$120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!

[Daniel Rouleau]

Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!

.."Directors of not-for-profit organizations in Canada have a legal duty to act in the best interests of the organization which they serve at all times. In fact, the law requires a director to place the interests of the organization ahead of his/her own. This is known as the fiduciary duty.

Please tell me you knew this already...

BT developed a special project for the York region. This was in the best interests of the OCA.

BT applied and received a grant to fund the project. This was in the bests interest of the OCA.

BT executed said project. Given equipment were purchased and some events were held, the presumption will be the monies were used in the best interests of the OCA.

Given the poor state of the documentation (does it even exist anymore?), does the OCA have an idea how many hours BT devoted to thie project or how much he was to be compensated, what arguments will you use to recover the monies?

Do you claim he did nothing towards the execution of the project? My understanding is BT purchased the equipment and managed the events. He certainly did something.

Do you claim he did not do enough with the monies received? This type of claim is usually very difficult to prove without a contract clearly stating agreed-upon deliverables. While it is certain he could have done more, did he meet his obligations? And if he did not, how much was due to unforeseen mitigating circumstances?

Did BT hired himself illegally? Trillium said no. The then executive censured him but no one attempted to impeach him (because he was preferable than having no president, a really dumb reason in my opnion if you believe the situation was that serious) nor they (or any OCA member for that matter) attempted to contact the authorities.

In my opinion, the burden of proof is so high and the case too costly in terms of manpower and monies, with very little chance of success.

Let it go, move forward.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!

In my opinion, the burden of proof is so high

Yes, and no (depends how much the OCA Constitution has value)

"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."

3.6 Books and Records – The Board shall ensure that all books and records of the Corporation required to be kept by virtue of the Constitution, these Bylaws or any statute of law are regularly and properly kept.

3.9 Limits on Financial Transactions – The Corporation shall incur no expenditure or liability in excess of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) unless such expenditure or liability has been expressly authorized in the annual budget, or by a Special Resolution where at least one-half (1/2) of the Directors have voted.

4.3 Managing the Affairs of the Corporation – The Board shall make policies and procedures for managing the affairs of the Corporation in accordance with the Constitution and these Bylaws.

a) President: The President is the Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation. He shall chair all meetings of the Board or of the Executive. He shall preside at all meetings of the Corporation and of the Board of Governors. He shall have the general and active management of the affairs of the Corporation. He shall see that all orders and resolutions of the Board of Governors are carried into effect.

c) Secretary: The Secretary shall have custody of and be responsible for the safekeeping of all books, records, correspondence, and other documents pertaining to the affairs of the Corporation, other than those required to be kept by the Treasurer. He shall perform duties incidental to the offices of a recording/corresponding/general secretary, and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, he shall conduct all routine correspondence on behalf of the Corporation; refer to the President matters from correspondence that require consideration of the Board or any Officer; and perform other duties in connection with his Office when requested by the Board or President.

d) Treasurer: The Treasurer shall keep and maintain all account books of the Corporation, which shall contain all receipts and disbursements, and shall have custody of all such books of account, bank books, cancelled cheques, vouchers, statements, and other documents pertaining to the accounts of the Corporation, and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, he shall: from time-to-time, when requested by the President, furnish information about the financial situation of the Corporation; annually, on the last day of the fiscal year, (March 31st), or as set at the discretion of the Board/Executive, stop-gap the Corporation’s accounts, prepare a financial statement for the Board, and file a copy with the Secretary, over his signature; at the direction of the Board, file a copy of these statements with the Auditor appointed by the Board, submitting for examination all records that the Auditor may require in order to effect an appropriate examination and in order to issue a certificate; prior to, or within thirty (30) days following the Annual Meeting, prepare a budget for the fiscal year.

Conflict of Interest

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.

Sorry for long citations, but if they are worth nothing they must be removed from the Constitution.

[Duncan Smith]

Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!

Steve, you truly are a CFC style politician in a traditional sense. Don't let anyone sway you from your documentation solution. Surely you are the next OCA president. It is your destiny Steve.

[Steve Douglas]

Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!

Steve, you truly are a CFC style politician in a traditional sense. Don't let anyone sway you from your documentation solution. Surely you are the next OCA president. It is your destiny Steve.

This is the second time in a matter of months you have chosen to sidestep the issue, post nothing substantive, and attack my character. Please stop.

Steve

[Pierre Denommee]

Background check

For the record, all CMA teachers are required to submit to police background checks.

All those who teaches Chess to children are required to submit to a police background check. I have never taught for CMA, but I have been required to submit to a background test for teaching elsewhere.

[Tom O'Donnell]

Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!

How many more individuals will you insunuate did something illegal or unethical before enough is enough?

All I see is a bunch of crybabies with no concrete proofs whatsoever that something illegal went on and then "enlarging" the debate to include a widespread conspiracy when they don't like the answers.

