USCF in Financial Trouble

January 30, 2008, 6:51 am
Is the United States Chess Federation in Trouble?
By Dylan Loeb McClain
NY Times

A statement from a meeting about the finances of the United States Chess Federation was posted over the weekend on the federation’s Web forum by Bill Goichberg, the president of the federation. In the statement, Goichberg talked about the federation’s finances, saying they are not in good shape and the federation is projected to run a significant deficit (significant from the federation’s standpoint as it does not have much in the way of financial reserves and its revenues are about $3 million a year). He also suggested some plans of action. Here is an excerpt from the statement, with the first few paragraphs about technology used to conduct the meeting and plans for the next meeting of the federation’s executive board, omitted.

As you know, after seven months we are running $42,341 behind budget. The membership trend has been poor in the past few months, and legal expenses for the rest of the year will be high, so I fear a loss for the year of at least $100,000.

Source: http://gambit.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/30/is-the-united-states-chess-federation-in-trouble/

Instead of doing everything possible to promote chess, the USCF, and raise the level of membership and revenues, some board members chose to use the USCF scarce resources for their personal political agenda.

So much money has been wasted without a sound direction or logical goals. When I inquired about the finances, I was told that the USCF attorney advised the board majority not to discuss it. Aren’t members of a non-profit membership organization entitled to know the finances? And when I pointed out the wasteful spending, I was insulted by my fellow board members.

When potential sponsors asked about sponsorship opportunities, the USCF was late in getting back to them and sometimes not at all. Many excellent suggestions were made during the last board meeting to improve the health of the USCF and very little was done to fix the problems. There is little accountability from the top to the bottom of this organization. There is also little transparency and full of conflict of interest.

This is unfortunately a serious flaw of the USCF. The board majority has the full control of how the federation is being run and there is almost nothing anyone can do other than not vote for those candidates or people who are affiliated with them next time. But that is a 4 year term and it may be too late.

The only person who can change the state of the USCF is President Goichberg. He controls the agenda, course of action and the majority vote. But this is an individual who has never lost an argument. Unless drastic changes are made NOW, $100,000 loss for the fiscal year is very optimistic.

My request to the board majority

My request to the board majority

by SusanPolgar on Mon Jan 28, 2008 9:39 pm

I just officially asked USCF President Bill Goichberg to add to the next EB meeting the following 2 items:

- Investigation of leaks of confidential information by board members to their circle of friends
- Investigation of the alleged Jerry Hanken’s negotiation with Sam Sloan (at least twice) regarding the lawsuit using USCF confidential information

Mr. Hanken definitely does not speak for me or Paul and I seriously doubt that he speaks for Mr. Channing. I would like to know how he got the board confidential information (if the allegation is true) and who authorized him to negotiate with Sam Sloan while a $20 million lawsuit against the USCF and its board members is pending. Was the USCF attorney notified of this? Did the USCF attorney authorize this?

This is a long time problem for the USCF and it needs to stop once in forever. This is why I asked for full transparency from all 7 board members.

Both of these have serious legal consequences for the USCF and its board members. Therefore, we need to know where the leaks came from and we must take severe actions against the violators. I would publicly ask those board members to resign immediately.

1.9 cents will save the USCF

President Goichberg just made a proposal that board members should pay for the conference calls in the next board meeting to save the USCF 1.9 cents per minute due to the severe financial crisis. Here was my response:

by SusanPolgar on Sat Jan 26, 2008 11:47 pm

Bill,

When Paul and I proposed the idea of having this type of meeting to SAVE the USCF money (because the USCF must be fiscally responsible no matter how well the federation is doing), you adamantly opposed. When the alternative suggestion came to have the meeting in Las Vegas where the cost would be minimal (according to Pat Knight) to save money, you also adamantly opposed.

Even after the vote for Las Vegas passed, you insisted on a re-vote the next morning to move the meeting to California. There was no concern on your part to save the USCF money at that time. Now, we are discussing 1.9 cents per minute when the board majority is willing spend just about any amount of money for legal fees for the next few years?

