ECF Council Meeting 12 April 2014

[Roger de Coverly]

The establishment of a Charitable Incorporated Organisation to be called "The Chess Trust" was approved with one vote against.

If it's now accepted that the main body of the ECF is not going to become a charity in any shape or form in the foreseeable future, that changes some received wisdom. In particular, there's no especial need from external pressures to have a Board limited to ten Directors.

[John Philpott]

Roger de Coverly wrote

In particular, there's no especial need from external pressures to have a Board limited to ten Directors.

Given that there are currently only seven directors, getting back to ten would seem to be a more pressing priority.

[Mick Norris]

Which is probably a good point to ask if Council discussed who should fill the vacant roles of President and NED? Or whether the Commercial Director 10th post was discussed?

I'm assuming here that no-one else has resigned

[Roger de Coverly]

Given that there are currently only seven directors, getting back to ten would seem to be a more pressing priority.

In the longer run, you could propose to have both a Chairman and a Commercial Director or another non-Exec or more without someone carping that the Charity Commission might in the future object.

[David Robertson]

This all seems a bit too pat to me. Council votes down Paulson as ECU delegate - fair enough - leaving him neither ECF President nor delegate. So what comes next? Business as usual, sans Paulson? Or something else?

For 'business as usual', we have to assume Paulson will also say 'fair enough', accept he has run out of road, and take himself off into the sunset. And that the Board is happy to be turned over.

Likely? I don't know, I really don't. But if it happens, I couldn't have called it from previous goings-on.

So I'm in 'wait-and-see' mode - until I hear the other shoe drop.

[Roger de Coverly]

Which is probably a good point to ask if Council discussed who should fill the vacant roles of President

Wasn't it reported earlier in the thread, that they considered and rejected the idea of a recall for Roger Edwards?

[John Philpott]

Mick Norris wrote:

Which is probably a good point to ask if Council discussed who should fill the vacant roles of President and NED? Or whether the Commercial Director 10th post was discussed?

I'm assuming here that no-one else has resigned

I am not currently aware of any further resignations!

The Board is taking it slowly on the President front, but might reach a relatively quick decision on the NED vacancy. The fact that Angus French had applied for the position was mentioned at the meeting.

There is interest from a couple of quarters in the Commercial Director position.

The Board will have a Skype meeting on Tuesday, when unfortunately I have a prior engagement at the Emirates Stadium.

[Michael Flatt]

Calling on Mike Gunn to chair the meeting seems to have taken the heat out of the situation and enabled all business on the Agenda to have been completed satisfactorily.

Can we rely on Mike Gunn to chair future meetings or will the infighting be allowed to continue without a neutral umpire?

Will the Minutes appear in reasonable time and will previous Minutes be re-issued as formally accepted documents rather than remain in draft form?

I don't recall any mention of Transformation or Strategy. Were they deferred to the next meeting?

[Mick Norris]

The Board will have a Skype meeting on Tuesday, when unfortunately I have a prior engagement at the Emirates Stadium.

You should be grateful you are playing Arsenal and not Wigan, much better chance of winning

[Paul Buswell]

Which is probably a good point to ask if Council discussed who should fill the vacant roles of President

Wasn't it reported earlier in the thread, that they considered and rejected the idea of a recall for Roger Edwards?

No... what Council rejected was a proposal (a) for the Board within one month to appoint a new President and (b) when so doing to consider Roger Edwards. As they never got (a) then (b) never came into it one way or the other.

I inferred that Phil Ehr's preference would be not to appoint in the interim, and to let it ride until Council in October.

PB

[Paul Buswell]

Calling on Mike Gunn to chair the meeting seems to have taken the heat out of the situation and enabled all business on the Agenda to have been completed satisfactorily.

Can we rely on Mike Gunn to chair future meetings or will the infighting be allowed to continue without a neutral umpire?

Will the Minutes appear in reasonable time and will previous Minutes be re-issued as formally accepted documents rather than remain in draft form?

I don't recall any mention of Transformation or Strategy. Were they deferred to the next meeting?

Transformation & Strategy: views on policy expressed from the floor, but the Board is now going for a period of consultation.

PB

[Paul Buswell]

Which is probably a good point to ask if Council discussed who should fill the vacant roles of President and NED? Or whether the Commercial Director 10th post was discussed?

I'm assuming here that no-one else has resigned

Apart from the mention above on Andrew Leadbetter's proposal there were two other strands:

under AOB Angus French's name was mentioned as NED and he (AF) said that he was interested as before: but there was nothing on the Agenda, it was AOB with quite a few having left, and so the matter lies with the Board still.

there was one potential candidate for Commercial Director present as an observer, poor soul, and Phil Ehr referred to at least one other on the Board's radar screen.

PB

[Mick Norris]

Which is probably a good point to ask if Council discussed who should fill the vacant roles of President

I inferred that Phil Ehr's preference would be not to appoint in the interim, and to let it ride until Council in October.

PB

Sensible, I think

[Roger de Coverly]

The result of the board motion to appoint Andrew Paulson as ECU proxy

For : 79
Against : 153
Abstentions : 30

It isn't going to be disclosed as to who voted what. But if you want to rattle the cage of your local ECF Representative Member at the local AGM, presuming that the local Constitution allows questioning, then ask why they supported AP as President, if they did, but then opposed him to be allowed to vote for himself as an ECU something or other.

It probably vindicates the cynical judgement of some of the ECF Directors, namely that they could sign up for a motion of support presented to the ECF Council meeting, confident that the wider meeting would dismiss the concept.

[Carl Hibbard]

There was one potential candidate for Commercial Director present as an observer, poor soul, and Phil Ehr referred to at least one other on the Board's radar screen.

Do we know who they are?