2005 USRA Wing Nats Vote

[oldweirdherald]

The Nats will go to Buena Park Raceway in 2005.

Details of the vote to follow....

There were 10 regional representatives present who were voting.

The first round of voting went as follows:

Port Jeff - 3
Buena Park - 3
Pasadena Raceway - 3
Speedway Slotcars - 1

As per the rules, the top two are selected to go to a second vote. In case of a tie, all tied ones are revoted.

So.... a second vote was cast between PJ, BP, & Pasedena.

The votes went as follows:

Buena Park - 5
Port Jeff - 3
Pasadena - 3

The second round included an International representative vote, (an 11th vote) which did not vote in the first round.

(If the International rep had voted in the first round - it still would have resulted in a tie - either 4,3,3,1 - or 3,3,3,2 - so it would not have altered the first round).

The 2005 USRA Wing Car Nats will be at Buena Park Raceway.


On the officer voting - all current officers were re-elected.

For the rules proposal votes, it is lengthy, and will take some time to put together, so I will leave that for Roy to post on the USRA web site soon.

[STUPIDFAST]

CONGRATS TO BUENA PARK. I AM SURE THEY WILL DO A GOOD JOB OF PUTTING TOGETHER A GREAT RACE FOR US PORT-JEFF
RACERS. SEE YA IN CALIFORNIA: cool: :cool:

[J Diamond]

Am I the only one who thinks that they have had the nats enough times in the past 5 years? Wont this be their third in 5 years?

[Ron Hershman]

J Diamond,
I hear what you say, but then again Buena Park hs never had or been offered the Worlds to my knowledge. ;)

Maybe that influenced the vote a bit.

I am sure all gave a great presentation and the reps in charge cast their votes for what they felt was best.

Hopefully other Nats sites proposals got voted in place so all will have a say in the future where the Nats will go.

[Edsel]

Well, I was hoping for PJ's. But, I have never had the chance to race in CA. Looking forward to racing there next year. Both Jonathan and I will be there. See you all there.

Edsel
:D

[Zippity]

A nicer couple you couldn't hope to meet :) :)

I feel the need for another trip to CA coming on :D


Ron

[J Diamond]

Well I have been to the buena park track while on vacation. I rented some cars just cause I was bored. It was in 02 or 03 when I went. I have nothing against the track or anything...I was just hoping it was more closer to home so I would be able to attend. Idk i guess we will have to see when the time comes if I can go or not. And you do have a point of the Worlds which PJ has hosted twice. (and set many records at the 04 worlds)

[Chubby]

congrats Beuna park..maybe i can make this one now

joe sss

[Mikael Silén]

I WILL BE THERE!!!!

i was realy happy to see that buena park will host the nats next year....
first time i was in us was in buena park 2002 and i had so much fun so there will be easy to go there again...it does not matter if the flight is 14 hours....:D :D :D

CONGRATULATIONS BUENA PARK AND CHRIS AND LENORE!!

mikael silén:D :D :D

[Mikael Silén]

please paul.... is it to early or is the dates already set???

becouse i asked you guyes to have the nats a little later if it was possible when i was in buena becouse it was not so manny drivers from europe....so next year in washington it was a lot of drivers...and then you had change the dates so it was off seasons her in europe....do you think it is possible to have it later next year also???
or are you americans having some kind of hollydays around the race dates???

best regards mikael

ps! say hello to everyone from me..... and please tell erkle that i can seeeeeeeeeee him!!!:D :D :D

congratulation to les......was it the 10 mags i gave you in port jeff??:D

[Slotracer152]

Originally posted by J Diamond
Am I the only one who thinks that they have had the nats enough times in the past 5 years? Wont this be their third in 5 years?


3 times in 6 years

and there is nothing wrong with that...they have a great facility and put on a great show every time...I look forward to seeing Chris and Lenore again...they were great to me in '02

[Wil Beach]

Congrats to Chris and Lenore of Buena Park Raceway.

Maybe you guys can bring Carlos & Connie out of retirement.

If all goes well I'll be there. I might try surfing, after the Box Stock race of course. On second thought, I'll walk on the beach instead to impress the girls in my bathing suit.

Schedule a Box Stock race (combine Pro & Am) Wed or Thurs before the Big Show.

Congrats again,
Wil Beach

[Chubby]

how did the rule proposals go? anything we need to kno?

joe sss

[prologix]