If it is OK with you, I would like to have all these expenses brought up in the next meeting. How much did the USCF pay for Internet insurance, deductibles, legal fees to our regular USCF attorney as well as Mr. Kronenberger, cost to redesign the website TWICE, and cost to maintain and update the website, etc.

In addition, did the USCF renew the Internet insurance and when will it be good until? Same goes with the deductibles. When will the next deductibles kick in? How much legal fees do you anticipate the USCF will spend in 2008? We can probably save at least $50,000 or more in these areas alone.

In a financial crisis like this, we must be fiscally responsible. We need to know where our money goes. I do not want to see the services for our members cut, especially scholastic and youth members (unless the scholastic council approves). All members should get what they paid for.

Susan Polgar

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

President Goichberg stated that the financial questions I asked cannot be discussed without consulting the USCF attorney. Here are some of the responses by USCF President Bill Goichberg:

- These are legitimate subjects for discussion and I have no objection to you and Paul participating, so long as our attorneys say it is OK.

- We are facing financial problems because membership revenue is down, not because of "many past horrendous decisions."

Here are some of my statements:

- First of all, what does this have anything to do with the USCF attorney? These are not legal questions. Why are we continuing to waste money which this federation does not have for something so standard as this. These are standard USCF financial questions. Don't members have the right to know how much money the USCF spends and for what? Is this supposed to be a secret? I was under the impression that all expenses have to be accounted for and members are entitled to know.

- I am not asking to participate. I am asking for the numbers as any USCF member is entitled to know. We are facing financial problems because of many past horrendous decisions. I don't want to see the USCF fall apart. I am trying to protect the finances of the USCF. You can suggest ways to save 1.9 cents. I am suggesting for the USCF to save hundreds of thousands of dollars.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

President Goichberg also suggested to cut services from the members. Here is my response:

Members get so little for the membership dues they pay right now anyway. I am against cutting services to the members. All members should get what they paid for. The USCF should not be in the business of bait and switch. To save money and raise additional much needed revenues:

- We should stop giving large contracts to political allies or friends without fair and open biddings. This is not the first time this kind of mistake was made.

- The USCF spent over $50,000 to redesign the USCF website TWICE because the first one did not work and the second one is still not working properly way after the deadlines. We need to know who authorized this and who should be held accountable for wasting USCF members’ money. I asked about this for 4-5 months and still no answer.

- We should stop wasting at least $25,000 (approx) a year for insurance and deductibles for the USCF political forums which only a dozen members or two utilize on a regular basis. Joel Channing, Paul Truong and I are on the record opposing this kind of waste. $25,000 a year can benefit many other important chess initiatives.

- We should stop wasting tens and thousands of dollars and potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars for legal fees for political purposes. After all the facts come out, all members will clearly see the whole picture.

- Now the board cannot even answer simple questions about finances which all members are entitled to know without paying for attorney’s advice. The board majority does not want the members to know what they are doing with the members’ money.

- We should have quarterly reports to show what each board member does to improve the USCF. All members are entitled to know this.

- We should focus on promoting USCF memberships through sensible, inexpensive, and effective grass roots marketing campaign. This will substantially increase the revenues that we badly need. Having ads in Chess Life is not good enough. What the USCF is doing right now is not effective and it is costly.

- We should severely penalize board members who leak confidential information to their friends and political allies. This can potentially put the USCF in serious legal problems as we have clearly seen.

These are just some of the things we need to do instead of cutting services and trying to save 1.9 cents.

Serious Financial Problems for the USCF

Serious financial problems for the USCF
by SusanPolgar on Sat Jan 26, 2008 2:22 pm

Here is the latest public statement by USCF President Bill Goichberg:

"...after seven months we are running $42,341 behind budget. The membership trend has been poor in the past few months, and legal expenses for the rest of the year will be high, so I fear a loss for the year of at least $100,000."

