Another lawsuit agains the USCF

More of the USCF legal saga: I am not endorsing this lawsuit and I am not commenting on the merit of it. USCF members can make their own conclusion. However, members need to know what is going on before they can make informed decisions.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE SEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
SANGAMON COUNTY, ILLINOIS

SAM SLOAN, )
)
Plaintiff )
)
- Against - ) 2011MR000159
)
WILIAM GOICHBERG, )
RANDY BAUER, )
JAMES BERRY, )
RUTH HARING, )
ALLEN PRIEST, )
GARY WALTERS, )
MICHAEL ATKINS, )
MICHAEL NIETMAN, )
BILL HALL, )
CONTINENTAL CHESS ASSOCIATION, INC, )
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CHESS FEDERATION, INC, )
an Illinois Not for Profit Corporation )
)
Defendants )

COMPLAINT

NOW COMES Sam Sloan, Plaintiff, and hereby files this
complaint against William Goichberg, Ruth Haring, Randy Bauer, James
Berry, Allen Priest, Gary Walters, Michael Atkins, Michael Nietman,
Bill Hall, the Continental Chess Association, Inc. and the United
States of America Chess Federation, Inc. (“USCF”) and alleges as
follows:

1. This is a proceeding for Declaratory Relief seeking to restore Sam
Sloan to the ballot as a candidate for Election to the Executive Board
of the United States Chess Federation. It also seeks the removal of
William Goichberg from the Executive Board and a permanent bar against
Goichberg from holding any position as an officer of the United States
Chess Federation or from running slates of candidates for election.
The Plaintiff Sam Sloan is a long standing member of the United States
Chess Federation, having been a member since 1956. Plaintiff submitted
himself for candidacy for the current 2011 election but has been
removed from the ballot this year due to Plaintiffs assertion of
voting regulation manipulation by the Defendants.

2. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants as Defendants
have performed duties as directors or officers of a corporation
organized under the laws of Illinois. 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(12). None of
the Defendants reside in Illinois, and therefore venue is proper in
this county pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-101. Defendants have previously
filed suit in this county and Court, and therefore provides
indisputable assertion that venue in this Court is proper. The
Defendants previously filed the case United States of America Chess
Federation vs. Susan Polgar and Paul Truong in this same court. This
case should be marked as related to that other case.

3. Defendant USCF is an Illinois not-for-profit corporation in good
standing, with its principal place of business in Crossville,
Tennessee. The USCF is the official, not-for-profit United States
membership organization for chess players and chess supporters of all
ages and strengths, from beginners to Grandmasters. The average or
median age of USCF members is ten years old. The USCF is governed by a
Board of Delegates, composed of a seven-member Executive Board,
Delegates at Large, and over 125 Delegates apportioned among U.S.
States.

4. The seven-member Executive Board ("EB") are tasked with managing
the affairs of the USCF between the annual meetings of the Board of
Delegates who are the true Board of Directors for the USCF.

5. Defendant James 'Jim' Berry is the President of the USCF. Defendant
Ruth Haring is the Vice President of the USCF.

6. Defendant Randy Bauer is the Vice President of Finance of the USCF
whose term expires at the beginning of the next Board of Delegates
meeting in July 2011 to be held in Orlando, FL.

7. Gary Walters and Michael Nietman are seeking re-election to the EB
through the 2011 elections.

8. Michael Atkins is a long term employee of William Goichberg and the
Continental Chess Association, Inc. He has performed significant
compensated duties to William Goichberg prior to Atkins' tenure as a
member of the EB.

9. Allen Priest is a member or chairman of many USCF committees
including the “Forum Oversight Committee” which has acted as a Board
of Censors so as to bar any negative comments about Goichberg or any
positive comments about Sam Sloan from being posted to the USCF Issues
Forum. Allen Priest is currently seeking a position on the EB through
the 2011 elections.

10. Bill Hall is the Executive Director of the USCF who is on
contractual terms of employment with the USCF.

11. Bill Hall's contract is set to expire this year and is a topic of
renegotiation for the EB that will be comprised as a result of the
2011 election.

12. Defendant William Goichberg has been an officer of the USCF as
either President, Vice-President, Executive Director or
Member-at-Large since 1996 with minor gaps caused by being 'termed
out' from time-to-time in accordance to the Bylaws of the USCF. Under
Rule by Goichberg, the USCF has lost more than two million dollars and
is now on the brink of bankruptcy.

13. Defendant William Goichberg is also the sole owner of the
Continental Chess Association ('CCA'), a for-profit corporation, which
is the dominate force in organized, large money stake chess
tournaments ($100,000-$250,000 in prizes) across the United States,
held under the auspices of the USCF. As such he is also the largest
customer of the USCF through advertisement fees, fees for rating his
tournaments, and new membership / renewal membership acquisition.

14. In years past there were spirited election campaigns for USCF
Executive Board with many candidates running. For example, in 1999
there were 17 candidates running. In 2009 there were ten candidates
running. However, in the last few years William Goichberg has become
extremely aggressive about attacking or blocking anybody opposed to
his policies which benefit his for-profit organization at the expense
of all other organizers and the federation, so as to prevent them from
even running. As a result, those not in accordance with William
Goichberg policies have almost all given up, considering running
against the Goichberg machine to be a waste of time and money.

15. Defendant Goichberg, in an attempt to provide a false front for
his motives, commissioned the Governance Task Force ('GTF'), which was
comprised of individuals that he exerts influence over.

16. The GTF was headed by a personal friend of Defendant Goichberg
named Joseph Lux. The deputy of the GTF was Defendant Allen Priest, a
Goichberg sycophant.

17. The USCF and the Executive Board ignored the suggestion of
delegates to have the GTF members be comprised of a group of cross
political parties to ensure fairness. Instead Goichberg sycophants
were the only active members.

18. The GTF proposed by-law changes that were presented to a meeting
of the delegates held in Irvine California on August 8, 2010 after the
election period had already stated and candidates were circulating
petitions. The delegates were not informed of the nature and extent of
the changes and were led to believe that this was a routine measure.
The proposal was not announced in advance and was not in the advance
agenda. No count was made so it could not be determined if the 2/3rds
vote as required in the bylaws was met.

19. The charter of the GTF was to make recommendations for improvement
of the governance structure of the USCF.

20. A crucial change that was the outcome of the GTF and voted upon at
the annual meeting of delegates was changes in election processes.
First it required a new structure of signatures, where 15 signatures
of delegates were required from 5 different states. Second it required
USCF members to register in order to vote.

21. This crucial change was hastily implemented during an election
year, instead of providing time for the new guidelines to become
distributed appropriately to the USCF membership community and the
delegates that were not able to attend the meeting. The next election
is in 2013, only two years away.

22. Meeting minutes from the annual board of delegates meeting were
not made available until December 4, 2010, four months after meeting.
No voice or video recordings have been made available, though they
were made during the meeting.

23. These by-law changes still as of the date of this complaint have
not been posted. No copy is available anywhere. The posted by-laws are
still not reflective of the important changes that have taken place.
They are nearly one year old and are dated May 2010.

