|
Home > Archive > Chess politics > April 2005 > Deafening Silence
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| parrthenon@cs.com 2005-04-15, 8:33 pm |
| A LIFE MEMBER ALSO WANTS TO KNOW!
Randy Bauer told me to ask Grant Perks about how much the USCF
netted from the sale of its building in New Windsor. I did. So far the
response has been deafening silence.
Mr. Bauer claimed he didn't need to answer my questions because I
don't belong to the USCF. Well, a life member has just asked a similar
question over at the FIDE newsgroup.
Date: 4/15/2005 10:10:56 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: corplawyer@earthlink.net
Reply-to: fide-chess@yahoogroups.com
<This is a basic reduce your costs of operation move. I've been
involved in literally hundreds of cost benefit analyses of this type. I
am an officer of the State of Iowa Public Facilities Improvment
Corporation and on the Board for the Iowa Innovations Fund.> Randy
Bauer
--------
<Sounds like you've done some significant analysis. As a Life Member of
the USCF, I'd like to know how the present value analysis of the total
net costs to move the operation (what are the actual costs, by the
way?) and the future reduced operating costs went. Even if we were to
radically treat a dollar of saved costs 5 years from now equal to a
current dollar of expended move costs, how many years of USCF operation
will it take to recover these dollars? Thanks in advance for the
information.> corplawyer
| |
| Tom Klem 2005-04-15, 8:33 pm |
| Isn't the silence really because all of your questions have been answered to
the best of their ability?
Isn't it really true that most businesses in the world exist in a dynamic
(fluid) state, rather than static, and the questions which have been asked
by yourself and others are for political purpose to take advantage of this
fact.
For example, question a, gets answer x, but the situation changes so that
answer x is not completely accurate ==end result== howling from Mount
Parthenon the foothills of Brooklyn??
Cordially,
Tom Klem
<parrthenon@cs.com> wrote in message
news:1113596587.145750.196900@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
quote:
> A LIFE MEMBER ALSO WANTS TO KNOW!
>
> Randy Bauer told me to ask Grant Perks about how much the USCF
> netted from the sale of its building in New Windsor. I did. So far the
> response has been deafening silence.
>
> Mr. Bauer claimed he didn't need to answer my questions because I
> don't belong to the USCF. Well, a life member has just asked a similar
> question over at the FIDE newsgroup.
>
> Date: 4/15/2005 10:10:56 AM Pacific Standard Time
> From: corplawyer@earthlink.net
> Reply-to: fide-chess@yahoogroups.com
>
>
> <This is a basic reduce your costs of operation move. I've been
> involved in literally hundreds of cost benefit analyses of this type. I
> am an officer of the State of Iowa Public Facilities Improvment
> Corporation and on the Board for the Iowa Innovations Fund.> Randy
> Bauer
> --------
> <Sounds like you've done some significant analysis. As a Life Member of
> the USCF, I'd like to know how the present value analysis of the total
> net costs to move the operation (what are the actual costs, by the
> way?) and the future reduced operating costs went. Even if we were to
> radically treat a dollar of saved costs 5 years from now equal to a
> current dollar of expended move costs, how many years of USCF operation
> will it take to recover these dollars? Thanks in advance for the
> information.> corplawyer
>
| |
| Grant Perks 2005-04-16, 12:30 am |
|
parrthenon@cs.com wrote:
quote:
> A LIFE MEMBER ALSO WANTS TO KNOW!
>
> Randy Bauer told me to ask Grant Perks about how much the USCF
> netted from the sale of its building in New Windsor. I did. So far
the
quote:
> response has been deafening silence.
>
> Mr. Bauer claimed he didn't need to answer my questions because I
> don't belong to the USCF. Well, a life member has just asked a
similar
quote:
> question over at the FIDE newsgroup.
>
> Date: 4/15/2005 10:10:56 AM Pacific Standard Time
> From: corplawyer@earthlink.net
> Reply-to: fide-chess@yahoogroups.com
>
>
> <This is a basic reduce your costs of operation move. I've been
> involved in literally hundreds of cost benefit analyses of this type.
I
quote:
> am an officer of the State of Iowa Public Facilities Improvment
> Corporation and on the Board for the Iowa Innovations Fund.> Randy
> Bauer
> --------
> <Sounds like you've done some significant analysis. As a Life Member
of
quote:
> the USCF, I'd like to know how the present value analysis of the
total
quote:
> net costs to move the operation (what are the actual costs, by the
> way?) and the future reduced operating costs went. Even if we were to
> radically treat a dollar of saved costs 5 years from now equal to a
> current dollar of expended move costs, how many years of USCF
operation
quote:
> will it take to recover these dollars? Thanks in advance for the
> information.> corplawyer
Larry,
Now that I have all of my clients' extentions filed, I have some time
to catch up on some of R.G.C.P.
Yes, the USCF netted about $515,000 from the sale of the building in
New Windsor.
Grant
| |
| parrthenon@cs.com 2005-04-16, 12:30 am |
| NO DUE DILIGENCE
Hats off to Grant Perks for a simple and direct answer. Would that
all the incumbents were equally forthcoming.
In answer to corplawyer: Thus far, the answer ALREADY given by these
people on a total assumed expense of about $200,000-plus is two to
three years. But the cost is evidently going to be far higher. But they
have no exact numbers -- not even a building cost because no due
diligence has been done.
<As a Life Member of the USCF, I'd like to know how the present value
analysis of the total net costs to move the operation (what are the
actual costs, by the way?) and the future reduced operating costs went.
Even if we were to radically treat a dollar of saved costs 5 years from
now equal to a
current dollar of expended move costs, how many years of USCF operation
will it take to recover these dollars?>
| |
| parrthenon@cs.com 2005-04-16, 3:30 am |
| DETECTIVE COLUMBO
Once again I want to thank Grant Perks for his answer. I hate to be
like Columbo, always asking a question just as he is about to exit a
room, BUT...
I know what the word "netted" means, and I take it to mean that the
Federation deposited about $515,000 into an account that is bearing
interest -- after all of the middlemen and the like have been paid off.
The problem is $515,000 is NOT the one that I was told was
actually deposited, which was less. A good deal less.
Have I been misinformed like Humphrey Bogart who said the reason
he went to Casablanca was to take the waters? "But there are none
here," replied Colonel Strasser. "I was misinformed," said Bogart.
Or does Grant Perks have a different understanding of the word
"netted"?
If Mr. Perks will simply come back to us and state the following,
then this matter can be laid to rest: "The USCF sold its New Windsor
building for $_______ [fill in the blank] and from this figure the
USCF netted a total of $515,000, after paying all of the realty and any
other associated expenses. The figure of $515,000, which came
exclusively from the building sale, was then deposited ... [in this or
that account or accounts]."
I see nothing conceivably wrong with providing this kind of
information. No one requires an account number or even, in truth, the
name of the bank or banks. One merely requires a foolproof statement
that is simple enough to give.
| |
| parrthenon@cs.com 2005-04-16, 8:31 pm |
| GROSS OR NET?
The conversation about the waters in CASABLANCA was between
Humphrey Bogart and Claude Raines (not Colonel Strasser). Was I also
misinformed that the sale of the building in New Windsor netted far
less than $515,000?
If Mr. Perks will simply come back and state the following, then
this matter can be laid to rest: "The USCF sold its New Windsor
building for $_______ [fill in the blank] and from this figure the
USCF netted $515,000 after paying all of the realty and any other
associated expenses. The figure of $515,000, which came exclusively
from the building sale, was then deposited ... [in this or that account
or accounts]."
| |
| Mike Murray 2005-04-16, 8:31 pm |
| On 16 Apr 2005 08:02:18 -0700, "Grant Perks" <gperks2@aol.com> wrote:
quote:
>Larry,
>
>$515,000 was deposited in the bank from the sale of the building.
>
>I am not in Crossville so I don't have access to the sales agreement,
>but as I recall the building sold for around $535,000.
>
>Grant
With a cost of sales under 4%, it appears we must have paid no real
estate commission, or, if we did, it was bargained down to something
very low. Sounds good.
| |
| Grant Perks 2005-04-16, 8:31 pm |
| Larry,
$515,000 was deposited in the bank from the sale of the building.
I am not in Crossville so I don't have access to the sales agreement,
but as I recall the building sold for around $535,000.
Grant
| |
| Taylor Kingston 2005-04-16, 8:31 pm |
|
parrthenon@cs.com wrote:
quote:
> The conversation about the waters in CASABLANCA was between
> Humphrey Bogart and Claude Raines (not Colonel Strasser).
Also, Strasser (played by Conrad Veidt) was a major, not a colonel.
| |
| jamesrynd@aol.com 2005-04-16, 8:31 pm |
| Like Humphrey Bogart, I was misinformed.
Reality check here, rabblerouser... Humphrey Bogart *played a character
in a movie* and *one of his lines* was "I am misinformed." You are a
real person who is constantly misinformed, and practice pounding the
keyboard as ersatz journalism. Humphrey Bogart was an excellent actor;
you are a boil on the XXX of chess.
| |
| parrthenon@cs.com 2005-04-16, 8:31 pm |
| Once again a tip of the hat to Grant Perks. Like Humphrey Bogart, I was
misinformed.