Joel Channing, Paul Truong and I told the board many times since August 2007 about the potential financial problems that could occur if no changes are made but the board majority completely ignored it. Instead of recognizing the problems and finding solutions to help the USCF, political decisions were made by some to keep their political power. If we do not fix the problems, how can we turn around the USCF?

Once again, the USCF members will suffer. Here are some of the mind boggling costly blunders:

- Approximately $15,000 in Internet insurance for a USCF political forum which only about two dozen members use frequently
- Another $15,000 has to be paid soon if not already.
- $10,000 in deductibles for insurance and another $10,000 will kick in after the renewal kicks in.
- At least $10,000 if not a lot more for legal fees and it can run as high a few hundred thousand dollars if the board majority will continue going down the same path. The numbers will come out sooner or later. They cannot hide this.
- More than $50,000 to revamp the USCF website TWICE and it is still not working properly. There were no fair and open biddings for this job and others.
- A number of potential sponsors inquired about sponsorships without getting proper information, numbers or response on a timely manner.

There are more but these are just some of the latest ones. This is what I stated on January 24, 2008:

“Here are the real issues: We cut the budget for college chess and we cannot afford to finance the US Championship or the Olympiad teams like we used to. We cannot even afford to help our top players like Kamsky for a shot at the World Championship. What happened to the money we were supposed to save? Where did it go? Why are we still financially weak?

Fiscal responsibility is a must if this federation wants to get back on track financially. We need to get back to the basics to find out the real problems and fix them immediately. Our members deserve better. Our members are entitled to know what the board is doing with their money and what direction this federation is heading in.”

This is what I stated on January 16, 2008:

“The same destructive political chess games have been played for years. It is the USCF members who lose. Whoever has the majority votes will decide how the political games are being played instead of focusing on what is best for the USCF. This is the long pattern of destructive politics that no one has been able to fix so far.

These problems have hindered the proper growth of chess within the USCF for decades. This is how so much money has been wasted and the financial situation of the USCF has gone down the drain. No one wants to talk about how much money this federation has wasted in the past 12-24 months alone.”

Instead of working together and allowing each board member to use their strengths to help the USCF, the USCF could potential end up spending hundreds of thousands of dollars for political witch hunts against people who want to end the status quo and transform the this federation into a financially strong, stable and viable organization. This is why the USCF has failed miserably for so many years. The members deserve better!

Best wishes,
Susan Polgar

Additional response

This was an answer by Paul:

Re: Q & A regarding my statement last week
by PaulTruong on Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:17 am

My answers and clear position were given to the board and the USCF attorney.

The clear and conclusive evidence to show that the conclusion of the report is way off was faxed to the USCF attorney. No one has this evidence except for the board and their attorney. He acknowledged in an email that the evidence was received but never followed up. No one asked for additional evidence or clarification until the after the board issued a statement to the NY Times on Monday, January 21, 2008. I would have been happy to provide more evidence if needed. I am not going to engage in this I said / they said nonsense. I have fulfilled my fiduciary duty. End of story.

What happened to due process and proper USCF procedures? The board is free to file a complaint with the USCF ethics committee if they feel otherwise. I will be more than happy to respond to the ethics committee and show them the same evidence and more if they ask. The case is quite clear once the ethics committee or the public have all the facts.

Only the board majority can give consent for all the facts to come out but they are trying to go around them. They do not want the USCF members to know what is going on behind the scene.

All the speculations and public guessing are useless so why go through them? The people with specific agenda will say whatever they want to say. I deal with the facts, not innuendos or leaks.

The USCF members will clearly see the true story relating to this entire matter if the board is willing to open everything up. I am for complete transparency without holding anything back from all 7 board members and all parties involved. This will clearly show who is guilty and who is not.

This will be my one and only public statement regarding your questions. The choice is up to the board majority.

USCF update

by SusanPolgar on Thu Jan 24, 2008 7:44 am

I was asked by a number of people about the latest development after I made this post http://chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=673 last week. Not much has changed but here is my summary:

I expect the board to deny that they tried to destroy my personal and professional reputation, cause me to lose my job or use my children as “pawns” to get me off the board, etc. What else can they say? Unless everything is opened up, the members cannot see the clear picture.

