10C / 10D National Youth Coach position

[Lyle Craver]

Both Motions moved Egidijus Zeromskis, seconded Fred McKim

Motion 10C: Be it resolved "The CFC establishes the National Youth Coach position to develop young Canadian chess talents."

Motion 10D: Be it resolved that "The CFC creates a committee to issue the RFP for the National Youth Coach position if the above motion passes."

Note that due to the conditional nature of motion 10D that while voting will take place on both motions, votes on 10D will only be reported to the Governors if motion 10C passes.

[Fred McKim]

I had expected to see this motion in the Outgoing Meeting, but this is fine. I am going to write some commentary on the background to this that those Governors that were not part of the Outgoing Board will need to be aware of, so they can vote intelligently.

[Fred McKim]

I had expected to see this motion in the Outgoing Meeting, but this is fine. I am going to write some commentary on the background to this that those Governors that were not part of the Outgoing Board will need to be aware of, so they can vote intelligently.

Vlad Drkulec and I put forward a motion recently that would have established the position of National Youth Coach. This was an initiative brought to us by IM Edward Porper, who we were putting forward to occupy this position..

This would be no cost to the CFC and the idea would be the position would be funded by payments by parents and fund raising.

During the debate an amendment was put forward to modify the motion so that the position would be founded, but it would be staffed only after an RFP. Due to some administrative problems the amendment wasn't voted on and the original motion was defeated.

Rather than extend the meeting it was decided that the amendment would be presentable as a new motion at the AGM.

[Fred McKim]

Based on the extensive discussions we had previously I was expecting that we would continue to have a lot of talk over this one. I had imagined that if this motion was presented at the last quarterly meeting as an amendment (as it should have) the amendment would have certainly passed and then the new amended motion would likewise probably have passed.

This program is coming to the CFC at no charge to us (or at least a possible version of it). The ultimate person selected to fill the post will need to take 2-3 years to build up a clienele and find suitable donors. We will do what we can to help, but this is not intended to replace coaches or tutors that are already in place. It can be seen as an alternative.

[Félix Dumont]

I have a hard time making my mind for this one. I'm all in favor of a national coaching program. However, we would need more than a national coach (i.e. really a program behind it) that could be taught in many provinces (so that one cannot do everything by himself). A good national coach would not teach to all the kids across Canada by himself, but could coordinate everything (while of course offering lessons) and provide a solid program.

Would the committee be allowed to decide to refuse all candidates? It's not like an executive director position, where we absolutely need someone. If for some reasons none of the candidates/programs are good enough, the committee should have the right not to recommend any.

So, I might be in favour, but it would imply that we clearly define what's a national coach and that the committee be responsible of looking at all the potential candidates and see if any has a suitable program (but wouldn't be forced to pick one if none is really suitable).

[Christopher Mallon]

The whole thing still seems like a waste of time at best at the CFC Governance level. If there is no cost, there's no reason why the President and/or Executive couldn't simply approve someone to run their own program. If the CFC wants to do it via governance motions, then we should be setting a few more parameters than are contained in this motion. As-is, this gives carte blanche to the committee (also unspecified) to do pretty much whatever they want.

Finally, if there is in fact no cost to the CFC, then that should be spelled out right in the motion. Having an RFP implies some transfer of money, either to or from the CFC and I'm pretty sure bidders aren't lining up to PAY the CFC for the rights to be the National Youth Coach.

[Fred McKim]

The whole thing still seems like a waste of time at best at the CFC Governance level. If there is no cost, there's no reason why the President and/or Executive couldn't simply approve someone to run their own program. If the CFC wants to do it via governance motions, then we should be setting a few more parameters than are contained in this motion. As-is, this gives carte blanche to the committee (also unspecified) to do pretty much whatever they want.

Finally, if there is in fact no cost to the CFC, then that should be spelled out right in the motion. Having an RFP implies some transfer of money, either to or from the CFC and I'm pretty sure bidders aren't lining up to PAY the CFC for the rights to be the National Youth Coach.

This motion was originally an amendment by Egis and Bob A. When it got omitted from the last meeting, it had to be slightly reworded to take on the form of a motion and I agreed to second it.

Personally, I don't think the second motion is needed, but didn't want to be a bad sport, so I remained the seconder.

Chris you are right, I think the Executive could appoint someone to fill this roll after we hear some proposals, or a committee could be appointed if the executive didn't feel qualified to make a decision. Certainly there is no budget money for it from our regular funds.

Certainly the Executive would be under no obligation to consider it, or even pass it off to a committee if there were no qualified candidates with strong proposals.

[Garland Best]

Personally, I see this as something that falls under the jurisdiction of the Youth Coordinator. I agree with Felix that we should look more carefully at a youth program as a whole. What direction should we take?

I would recommend deferring this motion subject to examination by the Youth Coordinator, preferably adding members to from a committee, to come up with a direction for the CFC to take regarding a national Youth Program.

[Lyle Craver]

If that is your wish then you can make a motion along the lines of

"Be it resolved that the motions 10C and 10D be tabled and subject to examination by the Youth Coordinator, preferably adding members to from a committee, to come up with a direction for the CFC to take regarding a national Youth Program"

If that's your plan you need to move and have it seconded before voting begins on these since amendments of any sort are out of order following the start of voting.

If you miss that deadline your only option is to vote against the motion and if enough Governors feel as you do to re-introduce a motion along the lines you suggest at the October quarterly meeting.

[Christopher Mallon]

I'll second the tabling motion if he moves it.