Claude Raines: What in heaven's name brought you to Casablanca?
Humphrey Bogart: My health. I came to Casablanca for the waters.
Claude Rains: The waters? What waters? We're in the desert.
Humphrey Bogart: I was misinformed.
| |
| Randy Bauer 2005-04-16, 8:31 pm |
| Yes, the silence truly is deafening.
It's similar to the conversation around the "wetlands," which are a tiny
tiny part of the USCF land parcel and adjoun the land owned by the city of
Crossville. We have no need to develop that border strip and no plans to do
so.
<parrthenon@cs.com> wrote in message
news:1113671383.210892.204410@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
quote:
> Once again a tip of the hat to Grant Perks. Like Humphrey Bogart, I was
> misinformed.
>
> Claude Raines: What in heaven's name brought you to Casablanca?
>
> Humphrey Bogart: My health. I came to Casablanca for the waters.
>
> Claude Rains: The waters? What waters? We're in the desert.
>
> Humphrey Bogart: I was misinformed.
>
| |
| Randy Bauer 2005-04-16, 8:31 pm |
|
"Sam Sloan" <sloan@ishipress.com> wrote in message
news:4261732e.33495406@ca.news.verio.net...
quote:
> On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 20:10:13 GMT, "Randy Bauer"
> <randybauer2300@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Yes, but we will still need permission from the Tennessee Department
> of Conservation to build anywhere on the land because a structure on
> any part of that land may affect the habitat of the ducks. This plot
> of land is only three acres so obviously a building on 5000 square
> feet could impact any part of this small plot of land.
>
> In addition, there is no sewer system on the land, so we will have to
> build our own sewer line or a septic tank. This too will obviously
> affect the wetlands area. The sewage will likely contaminate the river
> nearby which is already contaminated by the power station and the gas
> company next door.
>
> In order to get permission from the Tennessee Department of
> Conservation to build our new USCF headquarters, we will have to
> submit our building plans to that department. This means that we will
> have to pay the architect to design the building and then submit the
> plan to see if it passes. It is noteworthy that the contract that the
> architect got Beatriz to sign specified that he was under no liability
> if the plans were no good.
>
> I would like to remind you that Ken Thomas, the USCF Chief Financial
> Officer, warned you of these possibilities in a letter but you brushed
> him off and after only ten minutes of discussion you voted to move to
> Crossville. Perhaps you should have done some investigation into these
> matters before taking this vote. Perhaps you have considered the
> possibility that since this land was being given to us for free, there
> might be something wrong with the land. Turns out that there are many
> things wrong with the land which is why they selected a sucker, the
> USCF, to build there.
I didn't vote to move to Crossville.
Second, as has been written on this forum, Ken Thomas, that Great CFO hire
of Bill Goichberg, didn't bother to do CFO stuff like bank reconciliations
that would allow us to determine the USCF's financial position at the end of
the calendar year. Yes, this is the same Bill Goichberg that you credit
with single handedly saving the USCF from financial ruination. I've got
news for you, Sam, you don't hire a CFO who cannot CFO. If you do hire a CFO
who cannot CFO, you are responsible for their inability to CFO. Connect the
dots.
The land you now want to turn into an environmental shrine is on the very
border of our property and our structure and is not going to impact the
wetlands. I know you are having a wet dream over the possibility that this
move will fall apart, but, given the fact that Crossville wants us to move
there, do you really think they are presenting us with a parcel of land that
would make that move impossible? That, of course, would be the opportunity
the USCF may have once contemplated to get out of the deal. Now, we don't
want that, and they most certainly do not.
Just what color is the sky in your world?
Randy Bauer
quote:
>
> Sam Sloan
| |
| Sam Sloan 2005-04-16, 8:31 pm |
| On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 20:10:13 GMT, "Randy Bauer"
<randybauer2300@yahoo.com> wrote:
quote:
>Yes, the silence truly is deafening.
>
>It's similar to the conversation around the "wetlands," which are a tiny
>tiny part of the USCF land parcel and adjoun the land owned by the city of
>Crossville. We have no need to develop that border strip and no plans to do
>so.
Yes, but we will still need permission from the Tennessee Department
of Conservation to build anywhere on the land because a structure on
any part of that land may affect the habitat of the ducks. This plot
of land is only three acres so obviously a building on 5000 square
feet could impact any part of this small plot of land.
In addition, there is no sewer system on the land, so we will have to
build our own sewer line or a septic tank. This too will obviously
affect the wetlands area. The sewage will likely contaminate the river
nearby which is already contaminated by the power station and the gas
company next door.
In order to get permission from the Tennessee Department of
Conservation to build our new USCF headquarters, we will have to
submit our building plans to that department. This means that we will
have to pay the architect to design the building and then submit the
plan to see if it passes. It is noteworthy that the contract that the
architect got Beatriz to sign specified that he was under no liability
if the plans were no good.
I would like to remind you that Ken Thomas, the USCF Chief Financial
Officer, warned you of these possibilities in a letter but you brushed
him off and after only ten minutes of discussion you voted to move to
Crossville. Perhaps you should have done some investigation into these
matters before taking this vote. Perhaps you have considered the
possibility that since this land was being given to us for free, there
might be something wrong with the land. Turns out that there are many
things wrong with the land which is why they selected a sucker, the
USCF, to build there.
Sam Sloan
| |
| Sam Sloan 2005-04-16, 8:31 pm |
| On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 20:58:49 GMT, "Randy Bauer"
<randybauer2300@yahoo.com> wrote:
quote:
>
>"Sam Sloan" <sloan@ishipress.com> wrote in message
>news:4261732e.33495406@ca.news.verio.net...
>
>I didn't vote to move to Crossville.
>
>Second, as has been written on this forum, Ken Thomas, that Great CFO hire
>of Bill Goichberg, didn't bother to do CFO stuff like bank reconciliations
>that would allow us to determine the USCF's financial position at the end of
>the calendar year. Yes, this is the same Bill Goichberg that you credit
>with single handedly saving the USCF from financial ruination. I've got
>news for you, Sam, you don't hire a CFO who cannot CFO. If you do hire a CFO
>who cannot CFO, you are responsible for their inability to CFO. Connect the
>dots.
Ken Thomas wasout sick during the last two weeks of the calender year.
That is why he could not get the bank recs done. Also, he had given
notice that he was leaving on Dec. 31 anyway. Perhaps Bill could have
gone to a temporary agency and hired a CFO for two weeks but with you
planning to come in like gangbusters on Jan. 3 and change everything
anyway, it is understandable that he did not do that.
What you have not explained is what difference would it make. Bank
recs are done to catch errors. Were there any significant errors? Is
there anything that you did not know that you would have known had the
bank recs been done?
This was not like 2001 when the new board walked in and found a file
folder of unrecorded involves and thousands of dollars in unreported
liabilities. Bill and Ken paid all the USCF debts before they left.
quote:
>The land you now want to turn into an environmental shrine is on the very
>border of our property and our structure and is not going to impact the
>wetlands. I know you are having a wet dream over the possibility that this
>move will fall apart, but, given the fact that Crossville wants us to move
>there, do you really think they are presenting us with a parcel of land that
>would make that move impossible? That, of course, would be the opportunity
>the USCF may have once contemplated to get out of the deal. Now, we don't
>want that, and they most certainly do not.
>
>Just what color is the sky in your world?
>
>Randy Bauer
You are not fromTennessee and everybody on this group who is
fromTennessee says that wetlands is a very serious issue not to be
taken lightly.
As to your question: Why would they give us land that was no good? The
answer is obvious. We take off the risk. If we get past theTennessee
Department of Conversation and are able to build our headquarters,they
greatly benefit. If we fail, we lose everything,The USCF probably goes
out of business but they lose nothing.
Sam Sloan
| |
| Grant Perks 2005-04-16, 8:31 pm |
| Sam,
There is a building to the east of the supposed "wetland" that is just
about as close as the one that the USCF is planning will be.
While I don't pretend to know the Tennessee definition of a wetland,
there can't be much of an issue over this puddle on the property line.
GRant
| |
| Spam Scone 2005-04-16, 8:31 pm |
|
jamesrynd@aol.com wrote:
quote:
> Like Humphrey Bogart, I was misinformed.
>
> Reality check here, rabblerouser... Humphrey Bogart *played a
character
quote:
> in a movie* and *one of his lines* was "I am misinformed." You are a
> real person who is constantly misinformed, and practice pounding the
> keyboard as ersatz journalism. Humphrey Bogart was an excellent
actor;
quote:
> you are a boil on the XXX of chess.
That's Arthur Bisguier's description of Sam Sloan.
| |
| Vince Hart 2005-04-16, 8:31 pm |
|
Randy Bauer wrote:
quote:
> Yes, the silence truly is deafening.
>
Some people are unable to hear anything but the sound of their own
voice so it seems like everyone else is silent.
Vince Hart
| |
| Sam Sloan 2005-04-16, 8:31 pm |
| On 16 Apr 2005 14:54:40 -0700, "Grant Perks" <gperks2@aol.com> wrote:
quote:
>Sam,
>
>There is a building to the east of the supposed "wetland" that is just
>about as close as the one that the USCF is planning will be.