24. Election petition due dates were changed from previous years. In
past years, the last day to circulate petitions was January 10. This
year it was moved up to December 31, 2010 without adequate
announcement to the membership and the candidates. Delegates not in
attendance at the annual meeting in Irvine California on August 8,
2010 were not informed of this. Since no communications directed at
the delegates are performed by the federation, those not in attendance
in Irvine are not aware of these changes.

25. In the closing days of the petitioning period, when two candidates
who were members of the Goichberg Slate did not have enough
signatures, Defendant Bill Hall changed the 'received by' requirement
set forth in the by-laws to 'post-marked' by. This was to benefit
members of the “Goichberg Slate”, Allen Priest and Gary Walters, who
were having difficulty collecting signatures due to being unknown in
the chess community. Defendant Hall also should have known the office
was to be closed on December 31 and did not communicate that the
office was closed unless someone proactively asked about it. This
change in Bylaws is not within the power granted to Defendant Hall as
the Executive Director.

26. The Bylaws state that the petitions were to be sent to the
Election Committee, not the USCF office. No information on how to send
the petitions to the Election Committee was provided to any potential
candidates. Instead all petitions were forced to be sent to the USCF
office, the same office whose Executive Director has a vested interest
in the outcome of the election.

27. An appropriate and complete list of delegates were not available
online and to this date the full list is not known. The lack of
knowing who are the delegates (thus the true directors of the
corporation) means that the federation is filing false documents with
the State of Illinois and are only listing the EB members as the board
of directors (which is incorrect as a bylaw amendment exists stating
that the delegates are the Board of Directors, not the EB).

28. Due to the inaccurate and incomplete information on who exactly
are the members of the board of delegates, previous delegates signed
election petitions for Plaintiff Sloan, only to be rejected by the
USCF office.

29. The election committee did not receive physical copies
(scanned/faxed/photocopied) of election petitions or the proof of
receipt of petitions by the due date. They received a MS Word document
with purported names and ID's of people that signed the petitions.
This determination was used to qualify or disqualify signatures. The
USCF staff under the auspices of the Executive Director Bill Hall
validated each signature themselves. This is a conflict of interest as
there is no independence in the verification process.

30. Plaintiff was elected to the USCF Executive Board in 2006 but was
defeated when he ran for re-election in 2007 in part due to the “Fake
Sam Sloan” controversy in which another candidate for election who was
at the time allied with William Goichberg impersonated him more than
2500 times making obscene and scatological newsgroup postings.
Plaintiff is an announced candidate for the current 2011 election but
has been kicked off the ballot this year due primarily to the
manipulations of William Goichberg, the long time control person of
the USCF.

31. This action seeks to restore Sam Sloan to the ballot for the
current USCF election. Secondly, because Bill Goichberg persistently
violates the most fundamental rule involving not-for-profit
corporations in that he runs the USCF for his own personal profit and
benefit by running big money cash prize chess tournaments, Plaintiff
seeks the permanent removal of Bill Goichberg from holding any office
or position in the USCF and further seeks a court order enjoining
Goichberg from running slates of candidates for office in the USCF,
from posting articles on his websites attacking opponents of his
slates, from circulating petitions to get his candidates on the ballot
elected and from in any way interfering in the USCF Election process.

32. Defendants Gary Walters, Michael Neitman and Allen Priest
constitute the "Goichberg Slate" in the current USCF Election. Michael
Atkins and Michael Neitman are current members of the USCF Executive
Board. Gary Walters and Michael Neitman are running for re-election.
Michael Atkins is a long time employee of Bill Goichberg and has
worked as assistant director at many Goichberg tournaments.

33. Defendant William Goichberg is the control person of the USCF.
Goichberg dominates and controls the USCF Executive Board. For almost
every year since 1996, with just a few gaps, Goichberg has been a
control person, holding the positions of President, Vice-President,
Executive Director or Member-at-Large for all but a few of those
years. Goichberg was USCF President from 2005 to 2010 when he was term
limited out and became member-at-large, but he still controls the
board because, for the last three elections since 2007, no candidate
has been elected to the Executive Board without receiving the
endorsement of Goichberg. The “Goichberg Slate” swept the 2008, 2009
and 2010 elections. Under Rule by Goichberg the USCF has lost more
than two million dollars and is now on the brink of bankruptcy.

34. Defendant William Goichberg is also the sole owner of the
Continental Chess Association, a for-profit corporation. The
Continental Chess Association dominates the market for prize money
chess tournaments. During most of the weekends of every calendar year,
the Continental Chess Association holds cash prize money tournaments
around the United States in almost every state except for New Jersey,
where Goichberg is unofficially persona non grata. Goichberg holds
major big money tournaments in the major holiday weekends, such as his
“World Open” held in Philadelphia on July 4th weekend with Guaranteed
Cash Prizes of $225,000, the Chicago Open with $100,000 Guaranteed
Cash Prizes, the North American Open in Las Vegas and Philadelphia
Open with similar prizes, and until 2009 the Foxwoods Open following
which the Foxwoods Casino kicked him out. In addition to these major
tournaments, Goichberg holds minor tournaments on most weekends with
cash prizes ranging from about $4,000 to about $10,000 each.

35. All of these cash prize money tournaments are held under the
auspices of the USCF. They are all USCF Rated. They are all advertised
in Chess Life magazine. Goichberg so dominates the market for prize
money tournaments that it has proven nearly impossible for other
tournament organizers to compete with him. Several organizers who have
tried to compete against Goichberg have suffered severe financial
losses and some have even gone bankrupt.

36. In years past there were spirited election campaigns for USCF
Executive Board with many candidates running. For example, in 1999
there were 17 candidates running. In 2009 there were ten candidates
running. For many years Goichberg was a pariah in the USCF due to his
running exclusively big money tournaments, often in gambling casinos,
especially since the median age for USCF members is 10 years old.
Goichberg, knowing he could not get elected, did not run. However, in
the last few years Goichberg has become extremely aggressive about
attacking or blocking anybody opposed to his policies so as to prevent
them from even running. As a result, those not in accordance with
Goichberg policies have almost all given up, considering running
against the Goichberg machine to be a waste of time and money.

37. Among the things that Goichberg does to stop anybody not blessed
by him from running or being elected is he sends out huge mass
mailings primarily advertising his prize money tournaments but also
telling the voters whom to vote for. Goichberg typically mails 17,000
(seventeen thousand) postcards in a batch. Goichberg also posts on his
tournament websites including http://www.chesstour.com/ articles
attacking and ridiculing any candidate not favored or endorsed by
Goichberg, for example at http://www.checkmate.us/ . Goichberg also
hires assistant directors for his tournaments who also campaign for
his candidates while running his tournaments and while making pairings
and ruling on disputes.

38. Not satisfied with the fact that he already has a virtual monopoly
on big time cash prize money chess tournaments and he has such a lock
on the elections that almost all would-be candidates have given up
trying to run against him, Goichberg now is trying to avoid even
having to go to the trouble to run candidates for election by changing
the election rules so as to make it virtually impossible for anybody
not nominated by Goichberg even to get on the ballot.

