NHRA Leadership question

[Greg Hill]

What needs to happen is for the members to get their voting rights back. The members could then elect a board that could hire the CEO and other top management people and set their salaries. I think a board should be made up of sportsman racers, pro racers, track owners, and maybe sponsors. They should fill a term of two years with a maximum of three terms. Elections could happen every two years along with a convention for the members in a nice part of the country. The organization should be run for the benefit of its members. I think track owners, sponsors, and people who hold a competition liscense and race three or four times a year should be eligible to vote.

[FED 387]

Mr. Joffrion---Excellent well written letter to the NHRA mgmt. I find it inconceivable that they would not give you the courtesy of a reply even if was only "we got your letter ,will look at it, get back to you soon". But on the other hand I'm not surprised I think they have lots of things to maybe worry about NOW but not so in 2008,least of all a letter from "another disgruntled racer/track owner,whatever" about how the NHRA is being run. They could/should have at least sent a form letter acknowledging receipt of you letter--Well when the IRS agent/agents show up to look at the "books" you can bet there is gonna be a lotta *** kissing going on there--Comp

[Dgal]

Originally Posted by FED 387

Well when the IRS agent/agents show up to look at the "books" you can bet there is gonna be a lotta *** kissing going on there--Comp

Be careful of the toes you step on today because they may be connected to the *** you have to kiss tomorrow. A pretty good policy to adopt in my opine.

Don

[Julie Jordan]

Originally Posted by Greg Hill

What needs to happen is for the members to get their voting rights back. The members could then elect a board that could hire the CEO and other top management people and set their salaries. I think a board should be made up of sportsman racers, pro racers, track owners, and maybe sponsors. They should fill a term of two years with a maximum of three terms. Elections could happen every two years along with a convention for the members in a nice part of the country. The organization should be run for the benefit of its members. I think track owners, sponsors, and people who hold a competition liscense and race three or four times a year should be eligible to vote.

According to the 2009 tax returns $4.4 million was collected in membership "dues". At an average of $60, this equates to over 73,000 members. Track owners, sponsors and racers maybe comprise 10% of that? So, if the organization is to be run for the "benefit of its members" then how is it equitable to exclude the largest block of people from voting?

[Ed Fernandez]

Originally Posted by Julie Jordan

According to the 2009 tax returns $4.4 million was collected in membership "dues". At an average of $60, this equates to over 73,000 members. Track owners, sponsors and racers maybe comprise 10% of that? So, if the organization is to be run for the "benefit of its members" then how is it equitable to exclude the largest block of people from voting?

Thanks Julie for a dose of reality.
The LAST thing you would want is NHRA to be put in the hands of the racers.More math.
+ or - 4,000 S/SS racers(number taken out of the air) -:- by 73,000 + roughly 5% of the membership.I don't know the amount of super category racers,but if they're about another 4,000 then that's still a bit over 10%.So to get what we want,screw the fans and bracket racers.
All this talk about putting who we want in is moot anyway.If they are by a miracle equal to the parting of the Red Sea,removed from their positions,I'm sure they will hand pick their replacements.
Remember the devil you know and the devil you don't know.

[CycloneFE]

Greg,

Your comments are the reason I started this thread. IF we were to get the vote, what and who are we looking for? What qualities do they possess?

Julie,

You are correct regarding the member, but remember that out of ALL of those members just how many actually race. "Joe Fan" from Seattle(an NHRA member) may have never heard of Pat Joffrion, why would he vote for him? He may know of Shirley Muldowney and think she can run NHRA. I mean nothing against Shirley, she is just an example of a popular namesake.

Should we be able to vote, can we put someone in that really can do the job needed?

[davidhuff]

Originally Posted by Chad Rhodes

then why would they ignore one of their brightest, most profitable, most well respected track owners?

I would love to know the answer to that myself!

[Greg Hill]

In 1987 when NHRA was granted their 501c6 they said they had 4 classes of members. A lot of organizations have different classes of members some with voting rights and some without. It makes sense to me to have people who participate in divisional and national races to be the ones who vote for a board. No other member would be as affected by things done by the organization as people who participate in these races. I don't think people that don't race or only bracket race would have the interest that divisonal and national racers would have. The bracket racers would be represented by their track owners and the track owners could speak for their racers. People that don't race at all shouldn't have a voice in how the organization is run. I'm not talking about taking a vote on day to day issues. This mebership model is how the SCCA is run with the voting members voting for a board of directors. The board would set a broad policy of how the organization should be run and hire a professional to run it.

I think this would be a helluva lot better than what we now have.

[Chad Rhodes]

Originally Posted by Greg Hill

In 1987 when NHRA was granted their 501c6 they said they had 4 classes of members. A lot of organizations have different classes of members some with voting rights and some without. It makes sense to me to have people who participate in divisional and national races to be the ones who vote for a board. No other member would be as affected by things done by the organization as people who participate in these races. I don't think people that don't race or only bracket race would have the interest that divisonal and national racers would have. The bracket racers would be represented by their track owners and the track owners could speak for their racers. People that don't race at all shouldn't have a voice in how the organization is run. I'm not talking about taking a vote on day to day issues. This mebership model is how the SCCA is run with the voting members voting for a board of directors. The board would set a broad policy of how the organization should be run and hire a professional to run it.

I think this would be a helluva lot better than what we now have.

sounds great to me. I still wonder why they would completely ignore Pat though?

[Greg Hill]

Originally Posted by Chad Rhodes

sounds great to me. I still wonder why they would completely ignore Pat though?

Because they are ignorant and arrogant. A dangerous combination.