>
>While I don't pretend to know the Tennessee definition of a wetland,
>there can't be much of an issue over this puddle on the property line.
>
>GRant
You may prove to be correct. However, just about everybody familiar
with the situation in Tennessee says otherwise.
For example, Steve Owens who posts as "Steve from Tennessee" on my
email group has consistently been one of the strongest supporters of
the move to Crossville.
However, now that he has found out that there is a wetlands issue, he
seems to be hesitant.
Similarly, Rob Mitchell on this group has been a long time supporter
of the move to Crossville but now he is not sure either.
Rob is also the person who informed us of the nudist colony.
Leshaun Fossett, a Libertarian Party member fromTennessee with whom I
correspond privately, seems to believe that we will likely not be
allowed to build on this property.
A lawyer whom I met in the New York Appellate Division Second
Department yesterday seemed quite sure that we will not be able to
build in Tennessee and he was talking about starting a class action
over this.
So, the opinion of Randy Bauer and Elizabeth Shaughnessy, neither of
whom know anything about Tennessee, does not count much compared to
this weight of authority.
Sam Sloan
| |
| Randy Bauer 2005-04-17, 12:30 am |
| In article <426193ad.41814281@ca.news.verio.net>, Sam Sloan says...
quote:
>
>On 16 Apr 2005 14:54:40 -0700, "Grant Perks" <gperks2@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>You may prove to be correct. However, just about everybody familiar
>with the situation in Tennessee says otherwise.
>
>For example, Steve Owens who posts as "Steve from Tennessee" on my
>email group has consistently been one of the strongest supporters of
>the move to Crossville.
>
>However, now that he has found out that there is a wetlands issue, he
>seems to be hesitant.
>
>Similarly, Rob Mitchell on this group has been a long time supporter
>of the move to Crossville but now he is not sure either.
>
>Rob is also the person who informed us of the nudist colony.
>
>Leshaun Fossett, a Libertarian Party member fromTennessee with whom I
>correspond privately, seems to believe that we will likely not be
>allowed to build on this property.
>
>A lawyer whom I met in the New York Appellate Division Second
>Department yesterday seemed quite sure that we will not be able to
>build in Tennessee and he was talking about starting a class action
>over this.
>
>So, the opinion of Randy Bauer and Elizabeth Shaughnessy, neither of
>whom know anything about Tennessee, does not count much compared to
>this weight of authority.
Weight of authority? Four people, none of whom has seen the property (I have).
None of whom have probably dealt with a state department of natural resources (I
have). It's a minor strip of land that we're not planning to disturb. It's a
non-issue.
A lawyer, a libertarian, and a nudist... sounds like a typical Sam Sloan
audience.
Randy Bauer
quote:
>Sam Sloan
| |
| Sam Sloan 2005-04-17, 3:30 am |
| On 16 Apr 2005 19:47:07 -0700, Randy Bauer <Randy_member@newsguy.com>
wrote:
quote:
>In article <426193ad.41814281@ca.news.verio.net>, Sam Sloan says...
>
>Weight of authority? Four people, none of whom has seen the property (I have).
>None of whom have probably dealt with a state department of natural resources (I
>have). It's a minor strip of land that we're not planning to disturb. It's a
>non-issue.
>
>A lawyer, a libertarian, and a nudist... sounds like a typical Sam Sloan
>audience.
>
>Randy Bauer
You live in Iowa. My family is from Iowa. We settled the state in 1845
before it was a state. I know the state very well. It is completely
flat. Not a single mountain. In 1961 when I was 16 I drove more than
100 miles in less than an hour averaging more than 100 miles per hour,
all on dirt back-roads going from Orient to Sioux City, to meet Dick
Rees,CCLA Director.
I never did such a crazy thing again, fortunately.
You think you know everything but you know absolutely nothing about
Tennessee. You probably do not even know how to make moonshine.
My sources all live in Tennessee and they all say that this is a
serious problem. I am inclined to believe them.
Sam Sloan
| |
| parrthenon@cs.com 2005-04-17, 3:30 am |
| BACKING AND FILLING
quote:
>I didn't vote to move to Crossville.> Randy Bauer, who abstained in
the initial vote but has since proved to be the greatest cheerleader
for relocation.
In the exchange between Randy Bauer and Sam Sloan. Mr. Bauer
concludes with a question whether Cross-to-Bear would really present a
piece of land to the New York slickers that is so badly flawed.
It would have been nice, given requirements for due diligence,
if the answers were known before moving to Cross-to-Bear. It would
appear that the Federation has yet to conctact the Tennessee Department
of Conservation. The backing and filling is striking. At first Mr.
Bauer called the wetlands problem a non-issue. But now, like a true
politician, he seems to be distancing himself by claiming he didn't
vote for it in the first place..
Such a deal this is going to turn out to be.
Mind you, if a problem develops over building on this piece of
land (the presumption is against a serious problem because the bank
granted a loan) then the next line will be: it is still a grand thing.
We stay in the Church.
<As to your question: Why would they give us land that was no good? The
answer is obvious. We take off the risk. If we get past the Tennessee
Department of Conversation and are able to build our headquarters, they
greatly benefit. If we fail, we lose everything,The USCF probably goes
out of business but they lose nothing.> Sam Sloan
| |
| Spam Scone 2005-04-17, 3:30 am |
|
Sam Sloan wrote:
In 1961 when I was 16 I drove more than
quote:
> 100 miles in less than an hour averaging more than 100 miles per
hour,
quote:
> all on dirt back-roads going from Orient to Sioux City, to meet Dick
> Rees,CCLA Director.
Was this an attempt to get a candidate statement to The Chess
Correspondent editor after the deadline?
quote:
> I never did such a crazy thing again, fortunately.
Thank goodness you never tried to meet a CCLA official again!
| |
| Pinga Peluda 2005-04-17, 6:30 am |
| X-No-archive: yes
<parrthenon@cs.com> Randy Bauer, like a true
quote:
> politician, he seems to be distancing himself by claiming he didn't vote
for it in the first place..>
Whether the USCF goes down now or later, the vultures are still counting on
being able to loot the treasury. that is what matters to them.
| |
| Pinga Peluda 2005-04-17, 6:30 am |
| X-No-archive: yes
"Sam Sloan" > Leshaun Fossett, a Libertarian Party member seems to believe
that we will likely not be allowed to build on this property.
quote:
>
Libertarians cannot get elected to be morticians or dog catchers and they
are never right about anything, because it takes someone who is way-off to
begin with to publicly announce that he is a Libertarian.
| |
| Sam Sloan 2005-04-17, 8:30 pm |
| On 16 Apr 2005 14:54:40 -0700, "Grant Perks" <gperks2@aol.com> wrote:
quote:
>Sam,
>
>There is a building to the east of the supposed "wetland" that is just
>about as close as the one that the USCF is planning will be.
>
>While I don't pretend to know the Tennessee definition of a wetland,
>there can't be much of an issue over this puddle on the property line.
>
>GRant
>
I am from TN, have property not 60 miles from the land
under consideration, and I say you are all wet on the
issue.
--
Steve OWENS in Tennessee
"Knowledge is, in every country, the surest basis for
public happiness." --George Washington
| |
| Randy Bauer 2005-04-17, 8:30 pm |
|
"Sam Sloan" <sloan@ishipress.com> wrote in message
news:426180b6.36959500@ca.news.verio.net...
quote:
> On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 20:58:49 GMT, "Randy Bauer"
> <randybauer2300@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Ken Thomas wasout sick during the last two weeks of the calender year.
> That is why he could not get the bank recs done. Also, he had given
> notice that he was leaving on Dec. 31 anyway. Perhaps Bill could have
> gone to a temporary agency and hired a CFO for two weeks but with you
> planning to come in like gangbusters on Jan. 3 and change everything
> anyway, it is understandable that he did not do that.
Baloney. The bank reconciliations weren't the only problem -- and they
hadn't been done for a lot longer than a couple of weeks. Revenues were
also booked incorrectly, and the result was a significantly different
financial picture through the end of the second quarter than Goichberg
reported to the Board when we met in December.
quote:
>
> What you have not explained is what difference would it make. Bank
> recs are done to catch errors. Were there any significant errors? Is
> there anything that you did not know that you would have known had the
> bank recs been done?
This was discussed on this newsgroup, but you were probably too busy filing
since dismissed lawsuits.
quote:
>
> This was not like 2001 when the new board walked in and found a file
> folder of unrecorded involves and thousands of dollars in unreported
> liabilities. Bill and Ken paid all the USCF debts before they left.
It's very much like that.
quote:
>
>
> You are not fromTennessee and everybody on this group who is
> fromTennessee says that wetlands is a very serious issue not to be
> taken lightly.
>
> As to your question: Why would they give us land that was no good? The
> answer is obvious. We take off the risk. If we get past theTennessee
> Department of Conversation and are able to build our headquarters,they
> greatly benefit. If we fail, we lose everything,The USCF probably goes
> out of business but they lose nothing.