I also expect them to say that their attorney(s) will not allow them to release all confidential information (starting with the NDAs, board correspondence, confidential BINFO and everything else relating to this matter, etc.) to the public until the Sloan lawsuit is resolved or at all. They will try to save face by picking and choosing one or two areas to allow us to open up. No thanks! Unless everything is allowed (by the board and their attorney(s) in a legally binding statement) to open up, the members cannot know what their elected officials are doing and how they are spending members’ money.

I am not going to play their games. Their mistakes caused the federation to be in this position in the first place. Here is the summary of what I stated and I am also adding a few new items:

- We asked the board not to include Bill Goichberg in the sub-committee at the last board meeting in Crossville. Things would have gone a lot smoother and faster if Bill was not in the sub-committee. The reason is clear. Since there are a lot of potential legal issues involved in a number of possible cases, we consider it a direct conflict of interest for Bill to have privileged information. He should not be privy to them. We told this to the entire board. In fact, we feel that a full investigation should have been made about this matter which affected many USCF members. The board ignored our request and went ahead to form a committee of five members (including Bill Goichberg) AFTER we left the last board meeting in Crossville. We still ask Bill Goichberg to step down from the sub-committee.

- For the best interest of the USCF due to the legal situation, we now ask Randy Bauer to step down from the sub-committee as well due to his clearly documented recent mistake which caused severe problems for multiple parties, including the USCF.

- We requested the same access to the USCF database as the contractors so that our own experts can examine the validity of the data as well as matching IPs of suspicious posters. Our repeated request was ignored. We needed to examine the evidence at that time, not 5, 6 or 7 months later when the evidence can be compromised.

- We pointed out a handful of suspicious handles and postings directly related to this case to the attorney and other board members. We asked them to investigate. This request, and others, have also been ignored or denied.

- We now request to have a thorough independent review of how this federation spends money. We need to know why we wasted money to revamp the website TWICE and how the contracts came about. Were there fair and open biddings? I never saw any advertisement in Chess Life or other publications. I would like to know who approved this and who we can hold accountable for the financial blunders.

- There should also be an investigation regarding how non-board members can obtain confidential board information to spread out false rumors for various purposes.

- We asked the board to authorize ALL (not some or what they want to pick and choose) correspondence in the confidential BINFO from August 2007 to be released to the public. This should include the correspondence of all seven board members, the ED, the attorneys, and all parties relating to this case.

- In addition, we asked the board to grant us consent and immunity to release all information and board member correspondence and NDAs related to this case. We recommend that ALL confidentiality clauses be waived in order to make the case clear and in order to expedite its conclusion. We propose to show all USCF members any evidence we have of who leaked what to whom, who made what deals under the table and for what reasons, etc. We give consent to the board and their attorneys to publish all information they have about us relating to this case. Everyone can then decide who is clean and who is not.

I was also asked about the latest conclusion from an expert regarding the Internet report. I have no idea who he is but I have no doubt in his expertise. However, I gave the USCF evidence which clearly proves that the report has the wrong conclusion. Without the evidence from both sides and without having the opportunity to examine the USCF database, I would expect people without personal agenda to withhold judgment until the USCF decides to open everything up as I requested.

Here are the real issues: We cut the budget for college chess and we cannot afford to finance the US Championship or the Olympiad teams like we used to. We cannot even afford to help our top players like Kamsky for a shot at the World Championship. What happened to the money we were supposed to save? Where did it go? Why are we still financially weak?

Fiscal responsibility is a must if this federation wants to get back on track financially. We need to get back to the basics to find out the real problems and fix them immediately. Our members deserve better. Our members are entitled to know what the board is doing with their money and what direction this federation is heading in.

As I stated last week, as far as I am concerned, this matter ends unless EVERYTHING can be opened up for all members to examine. We have wasted enough time, money and energy on this.

