SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF ORANGE
_______________________________________________X

SAM SLOAN,

AFFIDAVIT
Petitioner,

INDEX
No. 2004-7739

-against-


Affidavit in Support
of
Order to Show Cause

BEATRIZ MARINELLO, TIM HANKE, STEPHEN
SHUTT, ELIZABETH SHAUGHNESSY, RANDY BAUER,
BILL GOICHBERG, KENNETH M. CHADWELL, AND
UNITED STATES CHESS FEDERATION, Assigned Judge

Lawrence I Horowitz, JSC

Respondents
________________________________________________X

STATE OF NEW JERSEY )
)SS:
COUNTY OF CAMDEN )


Leroy Dubeck, Ph.D., being duly sworn, deposes and says:

1. I am a professor of physics at Temple University, I am
also a life member of the United States of America Chess Federation
("USCF"), and the chair of USCF's Life Members Assets Committee
("LMA"), I am personally familiar with the facts to which I attest in
this affidavit.

2. I am also a past president of the USCF, serving from
1969 to 1972, and am thoroughly familiar with the mission, business
and operations of USCF, its corporate governance, its administration,
and procedures relating to its finances. As a former chair of USCF's
finance committee, and the author of several books on higher education
finance and budgeting, I am familiar with the economic, financial and
accounting issues confronting institutions such as the USCF.

3. I am also familiar with the many sound financial
reasons supporting USCF?fs planned relocation from its offices in New
Windsor, New York to Crossville, Tennessee. The LMA of the USCF has
traditionally exercised delegated authority to administer and oversee
USCF's life member assets, including the building in question Board
and the Board of Delegates. In my capacity as LMA Committee Chair, l
have been kept apprised of the Board's deliberations and its careful
weighing of the available alternatives and options for relocating
USCF's offices. The decision to move to Crossville was not undertaken
lightly and was the product of a long and careful process.

4. It is no secret that USCF, although providing valuable
services to the national and international chess community, amateur
and professional players and coaches, and educational institutions,
recently underwent several difficult years financially. Most of the
problems could be found in inefficiencies of operations and
administration, redundancies in personnel and services, and an
excessive cost structure. Among the latter were the high costs of
maintaining our principal offices and warehouse in New York due to New
York's above average payroll taxes, workers' compensation costs,
insurance and utility costs, sales taxes, and employee wages and
benefits.

5. USCF is solvent. Accounts payable and current
liabilities are insignificant and there is no long term debt. However,
USCF's current healthy position is due to vigorous action undertaken
since the summer of 2003. The steps taken included outsourcing our
retail merchandise sales operations, enabling us to reduce personnel
costs and overhead, and partnering with third party providers to
enhance our marketing, membership and sales presence while reducing
expenses. Having reduced our personnel by half, and having eliminated
the need for warehousing merchandise, the building on Route 9W in New
Windsor became a white elephant. At 12,000 square feet, of which half
was basement storage space, the building had become too large for our
needs. As an old structure, its costs for repair, maintenance and
utilities were excessive. The cost to maintain our operations in New
York were only going to increase relative to other regions of the
country, despite our success in re-establishing a good financial
picture.

6. USCF therefore renewed its nationwide search for a new
location. Crossville, Tennessee responded enthusiastically. The city
has conveyed to USCF without cost a prime three acre parcel, and has
arranged for USCF to have office space rent-free for a year while our
new offices are built. We have obtained very favorable loan terms,
with the lender agreeing to accept the value of the raw land as the
down payment and equity contribution. Labor and wage costs, and
payroll taxes and insurance, are far lower in Tennessee than in New
York, and other expenses are lower as well. The building for sale in
Liberty, New York, to which Mr. Sloan refers, is a century-old former
hospital in poor condition, possibly with asbestos in the structure,
which would be costly to renovate. Other locations have been
considered but rejected as less favorable. The decision to relocate to
Crossville is sound. The USCF would be remiss if it did not take
advantage of this opportunity.

