is a doctoral candidate in Anthropology with an Emphasis in Race and Justice at UC Irvine and is working on a literary ethnography of citizenship review and invalidation in the US borderlands. A co-founder of the Ethnic Studies Network of Texas, Orlando works with educators, organizers, and community leaders to grow Ethnic Studies in Texas at all grade levels. Andrea Aguirre is a 5 year veteran middle school teacher with a Masters in Special Education. She currently consults in advanced technology for Web3, NFT, and Blockchain Technology in addition to diversity, equity & inclusion. She is a Teach Plus Ready to Lead Fellow alumni. She is co-authoring the book, Invisible con ADHD: Real Policy Real voices of Latino Students with Nicole Biscotti, M.Ed. Emilio Zamaro - holds the Clyde Rabb Littlefield Chair in Texas History at the University of Texas at Austin, and is a Fellow of the George W. Littlefield Professorship in American History. He writes and teaches on the history of Mexicans in the United States, Texas history and oral history, and focuses on the working class and transnational experiences of Mexicans in Texas during the twentieth century. Annette Anderson, LCSW - Annette Anderson serves on the Council for the Indigenous Institute of the Americas. She collaborated in the writing of the Grand Prairie ISD American Indian/Native Studies Course for the past 2.5 years. Annette is the co-founder of the Seed Ambassador Program, Indigenous Grocery Store and Food as Medicine projects for IIA. Nuestra Palabra is funded in part by the BIPOC Arts Network Fund.

The DA remains adamant that an ad-hoc committee is the most appropriate and effective means through which to hold President Cyril Ramaphosa accountable for the allegations stemming from the Phala Phala robbery in February 2020. But in July this year, National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula denied their request, citing other organs of state which were dealing with the matter. Meanwhile, the Speaker announced that she would refer the African Transformation Movement's (ATM) Section 89 motion - to impeach Ramaphosa - to an independent panel composed of three panel members. DA deputy chief whip Siviwe Gwarube told BizNews parties have until 1 September to put forward their nominations for the panel. She argues that a newly announced probe into the Phala Phala matter by the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence (JSCI) would be limited in its scope, probing only two aspects. These include deputy state security minister Zizi Kodwa's alleged involvement in a cover-up, and the abuse of intelligence funds. Ramaphosa would be spared scrutiny by the JSCI, which operates behind closed doors with all committee members sworn to secrecy. Should the Section 89 Committee find a prima facie case for Ramaphosa's impeachment, Gwarube explains it will require a two-thirds majority to boot the President from office. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Fair property tax systems are crucial to developing a financially strong community, as property taxes represent a large source of public revenue for most local governments. In today's episode of the Strong Towns Podcast, Chuck Marohn talks with Joe Minicozzi from Urban3 about Buncombe County and the property tax inequities within Western North Carolina that are currently being investigated by the Just Accounting For Health (JAfH) consortium.  A few months ago, Minicozzi presented some compelling disparities in the data on the assessment process to the North Carolina Ad Hoc Appraisals Committee—only for his presentation to be cut short by defensive audience members. In this podcast, Minicozzi shares that data he presented to the Ad Hoc Committee and talks about the historical practice of redlining, and how it has contributed to our current, broken property tax system.  JAfH is a consortium partnered with Urban3, Strong Towns, the University of North Carolina-Asheville, and the Racial Justice Coalition. The team has been rigorously researching property tax inequities specifically in relation to Western North Carolina, as well as exploring implications of this system across the nation. Along with exposing the arbitrary data within the opaque property tax system, JAfH is answering the question, “How do systemic biases in local property tax policies and practices influence health equity in Western North Carolina?” In this podcast, Minicozzi shows Marohn some slides from his original presentation to the Ad Hoc Committee. To view the slides, check out the accompanying video to this podcast on YouTube. Additional Show Notes Learn more about Just Accounting for Health. Sign up for emails to stay up to date on JAfH findings. Joe Minicozzi (Twitter). Charles Marohn (Twitter).

Lawrence Datz is the managing partner at Datz & Datz. He has been described in leading publications as one of Florida's most experienced and best divorce law and family law attorneys. He has served on family law leadership committees for The Florida Bar Association. He chaired The Florida Bar's Litigation Support Professionals Committee from 2001-2008 and its Ad Hoc Committee on Parenting Coordination from 2007-2011. He also served as president of Florida's Association of Family and Conciliation Courts in 2012. Learn from Lawrence's expertise and find out how he grows his firm on this episode of The Managing Partners Podcast! —- Array Digital provides bold marketing that helps managing partners grow their law firms. arraylaw.com Follow us on Instagram: @array.digital Follow us on Twitter: @thisisarray Call us for a FREE digital marketing review: 757-333-3021 SUBSCRIBE to The Managing Partners Podcast for conversations with the nation's top attorneys.