That makes absolutely no sense at all. What "risk?" It's not as if the
city is stuck paying property taxes to itself for the land. It's not as if
some failing business is located on the land. It's a 3 acre parcel in an
industrial park.
Meanwhile, keep in mind that the county is letting us stay rent and
utilities free in a building they own while we build. If there are, in
fact, delays related to the project, we could just stay there longer. Keep
in mind also that the Tennessee Governor has been supportive of this project
and has personally pitched the state to the USCF. Last time I looked, the
state department charged with any determination on the wetlands issue is a
part of the administration of the Governor of Tennessee. Connect the dots.
Randy Bauer
quote:
>
> Sam Sloan
>
>
| |
|
| Okay,
Randy Bauer wrote:
quote:
> In article <426193ad.41814281@ca.news.verio.net>, Sam Sloan says...
wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
just[vbcol=seagreen]
wetland,[vbcol=seagreen]
line.[vbcol=seagreen]
he[vbcol=seagreen]
I have not sen the property in question.I do not know how signficant
an issue it is. In the State of Tennessee, the miinimun criteria for a
wetland is that plants that would flourish in a wetland envrionment be
present and productive six monthe out of the year.
I know this first hand as I have worked at wetlands preservation not
1/2 a mile from my home.
My concern would be more to the flood zone determinations. That could
be very costly and required by the lender. I simply do not know givin
the information at hand.
[vbcol=seagreen]
The colony is there, but I thought the information was funny and it was
done as a joke for Sam. Sorry if my humor missed the mark.
[vbcol=seagreen]
I[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Weight of authority? Four people, none of whom has seen the property
(I have).
quote:
> None of whom have probably dealt with a state department of natural
resources (I
quote:
> have). It's a minor strip of land that we're not planning to
disturb. It's a
quote:
> non-issue.
>
> A lawyer, a libertarian, and a nudist... sounds like a typical Sam
Sloan
quote:
> audience.
Okay, I consider Randy to be my friend( even though he didn't stop and
have bar-b-que with me his last trip into Tennessee ;-( ) LOL
But I am NOT! NOT! NOT! nor shall I ever become a NUDIST!!! LOL
PLease, don't ever say or imply that again. Pleole everywhere will
begin gouging out their "minds eye".[vbcol=seagreen]
> Randy Bauer
>
Rob
| |
|
| Uh Oh!
Randy Bauer wrote:
quote:
> In article <426193ad.41814281@ca.news.verio.net>, Sam Sloan says...
wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
just[vbcol=seagreen]
wetland,[vbcol=seagreen]
line.[vbcol=seagreen]
he[vbcol=seagreen]
I have personally worked at wetlands determinations with the State of
Tennessee. To be a "wetlands" area the minimum requirement is that
plants that would grow in a wetland environment be present and
productive six months out of the year. I doubt it will case any
problems, I simply do not know. I have not seen the parcel either. My
immediate concern would be for flood zone determinations. The lender
could reqiire flood insurance. On that type of project, if it is in a
flood zone, It could be expensive.
I consider Randy my friend( even if he didn't have barbecue with me
last time he was in the area! LOL)
[vbcol=seagreen]
That was a joke for Sam.
[vbcol=seagreen]
I[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Weight of authority? Four people, none of whom has seen the property
(I have).
quote:
> None of whom have probably dealt with a state department of natural
resources (I
quote:
> have). It's a minor strip of land that we're not planning to
disturb. It's a
quote:
> non-issue.
>
> A lawyer, a libertarian, and a nudist... sounds like a typical Sam
Sloan
quote:
> audience.
Let me make this PERFECTLY CLEAR:
I AM NOT, NOT, NOT EVER NOR SHALL I EVER BE A NUDIST!!!! LOL
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Randy Bauer
>
Rob
| |
| jamesrynd@aol.com 2005-04-17, 8:30 pm |
| Mind you, if a problem develops
If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we would all have a frigging Merry
Christmas, Chicken Little.
| |
| The Masked Bishop 2005-04-17, 8:30 pm |
| Gosh, that's just darn folksy and hee-yuk, I don't know what to say.
How old are you, 9?
<jamesrynd@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1113761590.705477.164860@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
quote:
> Mind you, if a problem develops
>
> If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we would all have a frigging Merry
> Christmas, Chicken Little.
>
| |
| David Ames 2005-04-17, 8:30 pm |
| Flood zone? What's it going to cost a business to insure against
floods?
David Ames
| |
| jamesrynd@aol.com 2005-04-18, 12:30 am |
| 9 going on 90, unfortunately.....
| |
| George John 2005-04-18, 3:30 am |
| Sam Sloan wrote:
quote:
> On 16 Apr 2005 14:54:40 -0700, "Grant Perks" <gperks2@aol.com> wrote:
>
just[vbcol=seagreen]
line.[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> I am from TN, have property not 60 miles from the land
> under consideration, and I say you are all wet on the
> issue.
>
> --
> Steve OWENS in Tennessee
> "Knowledge is, in every country, the surest basis for
> public happiness." --George Washington
Since Steve does not read or post on rgcp, he asked me to post the
following on his behalf.
"Please advise the RGCP that I
was saying SAM is "all wet" on this issue. Also, that I
still support the move to Crossville, and have never
"seemed hesitant" at all.
Please let anyone know that I have asked Sam to retract his
statement about me on every forum where he made it so that
they can see whether he has the honor to do so."
Best regards,
George John
| |
| Terminus 2005-04-18, 6:30 am |
| X-No-archive: yes
"George John" <> Since Steve does not read or post on rgcp, he asked me to
post the following on his behalf.
quote:
>
Steve sounds really gay. Did he ask you to wipe his butt too?
| |
| parrthenon@cs.com 2005-04-18, 8:30 pm |
| CRUD
quote:
>Since Steve does not read or post on rgcp, he asked me to post the
following on his behalf.> George John
What we have here is crud.
Sam Sloan, in my view, has nothing to retract. He said that it seemed
(to whom? to himself, of course) that Steve of Tennessee was hedging.
What retraction can Sam possibly write? That such did not seem to be
the case to him?
Ludicrous.
Meanwhile George John, a candidate for office on the Bauer ticket,
has still not stated his position on the propriety of USCF president
Beatriz Marinello serving as Chief Operating Officer, a new precedent.
| |
| klgore@mailinator.com 2005-04-18, 8:30 pm |
|
Randy Bauer wrote:
quote:
>
> A lawyer, a libertarian, and a nudist... sounds like a typical Sam
Sloan
quote:
> audience.
>
Sounds like a great joke setup...what's the punchline?? :-)
K
quote:
> Randy Bauer
| |
|
|
| George John 2005-04-18, 8:30 pm |
|
parrthenon@cs.com wrote:
Dear Larry,
[SNIP]
quote:
> Meanwhile George John, a candidate for office on the Bauer
ticket,
quote:
> has still not stated his position on the propriety of USCF president
> Beatriz Marinello serving as Chief Operating Officer, a new
precedent.
I am willing to comment on this once I have sufficient information to
discuss it intelligently. I have looked a bit for facts on this
subject in the public record, and have not had any luck finding
anything. Please give me a list of pages on the USCF Website that
refer to this issue. You don't have to give the URL to the Executive
Board "Standards of Conduct". But, any audio recording or minutes
where the board discussed this issue would be helpful. Since you
mentioned Wayne, I would be interested in seeing any comments, quoted
in proper context, he has made.
I am willing to offer the following hypothetical example however for
purposes of discussion.
Let's assume a former Executive Director, who did an outstanding job,
is now working for someone else, and is also the USCF President. The
current Executive Director is injured in a severe accident and will be
out of work for a month. It's a crisis situation and someone
absolutely has to fill in on an emergency basis. No one qualified is
available except for the USCF President.
The USCF President's employer is willing to allow him to take unpaid
leave for a month. The President offers to fill in for the injured ED
at no pay, but does ask that reasonable expenses be reimbursed, for
example a modest food allowance, lodging, and travel expenses. The
President must dip into savings to compensate for the loss of wages, a
significant financial sacrifice. He finds it unfair that he would have
to cover all of his reasonable expenses as well.
What should the organization to? It has a critical need. The cost of
reasonable expenses is far below the typical salary of an Executive
Director. The President is losing money by helping out, so he is not
financially gaining from filling in. Furthermore, this President has
no financial stake in chess whatsoever, and historically has helped
with chess only as an unpaid volunteer. This seems to be a win for
the organization, and this volunteer should be thanked for his willing
to sacrifice a month of salary to help the organization out at a
critical time.
What am I missing here please?
Best regards,
George John
| |
| George John 2005-04-18, 8:30 pm |
| parrthenon@cs.com wrote:
Dear Larry,
quote:
> CRUD
>
> following on his behalf.> George John
>
> What we have here is crud.
It appears you do not understand what has happened here. Let me try to
explain this better for you.
