Chess politics - Crossville Move Financials Posted to USCF Website

Author

Crossville Move Financials Posted to USCF Website

George John

2005-03-31, 6:00 pm

All,

A "Move Expenses To Date" report has been posted to the USCF Website at
http://www.uschess.org/org/govern/f...oveexpenses.pdf

The information is through the end of March and has columns for
"remaining", "total", "budget", and "variance".

The total budget was for $242,475.38. The actual is $201,466.6.

I note that this budget includes items like $30,868.71 for computers.
It has been reported this cost would have been necessary regardless
whether the USCF moved or not, which sounds correct.

I'm pleased the USCF has posted this information.

Best regards,

George John

irvin

2005-03-31, 6:00 pm

What's "Training" and who's providing it?

Who is being trained and who is performing the training?

What's the topic of the training?

Thanks!

--
Irvin
-------------------------
http://www.pixel69.com

"George John" <george@neosoft.com> wrote in message
news:1112297347.239369.204780@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

quote:

> All,
>
> A "Move Expenses To Date" report has been posted to the USCF Website at
> http://www.uschess.org/org/govern/f...oveexpenses.pdf
>
> The information is through the end of March and has columns for
> "remaining", "total", "budget", and "variance".
>
> The total budget was for $242,475.38. The actual is $201,466.6.
>
> I note that this budget includes items like $30,868.71 for computers.
> It has been reported this cost would have been necessary regardless
> whether the USCF moved or not, which sounds correct.
>
> I'm pleased the USCF has posted this information.
>
> Best regards,
>
> George John
>

George John

2005-03-31, 6:00 pm

irvin wrote:

Irvin,

quote:

> What's "Training" and who's providing it?
>
> Who is being trained and who is performing the training?
>
> What's the topic of the training?

Not all employees in New Windsor are moving to Crossville. New
employees, working in Crossville, need to be trained to handle some of
the duties currently being done by employees in New Windsor.

Some experienced staff have moved from New Windsor to Crossville. They
are doing the training.

[SNIP]

Best regards,

George John

Chess One

2005-03-31, 9:55 pm

"George John" <george@neosoft.com> wrote in message
news:1112297347.239369.204780@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

quote:

> All,
>
> A "Move Expenses To Date" report has been posted to the USCF Website at
> http://www.uschess.org/org/govern/f...oveexpenses.pdf
>
> The information is through the end of March and has columns for
> "remaining", "total", "budget", and "variance".

Thanks for the post George.

quote:

> The total budget was for $242,475.38. The actual is $201,466.6.

I assume you mean 'to-date expenses'.

Additionally there is a yet unexpended amount ot $42k for training, and $10k
for severance. Phil

quote:

> I note that this budget includes items like $30,868.71 for computers.
> It has been reported this cost would have been necessary regardless
> whether the USCF moved or not, which sounds correct.
>
> I'm pleased the USCF has posted this information.
>
> Best regards,
>
> George John
>

irvin

2005-03-31, 9:55 pm

That's very interesting...

I assume the people who are being hire will replace those employess who
chose not to move to Crossville. Those who chose to move, on the other hand,
are being paid to train the replacements to do a job that they (the
trainers) were not doing back in New Windsor.

This also means that the USCF has ALREADY hired a few people in Crosville
(the ones being trained).

Very interesting.

Thanks for the information, George.

--
Irvin
-------------------------
http://www.pixel69.com

"George John" <george@neosoft.com> wrote in message
news:1112307316.499987.241160@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

quote:

> irvin wrote:
>
> Irvin,
>
>
> Not all employees in New Windsor are moving to Crossville. New
> employees, working in Crossville, need to be trained to handle some of
> the duties currently being done by employees in New Windsor.
>
> Some experienced staff have moved from New Windsor to Crossville. They
> are doing the training.
>
> [SNIP]
>
> Best regards,
>
> George John
>

Mike Nolan

2005-03-31, 9:55 pm

"George John" <george@neosoft.com> writes:

quote:

>Some experienced staff have moved from New Windsor to Crossville. They
>are doing the training.

They're doing some of the training. Interim CFO Grant Perks has been
in Crossville working with the new accounting staff.

I've been working with Grant on interlinking the new computer systems with
the accounting system and setting up workflow processes that are more
efficient.

I've also been helping to train the new staff on the membership and ratings
programs.

The employees who moved from NY to TN have now been trained in how to
enter and validate rating reports, since the new office organization chart
has combined the ratings and membership departments.
--
Mike Nolan

George John

2005-03-31, 9:55 pm

Phil,

[SNIP]

I see I failed to mention the "Through March" column, which has the
to-date (as of March 31) figures.

The "total" column, which I quoted, is the sum of "Through March" and
"Remaining".

These move expenses will come in about $41k less than what was
budgeted, which is good. Randy's quoted estimate of $150-200k was
correct.

Best regards,

George John

George John

2005-03-31, 9:55 pm

irvin wrote:

quote:

> That's very interesting...
>
> I assume the people who are being hire will replace those employess

who

quote:

> chose not to move to Crossville.

I think that's correct.

quote:

> Those who chose to move, on the other hand,
> are being paid to train the replacements to do a job that they (the
> trainers) were not doing back in New Windsor.

I don't know if they were doing these jobs or not, but at a minimum
they are familiar with the jobs, and should be able to do a good job
with the training.

quote:

>
> This also means that the USCF has ALREADY hired a few people in

Crosville

quote:

> (the ones being trained).

Based on what I have read, I believe this is correct.

A significant portion of the USCF's work is now being done in
Crossville. Currently, the USCF Website calls for all correspondence
to go to Crossville except for that which pertains to the following:

Chess Life Articles
TLA's (Tournament Life Announcements)
Display Ads
Supernationals III entries
Correspondence Chess entries

This suggests that much, if not most, of the rating and membership work
is now being done in Crossville.

quote:

> Very interesting.
>
>
> Thanks for the information, George.

You're welcome.

Best regards,

George John

Spam Scone

2005-03-31, 9:55 pm

George John wrote:

quote:

> All,
>
> A "Move Expenses To Date" report has been posted to the USCF Website

quote:

> http://www.uschess.org/org/govern/f...oveexpenses.pdf
>
> The information is through the end of March and has columns for
> "remaining", "total", "budget", and "variance".
>
> The total budget was for $242,475.38. The actual is $201,466.6.
>
> I note that this budget includes items like $30,868.71 for computers.
> It has been reported this cost would have been necessary regardless
> whether the USCF moved or not, which sounds correct.

Didn't the telephone system need to be upgraded or replaced as well? If
so, both it and the computer/printer/fax cost should be removed from
the total. That lops 39K off the cost of relocation, bringing the new
total to about 163K.

Now if the USCF EB got back the graft it gave Bill Goichberg, it would
be reduced to 138K.

quote:

> I'm pleased the USCF has posted this information.
>
> Best regards,
>
> George John

Grant Perks

2005-03-31, 9:55 pm

Spam Scone wrote:

quote:

> George John wrote:
Website[vbcol=seagreen]
> at
computers.[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Didn't the telephone system need to be upgraded or replaced as well?

quote:

> so, both it and the computer/printer/fax cost should be removed from
> the total. That lops 39K off the cost of relocation, bringing the new
> total to about 163K.
>
> Now if the USCF EB got back the graft it gave Bill Goichberg, it

would[vbcol=seagreen]
> be reduced to 138K.
>

Actually, the telephone system was adequate for New Windsor, we just
needed an upgrade to make it work in Crossville.

Items that would have been incurred even without the move include the
new computers, vacation pay, and some of the severance pay. With more
and more TD's uploading their tournaments and memberships, the office
staff would have eventually been cut as a result of less paper to
shuffle.

The remaining cost for training as well as computer equipment is more
likely overstated than understated. Therefore, final cost including the
non-move items above will be less than $200,000.

Based on lower payroll cost, one year free rent, etc, I estimate it
will take two to three years to recover the actual move related cost.

Grant Perks

StanB

2005-03-31, 9:55 pm

"George John" <george@neosoft.com> wrote in message
news:1112297347.239369.204780@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

quote:

> All,
>
> A "Move Expenses To Date" report has been posted to the USCF Website at
> http://www.uschess.org/org/govern/f...oveexpenses.pdf
>
> The information is through the end of March and has columns for
> "remaining", "total", "budget", and "variance".
>
> The total budget was for $242,475.38. The actual is $201,466.6.

As I interpret the numbers it seems the direct expenses through March are
roughly 60,000. It is not clear to me what the column called "remaining"
relates to.

quote:

> I note that this budget includes items like $30,868.71 for computers.
> It has been reported this cost would have been necessary regardless
> whether the USCF moved or not, which sounds correct.

Capital outlays that have a useful life of more than one year are expensed
over the life of the equipment. I don't know that they can be called a
moving expense per se.

quote:

> I'm pleased the USCF has posted this information.

Why?

chessdon@aol.com

2005-03-31, 9:55 pm

Based on lower payroll cost, one year free rent, etc, I estimate it
will take two to three years to recover the actual move related cost.
Grant Perks

Grant do we have a budget projection for the rest of the costs (2nd
move, bldg and associated costs etc.?

When was the budget done that was shown and did it include all costs -
Beatriz'a managing the move cost architects costs, other trips to
crossville by staff such as yourself, the $500 per month for storage
space in Crossvillestc. , etc?

And let me say here, comments such as $60,000 for Beatriz's expenses
when extrapolated to a year are way way high the mark unless there is a
lot that I don't know about? Beatriz is not overcharging for her
expenses.

Despite my continuing misgivings about the move, let me compliment you
Beatriz, Judy, Joan, Mike Nolan, Pat Knight and others I'm sure that I
don't know about. You have all done a great , great job in getting us
this far.

Don Schultz

Randy Bauer

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

<chessdon@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1112321251.876594.321530@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

quote:

> Based on lower payroll cost, one year free rent, etc, I estimate it
> will take two to three years to recover the actual move related cost.
> Grant Perks
>
> Grant do we have a budget projection for the rest of the costs (2nd
> move, bldg and associated costs etc.?

I have no problem with continuing to account for costs, but I would suggest
that we also account for savings. By the time the second move is made, we
will have saved a year of costs associated owning, occupying, and
maintaining a building in New Windsor -- property taxes, utilities,
insurance, maintenance, etc. We would also not have the benefit of any
investment income from the proceeds of the sale.

I continue to marvel at people who only see a newly constructed building as
an expense. I'm not an accountant, but the last time I checked, buildings
were assets. It has its positive aspects for the USCF's finances as well.
Quite frankly, I'd rather own a new building in an industrial park in a
low-cost, growing community versus an old building in need of repair in a
high cost, stagnant community anytime.

quote:

>
> When was the budget done that was shown and did it include all costs -
> Beatriz'a managing the move cost architects costs, other trips to
> crossville by staff such as yourself, the $500 per month for storage
> space in Crossvillestc. , etc?

We had a contract, signed by the executive director under the previous
board, with an architect for $60,000. Don, are you suggesting that if we
had not moved the architect would have said, "no problem, let's just forget
the whole contract, gratis?" If that is the case, it is hardly a cost
incurred in the move. Besides, it is a building cost and should be
reflected in those calculations. I would also remind everybody that the
previous board also directed the sale of the building; we were going to have
rental costs in New Windsor, and those also must be factored into this
discussion -- New Windsor definitely had significant costs associated with
it.

quote:

>
> And let me say here, comments such as $60,000 for Beatriz's expenses
> when extrapolated to a year are way way high the mark unless there is a
> lot that I don't know about? Beatriz is not overcharging for her
> expenses.

Of course she isn't, we both agree on that, and I appreciate your saying so.

quote:

>
> Despite my continuing misgivings about the move, let me compliment you
> Beatriz, Judy, Joan, Mike Nolan, Pat Knight and others I'm sure that I
> don't know about. You have all done a great , great job in getting us
> this far.

Absolute agreement on that point as well. We're on a roll, Don.