Proposals 1-11
1. Voting for National Director and changes to bylaws affecting both scale and wing divisions.
A. There shall be an annual online/postal vote held annually to elect the National Director.
B. There shall be an annual online/postal vote held annually to elect the National Communications Director.
C. There shall be an annual online/postal vote held annually to vote on any changes to the ByLaws of the USRA, or any other matters affecting more than one division of racing.
The following proposal should be put to both the Scale Annual Meeting, and then the Wing Annual Meeting, and only passed if a majority vote in favor at both meetings. (Passed by scale membership: 27 for 3 against)
2. USRA Officers
Page 7 C. Remove the following : “The National Director may not be a manufacturer, owner, or employee of any company manufacturing or distributing products used in USRA racing.”
Page 7 D. Remove the following : “The Assistant Directors may not be a manufacturers, owners, or employees of any company manufacturing or distributing products used in USRA racing.”
Page 8 G. Remove the following : “The Tech Directors may not be a manufacturers, owners, or employees of any company manufacturing or distributing products used in USRA racing.”
Reasons for these proposals - We are eliminating the very group of people who are involved in slot racing fulltime. These are the people whose job it is to know the industry. This people elected into these positions should be elected for their skills, drive and ability to do the job. Manufacturer influence can still be exerted under the current system as most pro racers who end up in USRA positions have some manufacturer affiliation anyway.
The following proposal should be put to both the Scale Annual Meeting, and then the Wing Annual Meeting, and only passed if a majority vote in favor at both meetings.( Passed by scale membership with unanimous vote)
3. Online/postal voting format and procedures
A USRA official will be appointed by the National Director each year to officiate in the voting. This officials name will be published on the USRA website along with contact details.
A. Proposals and nominations for this vote will close on the 31st of July
B. Each fully paid member is entitled to one vote, providing the vote reaches the appropriate USRA official in charge of the voting on or before the 30th of September, in the correct form.
C. Voting papers showing all proposals will be mailed to every USRA member before September 1st. Members must either mail their vote to the USRA using the official USRA voting form, or may vote online at the USRA website http://www.usra.us using the official voting form. Votes without a current membership number and matching name will not be counted.
D. Any ties will be broken by a vote by the committee described on page 8 in the 2004 USRA rulebook as the “New rules committee”
Reasons for this proposal : Currently the National Director and other officers are elected at the wing annual meeting. It is time the whole membership had a vote on who these people should be.
4 Rules Committee
There shall be a rules committee for each division, consisting of a minimum of three (3) members. Change to Page 8 A Official Committees
Reason for this proposal : Each division should have it's own rules committee.
5. PAGE 8 ARTICLE 5 SECTION A CHANGE THE “NEW RULES COMMITTEE” TO THE “BOARD OF DIRECTORS.”
6. PAGE 8 SECTION B REPLACE “NATIONAL DIRECTOR” WITH THE “BOARD OF DIRECTORS”
7 Additions to the "Board of Directors" (if passed) I propose that each regional series be represented on the USRA board of directors i.e. each regional director (Division I or II) would automatically have a seat on the national board of directors. Also, if someone is a national officers and a regional director, the assistant regional director (or someone appointed by the regional division) would be on the BoD. If a region has both div 1 and 2 programs they get two seats.
Reasons
A- The national USRA puts on two races per year, while the regional series put on 6,8,10 or more. The regional directors are more in touch with regional racing than anyone else in the country.
B- They also have the best interest of their region in mind, and it is at the regional level that most rules and decisions are implemented. The regions are the strength of the USRA, and where the rubber meets the road.
C- This would give some incentive for local series to affiliate themselves with the USRA. As it is now there is little reason for a local series to call itself a USRA district. Give them a say in running the organization.
8 - Change to Ethics Committee by-law
PAGE 6 ARTICLE III PARAGRAPH A ADD THE FOLLOWING:
ANY REQUEST FOR A EMERGENCY RULE CHANGE MUST BE PRESENTED TO THE USRA BOARD OF DIRECTORS TO DETERMINE IF AN EMERGENCY EXSISTS BEFORE ALLOWING THE ETHICS COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER AND/OR RENDER A DECISION. ALL BOARD OF DIRECTOR MEMBERS MUST VOTE ON THE ISSUE BEFORE GOING TO THE ETHICS COMMITTEE. ANY ISSUE MUST PASS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS BY A 2/3 MAJORITY VOTE.
9 - Change to Ethics Committee by-law
Page 10, Article VIII section E add the following:
Any member of the ethics committee may bring an issue to the ethics committee and request a vote on the issue.
10. PAGE 6 SECTION D change to the following “ EACH MEMBER AT THE GENRAL MEETING WILL BE ENTITLED TO ONE VOTE EACH MATTER SUBMITTED TO A VOTE OF THE MEMBERS.”
11. RACERS AT THE WING CAR NATS WILL VOTE ON WHERE THE NATS ARE TO BE HELD THE FOLLOWING YEAR.

[prologix]

Proposals 12 - 27
By Laws- General Meeting and Proposals
12: Clarity of Proposals .( Passed by scale membership with unanimous vote)
Proposal: Rule proposals must include an explanation of how they will impact the current rule book. Proposal that do not fully and clearly state how the proposal, if passed, will change the rule book will not be considered for voting by the membership. This proposal shall be added to Article IX.
Reason: This would help voters know the full implication of what they are voting on. It would help prevent the passage of proposal where the implementation is far different from what the voters at the meeting thought they were voting on. It would also require the persons making the proposal to fully think through the implication of their proposal. Simply put, this would help put an end to the “approve now, specify later” pattern that has plagued the USRA in recent years.
13: Disallow Proposal changes during General Meeting .( Passed by scale membership with unanimous vote)
Proposals may not be changed once brought to the vote of the general membership. A printed ballot will be handed out and no changes will be allowed to the ballot once the meeting begins. This proposal shall be added to Article IX.
Reason: This would shorten the meeting and reduce confusion regarding the outcome of the voting.
14:Publication of voting .( Passed by scale membership with unanimous vote)
Proposal: The USRA Director or his designee shall be present at the general meeting and all pre-meetings for the purpose of announcing the proposals and counting votes. The voting results, including exact counts, shall be made public no greater than 30 days after the general meeting. This proposal shall be added to Article IX.
Reason: Members have the right to this information.