This episode of the Amazing Cities and Towns Podcast, Jim Hunt interviews Joe Buscaino, President of the National League of Cities (NLC) and LA councilman   How is LA doing 16,000 meals in over a month, groceries gift card and blood drives Why leadership is tested in a time of emergency Public safety perspective from Joe, a former LA police officer NLC member updates, what is going on across the US What is the Cities Are Essential campaign and why all cities are essential How to get involved in the fight for cities at https://covid19.nlc.org/cities-are-essential/ The importance of removing the city size in the federal support How to get back to a safe, happy and healthy life     7 Steps to an Amazing City:   Attitude Motivation Attention to Detail Zing Inclusiveness Neighborhood Empowerment Green Awareness   Thanks for listening and look forward to having you join us for the next episode.   Links Mentions During Show:   https://covid19.nlc.org/cities-are-essential/ AmazingCities.org LocalGovPodcasts.com   About Joe Buscaino: Joe Buscaino is President Pro Tempore of the Los Angeles City Council, representing the city's fifteenth Council District, and serves as the President of the National League of Cities (NLC). With a lifelong career in public service, Buscaino brings a broad range of expertise to NLC's leadership including the critical issues of public safety and crime prevention, economic development, infrastructure, transportation, homelessness, technology and innovation, and youth civic engagement. He has served in several roles at NLC, including chairing the Board Legislative Action Committee and serving as a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Services Committee, Board Membership Committee, Board Finance Committee, and Board of Directors. As president of NLC, Buscaino is focused on leading with urgency on the issues of housing instability and homelessness, strengthening the local-federal partnership, and supporting innovation-driven economies.   Buscaino has served the fifteenth Council District of Los Angeles since 2012. In 2017, Buscaino was named Chair of the new Trade, Travel, and Tourism Committee which oversees the Port of Los Angeles – the busiest Port in the United States, LAX – the second busiest airport in the United States, and the Department of Convention & Tourism Development. Buscaino was also named Vice Chair of the Economic Development Committee, as well as a member of the Public Works and Gang Reduction Committee, Public Safety Committee, and the Ad Hoc Committee on the 2028 Olympics and Paralympic Games.   Buscaino's legislative priorities include addressing the complex issue of homelessness from every angle – from emergency measures like portable restrooms and showers to long-term solutions like permanent supportive housing; increasing public safety, as witnessed by the recent re-opening of the Harbor Jail; ensuring the Port of Los Angeles becomes a zero-emissions port while scaling up its workforce; redeveloping the LA Waterfront and making it a regional destination and economic stimulator; and beyond.   Prior to his election to the City Council, Buscaino served for 15 years as a police officer in the Los Angeles Police Department. He created the LAPD's first Teen Community Police Advisory Board, an organization that works with teens to solve problems and break the barriers between police and teenagers. His concept was implemented citywide in 2011.   Buscaino also serves on the Southern California Air Quality Management District Governing Board and the Southern California Association of Governments Board. He has also served on the Board of Directors of the Boys and Girls Clubs of the Harbor Area, the San Pedro YWCA's Racial Justice Committee, and the Advisory Council for the Los Angeles Watts Summer Games. He is active with Mary Star of the Sea Catholic Church and various Italian-American organizations. Buscaino graduated with a BA in Communications from California State University – Dominguez Hills. He and his wife, Geralyn, are raising their two children in San Pedro. About Your Host, Jim Hunt: Welcome to the “Building Amazing Cities and Towns Podcast” … The podcast for Mayors, Council Members, Managers, Staff and anyone who is interested in building an Amazing City.   Your host is Jim Hunt, the author of “Bottom Line Green, How American Cities are Saving the Planet and Money Too” and his latest book, “The Amazing City - 7 Steps to Creating an Amazing City”   Jim is also the former President of the National League of Cities, 27 year Mayor, Council Member and 2006 Municipal Leader of the Year by American City and County Magazine.   Today, Jim speaks to 1000's of local government officials each year in the US and abroad.   Jim also consults with businesses that are bringing technology and innovation to local government.   Amazing City Resources:   Buy Jim's Popular Books: The Amazing City: 7 Steps to Creating an Amazing City: https://www.amazingcities.org/product-page/the-amazing-city-7-steps-to-creating-an-amazing-city   Bottom Line Green: How America's Cities and Saving the Planet (And Money Too) https://www.amazingcities.org/product-page/bottom-line-green-how-america-s-cities-are-saving-the-planet-and-money-too   FREE White Paper: “10 Steps to Revitalize Your Downtown” AmazingCities.org/10-Steps   Hire Jim to Speak at Your Next Event: Tell us about your event and see if dates are available at AmazingCities.org/Speaking   Hire Jim to Consult with Your City or Town: Discover more details at https://www.amazingcities.org/consulting   Discuss Your Business Opportunity/Product to Help Amazing Cities: Complete the form at https://www.amazingcities.org/business-development   Develop a Podcast for Your Amazing City: Discover more at LocalGovPodcasts.com Request a Podcast Launch Kit at LocalGovPodcasts.com/launchkit