Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old June 4th 05, 01:10 AM
StanB
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dubeck lashes out

Bill Goichberg and Conflict of Interest

Mr. Goichberg continues to attack me, President Beatrice Marinello, all four
members of the US Chess Success team, the Co-chair of the Finance Committee,
and anyone else who he thinks is obstructing his path to the Presidency of
the USCF. It is clear to me that if Mr. Goichberg and his endorsed slate of
candidates (Joel Channing, Robert Tanner and Greg Shahade) are elected, he
will become the next USCF President. Mr. Goichberg ran for that office in
1993, but was defeated by Denis Barry. One of the key issues in that
election was the conflict of interest that Mr. Goichberg has as the operator
(and I presume the owner) of the Continental Chess Association (CCA), if he
also serves on the Executive Board. He did not seem to recognize this
conflict when he served in the past on the Executive Board as USCF Vice
President under the Presidency of Don Schultz, his long time political ally,
when that Executive Board oversaw losses of over $700,000 in fiscal 1997,
1998 and 1999.

One of his more recent conflict of interest blind spots concerns the
selection of a site for the 2006 US Open. Mr. Goichberg accuses me of
"playing politics with the US Open". Well let me explain something. I
believe that Mr. Goichberg should have completely removed himself from the
decision process for awarding the 2006 US Open for the following reasons. He
opposed not only holding a US Open in Cherry Hill, New Jersey in 2006 but
also opposed any proposal from New Jersey for a US Open in 2007. In addition
he reportedly said that it would be best that any future US Open held in New
Jersey not be in Southern New Jersey, where Cherry Hill is located.

I have no objection to holding the US Open In Chicago in 2006. The Illinois
Chess Association is a fine organization: I plan to attend their 2006 US
Open.. But I did and still do vehemently object to Mr. Goichberg making the
decision and in addition I object to his blanket opposition to holding a US
Open In New Jersey in 2007 or even later years.

Mr. Goichberg favored going to one of two hotels in the Chicago area for
the 2006 US Open. One of them was a hotel with which the CCA does business.
My point stated repeatedly was that Mr. Goichberg had two conflicts of
interest. First it was not in the interest of his CCA to have a US Open in
Cherry Hill, New Jersey only minutes from Philadelphia where the CCA World
Open would take place only a month before the US Open. Obviously, entries at
the World Open could be negatively impacted. Secondly, he could hardly be
expected to be objective in choosing between a hotel with which he did
business and any other proposed hotel. When it became obvious that Mr.
Goichberg would not remove himself from the process and let someone else
decide between the bids, I felt it was pointless to try to improve the
Cherry Hill proposal for 2006. This is an example of what will happen to
others if Mr. Goichberg is in power on the Executive board-they will not try
to compete with CCA events. As a footnote, the same Cherry Hill Hotel
Goichberg opposed was awarded the 2007 US Open, but on much more favorable
terms to USCF. This improved proposal only came forward once Mr. Goichberg
was no longer Executive Director and his anti-Southern New Jersey bias did
not play any role in the decision.

Mr. Goichberg's responses to charges of conflict of interest typically is to
assert that he always does what is best for the USCF.

Another charge of Mr. Goichberg is that there was an "Outrageous use of
Chess Life". I think that there was an outrageous use of Chess Life-by Mr.
Goichberg who wrote an obvious political article under the guise of a
farewell from the Executive Director in the February Chess Life. He seemed
to overlook the fact that he was an announced candidate for the Executive
Board and this extra article gave him an unfair advantage over all eight
other candidates. Furthermore his article included financial information
that was either wrong or at the least misleading. When he was called on that
sloppiness he behaved like a kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar
yelling someone else is at fault. Dr. Leroy Dubeck, Past President USCF

Leroy Dubeck, USCF Past President


  #2   Report Post  
Old June 4th 05, 05:19 AM
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Leroy Dubeck, USCF Past President


In the old days before OMOV there use to be a lot of political mail
flying around with widely different opinions about policies, views,
attitudes, and the candidates themselves. Back then when I received
something from Mr. Dubeck it always made me immediately want to vote
against whoever he was supporting. All I can say at this point is that
some things change and some things don't.

Why not make things simple? Have the candidates agree [?!?!?!] on 3 or
4 topics that are the most important items currently facing the USCF.
Let each of the candidates state their views and then let the USCF
member vote. This would focus on major points that hopefully everyone
believes needs to be addressed. I would also suggest that any claims
of past performance on the board or as a USCF employee NOT be allowed.


No one person is responsible for everything that happens at the USCF.

