NZ Sports Car Racing Club 2016 AGM Minutes

Transcription

1 Minutes of the Annual General Meeting of the NZSCRC held at the Chateau, Tongariro National Park. Opening: Gerard Barker chaired the meeting and declared it open at 2pm. In Attendance: Lloyd Wilson, John Mines, Mike Limbrick, David Glasson, Nick Barker, Barry Styles, Craig Sawyer, Richard Kelly, Dean McCarroll, Peter De Joux, Kev Adlington, Gerard Barker and Paul Rasmusson, Mark Galvin and Nathan Head. Apologies: Anton Aalders, John Ryall, Alan Barker, Anthony Barker, Dave Beazer, Mark Burney, Bob Hulme, Robert Hulme, Anthony Moult, Chris Prout, Peter Zivkovic and Iain Slight. Confirmation of last years AGM Minutes: A copy of last years minutes was provided to attending members for confirmation. Chairmans Report: We enjoyed further improvements in numbers this season with a new high of 19 entries for the MG Classic. Even though Formula Libre support was reduced, we managed to have at least 11 entries at each round. There were more interesting dices on the track throughout the field to the extent that we received some complements. The highlight for me was the wet race at Taupo. New drivers, Craig Sawyer, Pete de Joux, Tim Sillay, Chris Prout and Bob Hulme joined the series to provide more competition on the track. Anton Aalders also returned with his re-fettled Aalders GCR and at the last meeting set some impressive track times. Once again, Derek Neal made the trip from Christchurch to run at the MG Classic Meeting. Nick Barker managed to get his new ARES running after sorting out the gremlins. Robert Hulme found much more speed mid season to put in some outstanding performances. Mike Limbrick provided some great mid field competition once he sorted out his problems. Congratulations to David Glasson with his new Juno for winning the Overall Championship and the Supersports class. The 100% finishing record with a new car was outstanding. Congratulations also to Richard Kelly who won both the Prosport and Sports Car Cup series. Like David, Richard had outstanding reliability and was only let down for one race. Pete de Joux s drives also served to reinforce the importance of reliability with second place in the Sports Car Cup. Next season we will be only supporting 6 meetings for our series. The non-championship races will no longer be sought, as they were not well supported. Racing on consecutive weekends added considerably to the strains of racing on our members. We will in future be seeking to have the meetings at more regular intervals.

2 The meeting dates are yet to be finalised, as there is a new promoter for the Premier series, which has changed the existing arrangements between promoters. We expect that the first meeting will be at the MG Classic meeting. Lloyd Wilson has decided to step down from the committee this year after 9 years involvement with sports cars. He is the longest serving member on the committee and has done an outstanding job for us. Thank you Lloyd, we hope that you will continue to keep in contact with us. And finally, many thanks to: - The committee for their help and support, - John Ryall for his donation of trophies, - Bazza for his photos and archives, - Anton Aalders for maintaining the website, - Beulah for organising the AGM. Gerard Mike proposed the Chairmans report be accepted Seconded by David Financial Report: New Zealand Sports Car Racing Incorporated Society Statement of Financial Performance Year ended April Income Entry fees received $8, IRC rebate received $ $ Series entry fee/membership $2, $3, Donations $ Provisional liabilities $ Sale of merchandise $ Interest received $33.09 $27.69 Refund, entries Taupo $ $13, $3, Expenses

3 Trophies $1, $ MSNZ AGM equalisation fee $ $ MSNZ membership levy $ $ Herald advert Denny Hulme meeting $ Website expenses $ $ Pre-paid subs $55.00 Tax on interest $10.92 $9.14 AGM room hire $ $ Entry fees $10, IRC levies $ Corporate room hire - Taupo $75.00 Competitor refunds $ $ $13, $2, Nett Trading Income -$19.71 $1, Bank account 30/4/15 $3, Bank account 30/4/16 $5, Current liabilities Pre-paid subs $55.00 Competitor refunds $ $- $ $- Stock on hand (cost) Polo shirts $64.40 $- Badges $34.50 $- Caps $60.40 $-

4 Lloyd Wilson spoke about the Financial situation of the Club. No entry fees received this year as now members do their own entries online, this makes things very easy with a lot less paper work. Series entry fees are up which is a healthy sign. Sales of merchandise is down, and as we agreed last year these have been written off. Bank balance has improved about $1700 due to more memberships and not having to subsidise IRC meetings. Gerard proposed that the Financial report be accepted Seconded by Nick Barker Election of Officers: Chairman - Gerard Barker was nominated by Paul Rasmussen - seconded by John Mines. Secretary - Dean McCarroll was nominated by Lloyd Wilson - seconded by Barry Styles. Treasurer - Mike Limbrick was nominated by Lloyd Wilson - seconded by Richard Kelly. Race Coordinator - Richard Kelly was nominated by Dean McCarroll - seconded by Pete de Joux Chief Technical Officer - Kev Adlington was nominated by Paul Rasmussen - seconded by John Mines. Remits: Gerard said that there are many contentious issues in the upcoming remits and he urged all members present to give each remit very careful consideration, as some could have very serious consequences to the Club going forward. Gerard, moved remits 1 and 2 to the end of the list as he felt it would be better to discuss them later, also, the remits were discussed in order the Chairman saw fit. Remit 3 Proposal: That Rule Maximum engine capacity be changed to remove the 1600cc limitation for bike-derived engines in ProSport class. Background: This rule is probably a relic from the past, when the technology and metallurgy in bike engines was superior to that of car engines. In terms of brake - horsepower per litre there is now probably no significant difference. People should be free to choose between the better torque characteristics of a car engine versus the lighter weight of a bike engine, without any restriction on overall capacity other than the 2000cc limit for ProSport class. Proposed by Pete De Joux Seconded by Richard Kelly

5 Kev stated that Prosports is and always has been the Sports cars class and we have to be very careful not to harm that, and he urges people to be careful because in his view this remit can have a very adverse effect on Sports Cars. Pete asked how this remit would have that effect. Kev replied that if we leave the door open and along with another remit you could have somebody put in 2 motorbike engines with potentially 400hp and there is no need for it. Richard suggested that even if you had a cc bike engine it still wouldn t see which way a 400hp prosport car goes. Richard said that John Mine s car, as an example, at 1445cc is the sweet spot for a hyabusa in terms of torque vs power but is still substantially slower than a Juno. Pete said that car engines have more opportunity to extract more power. Mike said Dean s car is quick because of its setup. Richard thought that rules should be set by members and with people that run their cars. David thought that any engine up to 2 litres should be ok and that our class encourages innovation, to which Gerard agreed. Pete thought that this rule change may attract people due to lower costs. The remit was put to vote - 11 in favour vs 3 against. Remit 3 Carried Remit 4 Proposal: I propose that we delete Rule Engine Quantity - Maximum of one engine per car. Background: Why does it matter how many engines it's got, as long as the maximum capacity isn't exceeded? If we promote ourselves as a free formula that encourages innovation, our rules shouldn't be unnecessarily restrictive. Proposed by Pete De Joux Seconded by Richard Kelly Nick said if a car had two engines it should automatically be put into the Supersport Class Paul thought that a car with two engines would have major reliability issues and this would not be a good look in the spectators eyes. Gerard said this opens up the power of cars to 400hp + Pete said he would like to amend his remit, to any car with two engines would automatically be in the Supersport Class. Seconded by Nick. The amendment was put to vote - 5 in favour vs 7 against Amendment not carried The remit was put to vote - 1 for vs 9 against Remit 4 not carried

6 Remit 5 Proposal: That the Overall Championship be discontinued. Background: Sports car racing in NZ was always a relatively free-format formula for 2000cc open-cockpit cars constructed from non-exotic materials, in the traditions of home built specials. Our ProSport formula continues this tradition, whilst constraining competitors to comply with certain agreed specifications that they all must adhere to - something would be normal for any championship in any sport. SuperSport is, by definition, all the other cars that do not conform to the formula but whom the committee allows to race alongside the ProSport cars. It seems silly to allow those cars to collect Championship points against ProSport cars, which have had their performance constrained by the specifications of a formula. There may sometimes be a perception amongst spectators, sponsors, and possibly even some of our drivers that the Overall Championship is the most important one, and that SuperSport and ProSport class trophies only exist to provide consolation prizes. We should remove this confusion. There is also the risk that some drivers might be motivated to abandon their ProSport car in favour of a SuperSport car if they saw the Overall Championship as the main prize for the season. Proposed by Pete De Joux Seconded by Richard Kelly Pete said that people are choosing to run in the Supersport class and that the points are irrelevant. Kev sees no reason to play with it. Lloyd thinks first to flag is more important than the overall championship. Dave said that there is a contradiction, if you are going to have a handicap race then there is a place for an overall championship. A motion was put forward to come back to remit 5 later in the meeting. Proposed by Pete and seconded by Lloyd. Amendment put to vote - 10 in favour. Amendment carried The remit was put to vote (later in the meeting) - 0 in favour vs 14 against Remit 5 not carried Remit 12 Proposal: That at least one race at each meeting (preferably two) are handicap races for the coming season. Background: Every other class at meetings we run at have handicap races and they do so because people come out to watch them. GT1/2 GT2/4 & Super Mini Honda Cup. We currently have a situation where our racing is boring to watch with very little passing and generally the races turn into a procession with big gaps between carsi have just returned from racing at Hampton Downs where 3 of us ran with the Rotary Enthusiast Class and it was one of the best day s racing I ve had in yearsto come in off the track with people clapping what they had just watched is really satisfying Proposed bymike Limbrick Seconded by Lloyd Wilson Mike said that people are interested in watching handicap races

