[Widget Codriver]

I wrote this letter to the Area Directors and SCCA President. I'll post the response as a "reply" to this thread.

----- Original Message -----
From: John Dillon
To: KBarnes @scca.org ; BHoltz @scca.org ;
KJones @scca.org ; PHylton @scca.org ;
KPatterson @scca.org ; CClark @scca.org ;
DSherrod @scca.org ; RSchader @scca.org ;
GPitts @scca.org ; TCampbell @scca.org ;
JJensen @scca.org ; PMellor @scca.org ;
JMartinsen @scca.org

Cc: Steve Johnson

Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 2:55 PM

Subject: Ex Post Facto Rules Changes


Dear Area Directors and President,

I am writing to you to make you aware of a problem
with the Performance Rally Dept and changes made to
the rules after the game has been played. In short,
several rallyists have raced in the 2002 according
to the rule book, but that rule book is now being
ignored by the Rally Dept.

In particular, I'm writing in regard to the
minimum participation requirements as defined in
section 9.1.A of the 2002 SCCA Performance Rally
rules. It reads: "Minimum qualifying criteria for
Driver and Co-Driver SCCA ProRally Championships
(Overall, Open, Group 2, Group 5, Production,
Production GT, Group A, and Group N) shall be
entering and participating in at least 5 SCCA
ProRally Championship events."

Note that the rule does NOT specify "five in
class." It only requires that drivers and codrivers
must simply commit the (considerable) time and money
to run five ProRally events.

The ClubRally Stewards and several active members
have concurred with this understanding of the rule,
however the Performance Rally Director has chosen to
willfully disregard this rule and refuses to
recognize the achievements of several competitors
who have met the requirements defined in 9.1.A. By
way of argument, he cites an unrelated paragraph
9.1.G, which says you can't transfer points from one
class to another. It reads: "Points earned in one
category or class are not transferable to any other
category or class." He also brought up an unrelated
topic about our former practice of scoring the best
seven out of ten events, but that's irrelevant to
the discussion. When I pointed out that a five-event
minimum has no relevance to the old way of scoring
the best seven out of ten events, I received no
further communication from the PRD.

I included the Performance Rally Board's
Competitor Liason in my early inquiries regarding
this subject. Subsequently the ProRally Series
Steward and PRB Chairman were included in the e-mail
exchange, but all have remained silent. Therefore
it's necessary to turn to you.

I respectfully request that you direct the
Performance Rally Department to enforce the rule as
written and thus award year-end recognition to all
competitors who competed in five ProRally events. In
at least two cases "recognition" means additional
trophies will need to be awarded; in several others,
it's simply a matter of acknowledge that these
people finished in the "n" position in their class
championships.

In my opinion, and the opinion of many other
competitors, the five-event rule should be
completely stricken from the rule book. However, if
member input is to be ignored, the rule should at
the very least be written to match what the author
intended.

Sincerely,

John Dillon
SoPac ClubRally Steward
Member #.....

[hr]

[p align=right]John Dillon
John @ WidgetRacing.com
www.WidgetRacing.com

 

[Widget Codriver]

Response from the SCCA Chair

This is the response from JoAnne Jensen, my Area Director and Chairman of the SCCA's BoD.

--- JoAnne Jensen wrote: ---
Dear John:

I am responding to your message on behalf of the
Board, in my capacity as your Director and also
Chairman.

It is apparent from my reading of the rule book that
9.1.A and 9.1.G cannot be read independently of one
another, nor are they intended to be. It is the
combination of participating in five events, and
non-transferability of points from one class to
another which defines the awards process. This is
aimed at encouraging greater participation in all
classes.

I do not know your record was for the 2002 season,
or in what classes you may have earned points,
though I do understand that you logged many miles
and hours and invested many dollars into your Rally
program. And, I do understand that it is a
disappointment that you will not trophy this year.

It does not appear that there is an inconsistency in
the application of the rules in this case.

Feel free to write or call if you wish to pursue
this further with me.

Thanks.

JoAnne

[hr]

[p align=right]John Dillon
John @ WidgetRacing.com
www.WidgetRacing.com

 

[Widget Codriver]

RE: Response from the SCCA Chair

Lastly, here's my response. I subsequently received permission from JoAnne to post this information.

Thanks for your response. I didn't finish in the top
three in any class--I should have been classified
fourth in Production and around ninth in Open, but now
I'll be listed as a non-entrant in both classes for
the year. Bill Montgomery and Conrad Ketelson are the
ones to be impacted the worst by the decision.

