John,
The point of this whole proposal was to eliminate the burden of finding corner workers and promote consistency of rule enforcement and interpretation. If we race at DKC or Katy we know what is going to be called and not called. At NTK, I have 6 different guesses. I would like to be clear on a few other points before I respond specifically to your questions.
Point 1 - I shared an earlier version of this proposal with the BOD but received no feedback in person or online until now. I have also done
ALL of the research and received no input from the BOD. I have received plenty of nay saying from "life long members". This is the same situation as the Karting 101 seminar - a few people came up with the idea and did the actual work and there was plenty of nay saying from the BOD before we tried to actually do anything. However, I have received constructive feedback from a few members.
Point 2 - Katy has done something similar and has received very positive feedback.
Point 3 - If we do nothing, people will go other places. We tried green tickets for the prize tables in 2017 and we can see that did us very little good in recruiting corner workers.
To answer your questions directly, inline:
*Where would you propose the leadership look for qualified individuals to hire for running our races? -
University of North Texas is right down the road. There is also FB and other social media outlets. As for the Race Director, there are plenty of qualified individuals that are non racing members. I also believe some of the regional race directors live near the track. I can also argue that many past and present members of the BOD are not qualified run a race.
*What if only 10 member choose to join in on this proposal? It seems to me at is an all or nothing option for our membership.
In the slide labeled "Additional Notes" it has a back out plan - Put rules changed in with an * and we can word the by law specifically to state that there is the option of not using paid workers if there are not enough funds to pay for it.
*If someone "opts in" on this proposal why wouldn't they be required to pay for 3 corners workers (one for each series)?
OK, this is definitely something we could discuss. Nothing I came up with is written in stone and why I posted it here.
Since they are opting out of work so they should be expected to pay at least $225 (the cost of 1 corner worker per series).
I was trying to give people the affordable option instead of raising everyone's dues.
*Why should those that choose not to pay an additional feel lose the opportunity for the 230 points for first place?
Those 230 points were put in as an incentive to get people to work, but that is not driving the workers we need to run a race (corner workers). In this proposal, no one would receive 230 points. It would also eliminate the burden on people who run multiple classes or have multiple racers.
*Why would you limit workers to only 2 entries per year...these volunteers would be the ones keeping karts on the track when we don't have enough paid workers...why should they be punished?
We can take that out, again put in there for discussion.
*Voting cannot be held on by-law changes at the January rules meeting.
And yet you did not object at the BOD or General Business meeting when it was brought up. And I disagree - The January Business Meeting is a regularly scheduled business meeting that we vote on rules. The December Meeting is the meeting designated to vote for BOD and Leadership, the November Meeting is the meeting to nominate, and there is a designated tire vote meeting. We conduct other General Business at those meetings.
*Tax implications of hiring workers has to be investigated with respect to our standing as a non-profit.
We discussed in the November General Business Meeting, we currently pay people for other services like Tech. We are only required to provide 1099's to people we pay over $600 a year. Federal Tax information for non and not for profit organizations - https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profi ... forms-1099 - but you are right, we should probably ask our accountant.
*I have other concerns but this is just to point out that we need more discussion and planning for this proposal -
it seems that a few of you are intent on killing this, so consider it a victory for no change. I am with withdrawing it from consideration. I will go back to being part of the problem and stop offering solutions. Sign me up for 50/50 next year! If someone else wants to pick this up, I will send you my notes.
Do you have a better solution?