Greetings to Chris Mallon, Eric Van Dusen et al

[Peter McKillop]

Gentlemen, how is your look-see into the Trillium grant proceeding? For those of us who have lost confidence altogether in the OCA, even to the extent of not wanting to pay a lousy $7 a year in dues, how about attempting to restore some of that lost confidence by making a full disclosure of what happened and what lessons have been learned?

[Caesar Posylek]

Re: Greetings to Chris Mallon, Eric Van Dusen et al

Welcome to any attempts to recover those lost funds! Unfortunately, they've been lost for a while, because of .....(that's never been told openly)? There is so much silence about that topic?

[Caesar Posylek]

Re: Greetings to Chris Mallon, Eric Van Dusen et al

Welcome to any attempts to recover those lost funds! Unfortunately, they've been lost for a while, because of .....(that's never been told openly)? There is so much silence about that topic? It looks like to recover them is impossible, but to get new ones would be optimistic.

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Greetings to Chris Mallon, Eric Van Dusen et al

Hi Caesar. I suspect it may be too optimistic to hope for a recovery of money. After all, there is nothing concrete to suggest that Thorvardson did anything wrong. At one point there was talk (i.e. hearsay) that Thorvardson had his sights set on obtaining a substantially larger grant, to be disbursed by Trillium over a period of several years. If that's true then maybe Thorvardson did absolutely nothing wrong. Maybe the Trillium people got cold feet and declined to participate in the longer term deal after Thorvardson had already spent a considerable amount of his own time and money laying the groundwork for the bigger plan. Maybe Thorvardson deserved every penny that was paid to him.

My point in raising this topic from time to time is not to praise or blame Thorvardson; rather, I want to see the public record on this matter set out straightforwardly and honestly. This Trillium grant was apparently arranged and disbursed in the name of the Ontario Chess Association. Unless there are two OCAs, then that's you and me, brother! That's our association whose name has been sullied, and whose credibility has been damaged, by the innuendo that's been floating around for the past couple of years.

To Chris Mallon and company, let's get this thing out in the open once and for all. Let's deal with it and move on.

[Caesar Posylek]

Re: Greetings to Chris Mallon, Eric Van Dusen et al

Hi Peter,
As a matter of fact, we still don't know all the details in this topic. Anyway, You are right, - let's deal with it and move on!

[Larry Bevand]

Re: Greetings to Chris Mallon, Eric Van Dusen et al

Hi Caesar. I suspect it may be too optimistic to hope for a recovery of money. After all, there is nothing concrete to suggest that Thorvardson did anything wrong. At one point there was talk (i.e. hearsay) that Thorvardson had his sights set on obtaining a substantially larger grant, to be disbursed by Trillium over a period of several years. If that's true then maybe Thorvardson did absolutely nothing wrong. Maybe the Trillium people got cold feet and declined to participate in the longer term deal after Thorvardson had already spent a considerable amount of his own time and money laying the groundwork for the bigger plan. Maybe Thorvardson deserved every penny that was paid to him.

My point in raising this topic from time to time is not to praise or blame Thorvardson; rather, I want to see the public record on this matter set out straightforwardly and honestly. This Trillium grant was apparently arranged and disbursed in the name of the Ontario Chess Association. Unless there are two OCAs, then that's you and me, brother! That's our association whose name has been sullied, and whose credibility has been damaged, by the innuendo that's been floating around for the past couple of years.

To Chris Mallon and company, let's get this thing out in the open once and for all. Let's deal with it and move on.

Hi Peter,

This is my take on the situation:

Barry worked hard to get money from Trillium, the York Region branch. He had help from Gary Gladstone who was on the York region Trillium board. I also signed off as a reference. When Trillium called me I said, "As long as Barry is running the OCA, I am pretty sure the money will be well spent". So the money began to flow. Barry asked for applications. Leslie Armstrong was hired on a contract basis as was Roman Pelts. So initially things looked good. At some point, these people were discarded and Barry became the employee or main contractor of the OCA...at the same time as he was President. Depending on who you talk to, this was known by the board but to the best of my knowledge was never officially sanctioned by the board (And I believe this is against OCA rules).

So basically the lion's share of the Trillium money went to Barry in the form of salary.

Some people will say...well...Barry did the work to get the money...so what's the problem?