7 Gerard wished to clarify Mikes remit, Mike accepted that 1 race was fine. Paul said that it is exciting for the whole race and people are interested in watching. John said that you need a good handicapper for this to work. Mike said that he has access to a program that the pre 65 s use that we can use and that the times used to calculate the handicap should come from the first scratch race. Lloyd said that the organisers are happy to do what ever our class would like, provided we sort out the handicap. Gerard asked if this race would count for full points. Mike said he thought it should. The remit was put to vote - 10 in favour vs 3 against Remit 12 carried Remit 13 Proposal: I would like to propose in a normal 3 race meeting, we run 1 scratch race & 2 handicap per meeting. Background: This suggestion is to provide races with greater levels of interest to 'the punters in the stands'. I don't think that needs a great deal of explanation. GT1&GT2 do this & it certainly offers more attractive racing. I know there will be comments of the dangers of this type of racing but I would suggest that the 'fast' cars need to take absolute responsibility for the passing manoeuvres. Maybe time penalties could be a deterrent for unsafe passing. (administering that may provide challenges) Also some discussion about the car being passed needing to hold to the racing line may be worth having too. Proposed by Craig Sawyer Seconded by Nick Barker Craig said that his remit was purely for the punters benefit. John said that it may even encourage people to race. Richard said that the punters are fellow car racers and there is no crowd. Dave said that the safety aspect should be paramount for both the passing car and the car being passed, the risks are very real and the responsibility lies with everyone. Pete asked which race would we drop if we had 2 handicaps. John suggested that we try 1 handicap race this season. The remit was put to vote - 2 in favour vs 8 against Remit 13 not carried Remit 14 Proposal: For the standing start race, the positions of cars within 106% of the fastest car shall start from the back of the grid (fastest car last) and be held at the grid; or at the discretion of the CoC, released from pit lane, for a handicap start. They will be held for no less than 50% of the lap time set by the fastest car during qualifying. Background: The fastest cars are getting faster and are now lapping even the quickest of the remaining mid-field cars at all circuits. This means some drivers are losing up to 10% of their racing on a weekend, which is not equitable in a series that is being fought for nothing but the fun of racing. This rule is intended to make it less likely for the slower competitors to be lapped and thereby lose racing time on track. Proposed by Richard Kelly Richard said that he would like to withdraw this remit.

8 Remit 15 Proposal: To include Pukekohe Park Raceway in our 2016/2017 race calendar. If next seasons calendar is already finalised then the motion would be for the following year. Background: My reasoning is as follows. Improve the variety of tracks we race on. Greater exposure for our class by being seen at more venues. Reduce dependency on Hampton Downs with potential price hikes. Proposed by Nick Barker Seconded by Kevin Adlington Richard said that he was 100% against this remit as the track is way to bumpy, and the venue operators have made it clear they don't want car racing there. Nick said that the bumps etc were part of the challenge. Richard doesn t want another AKL based meeting on the calendar and noise is a big issue with locals which is strictly enforced. Nick said that if the track isn t used it may not be available in 5-10 years time. Dave thought that once the Super V8 s leave, the track will get run down & they will switch to Hampton Downs. The remit was put to vote - 0 in favour vs 14 against Remit 15 not carried Remit 16 Proposal: To reduce the non-championship rounds from the calendar by one and increase the championship round calendar by one. Background: Our non-championship rounds this season have had substantially fewer cars on the grid. While our championship rounds have typically had larger grids. The figures suggest if we were to increase the championship rounds by one would be working towards making the previously optional meetings more viable. Proposed by Nick Barker Seconded by Craig Sawyer Dave said we discussed this last year and the reason for 6 meetings was to help reduce costs and encourage better turn outs. Richard prefers 6 meetings. The remit was put to vote - 2 in favour vs 9 against Remit 16 not carried