With your permission I'll share your findings with the
rest of the rally community.

[hr]

[p align=right]John Dillon
John @ WidgetRacing.com
www.WidgetRacing.com

 

[gplsek]

RE: Response from the SCCA Chair

John:

You should be listed on the final point standings.
Look at Kulig and McGeer they are listed in the final
standings as well.

That rule is intended only for the awards.
We did not ingnore your emails, there will be a competitor
bulletin going out to clarify the rule.

BTW there are PRB openings, and as of now we have 0 resumes to review.

-george

 

[Foghorn]

RE: PRB vacancy

Mr. Plsek (since I have never had the pleasure to meet you, please allow me the latitude to refer to you by a title of respect),

This isn't meant to be a smart*** comment but is an honest question concerning your statement about the PRB vacancy. (And it in no way reflects any desire on my part to throw a Peltor in the ring, I am happy participating on the divisional Club level and I would hope you are looking for someone interested in the national Pro level). However, since it has often been pointed out that the Special Stage forum is not the official vehicle for comment to the PRB, conversely how has the PRB or SCCA made known its current need for candidates for the PRB vacancy? I have just looked through the Performance Rally Section of the SCCA site and I don't seem to find any mention of the need. Is it there and well buried to the extent that one can't find it or has there just not been any "advertising" of the vacancy? Please don't assume that lack of volunteerism is due to lack of interested parties. If you need people to volunteer you need to officially let them know of that need.

Kent Gardam

 

[daphne]

RE: Response from the SCCA Chair

No resumes for the PRB?

George, you should probably make people aware that submitting their resumes previously does not mean they are kept in the files.

I was previously told that the PRD kept resumes on file for these situations but I must have misunderstood the rule. Sounds like there is an expectation that people resubmit.

 

[Bill Barfoot]

RE: Response from the SCCA Chair

what is the vacancy and where can one find out more of the position requrements.. (no, not for me, but I know others that are not aware of such a vacancy)

 

[Rick Hintz]

Re: Response from the SCCA Chair

JoAnne Jensen must not have understood your situation at all. Her statement is actually fairly accurate and correct - both of the paragraphs are applicable at the same time. But that is not the subject! What she must not be clear on is that you are not seeking to transfer POINTS from one class to another (you can't, as she correctly identified), but simply that your ELIGIBILITY is fully met by your total event participation (and it clearly is). You are clearly fully due your points in all classes you participated in - even to the extent that if you had won a class with less than 5 events in that class you'd still be champ. I can't see any other intelligent interpretation.

 

[Widget Codriver]

RE: PRB vacancy

Until tonight's ClubRally Stewards call I hadn't heard anything official either, but to be fair, remember that Doc's resignation happened only a couple of weeks ago.

[hr]

[p align=right]John Dillon
John @ WidgetRacing.com
www.WidgetRacing.com

 

[Bjorn240]

RE: Response from the SCCA Chair

>No resumes for the PRB?

My thoughts exactly. My resume has been previously submitted for a PRB vacancy, with the express interest of serving in ANY appointed capacity.

That said, I've now sent in another, updated copy.

- Christian

Bjorn Christian Edstrom
Co-Driver
Timefactors.com Rally Team
Gingras Rally Sport (SCCA)
Musketeer Racing (CARS)

 

[slidewaysmike]

RE: Response from the SCCA Chair

Not that I'm a lawyer or claim to be schooled in law in any way, shape, or form, but in having dealt with lawyers and law in the past I learned one very important "rule of thumb" when it comes to reading and understanding rules. It goes something like this:

We as citizens of the United States of America can not be expected to understand the "spirit of the law" (meaning what was intended by the author). We can only be held accountable for the "letter of the law" (meaning exactly how the rule/law is written). We shall not be held responsible to infer what was intended by the author.

I personally have championed many a change in companies that I have worked for based primarily on that statement. If they want us to follow their rules, then they need to state clearly what it is that they desire from their rules.

}> If they would like I would be more than happy to proof read the next draft of the rule book just to make sure it is understandable.}>

Mike Anderson
85 VW GTI

 

[patr]

RE: Response from the SCCA Chair

given that the second to latest sportscar says essentially (how come no one noticed this huge change) that the PR director (nice play on words, huh?) has final authority over everything over the PRB and clearly 'dumbs down' the PRB (my reading of the 'old' structure was that the PRB set the stage and the department operated according to that, my new reading says the new position of "PRD" has now been appointed with full authority over and above that of the PRB), not to diminish what you are doing George but specifically as written in Sportscar 2 months ago, the role of the PRB is significantly different than it was one year ago.