ChimeraCameleon

Remember that no matter how the colors change, the eagle will fly and
the lion will roar.

  #3   Report Post  
Old June 4th 05, 06:33 AM
 
Posts: n/a
Default

MORE ON BILL GOICHBERG'S "potential" CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Bill Goichberg wrote:

"I have not offered to sell the Continental Chess Association, nor do I
think this should be necessary, because I view my potential conflict of
interest as significant only if there is an actual conflict of interest
(I act in my own interest rather than that of USCF). I have not done
that, nor will I in the future. I am not aware of any charges that an
action I have taken was inappropriate due to a conflict of interest,
and if the Board has heard such charges, I believe you should also hear
my response to them first before arriving at any conclusions.

The idea of USCF buying CCA was suggested by Don. I told him that it
was very unlikely that I would agree to this, but that I was always
open to talking about anything. I believe in frank and open
communication, and am bewildered that the Board has apparently
discussed my alleged "conflict of interest" among itself without having
asked for my input first.

I agree with you that it would probably not be a good idea for USCF to
purchase CCA, for a variety of reasons, and also, I am very reluctant
to sell CCA. I have become attached to most of the tournaments, even
the majority of them that don't make money. Certainly I couldn't give
up the ones that do make a profit in return for a percentage of that,
as I would have no assurance that they would continue to make money
under USCF control."

Bill:

Do you remember this e-mail? Can you explain to us what is a potential
conflict of interest? Can you also address the fact that you got a deal
with EdgeTV while you were Executive Director?

It's clear that you would like to become the next USCF President. An
effective leader has to be able to take the credit and the blame for
the decision making process and the organization.

When we were about to close a deal with ICC, the contract was at the
attorneys' office. You decided to begin selling the join memberships
for both organizations by placing a note in the USCF website, you did
not setup any systems nor inform the employees in the office about this
new offer. As a consequence, four people purchased these join
memberships, when they did not got the service from ICC, they
complained to ICC. The owner of ICC rightly so, wrote a e-mail to you
with copy to the Executive Board. What do you do, rather than
apologizing for the mistake. YOU BLAMED IT ON JUDY MISNER AND THE MOVE
TO CROSSVILLE. ICC decided to cancel the deal. However, you got a
deal for CCA.

In the recent issue relate with the bonuses to the Women Olympic Team.
You have been letting me take ALL THE BLAME and attacks.

As Executive Director you were very difficult to work with, most of the
time I found out about important matters through Don Schultz. You
tried to undermine me and undermine the Executive Board. You presented
a motion to reduce membership dues, although you knew that the EB did
not endorse it. You did not accept the fact that the Executive Board
decided to relocate to Crossville. The list goes on.

Yes, I am guilty of expressing interest in the Executive Director's
position. I was wrong to think about it. I am far from perfect but I
am an effective leader and more than anything I have courage.

Bill, you are not suited to become USCF President..

WIM Beatriz Marinello not a WIMP

  #5   Report Post  
Old June 4th 05, 02:32 PM
Sam Sloan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

At 12:19 AM 6/3/2005 EDT, wrote:
Note that even though I endorse Greg Shahade (as well as Channing and Tanner), Greg is not part of a
team. He has not endorsed anyone and will probably vote for Steve Shutt, who used to be his high
school chess coach. I much prefer an independent candidate to your "slate" that falsely claims to
have "made the tough decisions" and saved the Federation. The "tough decision" was the vote to
lay off 17 employees in August 2003. It was the right decision, and how did your "success team" vote on it?


Frankly, I cannot understand why Bill refuses to endorse me because if
he endorsed me it is virtually guaranteed that I would be elected. I
was nearly elected the last times I ran even though Bill opposed me.
The people Bill supports instead cannot be considered reliable.

For example, Greg Shahade has not campaigned at all. He did not even
prepare his own nominating petitions. I gave him some of mine and told
him to white out my name and write in his instead, which he did.

Greg wrote something on rgcp a few weeks ago that I fell was a big
mistake. (I will not repeat what he wrote as I actually hope he is
elected.)

I am not against Greg. I think he will be a good board member if
elected, but I feel that he has no chance.

Tanner I find has a lot of enemies. I do not know the reason. This
does not concern me. What does concern me is his close friendship with
Beatriz Marinello. He says good things about Beatriz in his campaign
statements. Also, recall that Richard Peterson accused Tanner and
Beatriz of sleeping together in 1999. I do not feel that Tanner is
entirely trustworthy. At the same time, I would much prefer to see
Tanner elected than any of the so-called "success team".

