Item # 20B - Motion 2011-A - Activity Rule for Life Governors - for discussion

[Bob Armstrong]

[B]Motion 2011-A - Amending Motion 2010-03 (Activity Rule for Life Governors )/B]

Moved: Bunning/Craver –

Motion 2010-03, dealing with Section 6 of by law #2, is amended

1. by deleting from the current motion 2010-03 the first word “ deleting “ and substituting for it the word “ replacing “; and

2. after the sentences "The past presidents of the federation who have served as president for at least 2 terms. A term is that period between one annual meeting and the next", adding “ with the following wording: " The past presidents of the federation who have served as President for at least 2 terms and continue to demonstrate that they are active governors by attending at any one annual meeting over a 2 year period or commenting or voting on not less than 3 governors motions in any two year period or attending at least 2 on line governors meetings over a two year period. A term is that period between one annual meeting and the next ".

This thread is for discussion of the amending motion only. A separate motion voting thread for it will be posted at 9:00 PM EDT on Thursday, Oct. 7.

Note that the meeting has been extended to Tuesday, Oct. 12 at 10:00 PM for the purposes only of dealing with voting on this amending motion, and then the main motion or amended main motion and Motion 2010-04.

Bob

[Fred McKim]

Les: Can you explain why this amendment is not being applied against the lifetime Governors before 1994. This is the last class of Governors at Large. Surely any of these that are not active would willingly step down.

[Lyle Craver]

Our rules on Life Governors need revision - there is not even any provision for resignation and as our rules stand, any LG who resigned could take up his position again at any time.

There are all sorts of anomalies possible here.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Fred:

There was some ambiguity I believe in Les' Motion 2011-A when first posted because of the uncertainty because of the wording, whether it was a motion amending Motion 2010-03, as he clearly intended, or whether it was a competing motion amending the original section directly.

I clarified this with Les by rewording his motion to his satisfaction as above. It now shows that the part of the original section dealing with life governors under " the past Presidents who have been granted the life title of Governor at Large as at September 1994. “ will be deleted under either the amending motion or the main motion.

So the only category left for life governors under the amending motion will be:

" The past presidents of the federation who have served as President for at least 2 terms and continue to demonstrate that they are active governors by attending at any one annual meeting over a 2 year period or commenting or voting on not less than 3 governors motions in any two year period or attending at least 2 on line governors meetings over a two year period. A term is that period between one annual meeting and the next ".

It so happens that life governors by the deleted part, happen to also qualify under the new proposed part ( ie were also 2 term presidents ), except perhaps Nathan Divinsky, because Les is not certain he is a full two term president.

So effectively all life governors under the amending motion will be suject to the activity criterion.

Les can speak further to this if any of this is not correct.

Bob

[Les Bunning]

By law #2 is our main operating Bylaw . I completely rewrote it in the early nineties. Before that time all CFC presidents became Life governors even if they were only president for a short period of time. This used to happen if a president resigned, then under the old rules the Vice president automatically became president- sometimes only for a few months. The early nineties constitutional amendment changed this proceedure so that if a president resigns now the executive appoints a new President. It also reduced the life governorship to CFC presidents who served as Presidents for 2 full terms. This generally meant that only the most comitted presidents were so honoured. Presidents serving less than 2 full terms were granted governor status for 5 years. The constitutional amendment was passed at the annual meeting in Winnipeg but the consensus at that meeting was that past presidents who had obtained life governor staus - e.g. Nathan Divinsky- should retain this status. That is how the reference to 1994 came about. I believe that only Bruce Thomas and perhaps Nathan Divinsky are effected by this 1994 reference. I believe Bruce thomas is inactive but I would strongly urge an exemption being made for Nathan Divinsky.
Les Bunning

[Bob Armstrong]

This amending motion keeps alive the antiquated life governor system, trying to make it acceptable by applying an activity rule to the life governors. But it still KEEPS the life governor system.

If you want the life governor system, which gives the life governor a " vote for life " without being elected, to be eliminated totally, then you have to vote AGAINST this amending motion.

