Page 1 of 2

Mid-South Region/Atlanta Region Labor Day Nashville races

PostPosted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 12:18 pm
by FireballPhil
Gentlemen,

In 2006 the Atlanta Region hosted the first ever SCCA event, a South Atlantic Road Racing Championship (SARRC) race at the Nashville SuperSpeedway. Because it was the first time at that facility, the SEDIV Executive Steward suggested they run a Single SARRC to work out the logistics rather than attempt a more profitable Double SARRC. Although they knew they'd take a bath financially, Atlanta Region agreed to do so because it would establish a new venue for the Labor Day weekend that they "own" on the SEDIV calendar. Sure enough, it lost money but was an "artistic success" and proved the concept that a two-day, Double Regional event could work at the Nashville SuperSpeedway.

While it was not a MiDiv event, about 25 MiDiv drivers showed up to race because of the proximity to the eastern border of MiDiv. Over the weekend discussion ensued about co-sanctioning future events with the Mid-South Region since Nashville is on the fringes of both Divisions (a similar event occurs each May at VIR between North Carolina Region and WDC Region - a SARRC/MARRS combination). Phil Harris and his Board said they could maybe bring as many as 50 drivers by making it a Mid-Am weekend as well, but they would be unable to provide much if any help conducting the event. Atlanta was cool with that since they're already conducting the entire event anyway. Phil got approval to add the weekend to the 2007 Mid-Am calendar and apparently there is a decent amount of interest being generated. Based on the results in 2006 we are expecting on the order of 150 SARRC drivers to attend (people tend to travel for Doubles and run Singles in their backyard). Add in another 40-50 MiDiv drivers and we're looking at having a unique event that could become a "destination event" on both Divisional calendars.

As we got ready to prepare the Supps for the 2007 weekend, the question came up about the Mid-Am Trophy Fund and Worker Recruitment and Retention Fund. As was explained to us by Rocky Entriken, the $7 per car applies to ALL cars at the event, not just those running for Mid-Am points. Since this would result in an additional $2100 (150 SARRC cars x 2 races x $7) beyond Atlanta Region's original budget, preparation of the Supps came to a halt while we work this out.

Per the SARRC rules, Atlanta Region is required to submit $4 to SEDIV for each SARRC car in attendance, but there is no fee (to SEDIV) associated with drivers from outside the Division. The event will be conducted almost entirely by SEDIV members (with Atlanta Region coordinating the efforts and funding the weekend), plus an estimated 75% of the participants will be SEDIV drivers. What we propose is sending $4 per "non-SEDIV, non-SARRC" entry to MiDiv, which will make it a flat $4 per car going SOMEwhere regardless of where the driver is a member. This would also include any driver from another Division that participates as well.

We're entering new territory here that we believe can be a win-win for both divisions. Mid-South receives a co-sanction fee to defray their expenses, MiDiv gets an estimated $400 in Trophy fees (assuming 50 non-SEDIV cars participate), Atlanta Region reduces their financial risk, and Regional drivers from both divisions get to share the track with people they don't normally run with. We suspect you'll face similar issues with the RMDIV co-event at Hastings, but MiDiv is probably taking a more active role in conducting that event so the same situation may not apply there.

We know this is a last-minute request, but we sure would like to make this work. We need to have the final Supps to Topeka by July 15 so we'd like to know if this arrangement is acceptable by July 13 if at all possible.

Sincerely,

Phil Harris, Mid-South Region RE
Butch Kummer, Atlanta Region Competition Director

PostPosted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 8:43 pm
by spitfire4gp
First, to clarify, there are two separate fees involved here on the MiDiv side.

1. $2 per car to the Mid-Am Trophy Fund. This is set in the Mid-Am Rule 8.2: "A Trophy Fund fee of $2.00 for each entry, whether registered in the series or not, in each Mid-Am race will be remitted...". This rule has existed since the first series rules were created in 1972 (the amount rising on occasion as the economy demanded; two bucks still pretty low).

My opinion: We simply could not operate the Mid-Am Championship in the manner to which we have become accustomed without our trophy fund working in this manner. I do not believe it would be good precedent to create a loophole to this rule/obligation. The rule has functioned well to the series' benefit for 35 years.