I believe that Joel Channing will make an excellent board member if
elected. He has campaigned harder than anybody and deserves to be
elected. However, he was completely unknown prior to the start of the
election campaign and that could be a problem.

Regarding the other slate, I think Stan Booz is right. George John
will not be elected. Everybody can see right through him. He is just
saying goody-goody things to get elected.

Elizabeth Shaughnessy has turned out to be a terrible board member,
one of the worst ever. She is driven by her hatred of Bill Goichberg.
I do not know why she hates Bill Goichberg. Probably it is because she
is connected with Tom Dorsch and Jim Eade, who also hate Goichberg.
However, I believe that Shaughnessy will be defeated. She got elected
last time because of support from Northern California, where she
lives. However, several key chess personalities in Northern California
are completely against her now, and without their support she cannot
win.

Randy Bauer is the best of a bad lot. I believe that he will be
elected.

Steve Shutt has turned out to be a terrible board member. He does not
reads his e-mail or participate much. I do not know what has gone
wrong with him. I certainly hope that he is defeated, but I fear that
he might be elected because he has been around for so long and is so
well known.

This is the most important election in the history of the USCF. If the
bad guys win, the organization as we know it will die. The voters have
a simple choice. Life or Death? The problem is that neither slate is
very good. It seems that the best candidates have given up running in
these elections. In 1999, many good candidates ran and were defeated
and never ran again, so the voters are left with a very unsatisfactory
choice among the candidates this year.

Sam Sloan



  #6   Report Post  
Old June 4th 05, 04:55 PM
WPraeder
 
Posts: n/a
Default


StanB wrote:
Bill Goichberg and Conflict of Interest


Stan,

Perhaps we can simplify the controversy. Will Mr. Goichberg publicly
pledge:

1. To fully disclose all potential conflicts of interest consistent
with Delegate Motion 01-72 now and at least annually once elected;

2. As an EB member to completely remove himself from all corporate
transactions that can impact him, his business, his current or usual
employees, his business associates, or friends and allies;

3. To not accept a role acting in the capacity of USCF President;

4. To scrupulously honor all USCF bylaws, contracts, agreements, and
standards of conduct?

Regards,
Wayne Praeder

  #7   Report Post  
Old June 4th 05, 05:29 PM
StanB
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"WPraeder" wrote in message
ups.com...

StanB wrote:
Bill Goichberg and Conflict of Interest


Stan,

Perhaps we can simplify the controversy. Will Mr. Goichberg publicly
pledge:

1. To fully disclose all potential conflicts of interest consistent
with Delegate Motion 01-72 now and at least annually once elected;

2. As an EB member to completely remove himself from all corporate
transactions that can impact him, his business, his current or usual
employees, his business associates, or friends and allies;

3. To not accept a role acting in the capacity of USCF President;

4. To scrupulously honor all USCF bylaws, contracts, agreements, and
standards of conduct?


Of course not:

Bill Goichberg wrote:

"I have not offered to sell the Continental Chess Association, nor do I
think this should be necessary, because I view my potential conflict of
interest as significant only if there is an actual conflict of interest (I
act in my own interest rather than that of USCF). I have not done that, nor
will I in the future. I am not aware of any charges that an action I have
taken was inappropriate due to a conflict of interest, and if the Board has
heard such charges, I believe you should also hear my response to them first
before arriving at any conclusions.

The idea of USCF buying CCA was suggested by Don. I told him that it was
very unlikely that I would agree to this, but that I was always open to
talking about anything. I believe in frank and open communication, and am
bewildered that the Board has apparently discussed my alleged "conflict of
interest" among itself without having asked for my input first.

I agree with you that it would probably not be a good idea for USCF to
purchase CCA, for a variety of reasons, and also, I am very reluctant to
sell CCA. I have become attached to most of the tournaments, even the
majority of them that don't make money. Certainly I couldn't give up the
ones that do make a profit in return for a percentage of that, as I would
have no assurance that they would continue to make money under USCF
control."

Bill:

Do you remember this e-mail? Can you explain to us what is a potential
conflict of interest? Can you also address the fact that you got a deal with
EdgeTV while you were Executive Director?

It's clear that you would like to become the next USCF President. An
effective leader has to be able to take the credit and the blame for the
decision making process and the organization.