Randy Bauer

quote:

>
> Don Schultz
>

jimeade

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

Your board has made and continues to make the right moves to dig the
federation out of the hole a string of previous administrations dug for
you. It will be a shame, if your slate does not win. You all
obviously deserve the membership's thanks. It no longer amazes me that
people, like Beatriz, who have have made immense sacrifices for the
organization, come under attack.

If S. Sloan, Parr and their ilk are howling mad, and they are, you must
be doing something right. Keep up the good work.

Randy Bauer wrote:

quote:

> <chessdon@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1112321251.876594.321530@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
cost.[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> I have no problem with continuing to account for costs, but I would

suggest

quote:

> that we also account for savings. By the time the second move is

made, we

quote:

> will have saved a year of costs associated owning, occupying, and
> maintaining a building in New Windsor -- property taxes, utilities,
> insurance, maintenance, etc. We would also not have the benefit of

any

quote:

> investment income from the proceeds of the sale.
>
> I continue to marvel at people who only see a newly constructed

building as

quote:

> an expense. I'm not an accountant, but the last time I checked,

buildings

quote:

> were assets. It has its positive aspects for the USCF's finances as

well.

quote:

> Quite frankly, I'd rather own a new building in an industrial park in

quote:

> low-cost, growing community versus an old building in need of repair

in a

quote:

> high cost, stagnant community anytime.
>
costs -[vbcol=seagreen]
storage[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> We had a contract, signed by the executive director under the

quote:

> board, with an architect for $60,000. Don, are you suggesting that

if we

quote:

> had not moved the architect would have said, "no problem, let's just

forget

quote:

> the whole contract, gratis?" If that is the case, it is hardly a

cost

quote:

> incurred in the move. Besides, it is a building cost and should be
> reflected in those calculations. I would also remind everybody that

the

quote:

> previous board also directed the sale of the building; we were going

to have

quote:

> rental costs in New Windsor, and those also must be factored into

this

quote:

> discussion -- New Windsor definitely had significant costs associated

with

quote:

> it.
expenses[vbcol=seagreen]
is a[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Of course she isn't, we both agree on that, and I appreciate your

saying so.[vbcol=seagreen]
you[vbcol=seagreen]
that I[vbcol=seagreen]
us[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Absolute agreement on that point as well. We're on a roll, Don.
>
> Randy Bauer

Sam Sloan

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 02:27:31 GMT, "Randy Bauer"
<randybauer2300@yahoo.com> wrote:

quote:

>Quite frankly, I'd rather own a new building in an industrial park in a
>low-cost, growing community versus an old building in need of repair in a
>high cost, stagnant community anytime.
>
>Randy Bauer

Good! Wonderful!

Then,why do you not find such a place and forget about Crossville?

Sam Sloan

Randy Bauer

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

"Sam Sloan" <sloan@ishipress.com> wrote in message
news:424cb954.54055093@ca.news.verio.net...

quote:

> On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 02:27:31 GMT, "Randy Bauer"
> <randybauer2300@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Good! Wonderful!
>
> Then,why do you not find such a place and forget about Crossville?

You obviously know nothing about Crossville, the location for the new
building, or, I guess, the fact that a new building is a new building.

From the US Census Bureau actuals/estimates for Crossville, TN:

1990 6,930
2000 9,048
2001 9,252
2002 9,558
2003 9,725

Meanwhile, the county grew from 34,736 in 1990 to 46,802 in 2000.

By contrast, New Windsor's population declined from 22,937 in 1990, to
22,866 in 2000, to 22,514 in 2003.

Do the math.

Randy Bauer

quote:

>
> Sam Sloan

George John

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

StanB wrote:

quote:

> "George John" <george@neosoft.com> wrote in message
> news:1112297347.239369.204780@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Stan,

[SNIP]

quote:

>
> Why?

Because I support transparency (open governance).

Best regards,

George John

George John

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

Randy Bauer wrote:

Randy,

[SNIP]

quote:

> I have no problem with continuing to account for costs, but I would

suggest

quote:

> that we also account for savings. By the time the second move is

made, we

quote:

> will have saved a year of costs associated owning, occupying, and
> maintaining a building in New Windsor -- property taxes, utilities,
> insurance, maintenance, etc. We would also not have the benefit of

any

quote:

> investment income from the proceeds of the sale.