If Mr. Goichberg and Bauer are willing to put the best interest of the USCF first by stepping down from the sub-committee so we can expedite this matter, we are willing to sit down face to face with Mr. Hough, Berry and Channing to finalize this investigation and take care of unresolved issues. Since there are a lot of potential legal issues involved in a number of possible cases, we consider it a direct conflict of interest for Mr. Goichberg and Bauer to have access to privileged information. While the board figures out their next move, we will continue to devote our time and energy to promoting the USCF and U.S. chess. That is why we were elected.

Yours for the USCF,
Susan Polgar

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX


Here is an official statement by the USCF sub-committee and it was posted by President Goichberg on the USCF forum:

by chessoffice on Thu Jan 24, 2008 6:44 pm #88083

The following statement was approved today by a vote of 4-1, with Channing opposed.Bill Goichberg

Following is a statement by the Executive Board Subcommittee formed to address allegations made by Brian Mottershead relating to "fake Sam Sloan" and other internet postings.

On January 15, four of the five members of our committee stated that while no conclusions were reached as to the veracity of Brian Mottershead’s allegations, Paul Truong failed to admit or deny in writing whether he was involved in the “fake Sam Sloan” postings; failed to consent to the subcommittee obtaining his prior IP addresses; and generally failed to cooperate in the USCF investigation of the allegations.

As a result, the committee called on Mr. Truong to resign from the Executive Board for neglecting his fiduciary duties to USCF. Mr. Truong has neither resigned nor cooperated with the investigation since then, and our committee again requests that he voluntarily resign from the Executive Board.Susan Polgar has responded to the January 15 statement with a variety of unfortunate public charges which are both inaccurate and irrelevant to Mr. Truong’s continued failure to cooperate fully with the investigation.

Specifically, on January 17 Ms. Polgar accused "some of my fellow board members and their friends" of trying to destroy her personal and professional reputation. This charge is false. No board member has suggested that Ms. Polgar is or may be responsible for the fake internet postings in question. Further, no board member has stated or intimated that Ms. Polgar is anything but a consummate professional and a person of high moral integrity.

Additionally, no board member has in any manner tried to cause Ms. Polgar to lose her job. To the contrary, the board fully supports Ms. Polgar as an accomplished professional and leader in the chess community, who deservedly enjoys a good reputation.

Additionally, no board member has suggested in any manner that she quit the board.

The board also denies most vigorously any contention that any member of the board threatened Ms. Polgar’s family at any time.

Attorneys for the USCF have directed the organization not to release any confidential information during the pendency of the Sam Sloan litigation. And for that reason alone we cannot permit the publication of confidential exchanges as suggested by Ms. Polgar.


XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX


by SusanPolgar on Thu Jan 24, 2008 9:45 pm

This is exactly what I expected and this was what I posted this morning at 7:44 AM:

"I expect the board to deny that they tried to destroy my personal and professional reputation, cause me to lose my job or use my children as “pawns” to get me off the board, etc. What else can they say? Unless everything is opened up, the members cannot see the clear picture.

I also expect them to say that their attorney(s) will not allow them to release all confidential information (starting with the NDAs, board correspondence, confidential BINFO and everything else relating to this matter, etc.) to the public until the Sloan lawsuit is resolved or at all. They will try to save face by picking and choosing one or two areas to allow us to open up. No thanks! Unless everything is allowed (by the board and their attorney(s) in a legally binding statement) to open up, the members cannot know what their elected officials are doing and how they are spending members’ money."

So the question is after the Sloan lawsuit is dismissed or resolved, will the board open everything up (correspondence from all seven board members, the ED and related parties including the attorneys and USCF contractors, all items in the confidential BINFO from August 2007 relating to this matter, NDAs, and all items I requested here http://chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=697#p4175)?