When we were about to close a deal with ICC, the contract was at the
attorneys' office. You decided to begin selling the join memberships for
both organizations by placing a note in the USCF website, you did not setup
any systems nor inform the employees in the office about this new offer. As
a consequence, four people purchased these join memberships, when they did
not got the service from ICC, they complained to ICC. The owner of ICC
rightly so, wrote a e-mail to you with copy to the Executive Board. What do
you do, rather than apologizing for the mistake. YOU BLAMED IT ON JUDY
MISNER AND THE MOVE TO CROSSVILLE. ICC decided to cancel the deal.
However, you got a deal for CCA.

In the recent issue relate with the bonuses to the Women Olympic Team. You
have been letting me take ALL THE BLAME and attacks.

As Executive Director you were very difficult to work with, most of the time
I found out about important matters through Don Schultz. You tried to
undermine me and undermine the Executive Board. You presented a motion to
reduce membership dues, although you knew that the EB did not endorse it.
You did not accept the fact that the Executive Board decided to relocate to
Crossville. The list goes on.

Yes, I am guilty of expressing interest in the Executive Director's
position. I was wrong to think about it. I am far from perfect but I am an
effective leader and more than anything I have courage.

Bill, you are not suited to become USCF President..

WIM Beatriz Marinello not a WIMP




  #8   Report Post  
Old June 4th 05, 07:27 PM
[email protected]
 
Posts: n/a
Default

1) All candidates once elected should disclosed any potential conflicts
of interest!

2) IF there is a conflict [i.e. an impact on business or business
associates] then the standard is to abstain from voting. To COMPLETELY
remove one from ALL transactions would imply and include refraining
from participation in discussions. That is not normal when a conflict
occurs. Are you suggesting that ONLY Goichberg have this standard
applied to himself, or should it apply to any board member?

3) You mean to say the even if all 6 other EB members voted for Bill
Goichberg for president that he should not serve in that capacity?
Wouldn't a promise not to vote for himself be sufficient?

4) Who determines if Mr. Goichberg "scrupulously honors" ?

  #9   Report Post  
Old June 4th 05, 11:01 PM
WPraeder
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote:
1) All candidates once elected should disclosed any potential conflicts
of interest!

2) IF there is a conflict [i.e. an impact on business or business
associates] then the standard is to abstain from voting. To COMPLETELY
remove one from ALL transactions would imply and include refraining
from participation in discussions. That is not normal when a conflict
occurs. Are you suggesting that ONLY Goichberg have this standard
applied to himself, or should it apply to any board member?

3) You mean to say the even if all 6 other EB members voted for Bill
Goichberg for president that he should not serve in that capacity?
Wouldn't a promise not to vote for himself be sufficient?

4) Who determines if Mr. Goichberg "scrupulously honors" ?


The controversy being discussed concerns Bill Goichberg and Conflict of
Interest.

1. Yes, but the Delegates have also asked for this information from the
candidates during the election campaign to assist with the voter's
evaluation of the candidate. In my view this is not a difficult
request.

2. Yes, discussions also. That is only not normal in the USCF. It
applies to all, including Mr. Goichberg. See
http://www.boardsource.org/FullAnswer.asp?ID=97

3. This is one way to help mitigate an appearance of a disabling
conflict of interest, yes. Not voting for oneself would be expected.

4. The Executive Board, the Delegates, and the voting membership. I
don't think being upright and careful is too much to ask but I'll
settle for just honors.

Regards,
Wayne Praeder

  #10   Report Post  
Old June 4th 05, 11:46 PM
Vince Hart
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I have my concerns about some of the decisions that Bill Goichberg has
made and some of the positions he has taken, and I may not vote for him
because of those concerns. On the other hand, I am not persuaded by
the conflict of interest arguments regarding the 2006 US Open decision.
Personally, I thought the arguments in favor of Illinois and the
chosen hotel were pretty strong. I am also less than convinced that
Goichberg would have been concerned about a conflict between the US
Open and the World Open because I see no evidence that the 2002 US Open
had an impact on the 2002 World Open. 2002 attendance exceeded that of
2000, 2001 and 2004. Only 2003 was better.

As an Illinoisian, I may be biased by my delight in having the US Open
return to Chicago, but the reasoning behind the decision seems quite
sound to me.

Vince Hart

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Marinello Case: Reply Affidavit to Order to Show Cause Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 17 May 5th 05 04:00 AM
Marinello Case: Reply Affidavit to Order to Show Cause Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 15 May 4th 05 09:21 PM
Reply to Affidavit of Leroy Dubeck Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 22 March 29th 05 04:44 PM
Reply to Affidavit of Leroy Dubeck Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 51 March 29th 05 04:44 PM
Affidavit of Leroy Dubeck in Opposition to Sloan Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 1 December 8th 04 06:03 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:48 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017