2. $5 per car for the MiDiv Worker Recruitment & Retention Program. This is brand new this year and we are perhaps still learning the best way to operate it. This is not a Mid-Am fee, but is assessed to all MiDiv races including National races and non-point races. The authorization for it is reflected in minutes of last November's MiDiv Executive Committee meeting. It is collected by me as MiDiv Pointskeeper only because the money path already existed and it was efficient to do so. What I collect is passed through to the MiDiv ExCo treasurer who manages the funding for the WRR Program.

My opinion: This fund is intended to benefit MiDiv workers. The workers at the Nashville race will be mostly SEDiv people. IOW, very few MiDiv workers will earn credits to benefit from the WRR rewards program at Nashville. This may be an area where, because of that aspect, some accommodation could be made up to and including waiver of the entire WRR fee.

From our point of view, this is a double regional weekend with both races intended to be counted for Mid-Am points. Mid-South Region would be responsible for any MiDiv financial obligations therefrom and my invoice would go to Mid-South (who actually writes the check is irrelevant).

Another opinion: This co-host concept is a cool idea and I would hope the financial necessities can be worked out to permit it to go forward. It is also worth noting that SARRC races are two to three times as big as our Mid-Am races and thus the potential benefits to us from the co-hosting become obvious. These fees, however, are intended to be paid from driver entries, not region budget. That is, when we created both these programs (the predecessor to Mid-Am in 1972, the Worker Recruitment/Retention program in 2006) the intent was that driver entry fees would rise to accommodate the programs -- and in fact, if I remember correctly, the poll that the WRR committee originally put out supported doing exactly that. I really don't think any race driver who is going to put $3/gallon gas into his 12 mpg tow vehicle is going to be stopped by a $7 increase in the entry fee. That $7 is maybe one gallon of gas in his race car.

If a race is to be part of two different series simultaneously, each series must be paid according to each series' rules. It is not fair to either to create special exceptions. To do so means you lose much of the benefit of doing the joint-series race. The WRR fund, however, is not assessed under any series' rules -- rather, it is a MiDiv policy matter and thus subject to different considerations, and exceptions if appropriate.

If there is a 200-car entry each day (400 total), that would come to $800 for the Mid-Am Trophy Fund, $2000 for the WRR fund. I believe the Mid-Am portion ($2) should be firm according to our series rules, but the WRR portion ($5) could be subject to exception based on the fact it will not be MiDiv workers primarily staffing the race.

--Rocky Entriken
MiDiv Pointskeeper

PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:22 am
by FireballPhil
Very clear and fair explanation, thank you Rocky.

PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 4:52 am
by Chuck Clark
Since a lot of folks are on vacation (or at HPT) this weekend, why don't we think about this until early next week. I'll ask for a motion on Tuesday.

If anybody would like to discuss this issue with me, I'll be available on my cell phone 816 506 2107 or you can find me at HPT this weekend.

Thanks,
Chuck

PostPosted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 4:32 pm
by Chuck Clark
Based upon the 161 views of this thread, I'll assume most of the voting members have had the chance to read the proposal and give it some consideration.

At this time, I will entertain a motion, should somebody choose to make one.

Thanks,
Chuck

Motion

PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:40 am
by FireballPhil
I hereby make a motion to the MidWest Division Executive Committee to accept the above proposal as written and posted on July 3, 2007 at 12:18pm.

Sincerely,

Phil Harris
RE MidSouth Region SCCA
Memphis, TN

PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:19 am
by Chuck Clark
We have a motion on the floor. Is there a second?

Thanks,
Chuck

nashville races

PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:34 pm
by DSmith
I second Phil's motion. I think we need to support the needs of our fellow regions. We can come up with an official policy at our convention next fall, when we have more time to debate and consider all of the pros and cons.

PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:51 am
by Chuck Clark
Thanks, Dale. We have a motion and a second, so I will now ask for the vote.

All voting REs, or their proxies, please respond with "In Favor" or "Opposed".

Thanks,
Chuck

PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:15 am
by KPfautz
In favor.

Keith Pfautz
Wichita Region RE

Nashville Races

PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:04 am
by DSmith
In Favor

PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:24 pm
by FireballPhil
In Favor

PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:41 pm
by Chuck Clark
The following is copied and pasted from a reply to my email sent to all the REs:

"I am in favor.


Wendell Karr-Ake
Oklahoma Region RE 2007"

Thanks,
Chuck

vote

PostPosted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 7:19 am
by gridlarry
I am in favor.

Thanks,

PostPosted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:07 pm
by NPratt
In favor.

Nancy Pratt
DMVR RE