39. In order to do this a “Governance Task Force” was created
dominated by Goichberg himself plus Goichberg sycophants Joe Lux and
Allen Priest. Joe Lux was made the Chairman. This “Governance Task
Force” was originally set up to try to address the problems created by
the fact that Goichberg had the USCF in his iron grip. A fatal error
was made by allowing Goichberg to serve on a committee which was
supposed to deal with the problems caused by Goichberg. Goichberg
proceeded to take control of the committee.

40. The result was a proposal by Goichberg to disenfranchise the
30,000 voting members of the USCF and to give control of the election
process to the 125 delegates. Since a high percentage of the delegates
are employees of Goichberg working as assistant directors in the prize
money tournaments held by Goichberg around the USA and all the
delegates from New York State are personally appointed by Goichberg,
this meant that Goichberg would virtually control who got on the
ballot. The original Goichberg proposal was that in order to get on
the ballot a prospective candidate would need to obtain the signatures
of 40 of the 125 delegates from 15 different states. Since Goichberg
holds tournaments in more than 15 different states and more than 40
delegates either work for Goichberg or are beholding to Goichberg and
since nobody else does this, this meant that Goichberg would decide
who got on the ballot.

41. At the USCF Delegates meeting in Irvine, California in August
2010, in response to objections to the Draconian Rules proposed by
Goichberg, Goichberg agreed to reduce the number to 25 delegates from
15 different states. Goichberg stated at a by-laws committee meeting
chaired by Goichberg sycophant Allen Priest that 25 delegates should
be required to sign because in the past some of the candidates had
been “rather poor”.

42. There were still grumblings about this so as the USCF Delegates
meeting held on August 7, 2010 in Irvine, California a motion was made
to require that candidates for election obtain the signatures of at
least 50 voting members of whom at least 15 must be delegates
representing at least 5 different states. The maker of this motion was
Allen Priest who himself was a candidate for election. This motion
passed with virtually no debate or discussion. Several delegates who
were present and who voted in favor of the motion have since stated
that they did not know what the motion was as it was not explained nor
was in announced in advance and they would never have voted for this
motion had they known what it was.

43. The by-laws require that there be a 2/3rds vote for any by-law
change, especially those not included on the advance agenda. This
by-law change was not in the advance agenda. No count was taken or
show of hands to see if the 2/3rds requirement had been met.

44. Since the election campaign was already underway and several
prospective candidates including Gary Walters were circulating the
meeting room asking delegates to sign their petitions, this by-law
change should not have taken effect until the next election cycle,
which will be in 2012. However, the Goichberg controlled USCF office
has allowed this by-law change to become effective retroactively so
that it controls the current election campaign which had already been
started before this by law change had been voted upon.

45. Prior to this change, in order to get on the ballot, a candidate
needed the signatures of 30 adult voting members of which there are
about 30,000. After this change, one needed 50 signatures of adult
voting members of which at least 15 must be delegates representing at
least 5 different states. With only 125 delegates assuming all the
positions are filled (which is not the case) this made it vastly more
difficult.

46. In spite of the extreme difficulty of meeting these vastly more
difficult requirements, Candidate Sam Sloan circulated petitions and
obtained the signatures of 90 members of which 70 ruled valid. These
70 signatures including 16 delegates representing 11 different states.
Thus Sloan easily met the requirements.

47. Nevertheless, Goichberg Stooge Bill Hall ruled that 4 of those
signatures were invalid and thereupon has kicked Sloan off the ballot.
Most of those allegedly invalid signatures are from the State of New
Jersey where Goichberg is persona non grata. The three New Jersey
delegates whose signatures were ruled invalid were former USCF
President Leroy Dubeck, Steve Ferrero and Aaron Kiedes. They also
invalidated the signature of Gary Alan Fine of Illinois and Eric
Johnson of Pennsylvania.

48. At the same time a member of the Goichberg Slate, Allen Priest,
did not have enough signatures even though Goichberg was going around
the North American Open where he was the director on December 30, 2010
(the day before the deadline) twisting the arms of delegates to get
them to sign for Priest. Bill Hall extended the deadline for the
benefit of Allen Priest and Gary Walters (neither of whom are
tournament chess players and are only candidates as a result of being
Goichberg stooges) by extending the deadline so that the petitions did
not have to be received but only mailed by December 31.

49. Candidate Sam Sloan has never to this day been notified that he
has been kicked off the ballot. Page 10 of the February Chess Life
states that nominating petitions have been received from five
candidates, Sevan Muradian, Mike Nietman, Allen Priest, Sam Sloan and
Gary Walters. However, the April Chess Life, page 11 only lists the
names and candidates of four candidates, omitting Sam Sloan.

50. Having eliminated one candidate by having his signatures ruled
invalid, Goichberg is now attacking the remaining non-Goichberg
candidate by stating that he is not “loyal” to the USCF because he
scheduled a chess tournament to be held on the same weekend as a
Goichberg tournament, the Midwest Class tournament. See
http://www.checkmate.us/muradian.htm

WHEREFORE, for these any other reasons more fully set forth in the
accompanying affidavits and exhibits, Plaintiff demands the following
relief:

1. An Order Restoring Sam Sloan to the ballot for the coming USCF election.

2. An order removing William Goichberg from the board and permanently
barring William Goichberg from holding any office in the USCF or from
running slates of candidates or influencing the results of elections
through post card mailings, websites and other means as long as he
continues to hold large cash prize big money chess tournaments for
profit associated with the USCF.


Respectfully Submitted,
Sam Sloan

The same USCF political tactic

No One Is Bigger Than Chess
By WIM Beatriz Marinello
Former President of the USCF

Why didn’t the U.S. Chess Federation support my decision to accept the invitation to be part of Mr. Kirsan Ilyumzhinov’s Presidential Ticket?

I will answer this question matter of factly.

Back in February (2010), I was approached by Mr. Michael Khodarkovsky who is the President of the Kasparov Chess Foundation and a U.S. Chess Federation’s FIDE Delegate. At that time, Michael Khodarkovsky informed me that GM Ron Henley wanted to talk to me about GM Anatoly Karpov running for FIDE President. He told me that Mr. Henley also asked for a meeting with him. I mentioned to Michael Khodarkovsky that I could not meet with Mr. Henley at the time, but maybe later. Early in March, I agreed to meet with Mr. Henley since I have known GM Henley for a long time and I always thought he was a nice person.

The same week, I received a letter from FIDE President, Kirsan Ilyumzhinov inviting me to be part of his electoral ticket. When I meet with Mr. Henley, he offered to appoint me as FIDE Vice President in Mr. Karpov’s Presidential Board and compensation for actively campaigning.

After carefully reviewing the situation, I considered that FIDE President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov was the best candidate as FIDE President, and I was highly supportive of his team as well.

I did not think that Former World Champions Anatoly Karpov and Garry Kasparov, both great players and important members of our community, were the best people to run FIDE.

In the past they were both chess enemies, and I considered how this could create potential issues between them, in case that GM Anatoly Karpov became FIDE President. I also thought, that their motivations were not in the best interest of FIDE and GM Karpov was lacking the necessary experience to run an organization such as FIDE.

Something just didn’t quite fit or feel right about this situation and I held firm in this belief.

Additionally, I also did not wish to divide the Americas, since we have been working for 10 years in building a block in the American Continents.

During this time it also became clear that the Karpov team was going to try to split the continent by dividing the Americas in hopes of gaining ground in that region.

My vision is for a united chess community, which is best represented by Mr. Ilyumzhinov’s Ticket and his team.

Once I made the decision, I asked the U.S. Chess Federation’s Executive Board for a meeting, innocently I also included Michael Khodarkovsky as FIDE Delegate to join us in a conference call.

At the conference call, all members of the board (5) were present: President, Jim Berry; Vice President, Ruth Haring; VP of Finances, Randy Bauer; Members at Large, Michael Atkins and Bill Goichberg.

Mr. Goichberg is a former U.S. Chess Federation President and the main tournament organizer in the United States. Mr. Goichberg is very anti-FIDE and especially very anti-Kirsan Ilyumzhinov. I presented the situation to the Executive Board, Mr. Bauer got disconnected from the conference call, so he did not hear everything and did not vote. However, the Board took an unofficial vote. Mr. Berry and Ms. Haring voted ‘Yes’ to endorse me as a candidate in Mr. Ilyumzhinov’s ticket, Mr. Atkin said that he did not know enough, but was initially agreeable to support me, but decided to abstain, and Mr. Goichberg voted ‘No’ to my endorsement.

Acting on Mr. Khodarkovsky’s advice the Board postponed the meeting for two days later. At the time, I did not know that Mr. Kasparov was the person running the campaign for Mr. Karpov and Mr. Khodarkovsky clearly had a conflict of interest, since he works for the Kasparov Chess Foundation and he is also serving as USA FIDE Delegate.

During those two days, Grandmaster Kasparov and Grandmaster Henley made several phone calls asking the Board members not to endorse me in order to prevent me from joining Kirsan’s ticket and to only support Mr. Karpov. He even called a very influential person in U.S. Chess, who is also a major sponsor of the U.S. Chess Federation.

This whole situation reminded me of the 1994 Presidential FIDE Election, when the U.S. FIDE Delegate was Mr. Fan Adams and in a meeting held prior to the Chess Congress in Moscow, the U.S. Chess Federation decided to support the candidacy of Mr. Kouatly, but then after GM Kasparov’s phone calls to members of the U.S. Chess Federation’s Board, the United States changed their position at the last minute in favor of FIDE President Mr. Campomanes, resulting in the resignation of Mr. Adams. Back then, many promises were made but nothing happen in the end.

Now, back to March, 2010, two days after we had a conference call, we met again over the phone with the members of the Federation’s Executive Board, Mr. Khodarkovsky and GM Henley. Karpov’s team made a new offer to me in exchange for me not accepting Kirsan Ilyumzhinov’s invitation to be a member of his electoral ticket. The offer was an appointment in GM Karpov’s Presidential Board (in the event that he won the election) and full support to become Continental President. In addition they would not require that I campaign on behalf of Mr. Karpov.

I told them that I would not accept the offer. One hour later, Bill Hall, USCF Executive Director and Ms. Haring called me to tell me that I should accept the offer or else they would not endorse me and that they would even remove me as Zonal President.

By then it became clear that I was dealing with a very undemocratic organization, and the way in which they were pressuring me and trying to force me to accept Karpov’s offer by use of threats, convinced me more than ever that I was making the right decision.

I did not accept the offer, the board did not remove me as Zonal President, but the U.S. Chess Federation sent me a letter denying me the endorsement and making a statement that they would not support anyone who is on Mr. Ilyumzhinov’s ticket.

Fortunately, the National Federations of Chile and Brazil gave me an endorsement since I am also a member of these Federations.

Full article here.

No sunshine again

KARPOV FOR FIDE PRESIDENT
By the USCF Executive Board
April 12, 2010

Anatoly Karpov is one of the greatest players of all time, a chess celebrity who will greatly improve FIDE’s chances of attracting quality global sponsors. Mr. Karpov is a strong supporter of traditional chess played under consistent rules. He has been active in promoting the game in the United States, and offers hope for increasing the prestige and popularity of our great game everywhere.

We are pleased to endorse former World Champion Karpov for the office of President of FIDE. The world chess organization is in need of serious reform, and Karpov’s candidacy represents an unusual opportunity to vastly enhance FIDE’s reputation, and that of organized chess worldwide. USCF is looking forward to working closely with Karpov and his team to achieve a shared vision for chess excellence....

Anatoly Karpov has been a long time friend of mine. However, I take no position in this election so far. But many USCF members have raised legitimate questions:

- Did the USCF EB consult the USCF members about this endorsement?
- Why was there a closed door meeting to discuss this endorsement while this procedure is meant for legal or personnel issues only? This is against the rules and policies of the USCF.
- Why is there no transcript of this meeting? The USCF members have the right to know what goes on with a federation they paid dues to.
- Why so much secrecy?

Lev Alburt

BEHIND CLOSED DOORS

Someone once quipped that if Russian and American chess officials changed places, nobody would notice the difference. Have you ever wondered about how policy is made or what goes on behind closed doors of the United States Chess Federation?

Lev Alburt was the first grandmaster elected to the seven-member USCF board of directors and soon became the odd man out. In this exclusive interview he pierces the veil of secrecy and begins naming names.

After defecting from the USSR in 1979 he settled in Manhattan, married, and quickly became a fixture in American chess. After capturing our nation’s highest title three times, he retired from tournaments to write books and give lessons. Is what he had to say in 1989 after completing a three-year stint on a dysfunctional policy board still pertinent today?

INTERVIEW WITH GM LEV ALBURT

EVANS: You are the first grandmaster ever elected, yet on most major issues you were outvoted 6-1. How would you sum up the experience?

ALBURT: Disappointing. At the Delegates meeting I said I was leaving without any great sense of accomplishment but with a great sense of relief. This sentiment was probably shared by most of my colleagues on the board who joined in the general laughter.

EVANS: What were some of your objectives when you ran for office?

ALBURT: I wanted to reverse our FIDE policy and condemn such extravaganzas as the Soviet blacklist that our leadership accepted in the hope of launching a USA-USSR Summit Match in 1986. But my main goal was to work with the board to pursue what I thought was our common interest: to promote chess in this country, to help our federation grow towards the 100,000 mark. This certainly shouldn’t be a big task since all polls indicate that tens of millions of Americans know how to play chess.

Excerpt from THIS CRAzy WORLD OF CHESS by GM Larry Evans
Original post by former Chess Life Editor Larry Parr

Q & A from Chess Fans

Q & A from Chess Fans

Jackson (Denver, CO): I read on the USCF website about the revocation of your USCF memberships. Is it true and why?

PT: It is true. The Executive Board’s action is deplorable. Instead of doing what is best for chess and the USCF, these people appear to put their personal and political interests first. They are doing everything they can to hide their misconduct from the USCF members and delegates, even if this costs jobs for USCF employees and perhaps even cause the collapse of the entire federation. They used Chess Life and Chess Life Online to spread false information to hide the truth. But the facts will come out eventually.

JS (Los Angeles, CA): I have read only the USCF side of the story. Could you please summarize the cause of these lawsuits?

PT: Our position is that the USCF Executive Board and the USCF Executive Director continuously violated the USCF bylaws. I believe they abused their authority and used USCF members’ money for their own political agenda. I believe the legal cost so far exceeds $1 million for both sides, not counting what the USCF insurance has paid separately on behalf of the USCF. These people claim that the USCF has no money to support scholastic chess, college chess, women’s chess, professional chess, or chess promotion, etc. But they have no problem spending over $600,000 of members’ money for their own political agenda. It is inconceivable that these people are doing this in the middle of the worst economy in decades, and where countless USCF members have lost their jobs. These people could not care less about the welfare of chess or the USCF. They tried to blame this on us, while this has been their pattern of conduct for years.

These individuals can try to hide the facts, but the truth will come out in court. We have received tremendous support from countless USCF members encouraging us to stand tall and fight against these corrupt chess politicians.

The USCF has to cut their operating schedule to a four-day work week. The position of USCF Scholastic Director and FIDE Director had to be cut because of a serious financial meltdown. We offered to drop the lawsuit against the USCF for $1. The Executive Board rejected the offer because if the lawsuit against the USCF is dropped, they can not longer hide behind our federation to conceal their misconduct.

It also appears that they are also hiding from USCF members that Susan’s lawsuit against the USCF and its board members is covered by the insurance company. Mr. Jeff Jones is representing the USCF, and individual members of the Executive Board. These same people spent over $500,000 of members’ money to file frivolous lawsuits and to defend the misconduct of their political supporters from the lawsuit. They simply conveniently forgot to tell the USCF members this.

Chess Mom (Detroit, MI): Is it legal for the Executive Board to revoke your USCF Life Memberships and Executive Board status?

PT: We don’t think so. But it is up to the court to decide. But we do believe their actions directly violated the USCF bylaws.

Albert (Henderson, NV): What is your future plan with chess?

SP: We will continue to promote chess in multiple aspects. Nothing has changed. The SPICE Cup is the next big event on our calendar. You can follow our activities by checking out www.ChessDailyNews.com.

Jim (Des Moines, IA): Can you still compete in chess tournaments?

SP: No. The Executive Board revoked our USCF memberships. They claimed that we can still play. But there is no such thing as being able to play rated chess and not being a member. They are just making things up as they go along and this is clearly against the USCF rules. In addition, I cannot play in world championships or Olympiads unless I am a member of a national federation. So basically what the Executive Board did is to destroy what is left of my playing career.

RR: Paul, a few newspapers published some articles about problems with the chess federation. Can you explain? What does this mean? There are people out there writing things in papers and online that don’t do your good work justice.

PT: As the saying goes, you can either lead, follow, or get out of the way. We’re trying to lead, and they’re trying to make us get out of the way. Susan has worked very hard to get to where she is, and when you’re at the top of the game there will always be people who are jealous. The U.S. Chess Federation (USCF) is very political and extremely ineffective.

The bad PR we’ve received, yes, has been very unfortunate, and it came from people who want to see Susan and SPICE fail. It is a concerted effort on their part to try to stop our success. This is hurting our entire sport. Unfortunately, there is little we can do when people are not telling the truth. Things people claim are highly misleading and even slanderous. But, we’re doing good work, and it shows.

Source: http://www.chesscafe.com/polgar/polgar.htm

Bribery, dirty politics, and USCF corruption

Below are various emails which clearly show the involvement of USCF President Bill Goichberg, Chess Journalist of America President Jerry Hanken, and others in a bribery scheme for votes in July/August 2008. They also clearly show that USCF President Bill Goichberg clearly mislead me and the USCF members about his own involvement.

When I ran for the USCF Executive Board 2 years ago, this is one of the areas I said that I will do everything possible to clean up. This is just the surface of it. Because I am exposing these unethical individuals, they and their supporters have tried to trash my name and reputation.

In the past two years, instead of working with me and helping me promote chess to benefit our entire sport, some of these chess politicians have spread the most outrageous and vicious rumors and lies, trying to destroy my reputation, my employment at Texas Tech University, and my family. They even stooped so low as to use my children (who are only 8 and 10) as one of their targets.

Knowing that I am a one of the biggest advocates for scholastic chess in this country, especially for girls, some of these people spewed out the disgustingly offensive rumor that my husband and I were child abusers. They claimed that we abused my children and we even forced them to consume hot sauce. This sort of despicable thing made its way to the internet and even made its way to my employer Texas Tech University as well as to sponsors and potential sponsors. This outrageous lie was even tossed around within the USCF leadership as a way to pressure my husband and me to resign from the board even though they knew that it was false.

There were countless remarks and postings telling my husband and me to go “back to where we came from.” Some said this is the United States Chess Federation and not the United Nations Chess Federation, and a foreigner had no business running the USCF, while others were openly discussed ways to deport me back to my native Hungary although I have been an American citizen for a number of years and both my children were born in the U.S.But the facts are hidden from the USCF members and delegates. In the mean time, they are using Chess Life, the USCF forums, the USCF website, members' money and other means to mislead the USCF members, to cover up their incompetence and unethical conduct. I highlighted many of these facts here and here.

It is amazing that these people claim that the USCF has no money to promote chess, support chess players, chess clubs, and affiliates. But they have no problem spending over $500,000-$600,000 of USCF members money for lawsuits to go after and silence people who want to expose their misconduct.

These people crossed the ethical line and they clearly abused their political power. Their conduct directly and indirectly caused lawsuits / legal actions in New York, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Texas, California, Illinois, and Tennessee. The financial situation of the USCF is dire. If we do not stand up and fight against this kind of corruption, there soon will be no USCF.

A lot more information can be downloaded here.

Here are just some of the evidence of the bribery scheme:

From:
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 1:54 AM
To: Polgar, Susan

Hi Susan,

I wanted to forward this to you to prove that I originally had no plans, whatsoever, to attend the 2008 U.S. Open. I was simply going to visit my husband in San Jose, where the two of us intended to spend a week together before I returned to where I am currently living, in San Diego. Only after being convinced to attend, by Jerry, did I change my plans. I will include that proof as well, and you will also be receiving some other forwarded emails corroborating the rest of what I have told you already.

My husband and I are also seriously considering resigning as delegates, considering the fact that we were not otherwise interested in becoming such, except to help please Jerry, and go along with what he felt was right, because it would show loyalty and solidarity to someone who has, to this point, been a good friend. I hope this serves to do at least some good.

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

From: JerryHanken@aol.com
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 21:58:06 -0400
Subject: (no subject)

You have a free entry to the US Open (and some possible money for a blog for Jennifer.) You can't transfer the entry to a CCA. event. If I can get your airfare paid and I agree to pick up a few meals for you and Hero, couldn't you handle the room? I think Hero would go for it if I can swing airfare. Don't say "no" quite yet.

Jerry

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

From: JerryHanken@aol.com
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2008 06:11:49 -0400
Subject: Re: (no subject)

If Bill (Goichberg) says "yes", you wouldn't owe anything to him. I asked for a sponsorship gift, not a loan. At the Open, you could still spend lots of time with Hero. Also you may have some pay for the blog you will do for Jennifer. You will win games like that at 40 in two. You ARE improving-- don't let anyone tell you different. Notice that I am willing to provide some food for you and Hero. I will have a fridge which will help. As to changeing, aren't you on Southwest? They .don't charge to change or cancel a trip.

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

From: JerryHanken@aol.com
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2008 06:21:03 -0400
Subject: Re: (no subject)
To: Chessoffice@aol.com (Bill Goichberg)

Come on Bill (Goichberg), I will go half on the airfare. There are so many good reasons to do this. Give it some thought. Just think what going half means to me and what it means to you. If we lose a critical vote, you will think of this. All the money you have given the USFCF will be in the toilet if we ultimately lose this fight.

Jerry

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

From: Chessoffice@aol.com (Bill Goichberg)
To: JerryHanken@aol.com
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 11:01:45 -0500
Subject: Re: (no subject)

The affiliate needs to go to the TD/Affiliate area and purchase a 6 month membership.

Bill

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

From: JerryHanken@aol.com
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 11:35:28 -0400
Subject: (no subject)

Dear Jess and Hero,

If Hero is willing to serve as a Delegate, it is important that you go on line today (when it is still July) and purchase a six month membership in USCF. It is $25 and I will personally reimburse you this money. I hope to talk with you later today, Jess.

Jerry

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

7/30/2008 8:53:32 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time (11:53:32 A.M. EST), Chessoffice writes:

As I said, the $25 rate is only available to affiliates.

Bill

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

From: JerryHanken@aol.com
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:30:53 -0400
Subject: Fwd: (no subject)
To: randallhough@yahoo.com

Could you get this done today so we have the option of having Hero as a delegate I will pay.

Jerry

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

From:
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 2:12 AM
To: Polgar, Susan
Subject: Summing things up

Hi Susan,

By now, I've already sent you several emails, each one forwarded directly from my personal account, and numbered 1 to 9. Included are copies of both my hotel and flight reservations, whose dates exactly match those immediately following the forwarded emails from Jerry, in which he convinced us to come, just so we would be there to vote. That fact is quite clear here, and should be easily demonstrated.

Additionally, I should point out that since my real interest was in playing chess, and NOT getting politically involved, this is proven by the fact that Jerry, on more than one occasion leading up to the delegates' meeting, begged me to forego the Blitz, offering to pay for not ONE future event in speed, but THREE, if only I would be there to vote.

Now, my husband and I will also write the letters you requested, but I thought this data would prove useful in the meantime, considering the fact that it verifies my story for all those critics online. By the way, I still have not been able to locate any posts which specifically claim I am a liar, but I'm sure they are not all that far behind, since I have now pissed off quite a few people on Jerry's side, and all for voting what I could gather, based on fact, and not merely conjecture.

Anyway, I hope this helps.

Take care,

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

In a message dated 8/17/2008 8:02:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, SusanPolgar writes:

Bill,

Are you saying that you are absolutely not aware of any attempt to offer incentives / pay ordinary chess players and even non-USCF members to join the USCF, come to Dallas, get certified to be delegates, to vote against Paul?

I am not aware that anyone was paid, offered incentives or given free entry in order to vote a certain way.

If board members/ delegates are caught bribing / paying for votes, should you or the USCF report them to the Illinois Attorney General or other appropriate authority? I strongly believe that this is highly unethical and illegal and I certainly hope that you feel the same way.
In addition, should board members / delegates who do such thing resign from the executive board / delegates immediately?

Susan Polgar

Bribes are unethical and illegal, and charges of same should be dealt with as recommended by our attorneys.

Bill Goichberg

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

In a message dated 8/17/2008 8:31:06 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, SusanPolgar writes:

Thank you for your response. Just to clarify, did anyone approach you about the idea of paying / providing incentives in exchange for votes against Paul at the delegates meeting on Saturday, August 9, 2008?

Thank you.
Susan Polgar

NO!

Bill Goichberg

More filings have been added

More filings are available here: http://chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2556

Another major legal set back for the USCF

ORDER

On this day the Court considered Paul Truong’s Motion to Dismiss Under Rule 12(b)(1), or in the Alternative, Rule 14(a)(4) Motion to Strike Third-Party Plaintiff United States of America Chess Federation, Inc.’s Third-Party Complaint and Brief in Support (Doc. #136), filed May 5, 2009. The Court further considered Defendant United States of America Chess Federation, Inc.’s Response (Doc. #143), filed on May 22, 2009.

...Paul Truong’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED and USCF’s third-party claims against Paul Truong are DISMISSED without prejudice.

Click here to download the full order.

Summary Judgment Motion Filed

While the USCF's held insurance to defend against lawsuits, the USCF is now approaching insolvency (it is now apparently imposing a four-day workweek for USCF employees and has set up a legal defense fund) because of the affirmative lawsuits it has filed against Ms. Polgar both here and in Illinois. Both suits have cost the USCF, based on the USCF's latest financial report, nearly $600,000 in legal fees over the past two years.

Source: Page 10 of the DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case No. 3:08-cv-05126-MHP

The full filing can be downloaded here: http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2556

The individuals who are responsible for this kind of unauthorized spending which puts the USCF in a dire financial situation are Bill Goichberg, Jim Berry, Bill Hall, Randy Hough, and Randy Bauer.

There are 8 candidates in the current USCF EB election who support these unauthorized lawsuits which cost the USCF hundreds of thousands of dollars (which caused the USCF to approach insolvency). They are Bill Goichberg, Jim Berry, Mike Atkins, Ruth Haring, Mike Nietman, and Brian Mottershead, etc.

The only 3 candidates who opposed violating the bylaws and advocate for a responsible and professionally run USCF are IM Blas Lugo, Dr. Mikhail Korenman, and Dr. Eric Hecht.

Counter Claim in SF

We are fighting to protect the USCF members and the USCF from these people. This is what we are asking for:




You can download the entire filing here.

The Dirty Hidden Truth

The Dirty Hidden Truth
By Susan Polgar
June 2009
www.ChessCafe.com

How could a national organization, an organization which claims that it has no money to do many things for the benefit of chess and it members, afford to spend $500,000, $600,000, $700,000 or perhaps even more than $1,000,000 in legal fees for political purposes? How could a national organization, an organization which at one time had annual revenues over $6 million, sink this low? Finally, how can we fix the problems, to make things better, when the problems are being hidden and kept secret from the membership at large?

One of the key problems is the structure of the organization itself. It is very difficult to implement sound changes when the leadership is so far behind understanding the rapidly changing business world. If we do not understand our customers and do not offer what they want, we are doomed to fail. So many chess politicians have hung around for decades doing everything imaginable to grab and hold on to their power. Some have done this for three, four or even five decades.

Why? For some, it is very lucrative. For others, they are addicted to power. Many care more about their personal, financial and political agenda than the welfare of chess, the USCF and its members.

Many of my friends, including 3-time U.S. Champion Grandmaster Lev Alburt, have warned me about the dirty and vicious chess politics. I know that it is not easy to make positive changes. However, if no one is willing to step up to the plate and go to bat for the members, how can things get better?

... My experience on the USCF Executive Board in the past two years is like a mirror image of what GM Alburt said, except a lot worse. I am not a chess politician and I have no desire to get involve in the filthy disgusting world of chess politics. I did not want the failed status quo to continue. My sole intention was and is to help chess and the USCF.

In the past two years, instead of working with me and helping me promote chess to benefit our entire sport, some of these chess politicians have spread the most outrageous and vicious rumors and lies, trying to destroy my reputation, my employment at Texas Tech University, and my family. They even stooped so low as to use my children (who are only 8 and 10) as one of their targets.

Knowing that I am a one of the biggest advocates for scholastic chess in this country, especially for girls, some of these people spewed out the disgustingly offensive rumor that my husband and I were child abusers. They claimed that we abused my children and we even forced them to consume hot sauce. This sort of despicable thing made its way to the internet and even made its way to my employer Texas Tech University as well as to sponsors and potential sponsors. This outrageous lie was even tossed around within the USCF leadership as a way to pressure my husband and me to resign from the board even though they knew that it was false.

There were countless remarks and postings telling my husband and me to go “back to where we came from.” Some said this is the United States Chess Federation and not the United Nations Chess Federation, and a foreigner had no business running the USCF, while others were openly discussed ways to deport me back to my native Hungary although I have been an American citizen for a number of years and both my children were born in the U.S.

Ironically, the USCF and some board members have continued to deny that they have had anything to do with this despicable conduct, but their own attorney made sure to demand that I show proof that I am in the U.S. legally and if I “hot-sauced” my children in the past!? Outrageous, but true! Coincidence? You decide.

Some called me a “whore,” “bitch” and worse, with words that are not appropriate to print. They even created a public website about this. I informed the USCF and its board members, but they chose to ignore this and do nothing. Instead of investigating such vile and despicable conduct, the USCF and the board majority spent hundreds of thousands of dollars investigating us!

To support their agenda, misleading and one-sided information was published in Chess Life, the USCF website, in mailings and to the email list so I would have no opportunity to respond or correct the record.

Here is the full 8-page article. You can also read more about what these people have done here.

It is a tough battle fighting "the system". But it is a fight that all USCF members must take on to save what's left of this federation. Some of the same people have chased away so many good sponsors, volunteers and even members for years by attacking and destroying them so they can keep control of this federation.

If they can do this to me and my family, they will not spare anyone standing in their way. The USCF will not survive financially much longer if this trend of destruction continues. They have damaged the USCF enough. It is time to bring in professionals to fix and rebuild this federation. Please help me get the word out. Thank you!

Here is another website giving excellent details: http://uscf.fiorechess.org/

USCF belongs to the Members

This piece is written by USCF member John B. Flores:

Summary of Wick's response posted at his blog:

1. Feels Hall's summaries have been measured while providing accurate and fair updates;
2. Points out Goichberg can post what he wishes on his site;
3. Refers to semantics and legalese in response to who sued first;
4. With respect to the settlement offer made by Polgar, concedes it is accurate and yet misleading. He concedes she does not want to bankrupt the USCF and yet delves into personal opinions and analysis to disprove his concession;
5. Regarding Alexander's pleading, Wick discounts it as sloppy and points out the redacted material only proves Polgar did not have an anonymizer account fails to exonerate Alexander; and
6. With respect to the failed attempt to remove Truong and the alleged bribery, he asserts it fails to deliver the quid pro quo.

As previously mentioned, it was not my intent to cover all the intricacies of any one case or the sum of cases. Rather, my objective is to briefly raise some issues that are conveniently being omitted from updates, reports and mail-outs to the membership.

Point 1. Goichberg has no choice but to be measured and appear to be fair and forthcoming. However, the record reflects that he has been anything but the opposite and disparaged the opposition to diverge attention from his failure and shortcomings.

Point 2. I do not question Goichberg's posting on his site but rather object to the inappropriate and incompleteness of the updates in Chess Life and the USCF website. I do admit to being called into action after seeing the post on the Chicago Open site. Yes I was aware that he own CCA and he has a right to post on it what he wishes - he receives no opposition from me for having done so. I do, however, passionately object to his use of Chess Life and the USCF website for propaganda.

Point 3. The fact is the June 25, 2008 suit was filed 43 days before the August 7, 2008 suit. I believe, as does Polgar, they intended to harass, intimidate and rid themselves of her, by hook or crook. I do not expect Goichberg, et. al, to confess as to their intent and scheme. Instead, their approach has and continues to be measured, calculating and deceitful. The basis for my argument are:

1. USCF's Illinois Complaint filed on December 29, 2008, reads; "Between November 26, 2007 and June 24, 2008, with full knowledge that Polgar and her husband were under investigation by the USCF, Polgar and an accomplice unlawfully accessed the e-mail account of Excutive Board member Randall Hough (hereinafter "Hough") at least 111 times." They claim they did not know the identities at the time of the initial filing but I am not buying it.
2. On November 17, 2008, Goichberg issued the following statement: "Susan Polgar has sued the United States Chess Federation in a lawsuit styled Susan Polgar v. United States of America Chess Federation, Inc., et al.; cause no. 5:08-cv-00169-C; in the United States District Court, Northern District of Texas, Lubbock Division. Ms. Polgar filed the lawsuit and served many of the volunteer USCF board members while they attended the USCF annual convention in Dallas, Texas in August 2008. Notwithstanding the fact that they were attending the USCF meeting as part of their official duties, four Executive Board members, another delegate, and the Executive Director were individually named and served while they were in Texas. Consequently, Ms. Polgar caused the initial lawsuit to be filed against the USCF and these other defendants. Ms. Polgar gave no advance warning of the lawsuit..." It is well documented Polgar has come short of begging for the Goichberg gang to cease and desist in the interest of the USCF, all the way leading up to the delegates meeting and since.
3. Alexander's Pleading filed January 12, 2009, reads; "Actually, I spoke to Bill Hall before I switched on the IP addresses. Goichberg has also been involved in discussions. The discussion was not about my switching on the IP addresses; I decided to do that on my o[w]n after speaking to Hall. The information I had prior to doing that was already quite persuasive, and both Hall and Goichberg are quite eager to have the FRG/FSS character out of the USCF. Hall encouraged me to develop more information to strengthen the case, and to file an Ethics complaint. I am encouraged by this..." 'Develop more information'!? Messrs Goichberg, Hall and Kroenenberger have been 'developing' information from 2007 and this practise continues today in order to eliminate Goichberg enemies." Yet, Goichberg and gang continue to deny any wrongdoing or vendettas.
4. Finally, I use an analogy to make my final point as to why Goichberg should not be trusted. When faced with the dilemma of who to give the baby to, King Solomon asked a soldier to cut the baby in half so each woman can have a part of him. The real mother pleaded not to harm the baby but instead give it to the other woman. The "fake" mother agreed to the detestable act. Similarly, Polgar has held that an open and complete investigation by independent parties and if the evidence shows they have committed any wrongdoing they would resign. On the other hand, if evidence shows the Goichberg and gang committed the wrongdoing, they should resign. The "fake mother" would much rather harm the "baby" than tell the truth.

