Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: 1. Agenda

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,690

    Default 1. Agenda

    Agenda for the CFC Voting Members Meeting Sunday Feb 21st to Feb 25th

    1) Agenda

    2) Voting Member Sign-In

    3) Opening remarks of the Chair.

    4) Proposal by the President to enlarge the Executive by adding Mrs. Patricia Gamliel, attorney and member of the FIDE Social Commission, as a Director at large.

    5) Modification of Bylaws to reflect the fact that all members of the executive are directors of the CFC.

    6) "The Voting Booth" – vote for Director at large - Yes to confirm. No to decline to confirm. Abstain to decline to vote.

    7) Presentation of candidacy for the FIDE Representative position.

    8) "The Voting Booth" – vote for FIDE Representative / Zone President. Candidates have declared their candidacy one week prior to the beginning of the meeting with a brief bio and a statement of their plans for the posiiton. The election will take place beginning on Tuesday February 23, 2021 and conclude on Wednesday, February 24, 2021.

    8) Other business.

    10) Closing remarks by the Chair.

    11) Adjournment.

    SPECIAL NOTE: ALL THREADS WILL BE OPEN THROUGHOUT THE MEETING EXCEPT FOR THE TWO "VOTING BOOTH" THREADS WHICH ARE ONLY OPEN DURING THE PERIOD OF VOTING

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,732

    Default

    Regarding Agenda items, I have submitted Point of Order. While in the original text I was referring to the Agenda items as distributed to in the voting members.

    Here I modified the numeration matching above Agenda


    Point of order

    Regarding the (4) and (6).

    Class A members had not a resolution to increase the current number of directors from 7 to 8.
    .*-1

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,732

    Default

    With all respect, as I see the Agenda (4) item has changed as well from the initial announcement.

    3) Presentation of Mrs. Patricia Gamliel, attorney and member of the FIDE Social Commission, as a candidate for the position of Director at large. She will be involved in Corporate Affairs and General Outreach (see short biography below).
    .*-1

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,690

    Default

    Two points:
    (1) in the president's initial draft agenda he had omitted any reference to sign in so the sign-in was inserted at #2 and everything else was bumped down one.

    (2) I had a glitch in one member's e-mail which I retrieved from an e-mail from that person and pasted into the list. I apologize to anybody who may have gotten the e-mail with the link to this meeting twice.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    125

    Default

    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 Patricia, 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.

    Edited - to correct Patricia's name.
    Last edited by Michael Lo; 02-22-2021 at 08:45 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kanata, Ottawa, Ontario
    Posts
    1,218

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Lo View Post
    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.
    I support Michael's positions, especially this meeting having unexpected things added on later. If others agree, I encourage you to also express support.
    Last edited by Aris Marghetis; 02-22-2021 at 05:47 PM.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aris Marghetis View Post
    I support Michael's positions, especially this meeting having unexpected things added on later. If others agree, I encourage you to also express support.
    The voting and the drafting of amended motions, if any, will occurs 21 days after the announcement.

    It should be noted that the VM can amend the proposals in the agenda. For example, a proposal too increase the number of directors by one could be amended to increase it by two. A proposal to add something to the bylaws could be amended to include something else. The question is : are those unexpected things, as you call them, amendments or new proposals ?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aris Marghetis View Post
    I support Michael's positions, especially this meeting having unexpected things added on later. If others agree, I encourage you to also express support.
    I also support Michael's positions, except the legitimacy of this meeting. It is already happening, and CFC does need a new FIDE Representative. Other matters can wait for the next meeting or AGM (elections for other possible executive spots). No news on the motion to appeal by Egis, and yet the vote is already tomorrow?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    125

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nikolay Noritsyn View Post
    I also support Michael's positions, except the legitimacy of this meeting. It is already happening, and CFC does need a new FIDE Representative. Other matters can wait for the next meeting or AGM (elections for other possible executive spots). No news on the motion to appeal by Egis, and yet the vote is already tomorrow?
    We need to clarify and determine whether this meeting is legitimate. If this meeting is not legitimate, it will not make it legitimate even it is already happening. We cannot file the meeting minutes and voting results if the meeting is not legitimate, which means the voting results will be void. I understand that we need a new FIDE Representative asap. The fastest route is to setup a legitimate meeting asap (i.e. if this one is not legitimate). Please correct me if I am wrong.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tecumseh, ON
    Posts
    3,209
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Lo View Post
    We need to clarify and determine whether this meeting is legitimate. If this meeting is not legitimate, it will not make it legitimate even it is already happening. We cannot file the meeting minutes and voting results if the meeting is not legitimate, which means the voting results will be void. I understand that we need a new FIDE Representative asap. The fastest route is to setup a legitimate meeting asap (i.e. if this one is not legitimate). Please correct me if I am wrong.
    By showing up, you have rendered the meeting legitimate.

    Waiver of notice
    (4) Any person who is entitled to notice of a meeting of members may waive notice, and attendance of the person at the meeting is a waiver of notice of the meeting, unless the person attends the meeting for the express purpose of objecting to the transaction of any business on the grounds that the meeting is not lawfully called.

    Egis hit me with a barrage of emails on the Sunday night which almost delayed my email late enough to miss the deadline. With minutes to spare I sent notice. Notice can be modified after the initial notice.
    Last edited by Vladimir Drkulec; 02-23-2021 at 01:57 AM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •