David Whiteside's response to Jim Allen's open letter
forwarded to the list by Pat Ryan
Jim Allen (Julie Allen's father-in-law) recently posted a response to Pat
Ryan's open letter on the Internet. I wanted to respond to Mr. Allen's letter
because it misunderstands the purpose of the proposed buyout and contains
errors, misinformation and inaccuracies. Additionally, I am concerned about
Mr. Allen's motivations, because Henry Payne (one of the owners of SVRA) told
me that he received a similar fax from Mr. Allen about two weeks ago and
called Mr. Allen to correct the errors I will cover here. It is troubling
when someone's misunderstanding is shown to be wrong, yet they subsequently
republish inaccurate material.
Before I respond however, I want to summarize my history and relationship
with the SVRA, for those who may not know who I am. In 1978, at the
invitation of Ford Heacock, I attended my first vintage race at Sebring, and
I was hooked. I bought a vintage race car and joined the SVRA the next year
(member 131). From that point I attended EVERY SVRA event until 1991, when
my work caused me to miss Sebring. I have missed no more than 5 SVRA events
until this year, and I have attended more events than any other member,
including my hero, Bob Fergus. I was honored to receive the 1989 Driver of
the Year and I served as the first Group Two representative. Although I only
race Lotuses, I have raced them in every group except Group 7. I have driven
my cars to the track, brought them on open trailers and had them delivered by
18-wheelers. Like Mr. Allen, I enjoy the fact that, no matter what the
occupation or station in life, we have a common bond at the track our love
of old racing cars.
In 1996 I became very concerned about the direction the management of SVRA
(Frank Rupp and Julie Allen) was taking. I felt that many poor decisions
were being made without the input of the owners or the membership and that
those decisions were affecting the continued viability of the SVRA. Some of
the questionable decisions include:
1. Excessive charges. For example, it was unconscionable to charge
$60.00
for the year-end banquet ticket, thereby excluding "open trailer guys" and
even 18-wheeler crews from participating in our only organization-wide
function. The banquet should be a function that includes everyone, and many
members (including some former Drivers of the Year) did not go because of the
price.
2. Price gouging and lack of value. Management eliminated event
awards,
perks, parties and the subscription to Vintage Motorsport without
consultation with the members and without providing any corresponding
benefit, all in an effort to squeeze the last dollar out of the members. (In
fact, until a "stink" was made, the management contemplated eliminating the
subscription without any refund - it was only after protest that they gave a
paltry $10.50 merchandise rebate to those who had just renewed their
membership and been promised, when they renewed their membership, a year's
subscription to Vintage Motorsport as a "$60.00 value").
3. Loss of purpose. We are supposed to have fun and recreate the
spirit of
the "good old days." The scheduling of Phoenix at an impossible time of year
and at the same time as an already scheduled HARE event harmed our
relationship with two fellow clubs and was a public relations disaster. The
ultimate embarrassment was Race Jamaica, which answered the question of what
one does when one has so few entries that none are running at the finish.
Race Jamaica had nothing to do with vintage racing, but it did provide
management with the opportunity to make multiple visits to Jamaica.
4. Personality conflicts. The general abuse of the SVRA staff, which
was
once our greatest asset, was very disturbing. Management treated these
weekend volunteers (many of whom were judges, lawyers, accountants and others
professionals) as their personal vassals or servants. Many have left,
others are leaving.
5. Failure to handle the routine business of SVRA. The loss of the
event
which started
SVRA (Sebring) was distressing. The idea of "Period Prepared" was
depressing. What the membership doesn't know was until Pat Ryan started
working on his proposal, management had not secured a written contact with
either Mid-Ohio or Watkins Glen for THIS YEAR!
There may be a multitude of other examples of poor management, incompetence
or neglect that others could cite, but that is not the purpose of this
response. What I saw convinced me that SVRA needed to become more responsive
to its membership if it was to continue in its premier role. The best way to
insure that goal was through a democratization of the organization. When Pat
Ryan told me that the current owners (Syd Silverman, Henry Payne III and Mike
Amalfitano, plus the General Manager, Frank Rupp) agreed to consider a
proposal which would permit the membership to buyout the current owners of
SVRA and convert the SVRA to a non-profit entity, I volunteered to act as a
liaison between Pat and the owners. The Proposal was straightforward and had
no hidden agenda. The salient points, which have already been disseminated
by Pat Ryan, follow:
1. The SVRA would be changed to a not-for-profit corporation and anyone
(even "rivals" like Joe Pendergast if he wanted) who had ever participated in
an SVRA event could become an owner. There would be NO limit on the number
of owners and NO financial or other qualifications. If you paid the
ownership price that was it -- it didn't matter who you were, where you got
the money, etc.
2. The new owners would have the right to elect a Board of Directors
and
the officers of the club, and perhaps get a patch or shirt saying "charter
owner", but would receive no other benefits. It was never proposed that the
new owners would receive free entries they would pay their way just like
any other competitors who raced with SVRA, but were not owners. What I think
Mr. Allen has confused is that Pat's Proposal did permit Syd Silverman and
Henry Payne to remain as Directors and have one complimentary entry to SVRA
events in recognition of their invaluable (and often thankless) past service
as Chairmen of the SVRA.
3. Anyone who had participated in at least one SVRA event would have
the
right to vote for the Group Representative of the Group(s) they raced in.
There would be 9 Group Representatives, one for each race group and one for
Exhibition. The Group Representatives would have to be elected or reelected
each year and would have to approve any and all rule changes or
modifications.
4. As mentioned earlier, anyone could become an owner. We decided to
set
the price of ownership at $10,000, which admittedly is high, but probably no
more than 95% of our membership spends each year on vintage racing. We
recognized that $10,000 would eliminate some from ownership, but we had to
set the price high enough to fund the buyout and leave the club with
sufficient operating capital. There was NO attendance requirement for any
owner except the President of the club, who was expected to attend every
event. Pat anticipated a minimum of thirty owners (which we originally thought
was the number
necessary to fund the buyout and leave the club with a substantial working
capital cushion), but we hoped to have at least fifty. The more owners we
had, the better. The number of owners under Pat's Proposal is considerably
greater than the four current owners.
5. Pat Ryan and I had agreed that neither of us would be eligible to
serve
as an officer of the club, to show there was no hidden agenda and that this
was not some sort of "power grab" by us.
6. The Charter of the club could only be amended by a super majority
(either 66% or 75% affirmative vote of the owners). Henry Payne's "Three
Tenants of SVRA" [ 1) Cars racing with similar cars of the same period, 2)
guaranteed track time and 3) the 13/13 rule] were incorporated in the
Charter.
7. The current race groups would be maintained and there could be no
changes to the Groups or the Competition Rules without the affirmative vote
of a majority of BOTH the Group Representatives and the new owners.
While I recognize that a democracy is an inefficient way to run an
organization, I felt that this proposal might be the catalyst to re-energize
the SVRA, which still has many, many strong points and remains my first love
among racing organizations. Unfortunately, misinformation spread by people
like Mr. Allen, coupled with competing offers for SVRA, have dashed any hopes
of a democratic, not-for-profit reorganization of the SVRA. Nevertheless, I
wanted to take the time, as Mr. Allen and Paul Harvey say, "to tell the rest
of the story."
David Whiteside
E-mail :
DWhitesdJr@aol.com
Phone : (205) 320-0555
Fax : (205)
320-1444
|