By Laws- Other
15. ADD USRA CONSTITUTION TO RULEBOOK.
16. PAGE 5 MEMBERSHIP DUES RAISE MFG YEARLY DUES TO $200.00.
17. Rulebook publication online .( Passed by scale membership with unanimous vote)
The next years rule book for both divisions must be publicly available via the USRA Website no later than December 1st following the Nats. Reason: This would allow more people to ramp up to race in the Nats. It will also help encourage organizations to run the USRA rules in their weekly racing as they can actually have the rules at the beginning of their winter series. It will also allow manufacturers to know that the parts they are shipping will have more time on the shelves when they will be legal so hopefully they will be more willing to make said parts.
18. It shall be the responsibility of the Communication Director to publish all the following in accordance with the rules and in a timely manor: Current Rulebook, Decisions by committees, Committee memberships, Voting proposals, Voting results, contact info for regional representatives (as available) and National Championship results. All other material on the USRA official website is subject to the approval of the National Director. Reason: It is important for the website to be updated quickly. If all decisions must be made by committee, this will not be possible.
19. PAGE 7 COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR ADD THE FOLLOWING:
THE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR OR HIS SURROGATE WILL BE IN CHARGE OF UPDATING THE OFFICAL USRA WEBSITE. ALL Website UPDATES MUST BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
(Note: Proposals 18 and 19 cannot both pass)



By Laws- Regional Organization
20 - Regional Definition:
Section VII part E
E 1. The prospective region must have a minimum of 20 regional dues paying
members.

E 2. The prospective region must file a list of officers and a projected
race schedule with the appropriate Division Director by October 31st of
each year and co-ordinate schedules with the Division Director by November
30th each year. This list is to be published by the USRA by December 31st
each year for al divisions.

E3. A region that wants to be part of more than one division must register
their region with each appropriate USRA Division Director. Before a region
will be accepted by a Division Director it must satisfy the Division
Director that it does regularly run races for that division. This can be
established by looking at memberships lists for more than the last year as
well as race results and championship standings. The final decision rests
with the Division Director.

E4. The prospective region must have organized and run a race series
utilizing rules conforming to the National USRA rules (with minimal
modifications permitted) for at least one season.

E5. The regional racing series must include events scheduled for at least
three separate raceways. The Division Director may waive this requirement
in special circumstances (usually geographical) on the condition that the
series will meet the requirement should those conditions change.
21. PAGE 10 LINE 1 CHANGE NUMBER OF 50 TO 30. THIS SHOULD BE CHANGED AS SLOT CAR RACING HAS DECLINED SINCE 1992 WHEN THIS RULE WAS VOTED IN.
22. PAGE 10 LINE 3 ADD THE FOLLOWING TO LAST LINE IN CURRENT BOOK; AND MINIMUM OF 6 RACES. USRA SERIES HAVE MORE THAN THREE RACES BETWEEN THE MINIMUM THREE RACEWAYS.
23. REGION REALIGNMENT (referred to scale ethics committee by scale membership)
WASHINGTON, OREGON, IDAHO, MONTANA WYOMING. REGION 1
CALIFORNIA, NEVADA, NEW MEXICO, ARIZONA, UTAH, COLORADO REGION 2
NORTH DAKOTA, SOUTH DAKOTA, NEBRASKA, KANSAS, OKLAHOMA, TEXAS REGION 3
MINNESOTA, WISCONSIN, IOWA, ILLINOIS, MISSOURI REGION 4
ARKANSAS, LOUISIANA, MISSISSIPPI REGION 5
MICHIGAN, INDIANA, OHIO, KENTUCKY REGION 6
TENNESSEE, ALABAMA, GEORGIA, FLORIDA, NORTH CAROLINA,
SOUTH CAROLINA REGION 7
VIRGINIA, WEST VIRGINIA, MARYLAND, DELEWARE REGION 8
PENNSYLVANIA, NEW YORK, NEW JERSEY REGION 9
CONNECTICUT, MASSACHUSETTS, NEW HAMPSHIRE, MAINE, VERMONT REGION 10
ALASKA REGION 11
HAWAII REGION 12
Reason: WE NEED TO REALIGN THE WAY THE REGIONS ARE SPLIT UP IN THE USA FOR USRA NATS SITE SELECTION. THIS GIVES US MORE REGIONS, BUT WILL SPLIT UP THE WEST COAST REGION INOT THREE VESUS 1 REGION.
24. REGIONAL ROTATION FOR NATS SITES. (To be voted on only if re alignment passes)
THE REGIONS NEED TO BE PUT ON A REGIONAL ROTATION TO HELP SPREAD THE NATS AROUND THE COUNTRY AND PREVENT THE NATS FROM BEING STUCK IN ONE GENERAL AREA OF THE COUNTRY FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME.
25. Remove PAGE 23 SECTION G (To be voted on only if re alignment passes)
26. THE NATS CAN NOT BE HELD IN A BORDERING REGION THE FOLLOWING YEAR. (To be voted on only if re alignment passes) EXAMPLE; THIS YEAR THE NATS ARE BEING HELD IN REGION 1. THIS WOULD MEANT THE NATS COULD NOT BE IN REGIONS 1, 2 OR 3 THE FOLLOWING YEAR. IF THE NATS WERE HELD IN REGION 6 THE NATS COULD NOT BE HELD THE FOLLOWING YEAR IN REGIONS 6, 7, 4, 8 OR 9. THE ONLY EXCEPTION TO THIS RULE WOULD BE IF THERE WAS NO OTHER RACEWAYS OUTSIDE THESE REGIONS BIDDING FOR THE NATS. ALL OTHER RULES IN SECTION XV WILL STILL Apply.
27. THE NATS CAN NOT BE HELD IN THE SAME REGION TWO YEARS IN A ROW. THE ONLY EXCEPTION IS IF THERE IS NO OTHERS BIDDING FOR THE NATS.