As a federation with constant financial problems, we need to have a thorough independent review of how this federation spends money. We need to know why we wasted money to revamp the website TWICE and how the big contracts came about. Were there fair and open biddings? Did the contractors meet all deadlines and requirements? We need to know who approved this and who we can hold accountable for the financial blunders. We need to know how non-board members can obtain confidential board information to spread out false rumors for various purposes. We need to hold board members who leaked out confidential information responsible.

How about the sub-committee? Did Mr. Goichberg and Mr. Bauer officially agree to voluntarily remove themselves from this sub-committee to avoid conflict of interest and other potential legal issues so things can move forward swiftly?

Here is one of the most important questions which I think many USCF members would be interested to know: Were there phone calls to Sam Sloan to negotiate a settlement for the USCF? Who made these calls and who authorized these calls? Who gave this "agent" confidential board information for negotiation? Which board members were aware of this situation? Did the board consult their attorney(s) before these calls took place? There are many other questions which I asked and the board refused to answer.

I am very confident that once everything is opened up, all USCF members can then determine who did what and what games were played. I stand by my earlier statements about complete transparency from all seven board members, the ED, USCF contractors, attorneys and related parties. Until then, we will continue to devote our time and energy to promote the USCF and U.S. chess. That is why we were elected.

Yours for the USCF,
Susan Polgar

Updates on the USCF problems

Ron Suarez on Sun Jan 20, 2008 1:41 pm

I am personally very happy for the opportunity to present something that favors Paul Truong and Susan Polgar in this whole issue. I am aware that Gregory, presently snowshoeing, says that I am against Paul and Susan no matter what. I am happy to prove Gregory wrong in this.Susan posted this on chessdiscussion.com in response to Bill's posting here. I must say that Susan's points do apparently have merit.

As to #1 my response is that there is evidence that Paul has denied the charges and as I read Susan's point on this, I must ask if the attorneys asked formally or explained to them exactly what and how they wanted?

On #2, if Susan and Paul did ask for Bill Goichberg to not be on the subcommittee due to possible conflict of interest, I see nothing wrong with that request. I also see no reason why Bill Goichberg's absence on the committee would lessen the quality of the proceedings.

Finally, Susan is asking for complete disclosure of all the facts. Wow, that is great. I do believe that all facts do need to be made public as Susan requested. This argument of Susan's does seem quite a good one to me.

I guess it is now time for the rest of the Executive Board to cough up the facts.I also must say here that these points Susan brings up in no way distracts or obfuscates the situation, in fact quite the opposite. Good job Susan.

-------------------------------------------------

Ron,

Thanks for your input. Unfortunately, there is no winner in this case and the members stand to lose the most, again!

The bottom line is I hope this board will agree to open everything up (starting with the NDAs, correspondence, confidential BINFO and everything else relating to this matter, etc.) or get back on track to do what we were all elected to do. We have wasted enough time and money already.

In the mean time, we will continue to promote chess, organize events to benefit our game, support scholastic, college, military and correspondence chess as well as our professionals and talented juniors.

In the upcoming months, I will propose to have a thorough independent review of how this federation spends money. We need to know why we wasted money to revamp the website TWICE and how the contracts came about. Were there fair and open biddings? I would like to know who approved this and who we can hold accountable for the finances.

We cut the budget for college chess and we cannot afford to finance the US Championship or the Olympiad teams like we used to. We cannot even afford to help our top players like Kamsky for a shot at the World Championship. What happened to the money we were supposed to save? Where did it go? Why are we still financially weak?

Fiscal responsibility is a must if this federation wants to get back on track financially. We need to get back to the basics to find out the real problems and fix them immediately. Our members deserve better. Our members are entitled to know what the board is doing with their money and what direction is this federation heading to.

Best wishes,
Susan Polgar

-------------------------------------------------

Ron Suarez on Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:59 pm

I have said this before and more than once, the USCF needs to make this issue go away so that we can get on with the business of chess and all its activities.

Looking at this whole thing from a distance, we see it is nothing more than people getting upset by someone anonymously posting negative and vulgar statements on the rgcp usenet, where vulgarities and anonymous postings abound.

