[Mackie Family Racing]

Rock et al,

For those that might have interest, let me provide an update on the long-winded saga that started with an overlength citation from a fine officer of the Michigan State Police Commercial Vehicle Enforcement unit (on the way to the Stanton divisional). I had my day in court in Petticoat Junction yesterday (aka, Ithaca, MI), so here's what I know based upon my experience, and also a lot of digging that Rock Haas has been doing... apologize upfront for a long post:

- several weeks back, from two completely different sources, Rock and I confirmed that the strictest reading of the applicable length statute for MI highways would indicate that motorhomes are technically not allowed to tow ANYTHING... notably, there is a catch-all clause at the end of the statute that says (quite clearly, unforunately) that any combination (e.g., motorhome and trailer) that is not specifically dealt with in the statute is prohibited. So for several folks that proudly posted that they are using a 18' motorhome to pull a 16' trailer... you are just as illegal (technically) as us gluttons that have 80' plus units.

The MI State Police went on to say in one of the responses we rec'd that because it is largely impractical to pull over every single motorhome that goes by pulling a trailer of any kind (plus the danger of potentially making the driver unhook and leave their fishing boat at the side of the road), the officer will defer to the commercial code, and (very) arbitrarily choose to apply the length limited specified for (straight) trucks and trailers -- which is 65 feet. It is important to note that the same clause in the statute provides for an unlimited length for semi-tractor and trailer combinations (i.e., 18-wheelers), as long as the trailer is 53 feet or less.

In practice, since most of us are probably heading to races at night, or returning on Sundays when DOT presence is somewhat limited, there's probably not that much chance of getting pulled over. In addition, the majority of the DOT focus is clearly on big trucks, hauling lots of weight, constantly in use, etc. -- so like me, one could drive for years and never be pulled over (unless you give them a reason, like speeding). And for the benefit of those that do have shorter race rigs -- you're right, they're less obvious, and much less likely to get pulled over than an 85 foot rig.

- to my specific case -- as I previously posted, I was given the option of paying a $240 fine, visiting with a magistrate and the officer (not, waste of time), or requesting a formal hearing with an opportunity for a pre-hearing negotiation with the Prosecutor. I chose option #3, and had two conversations with the ***'t Prosecutor. Without boring you with the gory details, it was obvious she was entirely unfamiliar with the statute... when she called me back several days later, she tried to argue that there was an obvious reference to recreational vehicle length in one of the clauses, and on that basis, had agreed with her boss, the Prosecutor, that there was no need to negotiate with me. When I pointed out to her that she had mis-read the statute -- and that the clause in question was actually referring to commercial vehicles transporting recreational vehicles (e.g., from the factory to the dealer), she sheepishly said, "Oh. You're right. Well hopefully the Judge will see it your way"

- in court yesterday, I thought God was looking out for me, as the officer failed to show at 9am. Unfortunately, as this was in Petticoat Junction, the court didn't have much else to do that was pressing (unlike busy courts which probably would have instantly said "have a nice day, case dismissed"), I was asked to wait for an hour for the dude to show up.

- the actual hearing was almost comical. The Prosecutor made her case briefly, which was largely factual (i.e., the rig was 82 feet). I was given ample opportunity to present my views, which were largely that I had a clean record, had driven for years in a rig of this type with no problems, and there were hundreds of others with similar rigs that were at Michigan's 80 racetracks each weekend... I then pressed on the lack of any specific restriction on motorhomes and trailers in the statute, and the fact that if the officer chose to arbitrarily apply the CV restrictions, it made no sense to me why he picked the limit for truck and trailer versus semi-tractor and trailer... my argument being that a truck is something you put cargo/load into, which is pulling a trailer, versus a semi-tractor with a sleeper -- that is just a shorter version of what we drive.

- good news -- Judge agreed with virtually all of my points. Bad news -- he obviously had his mind made up that he was going to ding me for the fine regardless, which in the end, he did. He argued that the intent of the statute was to ensure public safety, and thus he said the limits should apply to motorhome/trailer combos -- even if it doesn't say so -- and for whatever reason (probably he wanted the money), he stuck at 65 feet. His ***-cover comment at the end was that it was a no point citation that wouldn't even be abstracted to the Secretary of State (DMV in MI terms), and if I thought he had mis-interpreted the statute, I could file an appeal within 21 days.

Apologize for the lengthy post -- but I assume only those of you with any interest would read it anyway. It's clear the only way we're going to solve this -- for everyone, not just those of us with big rigs -- is to get an exemption/permitting process incorporated into the law. Rock has been working this angle with his State Representative, and I have spoken to several contacts that I have (including Roger Penske) to have them put a little heat on the folks in Lansing to get something passed quickly.

So good luck everyone. Don't know what to tell folks that are dealing with the officer that is lurking at the Port Huron - Sarnia bridge... for everyone else, I can only suggest to avoid giving the boys a reason to pull you over, travel at night/Sunday's, tow your stacker behind your Chevette... whatever works for you.

Scott