"A" posts something
"B" posts something which attempts to refute "A"
"C" posts something which attempts to refute "B" (but it's somewhat
generic, for example "You are all wet")
"B" quotes "C's" generic post to refute "A", taking "C's" posts out of
context and giving the appearance that "C" opposes "A" and not "B"
Here's an example:
"A" says, "The world is round"
"B" says to "A", "No it isn't, it's flat"
"C" says to "B", "You are all wet. I have traveled around the world,
so I should know"
Now "B" makes a post like this:
A said: "The world is round"
C said: "You are all wet. I have traveled around the world, so I
should know"
I hope you now understand what Sam Sloan has done, and agree how
misleading doing something like this can be. It should be avoided, and
corrected once pointed out.
[SNIP]
Best regards,
George John
| |
| George John 2005-04-18, 8:30 pm |
|
George John wrote:
quote:
> I am willing to comment on this once I have sufficient information to
> discuss it intelligently. I have looked a bit for facts on this
> subject in the public record, and have not had any luck finding
> anything.
I have done a bit of research, and this is what I have found so far.
The decision to appoint the USCF President as "Volunteer Chief
Operating Officer" was made at the December 19, 2004 Executive Board
Meeting. The minutes have a one line item, and that is all. Although
the Bylaws require the audio portion of all meetings to be posted
within one month of any given meeting, I can not find the audio
recording of this meeting. I have just sent a message to the USCF
asking about this.
I discussed this issue with Wayne. The issue here is the COO reports
to the President. It is undesirable to have the COO reporting to
herself. The simple and sufficient solution is to have the
Vice-President assume the duties of the President while the President
is assuming the duties of COO. I don't know if this option was
discussed at the Dec 19th meeting since we have no audio recording.
Best regards,
George John
| |
| Terminus 2005-04-18, 8:30 pm |
| X-No-archive: yes
"George John" <> I am willing to comment on this once I have sufficient
information to discuss it intelligently.>
In your case, that will never happen. If you had said "immorally," or
"corruptedly" then we would have held out hope.
| |
| Terminus 2005-04-18, 8:30 pm |
| X-No-archive: yes
"George John" <The simple and sufficient solution is to have the
quote:
> Vice-President assume the duties of the President while the President is
assuming the duties of COO. >
What is the point of having the President become the COO and report back to
her inferior (the VP)? That is pure jack-off mentality, the kind of thing
everyone expects from a dumb corrupt bastard.
| |
| blahusenet@yahoo.com 2005-04-18, 8:30 pm |
| we have here what looks like a delibrate attempt by sam sloan to
falsify information. the above was called a "fabrication" by owens on
sam's newsgroup this morning. owens said he was responding to sam's
post and not perks. here is owens' post as it originally appeared:
------
From: "Steve in Tennessee" <p944dc@bellsouth.net>
Date: Sun Apr 17, 2005 7:38 am
Subject: Re: Deafening Silence
I am from TN, have property not 60 miles from the land
under consideration, and I say you are all wet on the
issue.
On 17 Apr 2005 at 8:15, fide-chess@yahoogroups.com wrote:
quote:
> You are not fromTennessee and everybody on this group who is
> fromTennessee says that wetlands is a very serious issue not to be
> taken lightly.
>
--
Steve OWENS in Tennessee
"Knowledge is, in every country, the surest basis for
public happiness." --George Washington
-------
and now here is how sloan reposted it:
-------
From: sloan@...
Date: Sun Apr 17, 2005 3:11 pm
Subject: Re: Deafening Silence
On 16 Apr 2005 14:54:40 -0700, "Grant Perks" <gperks2@...> wrote:
quote:
>Sam,
>
>There is a building to the east of the supposed "wetland" that is just
>about as close as the one that the USCF is planning will be.
>
>While I don't pretend to know the Tennessee definition of a wetland,
>there can't be much of an issue over this puddle on the property line.
>
>GRant
>
I am from TN, have property not 60 miles from the land
under consideration, and I say you are all wet on the
issue.
--
Steve OWENS in Tennessee
"Knowledge is, in every country, the surest basis for
public happiness." --George Washington
-------
as we can see sloan took owens' writing from a reply to sloan's post
and pasted it onto perks comments to look as if owens was in agreement
with sloan. that, from everything owens has written that i can find,
is not the case. there is nothing for slaon to read that would seem to
agree with sloan in owens' comments. parrthenon's effort to
rehabilitate sloan's obvious attempt at deception falls apart on this
ground.
bottom line: sloan lied and as owens alledged "fabricated" a message to
support sloan's lie. nothing that comes from sloan can be trusted.
who knows what is fact and fiction from sloan and what he has
"fabricated" to support his fiction.
these messages can be viewed on yahoo groups in these urls and their
threads:
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group...s/message/19967
(the message owens replied to in 19981)
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group...s/message/19986
(sloan's faked message)
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group...s/message/19981
(owens' true message replying to slaon's comments)
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group...s/message/19998
(owens asking sloan why sloan "fabricated" the message)
what else is sloan lying about?
| |
|
|
"Grant Perks" <gperks2@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1113660297.903392.55760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
quote:
> Larry,
>
> $515,000 was deposited in the bank from the sale of the building.
>
> I am not in Crossville so I don't have access to the sales agreement,
> but as I recall the building sold for around $535,000.
Yes but then we had to pay 10,000 for the first month's rent in a deal
hammered out by Goichberg to help the buyer cheat the mortgage company.
| |
| Spam Scone 2005-04-19, 12:30 am |
|
blahuse...@yahoo.com wrote:
quote:
>
> what else is sloan lying about?
What isn't he lying about? Aside from Philth Innes, I don't know of a
more untrustworthy poster.
| |
| Jehovah's Witness 2005-04-19, 3:30 am |
| X-No-archive: yes
<blahusenet@yahoo.com> > as we can see sloan took owens' writing from a
reply to sloan's post and pasted it onto perks comments to look as if owens
was in agreement with sloan.>>
You seem to have a lot of time on your hands. Have you ever considered
learning masturbation?
| |
| Chess One 2005-04-19, 6:30 am |
|
"George John" <george@neosoft.com> wrote in message
news:1113852745.091810.25810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
quote:
>
> George John wrote:
>
>
> I have done a bit of research, and this is what I have found so far.
> The decision to appoint the USCF President as "Volunteer Chief
> Operating Officer" was made at the December 19, 2004 Executive Board
> Meeting. The minutes have a one line item, and that is all. Although
> the Bylaws require the audio portion of all meetings to be posted
> within one month of any given meeting, I can not find the audio
> recording of this meeting. I have just sent a message to the USCF
> asking about this.
BYLAWS MEAN OPTIONAL LAWS?
Thank you, George.
No doubt you will also be able to track down the $30,000 associated with the
'Volunteer' position and even how much of that has been expended, and when
the budget line-item expires - or does it continue until exhausted?
When you asked me before "where does it say..." about these financials, I
thought you were joking!
Of course, the letter of the regulations, printed instructions & bylaws are
very important for some issues - election procedures, for example.
But as ani fül can see...
Phil Innes
quote:
> I discussed this issue with Wayne. The issue here is the COO reports
> to the President. It is undesirable to have the COO reporting to
> herself. The simple and sufficient solution is to have the
> Vice-President assume the duties of the President while the President
> is assuming the duties of COO. I don't know if this option was
> discussed at the Dec 19th meeting since we have no audio recording.
>
> Best regards,
>
> George John
>
| |
| Sam Sloan 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| On 18 Apr 2005 08:02:06 -0700, "George John" <george@neosoft.com>
wrote:
quote:
>I am willing to offer the following hypothetical example however for
>purposes of discussion.
>
>Let's assume a former Executive Director, who did an outstanding job,
>is now working for someone else, and is also the USCF President. The
>current Executive Director is injured in a severe accident and will be
>out of work for a month. It's a crisis situation and someone
>absolutely has to fill in on an emergency basis. No one qualified is
>available except for the USCF President.
>
>The USCF President's employer is willing to allow him to take unpaid
>leave for a month. The President offers to fill in for the injured ED
>at no pay, but does ask that reasonable expenses be reimbursed, for
>example a modest food allowance, lodging, and travel expenses. The
>President must dip into savings to compensate for the loss of wages, a
>significant financial sacrifice. He finds it unfair that he would have
>to cover all of his reasonable expenses as well.
>
>What should the organization to? It has a critical need. The cost of
>reasonable expenses is far below the typical salary of an Executive
>Director. The President is losing money by helping out, so he is not
>financially gaining from filling in. Furthermore, this President has
>no financial stake in chess whatsoever, and historically has helped
>with chess only as an unpaid volunteer. This seems to be a win for
>the organization, and this volunteer should be thanked for his willing
>to sacrifice a month of salary to help the organization out at a
>critical time.
>
>What am I missing here please?
>
>Best regards,
>
>George John
What you are missing iseverything.
On Octoiber 19,2004 I posted to this group
"Goichberg to be fired by Beatriz and replaced by Beatriz
"It is now an open secret that USCF President Beatriz
Marinello plans to fire Bill Goichberg and replace him with herself.
The only question is when and how. "
So,this is exactly what happened. Bill was prepared to move to
Tennessee. He had already ordered a moving van and was preparing to
pack his stuff and move when he found out that he was being fired by
Beatriz.
Also,Beatriz did not give up a job to become Chief Operating Officer
of the USCF. She did not have a job. Her pet store in Miami had failed
and gone out of business.