Even if they prove that ANY one individual was this false poster, what real damages have occurred? The only damages have come from people reading this specific "forum". The Sam Sloan lawsuit appears to have no real life because there is no jurisdiction and because of other legalities. So, what is everyone getting all upset about?

I really like Susan's latest suggestion regarding the total opening of all "confidential" things so that the evidence will show what matters and what doesn't.

So, I guess there is and has been a lot of arguing and debate going on, while the chess wheels have either slowed extremely or even stopped in a lot of areas.

I am going to post these exact comments on both the USCF and ChessDiscussion.com Forums. It is time we get on with things.

-------------------------------------------------

Ron,

Thanks again for your comment. I would like to point out some facts:

Paul and I did not stop doing what we were elected to do. We still promote chess on a daily basis since August 2007. We organized major chess events which brought a lot of attention to chess and the USCF. We visited Seattle, Roanoke, DC, Brownsville, Chicago, Aberdeen and Mexico City, etc. for the same purpose.

We had meetings with representatives from more than 90 schools and ran a number of free chess workshops to help teachers incorporate or bring chess into the schools. We offered to raise money to help Gata Kamsky and we are raising money to help our Olympiad teams this fall in Dresden, Germany. We sponsored prizes for various college chess, military chess and scholastic chess events.

All of our activities did not cost the USCF a penny. I know that Joel Channing contacted a lot of schools and organizations to partner up with the USCF to promote this federation. He also donated money to help our players. Jim Berry and his brother are involved in the US championships and other events in Oklahoma.

If the other board members would like to point out what they have done for chess and the USCF since August 2007, they are welcome to do so. Shouldn’t the members know what all board members and the ED are doing to benefit chess and this federation? And how much did this board majority and ED authorize to spend since that time? And how much more are they willing to go?

When we questioned how questionable contracts were awarded and how to improve the efficiency within the USCF in all facets, an "investigation" suddenly took place. I believed then and I still believe now that my colleagues have made many errors. These errors have caused many problems for the USCF and it will continue to cause problems for the USCF for many years to come unless they change their course of actions. Many chess organizations continue to thrive, why not the USCF?

Things took a turn for the worse once my fellow board members crossed the line and made inaccurate public statements. I had no choice but to ask for full transparency and corrected their misstatements. The last straw was when people want to use my children as pawns in this vicious political witch hunt. Is this what people are willing to do for political power?

As I said earlier, either end this nonsense and get back to what everyone was elected to do for the benefit of chess and the USCF or open everything up for the members to see. We proposed to show all USCF members any evidence we have of who leaked what to whom, who made what deals under the table and for what reasons, etc.

The members should know the severe conflict of interest in various decisions made by the board and they deserve to know how contractors can get their big contracts without fair and open biddings and how non-board members can obtain confidential information to spread out false rumors for political purposes. After all, it is their money and their federation.

Horrible decisions have cost the USCF year after year. Once everything is opened up, everyone can clearly see why the USCF has failed for so long. I have fought the system and won since I was 4 years old. I ran for the board to clean up the problems and I will continue to do so. The USCF cannot continue to survive if we continue to same path of failure. How can we expect different results when we keep repeating the same mistakes over and over again?

Best wishes,
Susan Polgar

Source: Chess Discussion Forum

My final statement about the latest USCF issue

January 16, 2008

I was elected to make a difference in the USCF and US Chess. I do not want to waste any more time on the ongoing, ridiculous issues that are being played out in the media. I have a few comments about the current problems.

First, there has been much misinformation and many false rumors circulated. If the USCF board continues to pursue this obvious witch hunt, wasting hundreds of thousands of dollars that the USCF does not have, USCF members are entitled to know about it. I recommend a policy of open information if this continues.

For instance, we have requested the same access to the USCF database as the contractors so that our own experts can examine the validity of the data as well as matching IPs of suspicious posters. We were told we could not have that access. Also, we have pointed out a handful of suspicious handles and postings directly related to this case to the attorney and other board members. We asked them to investigate. This request, and others, have been ignored or denied. These two points have been misrepresented in the media, and ultimately do USCF and US Chess harm.