[prologix]

Proposals 28 - 43
Race Procedure
28. No one taller than 5ft may use any device (box, stool etc) to elevate their driving position.
29. No Round Robin Semis, Quarterfinals, or Consis.
No Round Robin Semis, Quarterfinals, or Consis. Round Robins would only be allowed in a main if there are less than 12 entries, otherwise use 1998 rule book wording.
Reasons
A- Since we have gone to one class per day there is very little problem with time.
B- Round-robins are unfair in that the racing is always bad, and some is worse than others.
C- Round-robins go against the very spirit of the rules adopted with the Quarterfinal system, namely the top half of the race move up.
30. PAGE 15 VII CHANGE VOLTAGES TO MAXIMUM OF 14.3 VOLTS.
THIS WILL REFLECT THE NEWLY PASSED VOLTAGE REQUIREMENT THAT THE ETHICS COMMITTEE RECENTLY PUT INTO PLACE.
31. Allow the changing of bodies at a race. The rule would be as follows. A driver may change body, before the start of each race i.e. Consi, Semi, Main. Body must be of same type manufacturer and style. Body may not be changed from qualifing, to first race. This will allow for cleaner races at the main event level, and the more even races at the main level.




Race Classes
32. Remove the “and any lower class” on page 13, section 1, subtitle A #3.
Reason: This would allow racers to finish well in the upper classes, without penalty in the lower classes, i.e. Gp12. It has been proven that once racers move up, they simply don't return to the nats. I will bring the stats to backup my claims at the nats.
33. No Pros in GP-12, INT-15, and C-12's
The class structure in GP-12, INT-15, and C-12's should be referred to as Amateur and Expert. We voted this in a few years ago and have started deviating from it lately. I propose that both Amateur and Expert divisions in GP-12, INT-15, and C-12 be comprised of racers of amateur status ONLY. NO GP-7 racing "Pros". This means anyone racing in GP-7 Pro class or GP-27 Pro class may NOT enter in GP-12, INT-15, or C-12 classes. (This proposal may be made as a single proposal or as a separate proposal for each class)
Reasoning: This practice of allowing GP-7 Pro's to compete in the amateur classes has gotten out of hand and is starting to run off amateurs who want to compete in these classes. Pretty soon we will have just a handful of "Pro's" running in all of the classes and the Amateur will be a thing of the past. This is in the best interest of the future of wing-car racing as well as keeping the current group of racers that are competing in these classes.
The next 10 proposals, NUMBERED 34-43, ALL ADRESS THE PROBLEM THAT TECHNOLOGY AND THE COST OF RACING IN THE “ENTRY LEVEL” SIDE OF C-12 AND GR-27 CLASSES ARE OUT OF HAND. RATHER THAN BASE THE CLASSES ON DRIVER CLASSIFICATION THE CLASSES SHOULD BE BASED ON EQUIPMENT. MANY RULES IN THE CURRENT BOOK WOULD HAVE TO BE CHANGED TO REFLECT THE PROPOSALS GETTING VOTED IN PLACE. I THINK I HAVE COVERED ALL WITH THESE PROPOSALS.
34. CHANGE THE NAME OF AM C-12 TO RESTRICTED C-12 KEEP ALL MAGNET SPECS IN PLACE. PAYOUT MERCHANDISE ONLY.
35. CHANGE THE NANE OF EXPERT C-12 TO UNRESTRICTED C-12. PAYOUT MERCHANDISE ONLY.
36. CHANGE THE NAME OF AM GROUP 27 TO RESTRICTED GROUP 27. PAYOUT MERCHANDISE ONLY.
37. IN THE RESTRICTED GROUP 27 CLASS LIMIT MAGNETS TO ONLY SINGLES, QUADS BEING ALLOWED.
38. CHANGE THE NAME OF EXPERT GROUP 27 TO UNRESTRICTED 27 WITH NO MAGNET LIMITATIONS. PAY OUT IN MERCHANDISE ONLY.
39. RACERS MAY RACE EITHER RESTRICTED OR UNRESTRICTED C-12 CLASS, BUT CAN NOT RACE BOTH AT THE SAME EVENT. ANY DRIVER MAY ENTER EITHER CLASS.
40. RACERS MAY RACE EITHER RESTRICTED OR UNRESTRICTED GR-27 CLASS, BUT CAN NOT RACE BOTH AT THE SAME EVENT. ANY DRIVER MAY ENTER EITHER CLASS.
41. NO MOVE UPS IN RESTRICTED C-12 CLASS.
42. NO MOVE UPS IN RESTRICTED GR-27 CLASS.
43. IF A GROUP 27 LIGHT CLASS IS TO BE VOTED IN, ELIMINATE AMATUER 27 CLASS/RESTRICTED 27. G27 LIGHT WOULD BASICALLY BECOME THE NEW BEGINNERS 27 CLASS AT THE NATS.