Sam Sloan
| |
| parrthenon@cs.com 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| BEATRIZ MARINELLO REPORTS TO HERSELF!
quote:
>I am willing to comment on this once I have sufficient information to
discuss it intelligently...the Bylaws require the audio portion of all
meetings to be posted within one month of any given meeting, I can not
find the audio recording of this meeting. I have just sent a message
to the USCF asking about this. I discussed this issue with Wayne
[Praeder]. The issue here is the COO reports to the President. It is
undesirable to have the COO reporting to herself.> George John
<BYLAWS MEAN OPTIONAL LAWS?> Phil Innes
There was a time when expenses of board members were routinely
placed on the public record and published in the quarterlty board
newsletter.
The resolution making Beatriz Marinello a "Volunteer" Chief
Operating Officer is a hoot beyond hoots. "No pay" means "pay" re
Goichberg and "Volunteer" means $60,000 in annualized expenses with no
record of what has been actually spent and for what.
Amazing stuff. One notes how such transparent violations of
the bylaws and common decency no longer create any sense of outrage.
Beatriz Marinello was authorized $30,000 for "expenses" for six
months. Just how much has she spent so far, and what happens to the
rest of the money. Those are the issues.
To Phil Innes: it's true that Sam's suit was tossed out on a legal
technicality; but it's also true that it was a rather large
technicality. It wasn't served in time.
| |
| Spam Scone 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
|
parrthenon@cs.com wrote:
quote:
>
> To Phil Innes: it's true that Sam's suit was tossed out on a
legal
quote:
> technicality; but it's also true that it was a rather large
> technicality. It wasn't served in time.
It reminds me of another recent 'scandal' where Sam Sloan missed a
deadline.
| |
| parrthenon@cs.com 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| BEATRIZ MARINELLO REPORTS TO HERSELF!
quote:
>I am willing to comment on this once I have sufficient information to
discuss it intelligently...the Bylaws require the audio portion of all
meetings to be posted
within one month of any given meeting, I can not find the audio
recording of this meeting. I have just sent a message to the USCF
asking about this. I discussed this issue with Wayne [Praeder]. The
issue here is the COO reports to the President. It is undesirable to
have the COO reporting to herself.> George John
<BYLAWS MEAN OPTIONAL LAWS?> Phil Innes
There was a time when expenses of board members were routinely
placed on the public record and published in the quarterlty board
newsletter.
The resolution making Beatriz Marinello a "Volunteer" Chief
Operating Officer is a hoot beyond hoots. "No pay" means "pay" re
Goichberg and "Volunteer" means $60,000 in annualized expenses with no
record of what has been actually spent and for what.
Amazing stuff. One notes how such transparent violations of
the bylaws and common decency no longer create any sense of outrage.
Beatriz Marinello was authorized $30,000 for "expenses" for six
months. Just how much has she spent so far, and what happens to the
rest of the money. Those are the issues.
To Phil Innes: it's true that Sam's suit was tossed out on a legal
technicality; but it's also true that it was a rather large
technicality. It wasn't served in time.
| |
| chessdon@aol.com 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| george john said: ">I am willing to comment on this once I have
sufficient information to discuss it intelligently...the Bylaws require
the audio portion of all meetings to be posted within one month of any
given meeting, I can not
find the audio recording of this meeting. I have just sent a message
to the USCF asking about this. I discussed this issue with Wayne
[Praeder]. The issue here is the COO reports to the President. It is
undesirable to have the COO reporting to herself.> George John
Neither the COO or an ED (if there) report to the President. They both
have their responsibilities defined by the bylaws. The ED is appointed
by the EB. The EB reviews the work of the ED and sets direction. The
President is the Board point of contact for the ED.
That is how I see it but the mode of operation changed after we had
one very inept ED followed by a sick ED who could only answer yes when
he was asked to commit the USCF. In those instances the EB failed to
understand the disaster that was happening.
Then we had an over reaction to the poor management. The EB and the
President micro-managed.
Now governance needs to change once again. Micro-management has to
stop. That is why selection of the next ED is so important. We have two
fine candidates and will select one in May. It is very important that
each of our Borad members vote the one whom they consider the most
qualified. There is no room for politics in this decision. In a recent
post Randy Bauer expressed very well the differences between the two
candidates and the general think among the Board members
Frankly, I'd just as soon see an 8 week delay and let the newly elected
Board (we will know whom they will be after the vote count on July
20/21); after all the new Board will be the Board to whom the new ED
will report, but among current Boad members, I seem to be a minority
of one having that viewpoint,
Don Schultz
| |
| Randy Bauer 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| In article <1113908710.299383.77170@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
chessdon@aol.com says...
quote:
>
>Now governance needs to change once again. Micro-management has to
>stop. That is why selection of the next ED is so important. We have two
>fine candidates and will select one in May. It is very important that
>each of our Borad members vote the one whom they consider the most
>qualified. There is no room for politics in this decision. In a recent
>post Randy Bauer expressed very well the differences between the two
>candidates and the general think among the Board members
>
>Frankly, I'd just as soon see an 8 week delay and let the newly elected
>Board (we will know whom they will be after the vote count on July
>20/21); after all the new Board will be the Board to whom the new ED
>will report, but among current Boad members, I seem to be a minority
>of one having that viewpoint,
>
>Don Schultz
The current Board has spent a fair amount of time developing an ED job
description, reviewing and researching the applicants, narrowing the field of
candidates, and doing interviews. It's time we get on with it. Beatriz and the
USCF staff have worked extremely hard to keep the move on schedule, but it's
been 4 months without an executive director, and we shouldn't put it off until
August at the earliest. A new Board member would, to be comfortable making a
decision, may have to revisit all of the issues the current Board has already
worked through. That could take considerable time and effort. The last thing
we need is to re-open this discussion -- which, conceivably could leave the USCF
without an ED for nearly a year.
Randy Bauer
| |
| George John 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| chessdon@aol.com wrote:
Don,
[SNIP]
quote:
> Neither the COO or an ED (if there) report to the President. They
both
quote:
> have their responsibilities defined by the bylaws. The ED is
appointed
quote:
> by the EB. The EB reviews the work of the ED and sets direction. The
> President is the Board point of contact for the ED.
Do you agree or disagree that the "point of contact" between the office
and the Board should not be the same person?
[SNIP]
What are your plans please to have posted to the USCF Website the audio
recording from the December 19, 2004 Executive Board meeting, a report
which under the USCF Bylaws was to have been posted no later than
January 19, 2005, and is now three months past due?
Best regards,
George John
USCF Delegate, Texas
| |
| George John 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| parrthenon@cs.com wrote:
Dear Larry,
[SNIP]
quote:
> There was a time when expenses of board members were
routinely
quote:
> placed on the public record and published in the quarterlty board
> newsletter.
FYI. Quoted from the "DELEGATE ACTIONS OF CONTINUING INTEREST":
"42. VOLUNTEER EXPENSES. A summary of all reimbursements
to each member of the Executive Board, International Delegations,
and all other volunteers shall be published in the Executive
Board Newsletters and on the USCF website. (1990, 1998)"
Source: http://www.uschess.org/org/govern/2004delcall.pdf
[SNIP]
Best regards,
George John
| |
| Sam Sloan 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| On 19 Apr 2005 08:04:01 -0700, "George John" <george@neosoft.com>
wrote:
quote:
>parrthenon@cs.com wrote:
>
>Dear Larry,
>
>[SNIP]
>
>routinely
>
>FYI. Quoted from the "DELEGATE ACTIONS OF CONTINUING INTEREST":
>
>"42. VOLUNTEER EXPENSES. A summary of all reimbursements
>to each member of the Executive Board, International Delegations,
>and all other volunteers shall be published in the Executive
>Board Newsletters and on the USCF website. (1990, 1998)"
>
>Source: http://www.uschess.org/org/govern/2004delcall.pdf
>
>[SNIP]
>
>Best regards,
>
>George John
Great!! Now,tell us why you continue to support Beatriz Marinello and
the other incumbents who are obviously in violation of this and
several other by-laws.
Sam Sloan
| |
| Chess One 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
|
"George John" <george@neosoft.com> wrote in message
news:1113925532.105879.260970@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
quote:
>
> Chess One wrote:
>
> Phil,
>
> [SNIP]
>
> with the
> when
>
> Maybe. I have been unable to find any information about this $30,000
> figure (where did that come from again?) or a budget. Hopefully, we
> will learn more once the audio recording is posted from the December
> 19, 2004 meeting.
Yes. Hopefully.
Of and course, hopefully the letter of the regulations, printed instructions
& bylaws are
very important for some issues - election procedures, for example, and for
everyone equally.
Do you still think the letter of the law should apply to Sam Sloan the
candidate [I'm making him sound like Robert Redford], and not the board
itself?
There are no released minutes George - there is only what is written here.
And without scrutiny of the budget, or what is posted against it, what can
anyone say? Have a couple hundred thousand and go move! End of hopeful
story.
Phil
quote:
> BTW, the duration of the "transition team", which included the
> appointment of the President as Volunteer Chief Operating Officer, was
> to end on March 31, 2005. I can find no subsequent motion which
> extended that date.
