Took a little digging, but I went to USCF's website, clicked on
govnernace and brought up the transcripts of the motion passed in June
of 2001 by the Redman Board because of DeFeis' signing of the first GP
contract.

For those whose memories of this warm and fuzzy time have faded, DeFeis
signed the contract without showing the final draft to the Board. When
people found out what was in the contract and what DeFeis had agreed to,
they were furious.

To compound the problem there was a critical Board election going on and
Jim Pechac who was a critical ally of Tim Redman's was running for
re-election along with myself, George John, De Knudson and McCrary,
Shutt, Camaratta and Brady who were all working together to seize
control of the Board from Redman's faction. Redman decided to play
damage control policeman and refused to leak the horrid contract to
interested Delegates who wanted to see how bad it was in advance of the
Framingham meetings. This proved impossible as USCF was a leakproof as
a screendoor with submarines and soon Paul Rubin, Hal Bogner and Petrel
all were leaking and posting copies of it for anyone interested to read
and laugh at.

In light of this fiasco, read the interesting motion approved by the
Board in its June teleconference call and notice that McCrary voted for
it, as did all others present, including Bob Smith.

*REDMAN (ph):* That's correct.* OK.* A board motion, starting as of today, Tuesday, June 12, the board will follow the
following procedures as regards to all contracts.*

*

Number one, a list of contracts with a summary description will be circulated to the entire executive board two weeks before
the signing of any contract.*

*

Number two; any executive board member can request a copy of any or all of the contracts on that list.* If number three, any
board member requests a copy of any or all of the contracts on the list, copies of the full contract will be sent to all of the
board members.* And at that point, the board will have available its resources for discussion, namely any three members can
call for a conference call or the president can call for a conference call.* At that point the contract or contracts under
discussion will be discussed and voted upon period.*

*

Any further discussion?* Doris can you call the roll.*

*

BARRY (ph):* John McCrary.

*

MCCRARY:* Yes.

*

BARRY (ph):* Bob Smith.

*

SMITH:* I vote yes with the – I'd like to make the statement it is most unfortunate this procedure has not been followed prior to this date.* But my
vote is yes on this motion.

*

BARRY (ph):* Joe Ippolito.

*

IPPOLITO:* Yes.

*

BARRY (ph):* Helen Warren (ph).

*

WARREN (ph):* Yes.

*

BARRY (ph):* Tim Redman (ph).

*

REDMAN (ph):* Yes.

*

BARRY (ph):* Doris Barry, yes.

*

Motion passed* 6-0- 1 absent

*

REDMAN (ph):* OK.* And this is a board motion.* OK.* The next point has to do essentially I think the next point John that you raised is
contained in this procedure, don't you agree?

Was this motion EVER rescinded? If not it should still be in effect.
Did McCrary's Board follow this motion in allowing Niro to negotiate a
secret deal with GP? It would appear that they did not.

Can they get out of the GP contract because Niro didn't follow this
motion, (assuming it hadn't been rescinded)? That is debatable. Does
it mean that this was all Frank's fault, and that the McCrary Board can
walk away claiming it's not responsible for a rogue ED signing another
contract that the Board disapproves of? I don't believe so.

The next question, and I am assuming that this motion was never
officially rescinded by any Board vote, is, why was this provision not
followed? Is this really that unreasonable to expect a major contract
to be shown to Board members before it is executed? Why isn't it
STANDARD procedure for all Board members to be shown important contracts
before our agent officially signs them? Is someone being truth
challenged here about what is going on? What a shock that would be.


Best Regards,

Bruce

Oh, shut up and join.

On 16 Sep 2003 10:49:04 -0500, Bruce Draney wrote:

Took a little digging, but I went to USCF's website, clicked on
govnernace and brought up the transcripts of the motion passed in June
of 2001 by the Redman Board because of DeFeis' signing of the first GP
contract.

For those whose memories of this warm and fuzzy time have faded, DeFeis
signed the contract without showing the final draft to the Board. When
people found out what was in the contract and what DeFeis had agreed to,
they were furious.