You had an unmanaged, unsupervised, undocumented project with no measurable deliverables and you're shocked with how it ended? What else did you expect? All parties involved were incompetent and none appears to have performed any due diligence.

Your executive - not just BT - f***ed up royally and while I can understand your anger and you wishing to recover the monies, it won't happen. If I was a sane person (debatable) and I wanted to get involved with the OCA (not one bit), this thread would convince me otherwise.

It is time for the circus to leave town.

Wow, one of the greatest posts I have read here in a long time. Bravo.

[Caesar Posylek]

Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!

Wow, one of the greatest posts I have read here in a long time. Bravo.

Thanks Tom.

Caesar

:)

[Frank Dixon]

Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!

One additional very important idea, which GMC / FM / IA Jonathan Berry dealt with in his post, without, however, specifically identifying it as such, and which I have NOT seen discussed to date on this board, concerns Conflict-of-Interest provisions and elements. The CFC Handbook and Bylaws have a section on this, which should apply to all CFC Governors.

Conflict-of-Interest can arise in surprising ways, and need not necessarily indicate any wrongdoing 'a priori', so long as the situation is recognized as such, hopefully as early as possible in the matter, and then handled properly. It occurs frequently in legal matters. One outstanding example was in the Watergate tapes case which went to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1974; Justice William Rehnquist (later Chief Justice) recused himself (did not take part in the 8-0 decision against President Richard Nixon), since he had earlier worked for one of the key lawyers involved in a previously-investigated and controversial element of the case. That represented an outstanding display of legal ethics by Justice Rehnquist, who had in fact earlier been appointed to the Court by President Nixon, and who was a representative of the so-called 'Right' spectrum of legal thought, that is, the same spectrum as Nixon himself, who was a Republican. However, one should have expected no less from Justice Rehnquist, or any of the other Supreme Court Justices. The outcome of the decision was that President Nixon had to turn over the tapes to investigators, after delaying doing so for a year since their existence was revealed in testimony by Alexander Butterfield; several very bad tapes were found, showing that the President was clearly guilty of coverup from the start, and he resigned shortly afterwards, under the threat of certain impeachment.

In 2004, I had one chess matter, concerning the CFC, which, to protect myself and avoid criticism, I chose to interpret as a Conflict-of-Interest matter. I was serving as an Assistant Arbiter for the 2004 Kapuskasing Canadian Open (organized by the CFC); I was reporting for the CFC's magazine on the tournament; I was serving as a CFC Governor at the time; and I was a witness who gave some tangential evidence in the infamous Sam Lipnowski cheating case. On the record, to deal with my Conflict-of-Interest situation, and in my role as a CFC Governor, after consulting my lawyer on the matter, I chose to NOT report on the case for the magazine, notifying Editor FM Hans Jung of my problem, and letting him handle that, and he did so, and very well, by simply printing the report from the investigation done by the CFC Appeals' Committee, which found Sam Lipnowski guilty of cheating and imposed an appropriate penalty upon him.

In this Thorvardson / Trillium / OCA matter, as GMC / FM / IA Berry points out, there was seemingly NO arms-length relationship between the parties in the critical matter of responsibility for the "contract" and money transfer, with Thorvardson effectively approving HIMSELF as the receiver for the greater portion of the funds, in a matter which seems to have had limited (if any) discussion on the record in OCA minutes, if previous posts can be believed (and I see no reason to doubt them). This is the very heart of the matter. Thorvardson, in his role as a CFC Governor at the time, was bound by provisions of the CFC's Conflict-of-Interest guidelines, should have recognized this as such, and should have explicitly declared it, ON THE RECORD. He seems NOT to have done so. No clearer case could be imagined: he was in charge of the file, as OCA President; he had initiated the file with the OCA and Trillium in his role as President of the OCA; he was still President when the grant was approved; and he was the receiver of a high proportion of the funds, an amount which exceeded the $5,000 threshold for his personal approval of financial matters as OCA President. The fact that he DID NOT declare this Conflict-of-Interest goes hand-in-hand with his subsequent mishandling of the file, in a matter involving a large amount of money. Check and Mate, as they say!

[Gary Ruben]

Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!

Hi Frank,

Could you omit the references to U.S. law, the value added stuff about others and the run on paragraphs?

Possibly put your point into a few coherent paragraphs so we know what the hell you are trying to say.

Thank you,
Gary

[Daniel Rouleau]

Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!

[QUOTE=Egidijus Zeromskis;18402]Yes, and no (depends how much the OCA Constitution has value)

Directors Not Remunerated Are you saying any of the monies were spent to pay BT to be president? My undertsanding is he was paid to manage the project as per the provisions of the grant.

Books and Records The treasurer usually maintains the financial records. The secretary usually keeps the meeting minutes? If these artifacts no longer exist, you may want to ask the individuals who held these positions when BT was president.