9 Remit 6 Proposal: That the class we currently call ProSport Class be re-named Championship Class. Background: Like all proper championships, it is being contested according to some set of specifications or formula that all competitors must comply with. It should be the showcase for our type of racing, because it retains such a strong link to the history of sports-racing cars in NZ. Having one clearly-defined championship might encourage new competitors, some of whom have been put off by the possibility (or reality) of being thrashed by cars that aren t required to abide by the same rules. We should therefore remove any confusion and make the statement that these are the real sports-racing cars, and everyone else is just one of our friends who we encourage to race alongside us. Proposed by Pete De Joux Seconded by Nick Barker Dave thought that the idea did have some logic. Kev suggested that if it ant broke don t fix it. Richard said that according to the rules Pro Sport is the main class & if your car falls out of these rules it is in Supersport. Gerard suggested we could say Prosport Championship & Supersport Trophy Pete said that there are a huge amount of cars in garages not being used & the majority of them are Prosport cars. Bazza thinks that we are not able to use the term Championship as per MNZ rules. Gerard said the committee will look into it. Pete said that having a championship class might help people understand who is racing who. Richard proposed an amendment that we rename the current championship Prosport Championship and Supersport Trophy Seconded by Lloyd A vote for the amendment was put forward 6 in favour - 0 against Amendment carried The Remit was put to vote - 4 in favour vs 1 against Remit 6 carried Remit 7 Proposal: That the remaining non-compliant cars are still encouraged to race alongside us for their own SuperSport Trophy, but to avoid confusion the word Championship is never used in conjunction with this. Background: We want (and need) these cars on the grid, and actually some of them are the most exciting and interesting cars we have. We therefore shouldn t do anything to devalue or discourage these competitors, and I don t believe this remit would do that in any way. All it would do is to ensure there isn t any confusion about what we see as the one and only Championship we have. Proposed by Pete De Joux Seconded by Richard Kelly Nick asked what the Supersport class wording would be. Gerard said it would be called the Supersport Trophy The remit was put to vote - 5 in favour vs 0 against. Remit 7 Carried

10 Remit 8 Proposal: Part 4 Performance Index should be struck from the NZ Sports Car rules for the coming season. Background: This rule was not applied during the 2015/16 season even though there was cause for it s application. This rule needs to be either struck off; or ratified. If ratified it needs to be applied by the committee; or representative of the committee at all race meetings as required. Proposed by Richard Kelly Seconded by Pete De Joux Kev, if we voted for it what would the outcome be? Richard said the rule will remain and it will be implemented. Kev asked would it have made a change for anybody this year? Richard said Dave would have had to slow down 9 secs a lap and the way its written it would effect the entire field as well. Dave said he can t remember the rule ever been applied and bringing in the handicap will be the equaliser. Mike said that even if the rule was enforced it wouldn t change the outcome of the race. Lloyd proposed that it be thrown out. The remit was put to vote - 12 in favour vs 0 against Remit 8 carried Remit 9 Proposal: If Part 4 Performance Index is ratified as remaining in the NZSC rules; amend point a. to The driver of the fastest car will be asked to slow to an average lap time below the threshold for all remaining races at the event. Background: This amendment is to remove ambiguity in the current rule. Proposed by Richard Kelly Remit 9 was deemed irrelevant due to Remit 8 being carried. Remit 10 Proposal: Clause is amended to allow carbon fibre as a chassis material. Background: Carbon fibre is becoming the material of choice for construction of racing cars and it would enable the current CN sports cars which comply with the FIA crash standards to compete. A recent article on a Dallara carbon fibre chassis indicates that they can be very durable. The primary method of testing the integrity of the chassis is by a torsional test. New Zealand has the expertise through their yacht construction to successfully repair these chassis, witness the local repair of the TRS cars. Under the present rules, a steel chassis car with carbon fibre panel bracing is compliant with our rules. The essential purpose of this remit is to allow the latest cars which are safer. Proposed by John Ryall Seconded by Nick Barker