Point 4. The offer of the settlement is public record and I believe remains on the table still today. The fact he is hiding behind his fiduciary duty to the members is crap - the members he has failed and whose privacy he allegedly violated?!

Point 5. Regarding his claim of sloppiness (not sure if he refers to my work or how the complaint was worded, which is where I "borrowed" from) but it is irrelevant. The fact is Kronenberger, the USCF's attorney, is trying to build the case that Polgar and Alexander hacked into personal emails. Kronenberger submits anonymizer accounts and IP's to make his case. However, the evidence not only fails to make his case but in fact disproves it, at least to the extent that Polgar does not have an account and, "After diligently searching our records, I am unable to find anything concerning the requested IP addresses." That report not only exonerates Polgar (no account) but Alexander as well (nothing found regarding the IP's submitted for review). More importantly, however, is the fact that Kronenberger allegedly doctored the evidence to conceal pertinent information and portray it as damaging to Polgar and Alexander.

Point 6. I would suspect the elements of bribery may differ from state to state but believe the core elements exist in all of them. To be sure, I briefly researched Texas and California where the two principle cases are filed. My source for the former was a copy of the 1987-1988 Texas Criminal Laws book as it reads:

Sec. 36.02. Bribery.

1. A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly offers, confers, or agrees to confer on another, or solicits, accepts, or agrees to accept from another:
   
   1. any benefit as consideration for the recipient's decision, opinion, recommendation, vote, or other exercise of discretion as a public servant, party official, or voter;
   2. any benefit as consideration for the recipient's decision, vote, recommendation, or other exercise of official discretion in a judicial or administrative proceeding; or
   3. any benefit as consideration for a violation of a duty imposed by law on a public servant or party official.
2. It is no defense to prosecution under this section that a person whom the actor sought to influence was not qualified to act in the desired way whether because he had not yet assumed office or he lacked jurisdiction or for any other reason.
3. It is no defense to prosecution under this section that the benefit is not offered or conferred or that the benefit is not solicited or accepted until after:
   
   1. the decision, opinion, recommendation, vote, or other exercise of discretion has occurred; or
   2. the public servant ceases...etc.

The source for the latter state is the online version of Vol. IV of California Jurisprudence, Section 5, which reads, "Value of a Bribe. - It will be seen by reference to the legislative definition that a bribe may be "anything of value or advantage, present or prospective. While money is the usual consideration of a bribe, it is clear that almost anything may be the consideration which has sufficient value to influence the conduct of the person bribed. It is not necessary to the completion of the crime of offering to give a bribe that the thing offered as a bribe should have a present and ascertained value. To offer a thing in the future which, at the time agreed upon for future delivery, will have being and value is to offer a valuable thing within the meaning of the statute; and as the gravamen of the offense is the tendency which the thing offered as a bribe may have to pervert justice or corrupt official action, the crime is complete the moment an offer is made to give something, which may have a future existence and a prospective value.

In conclusion, I would like to be able to address several other issues but I have dedicated more time to this than I like to - it has taken away from some other very important issues. I leave you with the following questions:

1. Much has been made about the fiduciary duty of Polgar and Truong - what about the fiduciary duty of the remaining board members?
2. With declining numbers and already busted budgets can we afford settlements of $25 million, one million or attorney's fees of half or three-quarters of million? Putting aside the California and Texas cases, was the Illinois case wise and necessary? I submit it is beneficial to the attorneys but not the membership for whom the entire executive board has an obligation to uphold.
3. What about violations of the open meetings act? Most states have procedures governing the conduct of public meetings and consider it a violation of those laws if two or more members meet (and it does not have to be in person) to discuss official business. How may violations of the this law were there?
4. Is the intimidation and threat of lawsuits against delegates in their upcoming meeting an exercise or violation of their fiduciary duties?
5. Was the "meeting" to discuss the creation of the Chairmanship for Polgar a violation? I submit it was all a charade to get Polgar and Truong to go along for the good of the USCF while they were "developing" a scheme for her demise long before she took office.
6. Would the demise of the USCF benefit or damage the Continental Chess Association?

I beseech all USCF members and delegates to carefully consider their votes and make your decisions in the interest of saving the USCF.

Thank you for your indulgence and kind attention

John B. Flores
USCF Litigation
USCF Executive Board Endorsements

The Dirty Hidden Truth

Here are some of the stunning facts about the current state of the USCF:

Back in March 2003, the membership level of the USCF rose to 95,388. As of April 2009, the number is barely over 79,000 at 79,135. That is a loss of 16,253 members!

Financially speaking, the numbers are also bad. Here are some basic USCF numbers from the April 2009 financial report which was provided to me by the USCF Chief Financial Officer Joe Nanna:

Total Revenues: $2,952,904 (less $397,681 bequests = $2,555,223 of actual revenue) in 2009 versus $2,633,658 in 2008.

Total Membership Revenues: $1,457,224 in 2009 versus $1,568,324 in 2008.

(Down $111,100 from last year)

Total Expenses: $3,015,457 in 2009 versus $2,619,019 in 2008.

(We outspent the previous fiscal year by $396,438, which basically wiped out the bequests.)

Excluding the bequests, which clearly cannot be included in normal revenues, that means that USCF has lost, so far, nearly $500,000 in this fiscal year. (This number does not include more losses which were incurred in the month of May.)

The federation’s market share is also down. According to various sources, there are as many as 4-5 times more tournament chess players, especially younger players, who are not USCF members, than there are members of our national federation.

Because of incompetence, the USCF no longer owns the Book and Equipment business. The entire business had to be outsourced.

For the last few years, the USCF has not been capable of holding its own annual U.S. Men and U.S. Women’s Championships. It has to rely on the good will of generous individuals putting up money to save these prestigious events.

The USCF can no longer to fully fund the U.S. Men and U.S. Women’s Olympiad teams. Once again, it has to rely on the generosity of outside organizations or charitable individuals. The USCF is even incapable of sending our national team to the World Team Championship. And unless sponsorship can be found soon, the USCF either will not be able to send our “A” team and will have to resort to sending an amateur team to compete against the world’s best.

The USCF has no money to fund serious training programs for our most young talented male and female players. The USCF has no money to properly promote chess or the even just the basic agenda of its own mission.

How could a national organization, an organization which claims that it has no money to do many things for the benefit of chess and it members, afford to spend $500,000, $600,000, $700,000 or perhaps even more than $1,000,000 in legal fees for political purposes? How could a national organization, an organization which at one time had annual revenues over $6 million, sink this low? Finally, how can we fix the problems, to make things better, when the problems are being hidden and kept secret from the membership at large?

I will publish a full 8+ page report which includes major updates on the USCF legal woes ( lawsuits and legal battles in seven different states), massive financial losses, abuse of power, unethical conduct, and dire situation for this federation (critical facts that the current USCF management is hiding from the membership at large), on Tuesday night. Stay tuned.