7. I have read Mr. Sloan's factual allegations in his
affidavit and petition. They are unfounded. The proceeds from the sale
of the building were duly deposited in USCF's LMA accounts and have
been prudently managed. Beatriz Marinello as Board President, and Tim
Hanke as Vice President of Finance, are duly authorized to sign checks
on the LMA account. Bill Goichberg, Ken Thomas and Judy Misner have
authority over USCF's general checking account. All funds are
accounted for. USCF's financial statements are audited by a certified,
independent accounting firm, and are posted on USCF's website at
www.uschess.org for all to examine. Board resolutions, minutes, and
decisions are also posted. Neither Ms. Marinello nor the Board, or for
that matter any of the other respondents to my knowledge have acted in
self-interest and have not engaged in any self-dealing. If any members
such as Mr. Sloan are unhappy about the Board?fs decisions, they have
the right to express their feelings at both our membership meeting and
the Board of Delegates meeting, held in August each year. In addition,
he has the right under USCF?fs by-laws to file an ethics complaint
against any individuals he feels engaged in wrongful conduct I submit
that these internal solutions are more appropriate than wasteful
litigation.



______________________
Leroy Dubeck,
Ph.D.



Sworn to before me this
24th of November, 2004.


________________________
Notary Public
KENNETH OLIN
NOTARY PUBLIC OF NEW JERSEY
My Commission Expires October 5, 2005

"Sam Sloan" wrote in message
...

7. I have read Mr. Sloan's factual allegations in his
affidavit and petition. They are unfounded.

As are most of Sloan's "factual" allegations.

Regards,

Matt

ASBESTOS IN BUILDINGS

One of the arguments used by Leroy Dubeck in his affidavit for dismissing the
Liberty site was that it "possibly" contained asbestos. But how many buildings
100 years old even used asbestos? Since I know nothing about the subject, I
decided to check out the first time it was used in American structures.

It is remotely possible but highly unlikely that the Liberty site does
contain asbestos ("widely used in the United States beginning in the early
1900s"). This is certainly a topic that could have been explored with Mr. Gerry
(who may have repaired it if there was a problem) had the board granted just
two more weeks, but one wonders whether the board majority wanted to learn the
truth in their rush to Crossville.

http://www.asbestos-institute.ca/buildings/sba.html#9

Background

Asbestos is a generic name for six naturally occurring fibrous minerals found
in certain types of rockformations and has been used in various products for
approximately 4,500 years.1 Early uses included lampwicks, funeral cloth for
cremation, and reusable napkins. Asbestos was widely used in the United States
beginning in the early 1900s and continuing into the 1970s as an insulator for
fire protection....

Q. Does the mere presence of asbestos-containing products pose a significant
risk to building occupants?

A. No. The presence of an asbestos-containing material will not, of itself,
pose any hazard to building occupants. No risk occurs unless a significant
number of respirable asbestos fibres are released from the material and enter
the building air supply. The Environmental Protection Agency, in a document
entitled Sprayed Asbestos-Containing Materials in Buildings , has found that
most asbestos products "have effectively immobilized the asbestos fibres by
mixing them into a strong binding aterial." (22)

__________________________________________________ ______________
"FIDE has made its decision. Players who refuse to be drug tested will not be
able to play chess." -- Dr. Press, co-founder of the FIDE Medical Commission.

On 11 Dec 2004 16:23:02 GMT, (Parrthenon) wrote:

ASBESTOS IN BUILDINGS

One of the arguments used by Leroy Dubeck in his affidavit for dismissing the
Liberty site was that it "possibly" contained asbestos. But how many buildings
100 years old even used asbestos? Since I know nothing about the subject, I
decided to check out the first time it was used in American structures.

It is remotely possible but highly unlikely that the Liberty site does
contain asbestos ("widely used in the United States beginning in the early
1900s"). This is certainly a topic that could have been explored with Mr. Gerry
(who may have repaired it if there was a problem) had the board granted just
two more weeks, but one wonders whether the board majority wanted to learn the
truth in their rush to Crossville.

http://www.asbestos-institute.ca/buildings/sba.html#9

Q. Does the mere presence of asbestos-containing products pose a significant
risk to building occupants?

A. No. The presence of an asbestos-containing material will not, of itself,
pose any hazard to building occupants. No risk occurs unless a significant
number of respirable asbestos fibres are released from the material and enter
the building air supply. The Environmental Protection Agency, in a document
entitled Sprayed Asbestos-Containing Materials in Buildings , has found that
most asbestos products "have effectively immobilized the asbestos fibres by
mixing them into a strong binding aterial." (22)

The Asbestos Instute is an industry sponsored trade organization. I'd
be a wee bit skeptical of their spin on risk-management. Do a Google
on "Libby Montana asbestos" for some insight on the corporate
citizenship of the asbestos industry.