Well, I have a big problem with it. The situation disgusts me. We are talking real dollars here. It could have been used to produce a major benefit for chess in York Region. In my opinion, this did not happen.

There was a meeting after the fact between the OCA, Barry and Trillium to sort out what transpired....

The above comments and opinions are mine only. I will gladly retract anything I have written in the case that I have made an error.

Sincerely,

Larry Bevand

[Kerry Liles]

Re: Greetings to Chris Mallon, Eric Van Dusen et al

...

There was a meeting after the fact between the OCA, Barry and Trillium to sort out what transpired....
...
Sincerely,

Larry Bevand

I would only add that the meeting with Trillium was with Barry and Hal Bond (the latter to absolutely assure Trillium that none of the Trillium money was diverted to outside Ontario/York - ie: to the CFC -represented by Hal). At the last OCA AGM (last May/June? 2008) Barry discussed all of this openly and as far as I was concerned, he conceded that he should have been more up front with the OCA board, but I believe his intentions were genuine.

The OCA did not receive a detailed reckoning where the money went (other than 'mostly to Barry') but there were some activities that benefitted from the money. I cannot say what activities exactly nor to what extent. Perhaps only Barry knows that detail.

As OCA treasurer, I received NO paperwork from Barry (perhaps that paperwork is elsewhere in someone else's hands). We changed banks and started from scratch.

[Larry Bevand]

Re: Greetings to Chris Mallon, Eric Van Dusen et al

I would only add that the meeting with Trillium was with Barry and Hal Bond (the latter to absolutely assure Trillium that none of the Trillium money was diverted to outside Ontario/York - ie: to the CFC -represented by Hal). At the last OCA AGM (last May/June? 2008) Barry discussed all of this openly and as far as I was concerned, he conceded that he should have been more up front with the OCA board, but I believe his intentions were genuine.

The OCA did not receive a detailed reckoning where the money went (other than 'mostly to Barry') but there were some activities that benefitted from the money. I cannot say what activities exactly nor to what extent. Perhaps only Barry knows that detail.

As OCA treasurer, I received NO paperwork from Barry (perhaps that paperwork is elsewhere in someone else's hands). We changed banks and started from scratch.

Hi Kerry,

Thanks for the clarification.

If we could return in time, I would not have given my recommendation as I feel public funds were not used in a proper and efficient fashion.

You did not address the following issue:

Does the OCA have a requirement that officers of this non-profit organization can not also be employed or receive substantial amounts from the organization?

Sincerely,

Larry

[Caesar Posylek]

Re: Greetings to Chris Mallon, Eric Van Dusen et al

Hi Kerry,
Does the OCA have a requirement that officers of this non-profit organization can not also be employed or receive substantial amounts from the organization?
Larry

That's right! This could prevent anybody from such attempts as we have witnessed in the past in this matter. Certainly, it is too late for such action in this case.
:(

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Greetings to Chris Mallon, Eric Van Dusen et al

Does the OCA have a requirement that officers of this non-profit organization can not also be employed or receive substantial amounts from the organization?

Yes.

"4.38 A Governor, Officer, Special Officer or member of any Committee who has an interest, or may be perceived to have an interest, in a proposed contract or transaction with the Corporation shall disclose such interest to the Board or to the Committee; shall not vote or speak in debate of such contract or transaction; and shall otherwise comply with all requirements of law respecting conflict of interest."

and

"5. Directors Not Remunerated
The Directors of the Corporation shall serve as such without remuneration, and no Director shall directly or indirectly receive any profit from his or her position as such; provided that a Director may be paid reasonable expenses incurred by him or her in the performance of his or her duties as a Director in accordance with the Corporation’s policies relating to reimbursement of expenses."

As I am in that "et al", I will not make any more comments.

[Caesar Posylek]

Re: Greetings to Chris Mallon, Eric Van Dusen et al

How is your look-see into the Trillium grant proceeding for the future,Chris and Eric? I just repeat the question, as above.
:)

[Kerry Liles]

Re: Greetings to Chris Mallon, Eric Van Dusen et al

Hi Kerry,

Thanks for the clarification.

If we could return in time, I would not have given my recommendation as I feel public funds were not used in a proper and efficient fashion.

You did not address the following issue:

Does the OCA have a requirement that officers of this non-profit organization can not also be employed or receive substantial amounts from the organization?