If the members of this board are so sure of their actions, the 83,000 members of the USCF—because the board is merely a representation of the larger body—should have access to the correct information. The board and their attorney(s) should consent to and authorize all correspondence in the confidential BINFO from August 2007 be released to the public. This should include the correspondence of all seven board members, the ED, the attorneys, and all parties relating to this case.

In addition, please grant us consent and immunity to release all information and board member correspondence and NDAs related to this case. . We recommend that all confidentiality clauses are waived in order to make the case clear and in order to expedite its conclusion. We propose to show all USCF members any evidence we have of who leaked what to whom, who made what deals under the table and for what reasons, etc. We give consent to the board and their attorneys to publish all information they have about us relating to this case. Everyone can then decide who is clean and who is not.

Every board starts with big hopes and dreams and usually ends with one problem or another, unfortunately. The same destructive political chess games have been played for years. It is the USCF members who lose.

Whoever has the majority votes will decide how the political games are being played instead of focusing on what is best for the USCF. This is the long pattern of destructive politics that no one has been able to fix so far. These problems have hindered the proper growth of chess within the USCF for decades. This is how so much money has been wasted and the financial situation of the USCF has gone down the drain.

No one wants to talk about how much money this federation has wasted in the past 12-24 months alone. If we want to let the sunshine in, it has to be done across the board and not selectively to harm people who oppose the majority and the status quo. GM Larry Evans had the same experience when he wanted to be involved. So did GM Lev Alburt, GM Yasser Seirawan and many others. The same thing will happen to the next people who want to run and help the USCF. The sad truth is that before my husband and I ran for the executive board we were told that we better have good lawyers. Now we understand why.

As far as I am concerned, this matter ends unless everything can be opened up for all members to examine. I highly doubt that the board majority will agree to this. I can only hope. We have wasted enough time, money and energy on this. I will now devote my time and energy to promoting U.S. chess. That is why I was elected.

Here is a reminder:

“USCF is a not-for-profit membership organization devoted to extending the role of chess in American society.

USCF promotes the study and knowledge of the game of chess, for its own sake as an art and enjoyment, but also as a means for the improvement of society. It informs, educates, and fosters the development of players (professional and amateur) and potential players. It encourages the development of a network of institutions devoted to enhancing the growth of chess, from local clubs to state and regional associations, and it promotes chess in American schools.”

This will be my last statement about this issue.

Yours for the USCF,
Susan Polgar

Stating the facts

Stating the facts

by SusanPolgar on Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:00 am on the http://www.chessdiscussion.com/ forum

The following was issued by the majority of the USCF Executive Board last night to the NY Times:

"In asking for Mr. Truong’s resignation, the statement did not say whether the four members agreed that he had done what Mr. Sloan claimed. Instead, the board said Mr. Truong had not cooperated with a lawyer retained by the federation."

This is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. Answers and evidence were submitted to the USCF attorney. I was on the phone with the USCF attorney for a considerable length of time to discuss this matter and to answer his questions. If additional information was needed, we should have been asked. No one asked. I have an email from the USCF attorney confirming that he received the evidence. We were under the impression that everything was fine until last night after the statement has already been submitted to the NY Times. I can clearly document the time line step by step.

I cannot discuss this matter in details due to the pending legal issues. We followed the instructions of our attorneys, including the one who was assigned to us by the insurance company. All evidence will come out in due time.

Lastly, there have been numerous leaks of board confidential information from the 5 member sub-committee to various unauthorized people which can severely harm this federation in many ways. Some of the confidential information was told to Sam Sloan which can clearly effect the case for the USCF. These are the information that only the other 5 board members and their attorneys would know. We did not even know about it until after various stories were leaked out. We will make an official motion to investigate this type of inappropriate actions by board members shortly.

Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.SusanPolgar.blogspot.com
http://www.ChessDiscussion.com