As I understand it, older buildings were often insulated with various
forms of loose asbestos-containing product. Here's a link to the
EPA's site: http://www.epa.gov/asbestos/insulation.html

Asbestos–containing Zonolite gets nasty if disturbed or in poor
repair. If you drill in an attic insulated with Zonolite, or if the
insulation becomes deteriorated, there is high risk of the fibers
becoming airborne, where people can breath the asbestos dust or
fibers.

"Parrthenon" wrote in message
...

Q. Does the mere presence of asbestos-containing products pose a
significant
risk to building occupants?

A. No. The presence of an asbestos-containing material will not, of
itself,
pose any hazard to building occupants. No risk occurs unless a significant
number of respirable asbestos fibres are released from the material and
enter
the building air supply. The Environmental Protection Agency, in a
document
entitled Sprayed Asbestos-Containing Materials in Buildings , has found
that
most asbestos products "have effectively immobilized the asbestos fibres
by
mixing them into a strong binding aterial." (22)

Mere presence is not the issue. Generally, it is fine if undisturbed. The
issue from a business perspective is that the cost of renovations becomes
higher, and is accompanied by uncertainty. Some years back, I managed the
owner side of a building remodel valued at a shade over $1M. We spent
about $30,000 on planning, primarily space planning, architectural, and
building permits, before actual construction started. That's about 3% of
the total cost...a relatively small amount of money to invest during the
planning stages.

When asbestos is involved, it becomes less clear what the cost of
construction will be. It requires either more investment in the planning
stages to fully understand what is there, or an uncertainty in the
construction budget, represented by a higher contingency allowance. So,
instead of a 3% planning stage, maybe you are looking at a 20% planning
stage. In other words, spending 20% of your expected construction cost
prior to making the decision on whether to proceed. There are horror
stories in the building management industry projects that balloon in cost
when asbestos is discovered. Instead of a 3-5% contingency, you may find
the construction budget ballooning by 20 or even 50%.

Add to that the possible risk of liability (low chance, but high
consequence) if the asbestos is disturbed and becomes friable, and the
conclusion is that knowingly entering into the purchase of such a building
requires an acceptance of a high degree of risk...a level of risk more
appropriate to a developper who will raze or refurbish the building rather
than a small membership organization operating on a shoestring.

David


--
without the block

On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 09:39:55 -0800, "David"
wrote:

Add to that the possible risk of liability (low chance, but high
consequence) if the asbestos is disturbed and becomes friable, and the
conclusion is that knowingly entering into the purchase of such a building
requires an acceptance of a high degree of risk...a level of risk more
appropriate to a developper who will raze or refurbish the building rather
than a small membership organization operating on a shoestring.

Good point and good post.

ASBESTOS IN BUILDINGS

One of the arguments used by Leroy Dubeck in his affidavit for dismissing the
Liberty site was that it "possibly" contained asbestos. But how many
buildings
100 years old even used asbestos? Since I know nothing about the subject, I
decided to check out the first time it was used in American structures.

How about, all of them that needed heat.
What was the alternative? There really wasn't any.

Thus the dimension of the problem.

Rp

Q. Does the mere presence of asbestos-containing products pose a significant
risk to building occupants?

A. No. The presence of an asbestos-containing material will not, of itself,
pose any hazard to building occupants.
No risk occurs unless a significant
number of respirable asbestos fibres are released from the material and enter
the building air supply.

Sorry Larry, but this is just nuts.
When you make changes to asbestos you create lots of asbestos particles, any
particle of which has hooks which seat in the lungs and cause cancer.

No risk? Living or working in an asbestos building is like a very slow game of
russian roulette.

Rp