Then you will get to pass Motions 2010-03 & -04 to confirm the elimination of the life governor system.

Bob

[Bob Armstrong]

I note that only 3 out of 10 life governors have attended this meeting: Les Bunning, Phil Haley and Halldor Palsson.

The fact that the other 7 are governors, and not attending, drags down our attendance potential at this meeting, and diminishes the appreciation of governor committment in the eyes of the membership. They will no longer be life governors and will no longer have a vote if you vote AGAINST this amending motion 2011-A. But Motion 2010-04, brought with Motion 2010-03, will seek to keep the 10 life governors on as " non-voting governors-at-large for 10 years ".

But more importantly, quite apart from the question of life governor activity or not, the issue is that there should be no " life govenor, with vote, without election" system at all. Voting AGAINST this amending motion will get rid of this antiquated system.

Bob

[Christopher Mallon]

My feeling has always been that if they want to be active, that's great, there are plenty of either elected governor spots, or officer positions that would give them votes. And there is plenty of good they can do without voting too.

[Bob Armstrong]

I am bumping this thread up to the top, because I think it needs more discussion, and will likey draw more attention later today, since Motion 2011-A will be being posted for vote this afternoon at 5:00 PM EDT.

Governors may want more discussion before the vote starts late this afternoon.

Bob

[Bob Armstrong]

Here is part of the voting notice sent to all governors this morning, regarding discussion of, and voting on, Motion 2011-A:

There is one topic that has actually garnered relatively little attention so far this meeting – the elimination of the Past President/Life Governor system. There are now three motions involved in this topic, two that were originally on the agenda, and one that has formally arisen out of the meeting. They are described by Posting Secretary Lyle Craver ( he and I split the job this meeting ), in his summaries ( referring to the 2 agenda motions ), as :

“ the most contentious motions on the agenda “ !!

In his summary of the topic, he says:

“ the arguments are that

(a) life governors are anti-democratic;

vs

(b) no one becomes a life governor except by a long history of service to chess and these people are a resource we should not exclude.

Procedurally, the matter is being handled as one motion amending another. So the amending motion comes to a vote first. So Motion 2011-A, which seeks to amend Motion 2010-03, will be the first of the three motions voted on. It will be posted for vote tonight at 5:00 PM EDT ( advanced a bit from the earlier scheduled posting time ).

My description of the situation, which I think is close to Lyle’s, is :

( a ) Motion 2010-03 seeks to totally eliminate the Life Governor system; the companion Motion 2010-04 seeks to keep the current 10 Life Governors, by making them non-voting Governors-at-large for 10 years;

vs

( b ) Motion 2011-A, on which voting starts late this afternoon EDT , seeks to change Motion 2010-03 into a motion, by amendment, which would instead, seek to keep the Life Governor system, only subject it to an activity rule.

So, this is what your vote means:

1. A vote AGAINST Motion 2011-A – you wish Motion 2010-03 not to be amended, and to continue to seek the elimination of the Life Governor system,.

2. A vote FOR Motion 2011-A - you wish Motion 2010-03, by amendment, to instead seek to keep the Life Governor system, subject to an activity rule,

Though Motion 2010-03 is a “ constitutional “ amendment, since Motion 2011-A is only an “ amending “ motion, it only requires a simple majority to pass ( someone can post a correction for me if I’m wrong on this ).

If you want to discuss this motion before the vote, it is:

Item # 20B - Motion 2011-A - Activity Rule for Life Governors - for discussion

You have the right, and obligation, to decide this “ contentious “ issue. Please come out and discuss it and vote on it.

Voting on this amending Motion 2011-A closes at 1100 PM on Saturday, Oct. 9.

The meeting was specifically extended from Thursday, Oct. 7 to Tuesday, Oct. 12 at 11:59 PM EDT to deal with these three motions. Please make use of this meeting extension time by discussing, and then voting on, this motion, and then subsequently, Motions 2010-03 & -04.