>
> [SNIP]
>
> Best regards,
>
> George John
>
| |
| chessdon@aol.com 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| A reason, I think, why the lack of publishing of EB expenses is that
during the financial crunch beginning with Frank Niro's resignation,
there were, I believe, virtually no expenses by Board members that were
charged. There may have been an exception here and there but by and
large that was the case. When we were no longer on the brink of
bankruptcy starting about August 2004, the ost members of the EB
started again billing airfares and some other expenses.
| |
| chessdon@aol.com 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| It should be published. But the CFO can do it, The Secretary adds no
value here. If the CFO isn't sure of a partiiclar number or its
credibility he has access to all our committees and EB to seek advice.
As for the Newsletter, I review that for Rachel and almost always
discuss with Rachel whether or not to include something.
But posting of financials - no that must be left to the financial
folks.
As for Board member expense reimbursements. What was reimbursed should
be submitted to Rachel and published. It is strictly operational. Now I
feel sometimes explanations are needed. For example when I hosted an EB
meeting staff needed a smart memory card for their recorder. I
purchased it for them and was later reimbursed. Should that expense be
listed for me? Absolutely, but in that case an explanation might be
included.
| |
| Sam Sloan 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| On 19 Apr 2005 08:45:32 -0700, "George John" <george@neosoft.com>
wrote:
quote:
>
>Chess One wrote:
>
>Phil,
>
>[SNIP]
>
>with the
>when
>
>Maybe. I have been unable to find any information about this $30,000
>figure (where did that come from again?) or a budget. Hopefully, we
>will learn more once the audio recording is posted from the December
>19, 2004 meeting.
>
>BTW, the duration of the "transition team", which included the
>appointment of the President as Volunteer Chief Operating Officer, was
>to end on March 31, 2005. I can find no subsequent motion which
>extended that date.
>
>[SNIP]
>
>Best regards,
>
>George John
>
Smart boy !!! Perhaps you are finally getting the real picture.
The Marinello Gang are a bunch of crooks and criminals who are
systematically looting the assets of the USCF.
Sam Sloan
| |
| George John 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
|
Chess One wrote:
Phil,
[SNIP]
quote:
> No doubt you will also be able to track down the $30,000 associated
with the
quote:
> 'Volunteer' position and even how much of that has been expended, and
when
quote:
> the budget line-item expires - or does it continue until exhausted?
Maybe. I have been unable to find any information about this $30,000
figure (where did that come from again?) or a budget. Hopefully, we
will learn more once the audio recording is posted from the December
19, 2004 meeting.
BTW, the duration of the "transition team", which included the
appointment of the President as Volunteer Chief Operating Officer, was
to end on March 31, 2005. I can find no subsequent motion which
extended that date.
[SNIP]
Best regards,
George John
| |
| Randy Bauer 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| In article <42651f71.53221859@ca.news.verio.net>, Sam Sloan says...
quote:
>
>On 19 Apr 2005 08:04:01 -0700, "George John" <george@neosoft.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>Great!! Now,tell us why you continue to support Beatriz Marinello and
>the other incumbents who are obviously in violation of this and
>several other by-laws.
Sam Sloan appears to believe that each Board member types in material for the
USCF Board newsletters and USCF website. Newsflash, Sam, that's not how the
process works.
I, for example, would have no way of accumulating that information and putting
it anywhere. First, I believe these sorts of reporting issues are the
responsibility of, among Board members, the Secretary. Second, I would assume
the Secretary would work with the USCF CFO or accounting staff to accumulate the
necessary information.
I have absolutely no problem with it being published. To date, my reimbursed
expenses are $0.00. How about you, Sam -- would you make that pledge were you
to become a member of the Board?
Randy Bauer
quote:
>
>Sam Sloan
| |
| Sam Sloan 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| On 19 Apr 2005 08:31:42 -0700, Randy Bauer <Randy_member@newsguy.com>
wrote:
quote:
>In article <42651f71.53221859@ca.news.verio.net>, Sam Sloan says...
>
>Sam Sloan appears to believe that each Board member types in material for the
>USCF Board newsletters and USCF website. Newsflash, Sam, that's not how the
>process works.
>
>I, for example, would have no way of accumulating that information and putting
>it anywhere. First, I believe these sorts of reporting issues are the
>responsibility of, among Board members, the Secretary. Second, I would assume
>the Secretary would work with the USCF CFO or accounting staff to accumulate the
>necessary information.
As far as am aware, Don Schultz does not know how much Beatriz
Marinello has taken as expenses for herself. Why do not you tell him
or have one of your minions do so?
In addition, the USCF does not have an accounting staff at the present
time. They were all fired or let go.
quote:
>I have absolutely no problem with it being published. To date, my reimbursed
>expenses are $0.00. How about you, Sam -- would you make that pledge were you
>to become a member of the Board?
>
>Randy Bauer
Sure.I would make that pledge. I do not plan to spend any money or
have myself appointed as Executive Director or some other office
position.
Sam Sloan
| |
| George John 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| Sam Sloan wrote:
quote:
> On 19 Apr 2005 08:04:01 -0700, "George John" <george@neosoft.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Great!! Now,tell us why you continue to support Beatriz Marinello and
> the other incumbents who are obviously in violation of this and
> several other by-laws.
Minor violations of the Bylaws and "Delegate Action of Continuing
Interest" have been a problem with every administration I have
followed. It is one reason why I have called for a compliance
committee to positively help our governance system avoid future issues.
If elected, I think I can help the organization adhere more closely to
its "law", and am pledged to do so.
This "Delegate Action of Continuing Interest" (it's not a Bylaw) has no
deadline associated with it. So, in my estimation "reasonable and
customary" would apply. It has been customary for some time now for
these expenses to be published in the "Delegates Call". It is also
reasonable they be published in this manner.
Certainly, I would not object to more frequent reporting, especially if
the expenses exceed a certain threshold or are exceptional or unusual
in a nature. IMO, having a member of the Executive Board acting as the
VCOO for three months and having reasonable lodging, meals, travel,
etc. reimbursed, would fall into exceptional or unusual expenses, and
probably should be reported on a more timely basis, or explicitly
budgeted for up front. Perhaps this was done, but I can't find it in
the public record.
Finally, I do strongly support the administration of President
Marinello, and am pledged to support and vote for the members of her
team who have been and will continue to be committed to supporting her
policies which have turned the USCF financially around, and have
modernized the office -- two absolutely critical items which every past
administration since at least 1997 have failed to do.
I may at times disagree with certain actions or lack of action, no
administration is perfect, but overall the administration of President
Marinello is the best I have seen by a wide margin. I hope the USCF
Voting Members will agree and cast their votes accordingly.
Best regards,
George John
| |
| Randy Bauer 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| In article <42652a73.56040468@ca.news.verio.net>, Sam Sloan says...
quote:
>
>On 19 Apr 2005 08:31:42 -0700, Randy Bauer <Randy_member@newsguy.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>As far as am aware, Don Schultz does not know how much Beatriz
>Marinello has taken as expenses for herself. Why do not you tell him
>or have one of your minions do so?
How would I know, Sam? I have no "minions" and if this is a duty of the
Secretary, he should ask the office staff and file the report.
quote:
>In addition, the USCF does not have an accounting staff at the present
>time. They were all fired or let go.
Not true. The is an accuontant in Crossville and a CFO as well.
quote:
>
>
>Sure.I would make that pledge. I do not plan to spend any money or
>have myself appointed as Executive Director or some other office
>position.
So you promise you'll pay your plane fare or other transportation costs to get
to Board meetings?
Randy Bauer
quote:
>
>Sam Sloan
>
| |
| Randy Bauer 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| In article <42652bc5.56378000@ca.news.verio.net>, Sam Sloan says...
quote:
>
>On 19 Apr 2005 08:45:32 -0700, "George John" <george@neosoft.com>
>wrote:
>
>Smart boy !!! Perhaps you are finally getting the real picture.
>
>The Marinello Gang are a bunch of crooks and criminals who are
>systematically looting the assets of the USCF.
Please Sam, outline for us exactly who are crooks and criminals and the crimes
they are guilty of. I understand you're judgement-proof, but it would be good
for all to see the level of your crockery.
Randy Bauer
quote:
>
>Sam Sloan
| |
| Sam Sloan 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| On 19 Apr 2005 10:44:54 -0700, "George John" <george@neosoft.com>
wrote:
quote:
>Sam Sloan wrote:
>
>Minor violations of the Bylaws and "Delegate Action of Continuing
>Interest" have been a problem with every administration I have
>followed. It is one reason why I have called for a compliance
>committee to positively help our governance system avoid future issues.
> If elected, I think I can help the organization adhere more closely to
>its "law", and am pledged to do so.
You are an amazing hypocrite. Either the actions of Beatriz Marinello
are legal or they are illegal.
There is no such as actions which "adhere more closely to the law".
Either what she had done and continues to do is legal or it is
illegal. If it is legal, she is OK. If they are illegal, she belongs
in jail.