Items like this would be covered in a cost/benefit analysis, which
among other things would have estimated the break-even point for the
move, which Grant has estimated to be between two and three years.

I think it's great that the move financials have been posted. I think
the next step is to get a cost/benefit analysis posted please.

[SNIP]

Best regards,

George John

Randy Bauer

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

"George John" <george@neosoft.com> wrote in message
news:1112326287.932663.132290@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

quote:

> StanB wrote:
>
> Stan,
>
> [SNIP]
>
>
> Because I support transparency (open governance).
>
> Best regards,
>
> George John
>

My guess is that, the good accountant that he is, Stan is trying to remind
us that everything has a cost.

Don't get me wrong, I support open governance as well, but ultimately the
members also pay the expenses associated with it.

Randy Bauer

Randy Bauer

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

"George John" <george@neosoft.com> wrote in message
news:1112326844.466666.230890@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

quote:

>
> Randy Bauer wrote:
>
> Randy,
>
> [SNIP]
>
> suggest
> made, we
> any
>
> Items like this would be covered in a cost/benefit analysis, which
> among other things would have estimated the break-even point for the
> move, which Grant has estimated to be between two and three years.
>
> I think it's great that the move financials have been posted. I think
> the next step is to get a cost/benefit analysis posted please.
>
> [SNIP]
>
> Best regards,
>
> George John
>

Grant said between two and three years, I said a few years -- pretty similar
conclusions arrived at separately. I'm hesitant to spend much time on this
because I think it's more important that I spend the next few days
interviewing and helping decide on a new executive director for the USCF.

I think it's great that you are interested in this George, I really do. In
this case, however, the cost benefit analysis is so strikingly one-sided
that I don't see a whole lot of point in doing one. I've done hundreds of
them. Some things just have "no brainer" written all over them.

I'd also prefer that Grant spend his working time on other projects with
more immediate impact on the future of the USCF.

Randy Bauer

Grant Perks

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

StanB wrote:

quote:

> "George John" <george@neosoft.com> wrote in message
> news:1112297347.239369.204780@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Website at[vbcol=seagreen]
>

quote:

> As I interpret the numbers it seems the direct expenses through March

are

quote:

> roughly 60,000. It is not clear to me what the column called

"remaining"

quote:

> relates to.
>

The estimated costs remaining. Kinda like estimated cost to complete
the job on a percent complete job cost schedule.

quote:

computers.[vbcol=seagreen]
>

quote:

> Capital outlays that have a useful life of more than one year are

expensed

quote:

> over the life of the equipment. I don't know that they can be called

quote:

> moving expense per se.
>

The computers had to be purchased whether the USCF moved to Tennessee
or stayed in New York. The budget was apparently created to show all
major cost that were timed with the move.

quote:

>
> Why?

Randy Bauer

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

"Grant Perks" <gperks2@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1112329512.627006.209650@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

quote:

> StanB wrote:
> Website at
> computers.
>
>
> expensed
> a
>
> The computers had to be purchased whether the USCF moved to Tennessee
> or stayed in New York. The budget was apparently created to show all
> major cost that were timed with the move.

I've made this point over and over and over again. It's kind of like the
person that needed a new umbrella and blamed it on today's thunderstorm.

Randy Bauer

George John

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

Randy Bauer wrote:

quote:

> "George John" <george@neosoft.com> wrote in message

[SNIP]

quote:

[SNIP]

[vbcol=seagreen]
>

quote:

> The opportunity costs associated with somebody gathering this information

quote:

> and disseminating it. This request may seem benign and easy to
> accomodate,

quote:

> but that is not always the case.

[SNIP]

Randy,

I am working under the assumption that this information was already in place
prior to voting on the move to Crossville. If my assumption is correct, all
that should have been necessary to do prior to posting it is obfuscating the
salary information, which seems simple enough to do, as well as posting it.
What am I missing here please?