In essence, in a 'worst case scenario' where there is a disagreement between the PRB and the PRD, the PRB becomes a competitor relations commitee. I am not trying to piss you guys off, I know you put a lot of work into it. All I am saying is that it appears that the new changes make it not empowered. Am I wrong ?

-Pat

 

[Widget Codriver]

Now it's even more confusing

>You should be listed on the final point standings.

In what position? 4th in Production because I ran 5 events, or 18th?

>Look at Kulig and McGeer they are listed in the final
>standings as well.

Did Janusz Kulig finish 7th in Group N or did Seamus Burke, who ran five events?

>That rule is intended only for the awards.

Now I'm even more confused....

Are you saying that Bill Montgomery can claim second in PGT for the season, but he can't get a trophy? Or would you say that Jason Gillespie finished second in PGT ahead of Claire Chizma, Marie-Eve Pilon, John MacLeod, and Bill Montgomery, none of whom will get a trophy?

[hr]

[p align=right]John Dillon
John @ WidgetRacing.com
www.WidgetRacing.com

 

[gplsek]

RE: PRB vacancy

Kent:

I was told there was an add posted in the Sports Car Magazine.
Also the PRB stands for Preformance Rally Board, therefore it
covers all of rally, from rallycross to Pro Rally.
So even if your interest are in Club Rally you can still serve on the PRB and represent the Club Rally community.

-george

 

[DonSwier]

RE: PRB vacancy

>Until tonight's ClubRally Stewards call I hadn't heard
>anything official either, but to be fair, remember that
>Doc's resignation happened only a couple of weeks ago.

Forgive me if I missed this bit of info, but...

Most of us are aware of Doc's resignation, but was there ever an explanation about the reason(s) why?

-Don

 

[Foghorn]

RE: PRB vacancy

Leslie Suddard posted this in the PRB Secrecy thread:

"Okay, my turn to pipe up. Doc told me this Friday evening in Kenton service. He came up and announced he'd be available to co-drive all year in 2003 because he had resigned from the PRB.

I asked why and he said "because of the way they were handling things last night" (I didn't have a chance to press for more information, but guess Thursday evening was when the PRB or whoever met to decide how to handle the Wild West scenario.) Doc was stone cold sober, and quite adamant about his decision to quit right then and there. He never changed his tune over the course of the weekend. He just got more vociferous about it at the Library at 2am"

 

[Widget Codriver]

RE: Re: Response from the SCCA Chair

>JoAnne Jensen must not have understood your situation at
>all. Her statement is actually fairly accurate and correct
>- both of the paragraphs are applicable at the same time.
>But that is not the subject! What she must not be clear on
>is that you are not seeking to transfer POINTS from one
>class to another (you can't, as she correctly identified),
>but simply that your ELIGIBILITY is fully met by your total
>event participation (and it clearly is)....

While I think most rallyists agree with you on this, it doesn't matter since the PRD has made his own determination and the membership has no say. What I read in my area director's letter were exactly the same words the PRD gave me earlier.... "You can't transfer points" is the same thing as "you must finish five events in class."

Even though communication with the top brass of the SCCA about rally issues is usually futile, you should voice your concerns with them. For convenience, here are the e-mail addresses of the SCCA's Board of Directors as listed on the SCCA web site: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], and [email protected]. Cut and paste--what a wonderful technology.

Personally I think that this is a done deal, nothing will change, and no amount of reason or logic will make things right, not now, and probably not in the future.

[hr]

[p align=right]John Dillon
John @ WidgetRacing.com
www.WidgetRacing.com

 

[randyzimmer]

involving the SCCA board of directors

But weren't we told at the STPR meeting not to involve the BoD? They move slow and don't care about rally so just keep everything to ourselves and be nice sheep.
Baaaaa
I've re-sent my letter from 9/12 to the Board of Directors to see what they think now.
Luckily, I live in a border town but hate to give up, that's what Kurt wants.
rz

 

[Don Kennedy]

RE: involving the SCCA board of directors

>Luckily, I live in a border town but hate to give up, that's
>what Kurt wants.
>rz

Agree. I don't live in a border town but have been there and done that before. I was here before "them" and I'm going be there after "them".

 

[Widget Codriver]

RE: Now it's even more confusing

Following up on this.... Still haven't heard anything.

[hr]

[p align=right]John Dillon
John @ WidgetRacing.com
www.WidgetRacing.com