You have just demonstrated that her actions are illegal, yet you
support her.
quote:
>This "Delegate Action of Continuing Interest" (it's not a Bylaw) has no
>deadline associated with it. So, in my estimation "reasonable and
>customary" would apply. It has been customary for some time now for
>these expenses to be published in the "Delegates Call". It is also
>reasonable they be published in this manner.
The delegates call will not be published until after the election is
over. Then, it will be to late for the voters to find out that she is
a crook.
quote:
>Certainly, I would not object to more frequent reporting, especially if
>the expenses exceed a certain threshold or are exceptional or unusual
>in a nature. IMO, having a member of the Executive Board acting as the
>VCOO for three months and having reasonable lodging, meals, travel,
>etc. reimbursed, would fall into exceptional or unusual expenses, and
>probably should be reported on a more timely basis, or explicitly
>budgeted for up front. Perhaps this was done, but I can't find it in
>the public record.
>
>Finally, I do strongly support the administration of President
>Marinello, and am pledged to support and vote for the members of her
>team who have been and will continue to be committed to supporting her
>policies which have turned the USCF financially around, and have
>modernized the office -- two absolutely critical items which every past
>administration since at least 1997 have failed to do.
She did not modernize the office. Bill Goichberg did that. Beatriz has
FIRED EVERYBODY INCLUDING THE ENTIRE ACCOUNTING STAFF.
quote:
>I may at times disagree with certain actions or lack of action, no
>administration is perfect, but overall the administration of President
>Marinello is the best I have seen by a wide margin. I hope the USCF
>Voting Members will agree and cast their votes accordingly.
>
>Best regards,
>
>George John
Are you willing to share her prison cell?
Sam Sloan
| |
| George John 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| Sam Sloan wrote:
[SNIP]
quote:
> You are an amazing hypocrite. Either the actions of Beatriz Marinello
> are legal or they are illegal.
There are two issues here. One, is any action a violation of the laws
of the land. Two, is any action a violation of the USCF's 'law' which
is its Bylaws, Delegate Actions of Continuing Interest (DACI), past
motions of the Executive Board which are not moot, etc.
WRT the reporting of expenses, I am unaware of any violations of the
law of the land. Furthermore, the DACI has no explicit reporting
deadline, so, IMO, the implied deadline is "reasonable and customary".
As long as these expenses are reported in a reasonable timeframe on the
USCF Website and in the Executive Board Newsletter, there will be
compliance with the DACI.
As a reference point, the failure to post the audio recording of the
December 19, 2004 EB meeting by January 19, 2005 *IS* a clear Bylaws
violation (or the USCF's 'law'). But, is this an illegal act in the
eyes of the law of the land? Since I am not a lawyer, I don't know for
certain, but I very much doubt it.
[SNIP]
Best regards,
George John
| |
| parrthenon@cs.com 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| INTELLECTUAL HONESTY -- ENRON STYLE
<Due diligence was done...When have past boards published board member
expenses? -- resident CPA Stan Booz is refuted by his own ally George
John:
<Quoted from the "DELEGATE ACTIONS OF CONTINUING INTEREST":
"42. VOLUNTEER EXPENSES. A summary of all reimbursements to each member
of the Executive Board, International Delegations, and all other
volunteers shall be published in the Executive Board Newsletters and on
the USCF website. (1990, 1998)"
Source: http://www.uschess.org/org/govern/2004delcall.pdf
BTW, the duration of the "transition team", which included the
appointment of the President as Volunteer Chief Operating Officer, was
to end on March 31, 2005. I can find no subsequent motion which
extended that date.> -- George John
| |
| parrthenon@cs.com 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| INTELLECTUAL HONESTY -- ENRON STYLE
<Due diligence was done...When have past boards published board member
expenses? -- resident CPA Stan Booz is refuted by his own ally George
John:
<Quoted from the "DELEGATE ACTIONS OF CONTINUING INTEREST":
"42. VOLUNTEER EXPENSES. A summary of all reimbursements to each member
of the Executive Board, International Delegations, and all other
volunteers shall be published in the Executive Board Newsletters and on
the USCF website. (1990, 1998)"
Source: http://www.uschess.org/org/govern/2004delcall.pdf
BTW, the duration of the "transition team", which included the
appointment of the President as Volunteer Chief Operating Officer, was
to end on March 31, 2005. I can find no subsequent motion which
extended that date.> -- George John
| |
| Randy Bauer 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| In article <1113927811.287517.239710@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
chessdon@aol.com says...
quote:
>
>A reason, I think, why the lack of publishing of EB expenses is that
>during the financial crunch beginning with Frank Niro's resignation,
>there were, I believe, virtually no expenses by Board members that were
>charged. There may have been an exception here and there but by and
>large that was the case. When we were no longer on the brink of
>bankruptcy starting about August 2004, the ost members of the EB
>started again billing airfares and some other expenses.
The point, of course, is to have a method for getting the information
disseminated. If it is the responsibility of the ED, the CFO, the accountant,
the Secretary, whatever, it's fine with me.
Randy Bauer
quote:
>
| |
| Chess One 2005-04-19, 8:30 pm |
| sloan@ishipress.com> wrote in message
news:426577b8.75821515@ca.news.verio.net...
quote:
> On 19 Apr 2005 13:56:16 -0700, "George John" <george@neosoft.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> This is a perfect example of why I consider George John to be a
> disgusting excuse for a human being.
Sam, you are over the top here, as we Brits would call it. I am thinking of
complaining to the moderator.
quote:
> The USCF sold chess sets. The House of Staunton also sold chess sets.
> Therefore, Frank Camaratta, owner of the House of Staunton, should not
> have breen "tolerated" as a member of the Board, according to George
> John.
>
> However, the USCF Voting Members knew that Frank Camaratta was selling
> chess sets (a very small-time business) and nevertheless elected him.
> He was a good board member.
Sure.
quote:
> By contrast, nobody who voted for Beatriz Marinello knew or had even
> the slightest reason to suspect that Beatrz Marinello would try to
> take over as Chief Operating Officer of the USCF, yet George John
> finds no conflict of interest in that.
I understand that from his perspective - it seemed expedient. It is unclear
what other options he was presented with in this case, or, more to the
point, by whom. Clearly George is not aware of the expenditure budget, can't
find it in the minutes, a budget which is annualised to rather more than the
$60k, if we except end of March as end-date. Larry and I have mentioned 60k
before - in fact as a quarterly expense it would annualise to over $100,000.
I have read George John's posts for some time, and think he is sincere in
his wishing for open governance, but he is possibly a bit naive about what
it would take to achieve that task, even just in consideration of his slate
mates.
I have the same attitude as you - something is definitely and deliberately
being kept under the covers with these financials, and with the willful
suppression of bylaws to one party's advantage. You might be excused for
feeling hotter on the subject than I, since you seemed to suffer abuse by
pious 'letter of the law' verdicts in terms of the election, while observing
such flagrant evasion of bylaws taking place by those who accuse you, and
who take advantage of it.
George John is a target of opportunity, nothing more. Doesn't he seem to
think that things should be other than they are - and isn't he now educated
to 'think twice'?
I offer you this perspective for your consideration.
Phil Innes
quote:
> Sam Sloan
| |
| StanB 2005-04-20, 12:30 am |
|
"George John" <george@neosoft.com> wrote in message
news:1113932694.548489.273350@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
quote:
> Minor violations of the Bylaws and "Delegate Action of Continuing
> Interest" have been a problem with every administration I have
> followed. It is one reason why I have called for a compliance
> committee to positively help our governance system avoid future issues.
> If elected, I think I can help the organization adhere more closely to
> its "law", and am pledged to do so.
More unfunded delegate mandates?
| |
| StanB 2005-04-20, 12:30 am |
|
<parrthenon@cs.com> wrote in message
news:1113938751.869094.312950@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
quote:
> INTELLECTUAL HONESTY -- ENRON STYLE
>
> <Due diligence was done...When have past boards published board member
> expenses? -- resident CPA Stan Booz is refuted by his own ally George
> John:
Refuted for asking a question? Amazing.
| |
| parrthenon@cs.com 2005-04-20, 12:30 am |
| IGNORANCE IS BLISS
<Due diligence was done...When have past boards published board member
expenses? -- resident CPA Stan Booz is refuted by his own ally George
John:> Larry Parr
<Refuted for asking a question? Amazing.> -- Stan Booz
Our resident CPA claims due diligence was done but doesn't even
know the rules.
| |
| George John 2005-04-20, 3:30 am |
| Sam Sloan wrote:
quote:
> On 16 Apr 2005 14:54:40 -0700, "Grant Perks" <gperks2@aol.com> wrote:
>
just[vbcol=seagreen]
line.[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> I am from TN, have property not 60 miles from the land
> under consideration, and I say you are all wet on the
> issue.
>
> --
> Steve OWENS in Tennessee
> "Knowledge is, in every country, the surest basis for
> public happiness." --George Washington
Since Steve does not read or post on rgcp, he asked me to post the
following on his behalf.
"Please advise the RGCP that I
was saying SAM is "all wet" on this issue. Also, that I
still support the move to Crossville, and have never
"seemed hesitant" at all.
Please let anyone know that I have asked Sam to retract his
statement about me on every forum where he made it so that
they can see whether he has the honor to do so."
Be | | |