[prologix]

Proposals 44 - 65

Product Approvals
44 Give the National Tech Directors the authority to remove any restricted products that they can prove are no longer available.
Reason: With the current trend of manufacturers using other manufacturers parts in there submittals, this rule would make it harder for the supplier to cheat on the approval process.
45. change in articleX section B. Submissions to be made to the Tech Directors, not the divisional directors. This is the way we have done this in the past few years, and has worked very well.
46. Add following to Article X. The products submitted to the USRA for product approval are the property of the USRA, and not the individuals in the respective positions of the USRA. All products are to be available for inspection at the nats. Products must be turned over to the incoming tech director by the outgoing tech director.
47 DEFINE C-CAN SET-UPS. THE TIME HAS COME TO DEFINE WHAT THE USRA CONSIDERS A MOTOR SET-UP IS. THIS IS ONLY IF A PROPOSAL FOR SET-UPS ONLY GETS VOTED IN PLACE. (Note:this was not voted on by scale members because there was no proposal to allow incomplete C can motors to be submitted)
SET-UPS ARE TO BE SUBMITTED AND SOLD AS READY TO RUN. SET-UPS SHOULD BE READY TO INSTALL AN ARMATURE, BRUSHES, SPACERS, SPRINGS WITH NO FURTHER ASSEMBLY WORK NEEDED. SET-UPS WHOULD HAVE THE MAGNETS INSTALLED BY USING MAGNET CLIPS OR CAN FINGERS FOLDED OVER AND OR SUPER GLUE USED TO RETAIN MAGNETS. CAN OILITE PRESSED OR SOLDERED IN PLACE. END BELL FULLY ASSEMBLED AND DRILLED TO SCREW TO CAN. PARTS/KITS ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE AS SET-UPS. BY ADDING THESE WORDS, THIS WILL STOP THE ENDLESS FIGHTING BETWEEN MFG'S. THIS WILL ALSO REMOVE ALL GREY AREA FROM WHAT A SET-UP IS TO BE. ANY NEW OR EXSISTING MFG. WILL KNOW UP FRONT WHAT THE USRA CONSIDERS AS A SET-UP.
48. IMPOSE PRICE FOR PRODUCTION C-CAN SET-UPS. (Note:this was not voted on by scale members because there was no proposal to allow incomplete C can motors to be submitted)
IF THERE IS A RULE VOTED IN PLACE CALLING FOR ONLY SET-UPS TO BE APPROVED INSTEAD OF PRODUCTION C-CAN MOTORS. THEN THAT PRICE SHOULD BE SET AT 28.00 OR LESS FOR 2005. THE RULE WOULD READ THAT SET-UPS SELLING FOR 28.00 OR LESS EACH WILL BE APPROVED AND ALLOWED FOR COMPETITION. WE HAVE PRICES RESTRCITIONS FOR C-CAN MOTORS AND ARMATURES AS WELL AS 16-D SET-UPS AND WE SHOULD HAVE FOR C-CAN SET-UPS IF THIS IS WHAT IS TO BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED IN THE FUTURE.
49. PAGE 11 ARTICLES X SECTION B. CHANGE TO THE FOLLOWING: MANUFACTURERS MUST SUBMIT ONE PIECE OF EACH COMPONENT FOR WHICH THEY SEEK TECHNICAL APPROVAL TO THE RESPECTIVE DIVISION DIRECTOR BY AUGUST 1 FOR EVALUATION AND INSPECTION.