Sincerely,

Larry

YES. As pointed out below, the OCA Constitution has (for as long as I can tell) explicitly stated that restriction. That was one of the things that annoyed me into attending the OCA AGM last year and leading ultimately to me 'volunteering' for the Executive. There was no way I was going to let Barry continue in any role (that was one goal of mine - there were some others). In any case, Barry decided to pre-empt any such confrontation by announcing at the start of the AGM that he would not be standing for any office... I would have left at that point, but there were TimBits...

Anyway, I am not involved in any investigation of the matter (nor have I heard anything about any progress). The OCA Executive decided early last Fall that trying to bring legal action would not be feasible since the OCA's balance at the AGM was -$2. and we felt that it would (at a minimum) be a long and protracted action. I don't know if any current investigation would come to any different conclusion since the scope of the Trillium grant was vague (in my opinion) and the records available were minimal to non-existent.

I fully understand (and share) everyone's outrage at the blatant disregard of the OCA constitution and the apparent squandeing of the Trillium grant (I do understand there was some benefit achieved here and there) but it seems pointless to beat a dead horse.

I think the OCA has moved on and cleaned up its operation (dont forget there were OTHER issues: the same individual was involved in the dispute over the entry fees from the OCA-sponsored Canadian CLOSED in 2006. $300/person entry fees were collected by two groups: the CFC office and the OCA. Somehow, $300 x 30-some-odd (if I recall correctly) worth of fees were never accounted for and the CFC office withheld the provincial membership rebates to the OCA to cover that shortfall. The OCA has been desperately short of operating funds ever since.

There was no point in pursuing the entry fee matter: no one wanted to contact all the players in the 2006 Closed and ask them if they have cancelled cheques or other records to indicate who they paid.... Also, two late entrants (from Quebec?) paid by cheques that apparently bounced!!! No followup was taken on that either apparently.

and so it goes...

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Greetings to Chris Mallon, Eric Van Dusen et al

How is your look-see into the Trillium grant proceeding for the future,Chris and Eric? I just repeat the question, as above.
:)

Surely the government is not going to give them more money.

[Frank Dixon]

Re: Greetings to Chris Mallon, Eric Van Dusen et al

So far as I know, Larry Bevand's statements on the Trillium Grant situation with the OCA and Barry Thorvardson's involvement in it are a very good estimation of the truth. The amount of money is in the $80k range, so far as I know. Clearly, Barry Thorvardson was in a conflict of interest position, being President of the OCA, while at the same himself time being the main contractor for the Trillium Grant money, and while also not providing this information in a clear manner to the OCA Executive Committee. Since the OCA is a member group of the CFC, since Barry was also a CFC Governor at the time, and since the CFC has a clear statement on conflict of interest situations, there are strong grounds for proceeding along those lines with an investigation. There may also be elements of the situation requiring reference to the Criminal Code of Canada.

There was a similar case in Prince Edward Island recently, involving some government agency, where a former director of the agency himself benefited from grant money, using procedures he had set up himself, although this was apparently after he had finished his term as head of the agency. He didn't disclose his interest at the time; this was discovered later. He has been asked to return the money by the Premier of PEI, although no criminal charges will be laid, apparently. It was reported extensively in the national media.

I am exceptionally disappointed in Barry's conduct. It is very interesting to note that he had been trying to secure the Trillium grant money for several years beforehand; I remember when I served briefly on the OCA Executive in 2004 (at Barry's request), hearing talk about this at high levels. I stepped down from that position because of very strong reservations about Barry's conduct involving another important matter; as it turned out, I was wise to get out when I did. Barry did do a lot of hard work for Ontario and Canadian chess after he became OCA President in 2003; I had thought this was simply the work of a very dedicated volunteer. It now appears that it had been Barry's plan all along to pay himself this money as a salary.

[Christopher Mallon]

Re: Greetings to Chris Mallon, Eric Van Dusen et al

The investigation is completely arms-length from me, I'm not directly involved.

Even if that were not the case, however, it wouldn't really be fair to comment publicly before an official report was issued.

However, I expect that it will eventually reach the same conclusion we reached at the AGM last year - Rules were broken (ironically, rules Barry wrote himself), but there's nothing to be done at this point. Even if it was obvious that the money was owed back to the OCA, a) we can't afford legal action and b) it might be hard to collect as I'm sure it's already spent...