| Sam Sloan 2005-08-18, 8:32 pm |
| On 17 Aug 2005 20:48:13 -0700, "Bruce" <bdraney@novia.net> wrote:
quote:
>"This is only one of many reasons why I believe that the delegates in
>Phoenix will reject the contract signed by Beatriz as unauthorized and
>prohibited by the By-Laws and therefore invalid."
>
>Sam Sloan
>
>
>
>Hmmmm, based on Hal Terrie's report from the meetings it sounds like
>this was typical Sam Sloan vapor-crap.
>
>The delegates in fact ratified all actions of the Board which included
>the so called, 'unauthorized and prohibited by the By-Laws/invalid'
>contract.
Not true at all. The delegates did not do that. Here is what the
delegates actually passed:
V. RATIFICATION
ADM 05-6 (Harold Winston, IL): The Delegates ratify all actions of the
Executive Board appearing in Minutes published in the Executive Board
Newsletter and the Delegates Call, since the conclusion of the 2004
Delegates Meeting, including the minutes, as amended, of the July 20th
meeting of the Executive Board. PASSED
As you can see above, the delegates only ratified actions "published
in the Executive Board Newsletter and the Delegates Call". Since
almost none of the actions of the Executive Board were published in
the Executive Board Newsletter and the Delegates Call, that means none
of them were ratified.
Also, the delegates did not ratify the contract signed on July 28,
2005, nor could it have done so, because neither the delegates, the
old board nor the new board had even seen the contract signed on July
28, 2005 as of the close of business on August 14, 2005. Obviously
they could not ratify a contract they had never seen.
quote:
>It also sounds like the architect convinced the Delegates of the
>suitability of the construction site and in fact that the building IS
>being built and that the so-called $1.00 land snafoo that much ado was
>made about was just another tempest in the teapot by those forces
>desperate to find any reason at all not to move USCF permanently to
>Crossville.
Not true. No vote was taken on the suitably of the construction and
there was really no discussion of the issue.
quote:
>My question is now, what would happen if Bill hijacked the Board and
>had them completely reverse course now?  ) That would be very
>interesting.
The reason the new board avoided a vote or even a discussion of these
issues is that this leaves the new board with a free hand to do
anything, including scrapping construction of the building entirely.
quote:
>Also HAS Beatriz resigned or not? First I heard she HAD resigned.
>Then I heard she had said she was GOING to resign, then I'd heard that
>others were convincing her NOT to resign and that she might stay on.
>
>Does anyone know if she actually DID resign or not?
I believe that Beatriz will resign after she gets back from the FIDE
meeting in Germany. Beatriz is running for FIDE Continental President
for the Americas, and she has a good chance since she speaks Spanish.
quote:
>If she didn't then the Board is only 6 members. I doubt very seriously
>that Shahade, Tanner and Marinello would vote to reverse the Crossville
>course of action at this point. With Marinello gone however the
>question would be whether Channing, Goichberg and Schultz would throw
>the organization into chaos by voting to move out of Crossville.
Greg Shahade did not attend the delegate's meeting, except that he
came in at the very end just when the new board was about to be
installed. His views are entirely unknown. I doubt that he even has
views on the subject yet.
In spite of the failed Palace Coup, I doubt that Shahade and Tanner
are allies of Beatriz because otherwise they would kept her for
another two years as president which they had the power to do.
Sam Sloan
|