Best regards,

George John

Sam Sloan

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 06:06:44 GMT, "George John" <george@neosoft.com>
wrote:

quote:

>I am working under the assumption that this information was already in place
>prior to voting on the move to Crossville. If my assumption is correct, all
>that should have been necessary to do prior to posting it is obfuscating the
>salary information, which seems simple enough to do, as well as posting it.
>What am I missing here please?
>
>Best regards,
>
>George John

I do not know what you are missing, but what many others are missing
is that you are writing as though you are on our side but actually you
are on their side.

This is why so many of us distruct you.

Sam Sloan

Randy Bauer

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

"George John" <george@neosoft.com> wrote in message
news:Ux53e.17070$1H3.13063@tornado.texas.rr.com...

quote:

>
>
> Randy Bauer wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> [SNIP]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [SNIP]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [SNIP]
>
>
>
> Randy,
>
>
>
> I am working under the assumption that this information was already in
> place prior to voting on the move to Crossville. If my assumption is
> correct, all that should have been necessary to do prior to posting it is
> obfuscating the salary information, which seems simple enough to do, as
> well as posting it. What am I missing here please?
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> George John
>

No, we're talking about financial information after the move. That is what
has been posted. That is what Larry Parr, non-member, has been demanding
for all these many days or months. Fine, it's been posted. It's pretty
uneventful. I suppose that I, as a Board Member, could take great delight
in just how uneventful it is. That's fine, but it still took time away from
other activities to put it out there for all the world to see. Nothing
comes without a cost.

Randy Bauer

Sam Sloan

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 06:16:58 GMT, "Randy Bauer"
<randybauer2300@yahoo.com> wrote:

quote:

>No, we're talking about financial information after the move. That is what
>has been posted. That is what Larry Parr, non-member, has been demanding
>for all these many days or months. Fine, it's been posted. It's pretty
>uneventful. I suppose that I, as a Board Member, could take great delight
>in just how uneventful it is. That's fine, but it still took time away from
>other activities to put it out there for all the world to see. Nothing
>comes without a cost.
>
>Randy Bauer

You are telling us that the expenditure of $242,475.38 is
"uneventful".

How much would it have to be to be eventful?

Sam Sloan

George John

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

"Randy Bauer" <randybauer2300@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Bx33e.16380$NW5.6220@attbi_s02...

Randy,

[SNIP]

quote:

> Grant said between two and three years, I said a few years -- pretty
> similar conclusions arrived at separately. I'm hesitant to spend much
> time on this because I think it's more important that I spend the next few
> days interviewing and helping decide on a new executive director for the
> USCF.
>
> I think it's great that you are interested in this George, I really do.
> In this case, however, the cost benefit analysis is so strikingly
> one-sided that I don't see a whole lot of point in doing one. I've done
> hundreds of them. Some things just have "no brainer" written all over
> them.
>
> I'd also prefer that Grant spend his working time on other projects with
> more immediate impact on the future of the USCF.

I have been working under the assumption that a formal cost/benefit analysis
had been done prior to voting in favor of selling the building in New
Windsor and moving to Crossville, and all that was necessary was obfuscating
some salary information and posting a current document to the USCF Website.
It sounds like I was incorrect to have made that assumption, and the
cost/benefit analysis was intuitive, which might very well be okay in your
case given your experience of having done hundreds of them. In my case, I
haven't done hundreds of them, and would have wanted to see some solid
numbers prior to voting.

As a matter of general policy, I think any major decision of the board
should have a posted, written justification which supports it. The decision
to move the HQ falls into that category IMO.

I most certainly agree that at this point in time the selection of a new
Executive Director (and no doubt many other things) is much more urgent and
important than this, especially if it is true that a formal analysis doesn't
currently exist which would be easy to post.

Best regards,

George John

parrthenon@cs.com

2005-04-01, 3:54 am

UNEVENTFUL

<You are telling us that the expenditure of $242,475.38 is
"uneventful".How much would it have to be to be eventful?>

Sam Sloan to Randy Bauer

Hey, guys, these figures are just the tip of the iceberg. There's a
lot more coming down the pike.

<I have been working under the assumption that a formal cost/benefit
analysis had been done prior to voting in favor of selling the building
in New Windsor and moving to Crossville.>

George John, who is suddenly shocked by what board member Frank Brady
and yours truly has been saying all along. There was a total lack of
due diligence on the part of the board majority. There was never any
need to sell the building in New Windsor to begin with due to a
so-called "parking problem."

