I am placing this message under the “Agenda” thread since it does not seem to belong to any other threads.
I do not doubt the qualification of Diana, Victor and Vadim for the positions they are running. I am not comfortable with the rushing of decision making and not clarifying the ambiguities in the legitimacy of this Special meeting.
With the fierce competition for the FIDE rep position, there is a non-negligible chance that the losing candidate may appeal the legitimacy of this Special meeting and void the voting results.
Please clarify the following and explain the impact to the legitimacy of this meeting if it is being appealed:
1) Proper procedure to replace a resigned director
Lyle has raised the concern "- our bylaws say very clearly how a resigned director is to be replaced and that the method chosen does not follow those."
Vlad argued that "Then it should be easy to point exactly where in the bylaw it says that."
2) Notice of meeting legally required timeline
Christopher has raised the concern of "the notice of meeting was NOT within the legally required timeline (as it was sent out 19.5 days before the meeting started when the required amount in our bylaws is 21 days, potentially making this entire meeting illegal)..." which is not being clarified or addressed.
There is also the hanging “motion to appeal” moved by Egidijus and seconded by Christopher (and Lyle?). Does it mean that the voting on “Director at large” is now deferred until the “motion to appeal” is resolved? What is the current status, proper procedure and schedule to handle this “motion to appeal”?
I would like to further point out that the straw poll initiated by Vlad on Jan 22 2021 (
http://www.chesscanada.info/forum/sh...-Rep-Selection) specifically asked for the opinion of holding a special meeting on "How should exec seat new FIDE rep". The agenda of this meeting has extra items that I feel are being notified too late and do not allow enough time for the VMs to thoroughly discussed before voting.
The election of a new FIDE rep is complicated enough and I can see the urgency of appointing one asap. For the other items in the agenda - "enlarge the Executive" and "Modification of Bylaws to reflect the fact that all members of the executive are directors of the CFC", I do not see the urgency of squeezing them into this special meeting. These can be resolved either in the spring meeting or the next AGM.