To compound the problem there was a critical Board election going on and
Jim Pechac who was a critical ally of Tim Redman's was running for
re-election along with myself, George John, De Knudson and McCrary,
Shutt, Camaratta and Brady who were all working together to seize
control of the Board from Redman's faction. Redman decided to play
damage control policeman and refused to leak the horrid contract to
interested Delegates who wanted to see how bad it was in advance of the
Framingham meetings. This proved impossible as USCF was a leakproof as
a screendoor with submarines and soon Paul Rubin, Hal Bogner and Petrel
all were leaking and posting copies of it for anyone interested to read
and laugh at.

In light of this fiasco, read the interesting motion approved by the
Board in its June teleconference call and notice that McCrary voted for
it, as did all others present, including Bob Smith.

*REDMAN (ph):* That's correct.* OK.* A board motion, starting as of today, Tuesday, June 12, the board will follow the
following procedures as regards to all contracts.*

*

Number one, a list of contracts with a summary description will be circulated to the entire executive board two weeks before
the signing of any contract.*

*

Number two; any executive board member can request a copy of any or all of the contracts on that list.* If number three, any
board member requests a copy of any or all of the contracts on the list, copies of the full contract will be sent to all of the
board members.* And at that point, the board will have available its resources for discussion, namely any three members can
call for a conference call or the president can call for a conference call.* At that point the contract or contracts under
discussion will be discussed and voted upon period.*

*

Any further discussion?* Doris can you call the roll.*

*

BARRY (ph):* John McCrary.

*

MCCRARY:* Yes.

*

BARRY (ph):* Bob Smith.

*

SMITH:* I vote yes with the – I'd like to make the statement it is most unfortunate this procedure has not been followed prior to this date.* But my
vote is yes on this motion.

*

BARRY (ph):* Joe Ippolito.

*

IPPOLITO:* Yes.

*

BARRY (ph):* Helen Warren (ph).

*

WARREN (ph):* Yes.

*

BARRY (ph):* Tim Redman (ph).

*

REDMAN (ph):* Yes.

*

BARRY (ph):* Doris Barry, yes.

*

Motion passed* 6-0- 1 absent

*

REDMAN (ph):* OK.* And this is a board motion.* OK.* The next point has to do essentially I think the next point John that you raised is
contained in this procedure, don't you agree?

Was this motion EVER rescinded? If not it should still be in effect.
Did McCrary's Board follow this motion in allowing Niro to negotiate a
secret deal with GP? It would appear that they did not.

Can they get out of the GP contract because Niro didn't follow this
motion, (assuming it hadn't been rescinded)? That is debatable. Does
it mean that this was all Frank's fault, and that the McCrary Board can
walk away claiming it's not responsible for a rogue ED signing another
contract that the Board disapproves of? I don't believe so.

The next question, and I am assuming that this motion was never
officially rescinded by any Board vote, is, why was this provision not
followed? Is this really that unreasonable to expect a major contract
to be shown to Board members before it is executed? Why isn't it
STANDARD procedure for all Board members to be shown important contracts
before our agent officially signs them? Is someone being truth
challenged here about what is going on? What a shock that would be.


Best Regards,

Bruce

Very good. Thank you Bruce, for digging this out.

I am probably the strongest supporter that Frank Niro has, but the
fact that he signed this contract and kept it secret from the board
for a long time and it is still secret from us is a black mark on his
administration which will never be erased.

I am told that Dr. Joe Wagner was the person who finally obtained a
copy of this contract and found that it was a three year contract. (By
the way, don't forget Bruce that I am the person who first reported
this to this group). I have been told that Dr. Joe Wagner was one of
the strongest if not the strongest board member. However, everything
he did was out of public view, such as obtaining this contract for
example. In the public view, Wagner was the weakest board member and
for that reason was defeated for re-election.

Now, we need to find out what the Games Parlor contract says and we
need to find out why Frank Niro concealed it from the board and why
the newly elected still to this day conceals it from us.

Sam Sloan