And so it goes.

Grant Perks

2005-04-01, 6:53 am

chessdon@aol.com wrote:

quote:

> Based on lower payroll cost, one year free rent, etc, I estimate it
> will take two to three years to recover the actual move related cost.
> Grant Perks
>
> Grant do we have a budget projection for the rest of the costs (2nd
> move, bldg and associated costs etc.?
>

Don, while I didn't prepare the original move budget I will attempt an
answer with regard to the additional move. The cost associated with the
move from the temporary quarters to the new building should be nominal.
As you can see from this budget, the major cost are personnel related
which won't be part of the second move. The free rent and utilities for
over a year at the church should be significantly greater than what we
will pay a moving company to move equipment and furniture.

quote:

> When was the budget done that was shown and did it include all costs

quote:

> Beatriz'a managing the move cost architects costs, other trips to
> crossville by staff such as yourself, the $500 per month for storage
> space in Crossvillestc. , etc?
>

I believe the original budget was done in January and it did include
Beatriz's cost. Since Beatriz is acting COO it was felt that those cost
are normal and generally relate to the day to day management of the
USCF. Yes, my cost since the accounting department was hired in the
middle of February are included in the cost. Mike Nolan's hotel bill is
also included, while some of that cost could be attributed to the new
rating system. Mike would have to train staff in its use anyway.

I see the $500 per month for storage as being a normal cost of
operations in Crossville. While it should go into a cost/benefit
anaylsis I don't see that it belongs in a calculation of the expenses
that relate to the actual move of the operation. For example, in New
Windsor our data lines and most of our telephone calls came in a a T-1
line. We now have copper telephone lines with DSL service for the data.
While a comparison of the two belongs in a cost/benefit anaylsis, I
don't see them as move related per se.

quote:

> And let me say here, comments such as $60,000 for Beatriz's expenses
> when extrapolated to a year are way way high the mark unless there is

quote:

> lot that I don't know about? Beatriz is not overcharging for her
> expenses.
>
> Despite my continuing misgivings about the move, let me compliment

you

quote:

> Beatriz, Judy, Joan, Mike Nolan, Pat Knight and others I'm sure that

quote:

> don't know about. You have all done a great , great job in getting us
> this far.
>

On their behalf I will say thanks. As I have stated before, I would
have rather seen the office stay in New Windsor. That being said, I see
a lot of benefits from the move.

Best,
Grant

Chess One

2005-04-01, 5:58 pm

"Grant Perks" <gperks2@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1112351628.044545.306190@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

quote:

> I believe the original budget was done in January and it did include
> Beatriz's cost. Since Beatriz is acting COO it was felt that those cost
> are normal and generally relate to the day to day management of the
> USCF.

In other words, indistinguishable from a salary?

----------

quote:

>
> a

If the existing budget is $30k for Beatriz, how much of that has been
expended?

I take it that all costs of the move are not yet reported - so the final
amount will be about a quarter of a million dollars.
[vbcol=seagreen]
> On their behalf I will say thanks. As I have stated before, I would
> have rather seen the office stay in New Windsor. That being said, I see
> a lot of benefits from the move.

I would hope there would be 'a lot'. But I also hoped that this might have
been a greater subject of conversation beforehand. With George John I am
concluding that there does not seem to have been more than 'intuition' as a
guide.

The next question must be, 'a lot' to whom?

What is the benefit to members?

Phil Innes

quote:

> Best,
> Grant
>

StanB

2005-04-01, 5:58 pm

"jimeade" <jimeade@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1112323437.758568.180960@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

quote:

> Your board has made and continues to make the right moves to dig the
> federation out of the hole a string of previous administrations dug for
> you. It will be a shame, if your slate does not win. You all
> obviously deserve the membership's thanks. It no longer amazes me that
> people, like Beatriz, who have have made immense sacrifices for the
> organization, come under attack.
>
> If S. Sloan, Parr and their ilk are howling mad, and they are, you must
> be doing something right. Keep up the good work.

