Imp

Please read this thread and send your letter this weekend to seb@scca.com regarding setting a timeframe before the SEB can send items to the BOD.

http://sccaforums.com/forums/341763/...ad.aspx#341763

In a nutshell...

Right now, there is no set/mandated timeframe that the SEB has to wait before they send items up to the BOD.

Fastracks are published online around the 20th to the 23rd of the month before the month they become effective.

In there are items that get sent out out for member comment.

In a recent case, the Sept FasTrack was published on the 20th of Aug. asking for feedback on the STS to ST and STS2 to STS class name changes.

The SEB met by conference call on Aug 27th and pushed a rule change through to the BOD, 4 days before the effective date of the FasTrack, and leaving only 1 week for those that get the e-mail notification to write in on the rule change, never mind those that still get the FasTrack mailed to them. (Log in to your SCCA.com account and the options are at the bottom.)

Recently I did an informal poll on SCCAForums.com and NASIOC and over 1/2 of the people that responded, voted that they take over 1 week to respond.

What does this mean? Certain rules changes are getting made in too short of a time frame.

So please, write a letter within 3 days to seb@scca.com asking for the SEB to either a) put a date when they need/expect answers by with the 'out for member comment' notice or b) make it that nothing gets sent up that was just put out for member comment in the previous months FasTrack. Get your letters logged because I think my one letter is not going to change anything.

--kC

ULLLOSE

iTrader: (1)

I think your example is blown way out of proportion. The ST class name simplifications were in the works for over a year, in fact were being discussed before it was a natl class, it also made more than one appearance in FasTrack (first as STS2-STR). I seem to recall things were already set (approved/stamped/on its way out the door) to change from STS2 to STR and the end of 2007.

Fortunately for me I have done my time, and no longer have deal with any of this. As a past member I would be against setting any kind of mandatory time-line that could further bog down the already way to slow process. Keep in mind the normal process is member feedback goes to the AC/SEB, the AC meets to talk about it, then forwards their findings to the SEB. Most ACs only meet every other month, so many items already take 60+ days.

It is a letter on a door, this was not a change that in anyway effected the performance of given class or car. And from the standpoint of someone who often works in timing/scoring it is a way overdue change.

Imp

Jason, I just cited that as an example, as it was the most recent one. It's not that I saw that some letters on a door were changed and said 'that's got to stop'.

It's about setting a timeframe, or an expectation to the membership with a date or timeframe of a deadline for the letters to be received. If it's a week, it's a week. I'm fine with that.

Only allowing a short time frame for people to respond, never mind those that still receive the FasTrack through the mail at the SCCA's provided "Please Mail a FasTrack to me" option in their account file/settings, is a problem.

What I'm absolutley not fine with though is the SEB sending something up before the effective date of the publication that was just put out for comment *in the same issue*. In the most recent case with the classing name change, the official, on the cover effective date of the publication was Sept 1 asking for comments on the name change.

SEB sent it up on Aug 27th when it really wasn't 'official' until Sept 1st (which includes everything in that Official Publication unless otherwise noted).

That's a problem to me and some other people also.

I'll speak to this separately. I also work timing and scoring. ST STS STX STU can all have 2-3 cars on the course from 1 each of ST, STX and STU at the same time. As is the case with regional events, those on radio, try as we might to get experienced people to hold down the button for a sec before talking and don't let up too early.

I welcome the challenge of trying to decyper "Corner 1 to control. Car number 42 ST {pause} one cone." Was that 42 ST? 42 STX? STU? Did the radio crap out in the middle, or more importantly, did they lose a magnet? Just saying... it can happen. IMHO, this is going to be a more common occurance than one may think.

Let's not forget getting people locally that come to register their car at events as STS and they're now ST... Did they want the old STS or new STS?

Why didn't I write in at the time? I wasn't a member. My membership expired in May and I didn't re-up until a few weeks ago.

You're right, July 2007: Where does it say rename STS to ST? Not until September 2008. And it's not "Rename STS2 to STS and rename STS ST". It asked for feedback on "STS2 to STR". If you want to change it to something else... shouldn't it go back out for comment?

Are we supposed to read the SEB/STAC's mind "things they're working on for a long time" aren't published anywhere?

--KC

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

technically member feedback isn't even required, I'm just sayin' ...