Conflict of Interest If my understanding is correct, the executive censored the president for his self-hiring. The appearance or actual conflict of interest was not deemed serious enough to pursue impeachment or to contact the authorities.

The conflict of interest was known at the time and yet nothing was done to stop it. It was known by a much wider audience shortly thereafter and no one reported it to the authorities. It is now known by every ChessTalk reader and again, it appears no one has reported it to the authorities. An inidvidual will talk to his attorney, another will free up some time in the near future to investigate the matter further, another bla-bla-bla...

All I learned from reading this thread is the OCA was likely as incompetent as the CFC, very sad news indeed, and some players will complain and never be moved to action.

OK, I am just joking; I knew about the players' attitude 25 years ago.

And players complain so few people are involved in promoting chess and even fewer companies in sponsoring chess.

One wonders why ...

[Caesar Posylek]

Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!

Hi Frank,

Could you omit the references to U.S. law, the value added stuff about others and the run on paragraphs?

Possibly put your point into a few coherent paragraphs so we know what the hell you are trying to say.

Thank you,
Gary

May we know that stuff, Frank?

:)

[Duncan Smith]

Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!

My post is direct, to the point, and contains no character attack. Your post on the other hand does not meet any of that criteria. And, the sense of "deja vu" one can't help but get reading your condascending posts with respect to the Stockhausen and Thorvardson cases is interesting. One would think the burden of accountability rests with the leadership of the organizations, but your focus is more on shooting
down any messenger who expects basic competancy from these various chess organizations.

I would say assembling a team of people to gather information and document the past events is a typical CFC style waste of time that achieves nothing. Hopefully that is direct enough for you. I see others are coming around to this conclusion today.

[Bob Armstrong]

OCA/Trillium Grant Record

Posted yesterday on the CFC Chess Forum:

It seems there is no will to collect available information on the Trillium Grant, to create a record of events, to complement the OCA Action Committee Report, which was generally felt to fall far short of a good in-house investigative review. One of the prime movers in this issue, Peter McKillop has declared he is unwilling to become involved in such an exercise.

I think there should be more available to those interested in future, than just the Action Committee Report. So I have sent my private " down and dirty " report ( corrected as per Hal Bond's post; despite Peter's comments on its limitations; initial draft posted on CFC Chess Forum ) to OCA President, Chris Mallon, to file with the official report in the OCA website archive. Here is my recent letter to Chris:

Hi Chris:

I am writing to you as current OCA President, as an OCA Life Member interested in the problem of the Trillium Grant.

The OCA Action Committee Report was not well received.

So I have done a quick “ report “ attempting to create some record of the issue for posterity, to complement the official investigative report. This is merely a survey collection of facts gleaned from chess chat sites mainly. I hope it will be helpful.

It may be, as has been suggested, that the official report and mine should be archived on the OCA website, so in future there is some record to review, should members or public ever be interested.

Bob

P.S. I have made some corrections to my original report, based on corrections to my facts by then V-P Hal Bond. I would be pleased to have you review my “ report “ and advise me if there are any further corrections for me to make. Thanks.

It seems to me that this may be the end of the road for this issue, but we'll see.

If anyone wants a copy of my final report, just e-mail me : bobarm@sympatico.ca

Bob

[Peter McKillop]

Re: OCA/Trillium Grant Record

... One of the prime movers in this issue, Peter McKillop has declared he is unwilling to become involved in such an exercise. ...

You're being inaccurate, Bob. From another of my posts in this thread, here is what I committed to doing:

... I'll also commit to assisting on a committee that will properly investigate this matter subject to these conditions: 1) that people understand that I won't be in a position to make much of a contribution this month; 2) that, as noted elsewhere by Steve Douglas, the OCA provide the committee members with all of the necessary authorizations required to review all of the OCA's records, including banking records, and to represent the OCA in dealings with third parties (e.g. former OCA directors, Trillium, the bank); 3) that the committee's terms of reference be acceptable.

Do you understand now?

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: OCA/Trillium Grant Record - McKillop Participation

Hi Peter:

I think I am being accurate.

I was referring to your reply post to Steve Douglas' willingness to sit on a fact-assembling committee. You posted on the CFC Chess Forum:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jan. 19, 2010, 10:48 AM
Peter McKillop

Just a point of clarification (in case anyone gives a ****), I will not be participating in this project. I said, somewhere, that I would serve on a properly constituted and empowered committee. The job that you and Chris Mallon are talking about is simply the collecting of anecdotal information into one spot for easy reference (i.e. hopefully an improvement on what Bob Armstrong attempted elsewhere).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was merely pointing out that you were unwilling to sit on a fact-assembling committee, as Steve seemed to be proposing ( which he thought, apparently, was something you would be interested in ). I was not saying you were unwilling to do something else.

It seems from his posts that Chris Mallon is not interested in forming the committee you propose. It is unclear to me whether Steve Douglas might be willing, since he committed only to sitting on a somewhat more limited committee.

Bob