That pretty much sums it up. If the misinformation mavens are unhappy we
must be doing something right.

Mike Nolan

2005-04-01, 5:58 pm

"Chess One" <innes8@verizon.net> writes:

quote:

>The next question must be, 'a lot' to whom?

quote:

>What is the benefit to members?

Since transferring membership and rating report processing to the TN office
in early March, memberships have generally been processed within 2 days
of when they are received and most rating reports have been entered
within 3 days of when they are received. (That doesn't necessarily mean
those events are rated yet, they still have to pass validation first.)
--
Mike Nolan

Chess One

2005-04-01, 5:58 pm

"Mike Nolan" <nolan@gw.tssi.com> wrote in message
news:d2jhv1$149$1@gw.tssi.com...

quote:

> "Chess One" <innes8@verizon.net> writes:
>
>
>
> Since transferring membership and rating report processing to the TN
> office
> in early March, memberships have generally been processed within 2 days
> of when they are received and most rating reports have been entered
> within 3 days of when they are received. (That doesn't necessarily mean
> those events are rated yet, they still have to pass validation first.)

Thanks Mike, all it cost was an average $10,000 per employee to achieve this
laudable goal.

Is USCF intending to do anything else?

Phil

quote:

> Mike Nolan
>

Mike Nolan

2005-04-01, 5:58 pm

"Chess One" <innes8@verizon.net> writes:

quote:

>Thanks Mike, all it cost was an average $10,000 per employee to achieve this
>laudable goal.

quote:

>Is USCF intending to do anything else?

Later today, we will announce that we will be auctioning off ratings
points on E-Bay.
--
Mike Nolan

George John

2005-04-01, 5:58 pm

Randy Bauer wrote:

Randy,

[SNIP]

quote:

> No, we're talking about financial information after the move. That

is what

quote:

> has been posted. That is what Larry Parr, non-member, has been

demanding

quote:

> for all these many days or months. Fine, it's been posted. It's

pretty

quote:

> uneventful. I suppose that I, as a Board Member, could take great

delight

quote:

> in just how uneventful it is. That's fine, but it still took time

away from

quote:

> other activities to put it out there for all the world to see.

Nothing

quote:

> comes without a cost.

I sincerely hope that it didn't take much time at all to prepare. This
strikes me as something that management would have want to see anyway
for a major project like a HQ move. It is certainly something I would
have wanted to see.

I agree reporting does have a cost. The key is knowing what the right
amount of reporting is. If there is too much, money has been
unnecessarily wasted. If there is too little, the chances of making
poorer decisions are increased, and the membership is left more in the
dark.

I recently heard a report on NPR that donors to not-for-profits are
increasingly demanding to see greater information about the
organizations they are contributing to. I think the need for greater
transparency and good communication is only going to increase, and the
USCF might be wise to revisit its communication and disclosure policies
after more pressing matters like the selection of a new Executive
Director have been completed.

I truly think there is room for improvement here, and by improving the
USCF will be a more successful, member-friendly organization.

Best regards,

George John

99% Kosher

2005-04-01, 5:58 pm

I'm sure Ray Gordon will buy some. He'll even bid against himself.

Sam Sloan

2005-04-01, 5:58 pm

On 1 Apr 2005 13:51:46 GMT, nolan@gw.tssi.com (Mike Nolan) wrote:

quote:

>"Chess One" <innes8@verizon.net> writes:
>
>
>
>Later today, we will announce that we will be auctioning off ratings
>points on E-Bay.
>--
>Mike Nolan

Finally, a good April Fools Joke.

Thank you,

Sam Sloan

George John

2005-04-07, 6:07 pm

Randy Bauer wrote:

Randy,

[SNIP]

quote:

> No, we're talking about financial information after the move. That

is what

quote:

> has been posted. That is what Larry Parr, non-member, has been

demanding

quote:

> for all these many days or months. Fine, it's been posted. It's

pretty

quote:

> uneventful. I suppose that I, as a Board Member, could take great

delight

quote:

> in just how uneventful it is. That's fine, but it still took time

away from

quote:

> other activities to put it out there for all the world to see.

Nothing

quote:

> comes without a cost.