I've been looking at this rule book for too long, so maybe i missed it, but there seems to be no formal definition of the rule book committee. Yes I know, the rider reps are part of it and it's mentioned in that section. We also list a chairman in the org chart... Even if I missed it it's time to clean this up: I propose that we formalize the rule book committe in our rules. Here is what I propose: The rule book committee shall be comprised of the three rider reps, and three members from the general membership, all to be nominated and elected at the AGM. The members of the rule book committee are not part of the excutive. No member of the executive can be part of the rulebook committee. The rulebook commmittee shall vote on only the topics proposed on the "rule changes" forum at the rulebook committee meeting. In case of a deadlock/tie the topic(s) shall be put before the genreal membership for a yes/no vote (no discussion alowed). The rulebook committee approved/voted on changes, do not need to be approved by the executive. The rulebook committee shall have an impartial chairman (not allowed to hold any other position in the club) whose job will be to chair the meeting, take minutes, count votes, but will not have a vote on any issue. Rational: Do I really have to say it? Democracy, transparency, fairness in changes, and having the general membership involved in any/all changes that affect them. cheers alex
Put the vice prez on the committee for 2 reasons. Odd number of votes to avoid ties. Represent the executive and the views of the executive with respect to the best interests of the club. The rules committee might come up with something nobody has thought of. They can post it up in this forum so it can be discussed and included in their deliberations.
Too late for this year since AGM has already passed. I prefer to go with what was suggested and agreed upon last year, which is to mirror OMRRA's system. Have a period of time when rule changes are open for submission (say 2 weeks). There is a rulebook committee that reviews and vets submissions to avoid redundancies, clarify wording and to remove the rediculous (i.e. - Formula Accountant, only open to accountants). Each rule has it's own thread for discussion, rules are then voted on by the membership either electronically or by mail in.
Really? The rule book committee sits every year after the AGM and makes changes, including, last year, to the clubs by-laws. I think what has been proposed is a rule book change so when would such a suggestion be appropriate if not now? Obviously a change affecting how the committee is made up would not come into practical effect until next year but as of now I don't see any rules which guide the make up of committees, except that it is up to the executive. If that's acceptable to the membership at large then no change is required. This is as good a place to discuss as any, no? The way I see it this has nothing to do with last years decision to mirror OMRRA in how the system works, that is just fine. This proposal is suggested to define how the committee is made up. Unless I'm mistaken OMRRA elects their rule book committee. And it is just a proposal for discussion, not a motion to vote on and not something that IMO should be dismissed out of hand.
Sorry Tony, I thought it was in reference to how the 2013/2014 rulebook committee would be in place, rather than a process to take place at next year's AGM. OMRRA forms their rulebook committee in a similar fashion as the WMRC. As posted on OMRRA forums: 2013 Rules Committee and Rules Submissions Members: The 2013 Rules Committee is about to be formed. If you are interested in joining me, Keith Dibrino and our referee Geoff Ford in an effort to further refine OMRRA rules, please send an email to chrispage47@gmail.com. We will accept 2013 rules submissions for the remainder of the 2012 race season, with the intent of publishing 2013 rules by January 1st. If you have a rules suggestion, please: 1. Send an email to chrispage47@gmail.com with the suggested change or request. 2. Reference the rule book section and page number. For example: Supersport, (B-2), Page 11. From the OMRRA Rule Book: The entire OMRRA Rule Book is subject to the editing control of the Rules Committee regarding issues of appearance, formatting and clarity, with approval from the OMRRA Board of Directors. Rule Book content in the Introduction, Sections D through N, Schedule, Charter, List of Officers and Board Members, General Race Day Information and the Appendices are entirely kept up to date and administered by the Rules Committee with approval from the Board of Directors. Rule Book content in Sections A, B, C and O is administered and updated by the Rules Committee, with approval from the General Membership. Thank you, Chris Page 2012 OMRRA VP
My mistake, it's WMRRA that elects a rule book committee chairman The Second Vice President is in charge of updating the rulebook.The Second Vice President shall preside over the rules committee.The voting members of the rules committee shall be: board of Directors,President,First Vice President,Second Vice President,Third Vice President,secretary, treasurer, grand prix/superbike representative, supersport representative, novice representative, vintage representative,Referee, course marshal, chief technical inspector and past President.The Second Vice President shall have the authority to appoint no more than three additional persons to the rules commitee .The rules committee may review and consider all proposals made pursuant to the rules. In the course of its consideration of the rules proposal or at any other time,the rules committee may adopt, amend blueline or revise any proposal that the rules committee, in its sole discretion,deems appropriate . he rules committee may also,on its own motion, draft,consider and adopt any rules that the rules committee in its sole discretion deems appropriate. The rules committee shall have the authority to delegate its duties and to create sub-committees Seems they call nearly everyone a vice-president
my feeling is that OMRRA's approach is the best. The role of the committee isn't to say yes or no, but rather to weed out the crazies appropriately articulate rule proposals to be put to vote by the general membership
With the OMRRA approach, you don't need a committee at all, just a forum moderator. Maybe that is for the best.
I could go along with that... Let's just get rid of the whole comittee thing, and have the general membership decide on any and all changes that have been proposed. True democracy at work... cheers alex p.s yes Ryan, that includes your Formula Accountant proposal as well... LOL. After all, we did have Formula 40, so why not that. I vote YES! You can grid up with the FC guys/gals...We LIKE accountants!
Just my observation here, but there are 3 people involved in the rules discussion here total in all the threads started. How can the OMRRA model be effective with this level of participation?
To be very honest, with around 125 members at large, how many actually turned up to the AGM to vote? 33 members according to the minutes. In the last 10 years, we've only ever had 2 quorums. One when I was going to cancel the season, and once when everyone wanted to express their hate for the Exec in 2004, when Al Beck had to do the sound rules. Even electing the rule book committee will not adequately express the will of the group. Those who are discussing this now are the passionate ones.
I don't think the membership should be voting on each individual rule. I think that would just end up being messy, and you could get into situations where the majority of the club royally screws a significant minority. The rulebook committee should try to take situations like that into account and come up with some sort of balance. It would be nice if the membership had more visibility into the process and had a chance to respond to proposed changes (like last year with the minimum lap time cutoffs which came out of nowhere with zero discussion with the membership either on the board or at the monthly meetings). Should there be an elected 'rulebook chairman' position? I think that is a good idea, combined with the rider's reps and the VP, I think that would make sense. I also like the suggestion of a time-limited period for submissions, and a central location for those submissions that guarantees they get at least examined and debated by the committee.