Reason: THE CURRENT LINE DOES NOT SPECIFY WHAT TYPE OF APPROVAL. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TECHNICAL AND COMMERCIALLY APPROVAL.
50. PAGE 11 ARTICLE X SECTION D. REMOVE RACEWAYS FROM THIS LINE.
Reason: IS IT NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO NOTIFY ALL THE RACEWAYS? MFG'S TELL THE DISTRIBUTORS AND THE DISTRIBUTORS TELL THE RACEWAYS. IF A MFG WANTS TO TELL RACEWAYS DIRECT THEY CAN. THE RULE MAKES IT MANDATORY THAT THEY DO.
51. PAGE 11 ARTICLE X NEW SECTION ADD THE FOLLOWING:
ANY AND ALL APPROVED COMPONENTS FOR THE FOLLOWING CLASSES MUST BE AVAILABLE THROUGH DISTRIBUTORS ONLY: SPEC 15 CHASSIS, MOTORS AND BODIES. GP-12 CHASSIS, MOTORS, MOTOR PARTS (ARMATURES, MAGNETS, CANS, ENDBELLS, ETC) AND BODIES. GROUP 10 CHASSIS, MOTORS, MOTOR PARTS AND BODIES. PRODUCTION 1/24 STOCK CAR CHASSIS, MOTORS, MOTOR PARTS AND BODIES. GT-1, GTP AND GT-12 CHASSIS, MOTORS, MOTOR PARTS AND BODIES. C-12E BODIES AND CHASSIS. INT 15, C-12, GR 27, EURO -32 AND EURO-24 BODIES.
52. IF A PRODUCT(S) HAS BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO THE DISTRIBUTORS AND DISTRIBUTORS CHOOSE NOT TO DISTRIBUTE SAID PRODUCT(S) TO THE RACEWAYS, THE USRA BOARD OF DIRECTORS WILL DETERMINE IF THE PRODUCT(S) IN QUESTION ARE COMMERICALLY AVAILABLE TO RACEWAYS AND ALLOWED FOR USRA COMPETITION.
THE REASON FOR THIS IS THESE CLASSES ARE THE BACK BONE OF OUR INDUSTRY AND NO MFG SHOULD BE ALLLOWED TO BY PASS THE TRADITIONAL MFG TO DIST TO RACEWAY CHANNELS. THESE ARE BASIC PRODUCTS THAT ARE TO BE MASS PRODUCED AND MADE AVAILABLE TO THE MASSES. THE OTHER CLASSES ARE ALL BASED ON RACER OR CUSTOM BUILT ITEMS. NEED I SAY MORE???
53. PAGE 14 II COMMERCIAL AVAILABILTY ADD ALSO REFER TO BY-LAWS ARTICLE X.
THIS HELPS TO MAKE SURE ALL KNOW ALL OF THE RULES PERTAINING TO THESE RULES AND SECTION OF THE RULBOOK.
54. PAGE 15 SECTION E OF COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE ADD THE FOLLOWING; NEW RETAIL PRICE LIMITS MUST BE SENT TO THE MFG'S NO LATER THAN JULY 1. THE PREVIOUS 12 MONTHS (PRIOR TO JULY 1) COST OF LIVING INCREASE WILL BE USED TO DETERMINE THIS. THE MFG'S NEED THIS INFORMATION PRIOR TO SUBMISSION CUTOFF DATES.
55. ADD TO THE BY-LAWS ARTICLE X THE FOLLOWING:
ALL PRODUCTS SUBMITTED ARE “AS IS” THIS MEANS THAT AFTER FINAL USRA APPROVAL, ANY PRODUCT(S) THAT ARE CHANGED AND/ OR ASSEMBLED DIFFERENTLY FROM THE WAY THEY WERE SUBMITTED, WILL NO LONGER BE APPROVED FOR USRA COMPETITION. THE TECH COMMITTEE AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS WILL DETERMINE THE STATUS OF ANY PRODUCT(S) IN QUESTION. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MAY ALLOW CHANGES BASED ON PRODUCTION PURPOSES ONLY.