11 Gerard thinks Carbon Fibre chassis more to do with improving safety than performance. As carbon fibre chassis cars are generally newer, their performance is better as a result of improved design. John Mines wondered if john Ryall was thinking of getting a carbon fibre chassis car & if so, the issue is do we want to let the newest fastest cars in. Richard said that carbon chassis is coming, that s progress. Lloyd said we discussed this last year & it was voted out because of concern a damaged chassis needing to be repaired. In his view the technology is in NZ to do this now. Paul asked if any repairs need to be carried out by a certified repairer. Richard said scrutineers at race meetings are responsible for deeming cars fit to race. Dave suggested that the committee could consult with MNZ regarding their stance on repairs etc. The Remit was put to vote - 6 in favour vs 4 against Remit 10 Carried Remit 11 Proposal: Clause is amended to allow carbon fibre as a chassis material for the Supersport Class. Background: Carbon fibre is becoming the material of choice for construction of racing cars and it would enable the current CN sports cars which comply with the FIA crash standards to compete. A recent article on a Dallara carbon fibre chassis indicates that they can be very durable. The primary method of testing the integrity of the chassis is by a torsional test. New Zealand has the expertise through their yacht construction to successfully repair these chassis, witness the local repair of the TRS cars. Under the present rules, a steel chassis car with carbon fibre panel bracing is compliant with our rules. The essential purpose of this remit is to allow the latest cars which are safer. Proposed by John Ryall Remit 11 was deemed redundant due to the acceptance of Remit 10 Remit 1 Proposal: The 2011 remit, Technical class rules to have a 2 year lock down period, is rescinded. Background: Since many of the members have not been aware of the rule, which was passed at the 2011AGM, it is appropriate for them to confirm or delete the rule. Proposed by Gerard Barker Seconded by Mike Limbrick Gerard stated that the issue was raised by Anton Alders. The remit is pretty vague & he s not sure how it could be applied, there is also a question about the legality of it and he wants it gone. Richard said that it impinges on our constitutional rights to be able to vote on and discuss remits at AGM s. The committee in 2011 didn t follow the correct procedures in the constitution in order to get this remit carried, so it is invalid. Pete said if we vote this remit in what would be the effect of all the technical remits we voted on today? It s best we kill it. Richard said that we must follow legal requirements. The Remit was put to vote - 10 in favour vs 0 against Remit 1 Carried

12 Remit 2 Proposal: In the event of the 2-year lockdown period being confirmed, the wording is changed so that the technical rules may only be changed in odd years unless a change is mandated by MSNZ; or clarification of the rule is required. Technical rules are those that apply to the construction of the cars for racing in the series. The rules as they apply to the points and racing formats are not part of the technical rules. Background: The amendment endeavours to provide some further clarity to the rule and will allow us to deal with unintended consequences of a locked down rule during its mandated locked down period. Proposed by Gerard Barker Remit 2 was deemed redundant due to the acceptance of Remit 1 General Business Richard spoke of the publicity level of the Clubs activities regarding press releases etc. Richard approached Simon Chapman from Velocity & he is interested in discussing ways in which he could help us promote our class, he doesn t think it will be expensive. Simon contributes to several magazines and a handful of newspapers so he would be a good fit for us. Gerard said the Premiere classes including the TRS rounds are being run by a new group who have asked us for our interest. The 10th December Speedworks meeting at Taupo could be a good meeting, but doesn t think the TRS rounds are a good fit for us. Chris Watson would like us to run in the Classic HRC meetings he is organising and Gerard has put a list of dates to him that would suit us and we will hear back from him. Craig said that the biggest meeting in Taupo in terms of crowds this year was with the Trucks racing. This included Motards plus lots of interesting things for families, displays etc. Richard said we have been invited to race at this meeting and Bazza said we would be a good addition. Gerard said things are a bit mixed up this year with new promoters on the scene etc. Gerard said that he would like to rewrite the Club rules, not to change them, but to make them easier to read. Pete asked that next time the website was updated could we remove the turbos permitted" in the Prosport class description. Gerard said this was an oversight and it would be removed. There was a discussion regarding Club Sport cars, Gerard thought we should keep things as they are in case in the future we get 1 or 2 of them who would like to run with us.

13 Proposed Calendar for 2016/2017 MG Classic Manfeild 12th-13th November Speed Works Taupo 10th-11th December Classic and Historic Hampton Downs 14th-15th January IRC Manfeild 18th-19th February Taupo Car Club IRC/HRC 15th-16th April Hampton Downs 6th-7th May Meeting Closed at 5.06pm. Post Meeting Note The 10/11th December meeting at Taupo is not available to us and the Easter 15/16th April meeting is to be confirmed.