Technical Rules
56) THE ONLY PARTS THAT CAN BE INTERECHANGED BETWEEN C-CAN MFG'S ARE THE PARTS (END BELLS, ARMS, CANS, MAGNETS, OILITES, HARDWARE) THAT ONLY COME ON APPORVED PRODUCTION MOTORS (OR SET-UPS)
Reason: IF VOTED IN. THIS WILL STOP PRODUCTION/APPROVAL FOR COMPONENTS ONLY. NO INDIVDUAL PARTS WOULD BE APPROVED FOR COMPETITION.
57) Restriction on magnets for cobalt classes
57a)C - 12, Am. up to 6 mags - Pro 10 mag
57b) Gp.27, Am. up to 6 mags - Pro 10 mag
57c) Gp.7 semi-pro - up to10

58) Magnet restriction in C-12 Expert to single, quad or 6 mag motors only.
59) Magnet restriction in Amateur GP-27 to single, quad, or 6 mag motors only.
60) Add the following; must use round copper wire only. No litz wire allowed. For all classes with armature wire specifications.
Reason This will help to stabilize armature production by not allowing flat wire, silver wire, aluminum wire. None of this is needed in our industry. By allowing flat or exotic metal wires we would increase the cost of racing to the participants with no gain. (Passed by scale membership with unanimous vote)
The following C can proposals were passed by the Scale general membership. The scale membership urges that these proposals also be voted on by the wing racers. Note that there is no distinction between pro and amateur motors in the scale division.
61. There shall be a C Can Rules Committee created. This will be a committee comprising all members of the rules committees from both divisions, plus the National Director. Any and all rule changes relating to C Can motors will have to pass through this committee before becoming a binding rule of the USRA. This committee may override votes relating to C Can motors at any General meeting. (Passed by scale membership with unanimous vote)
62. Set minimum weight of a C can to be the lightest can currently in production. This weight to apply to manufacturers submitted motors only. Racers cans will not be weighed during any tech process. . (Passed by scale membership: 16 for, 7 against)
63. Allow magnets to be honed in all C-Can motors. (Passed by scale membership with unanimous vote)
Rationale: This will remove a rule which serves no real purpose in the Pro classes and aligns rules with Division I.
64. Allow any type of adhesive to glue in magnets to C cans. (Passed by scale membership with unanimous vote)
65. Allow any airgap for C can motors. (Passed by scale membership: 37 for, 2 against)

[Aubin 3 sixteen]

Maybe we should allow those people who are attending the race to do just that and maybe get back to this web site a week or two down the road? At least that way they will be able to respond to all the whining that will occur regardless of how the voting went :)

[prologix]

Aubin 3 sixteen - Slotcar racers whine? When?
But seriously folks, I have purchasing decisions to make I am sure my raceway would like me to buy this week instead of next. or for that matter the week after. Who knows I may race g12 or even spec 15 next year.

[prologix]

Originally posted by oldweirdherald

For the rules proposal votes, it is lengthy, and will take some time to put together, so I will leave that for Roy to post on the USRA web site soon.

I was just trying to help.

[Zippity]

Is there enough space in this topic/forum for them to be posted? :D :D

[LoudCat]

Originally posted by prologix
Proposals ... You could have just given the link, which I already posted on OWH several times. http://www.usra.us/rules/2004/natsvoting.htm

If you read closely, you will see at the top of the page it says "The proposals must be approved by the regional directors before going to the general meeting for a vote. " Furthermore, the proposals may also have been changed in the committee before going to the general meeting.

I was not present but I understand that less than half the proposals were voted on by the general meeting. Chris took notes and had a printed ballot for the general meeting. Like Kassens said, it will not be long after he gets home that the results will be on the usra website.

[wayne h]

Originally posted by oldweirdherald

There were 10 regional representatives present who were voting.

does this mean that only 10 people were allowed to vote or that there were only 10 people present at the meeting?

were all the other proposals voted in or out by a mere 10 people?

somehow this doesn't seem very representative of the membership-at-large.

wayne h.

[tonyt]

Why don't all the proposals go to the floor to be voted on??

If I have paid my USRA membership dues and I make a proposal all other "paid members" should have a say in it. It should not be upto to a room full of track owners, manufacturers or "racers" in the click behind closed doors making descisions or deciding what I should be able to vote on.

By the way when and why did the dues go up to $20??was this a closed doors descision or did I vote on this last year and forget?? and where is this extra money going??

Tony

[PeteV]

Originally posted by tonyt
Why don't all the proposals go to the floor to be voted on??

If I have paid my USRA membership dues and I make a proposal all other "paid members" should have a say in it. It should not be upto to a room full of track owners, manufacturers or "racers" in the click behind closed doors making descisions or deciding what I should be able to vote on.
By the way when and why did the dues go up to $20??was this a closed doors descision or did I vote on this last year and forget?? and where is this extra money going??

Tony

OK, I see you paid your dues and I'm guessing you got a rulebook. The answers to all your questions are in the rulebook. Bottom Line: the rules are the way they are. Now, if you are saying that they are problematic, elitist, obscure, ambiguous, duplicative, etc., etc. ... well, I'd have to agree with you.

If you will take the time to read the proposals that were passed at the Div. ii Nats and look at the list of proposals that were made for the Div. I Nats you will see that steps are being taken to broaden the voting privilege to include all the members. Until that happens, you and all the other members who are unable to attend the Nats will have no voice.

Many will say in reply that inasmuch as the USRA rules only apply at the two Nats then only the people who attend the Nats are affected. I find that argument too naive to credit, but it keeps coming up. It's pretty obvious that there are a LOT of active regions running by the USRA rulebook and a lot of independent tracks that are heavily influenced by them as well.

But we (the USRA) are what we are at this point and whatever needs to be fixed will have to be done under the prevailing rules and regulations. When (not if) changes are put in place, I hope they are to your liking.

[Chubby]

so what gat changed?

joe sss

[J Diamond]

All I found out from talking to Erkle today was the new Am box rules. We can hone mags now. There is also no minimum air gap.

[Chubby]

sweeeeeeeet

[PeteV]

Originally posted by J Diamond
All I found out from talking to Erkle today was the new Am box rules. We can hone mags now. There is also no minimum air gap.

These were voted in at the Div. II Nats and I'm happy to see that Div. I did the same. Both are steps in the right direction... uniformity.

What didn't make it to the meeting floor and what was voted down are more important at this point.

[oldweirdherald]

Like I said in my first post, to post all the proposals and voting results would be lengthy and time consuming.

The rules committee reviewed and weeded through the rules proposals in the pre-meeting, which is their function, eliminating some of the duplicate and redundant proposals, and editing the wording of those that needed clarification.

It is a busy and hectic schedule here at the Nats, and Chris Radisich is still quite busy here. Once he gets home and has a chance to meet with Roy Hood and go over all of the voting results, I'm sure Roy will get them posted as soon as he can. It will take some work, however, so chill out folks and gives us all some time to do our jobs, ok?

Wayne - as at the Scale Nats, each class had class specific rules voted on by the racers in that class before their race.

The general rules proposals were voted on in the General Meeting by ALL members in attendance.

The 2005 Wing Car Nats vote was voted on by the 10 regional representatives, and 1 European representative, after presentations by all of the raceways bidding gave their presentations to the entire group of racers at the General Meeting. Their written proposals were on display all week on the front counter for all to see.

NEXT YEAR - this will change, as the proposal passed to change to ALL MEMBERS present at the Nats to cast a popular vote for the following year's Nats.

On rules changes, it also passed to move to an online / postal mail voting system so that ALL DUES PAYING USRA MEMBERS may vote on rules changes. Details of a secure and accurate method system of making this happen were discussed briefly, but are to be worked out by a committee or collaboration with volunteers who are experienced in those fields (of which several USRA members are).

The rules books will also be available by Dec 1st.

Anyway, there are many more changes coming, too numerous to post here now, but that I'm sure many racers will be happy to hear.


Personally - I would not be in such a hurry to buy new chassis and motors for NEXT YEAR's Nats, that I could not wait a week or two (at least) to see what rules changes were voted in. I would also wait until new products are submitted and approved for NEXT YEAR's Nats. Until then - this year's rules are still in place for any regional racing using USRA rules for current series racing. :p

[LoudCat]

Wayne,

In 2004 it works like this:

1)Anybody can send a proposal to the National Director

2)Regional reps review the proposals at the pre-meeting and vote on what proposals get to be voted on by the general membership meeting. Only the regional reps can vote in the pre-meeting. Anyone else can attend the pre-meeting but only as an observer without a vote.

3)Members present at the general meeting get to vote on the proposals that make it out of the pre-meeting.

This may change. Stay tuned.

Tony:
This was not a “behind closed doors” thing at all. For probably the first time ever, the proposals were published beforehand. You had the chance to tell your rep (Doug I think) how you felt on the issues. You can certainly ask him why he voted as he did when you get home.

[Jeff Bechtel]

The point that Tony was trying to make was he WAS at the Nats and still did not get to vote!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 10 people got to decide on what we were allowed to vote on. EVERYTHING SHOULD BE VOTED ON!!!!!!!!!!!! Not just what 10 people feel we should vote on. When I asked what was being taken to the membership to vote on, I was told, "Not very much is coming to a vote." I asked about a particular rule that I felt very strongly about and was told, "We did not take that because Boyt did not like the proposal nor did HE agree with it." To me THAT IS NOT A REASON for a rule not to be taken to the general meeting for a vote! This is why Tony, myself and everyone else should be VERY upset with these 10 people for not making REAL decisions on OUR future. I will propose next year that ALL RULES MUST GO TO THE GENERAL MEMBERSHIP FOR A VOTE. Of course, it will probably get thrown out by the 10 people who threw out ALL of the other rules that they did not agree with this year! Yeah, that's the way to run OUR organization. And just think, you all voted these same people back in to run it next year too! Remember, I tried to let ALL of you vote on the rules on-line two years ago and got told that I could not do that. When are you guys going to wake up? We are all being lead down a path that they want to lead us down. Does any body else think this is wrong or are Tony and I the only ones that feel this way?

[Bill Fulmer]

Originally posted by Jeff Bechtel
The point that Tony was trying to make was he WAS at the Nats and still did not get to vote!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 10 people got to decide on what we were allowed to vote on. EVERYTHING SHOULD BE VOTED ON!!!!!!!!!!!! Not just what 10 people feel we should vote on. When I asked what was being taken to the membership to vote on, I was told, "Not very much is coming to a vote." I asked about a particular rule that I felt very strongly about and was told, "We did not take that because Boyt did not like the proposal nor did HE agree with it." To me THAT IS NOT A REASON for a rule not to be taken to the general meeting for a vote! This is why Tony, myself and everyone else should be VERY upset with these 10 people for not making REAL decisions on OUR future. I will propose next year that ALL RULES MUST GO TO THE GENERAL MEMBERSHIP FOR A VOTE. Of course, it will probably get thrown out by the 10 people who threw out ALL of the other rules that they did not agree with this year! Yeah, that's the way to run OUR organization. And just think, you all voted these same people back in to run it next year too! Remember, I tried to let ALL of you vote on the rules on-line two years ago and got told that I could not do that. When are you guys going to wake up? We are all being lead down a path that they want to lead us down. Does any body else think this is wrong or are Tony and I the only ones that feel this way?

Jeff,
I agree that all members of USRA should vote,but you may want to post this in the USRA forum,with any vote changes you will have to address the Ethics commitee ability to overturn any vote also.I think there will have to be major changes in the basic structure for this to work. Bill