by Steve Hudson When the Solo Events Board asked for member comment on the Street Touring rules change proposals in February’s Fastrack, it did not take very long for the forums to start humming.  Pretty soon phrases like “done deal,” “class killer” and “for sale” were flying around the web.  To help us get away from the rumor and speculation, SEB Chairman, Steve Hudson has agreed to shed some light on the potential problems and challenges presented by the current Street Touring rule set. I’ve been asked to comment on the “whys” behind the Street Touring rules proposal published in the February FasTrack.  Street Touring is a growing and popular category, but the SEB is looking to the future.  Our primary focus when making decisions is always the core values listed on page 16 of the Solo rules:

• Increased participation and involvement
• Providing a variety of classes to satisfy a range of economies and commitments.
• Evolving rules in a planned manner.

One of our goals is to eliminate some of the most confusing and contentious requirements, creating a flexible, competitor-friendly set of allowances to carry the Street Touring category forward for the future. Currently, ST and STS are dominated by the Honda Civic/CRX and the Miata and the times for the top cars are almost identical. Meanwhile, there are relatively few modern, low-cost cars competing in what should be a very welcoming category for them.  By consolidating these current top performers in ST and STS into a common class, we feel that it would have the dual benefit of increasing competition for the drivers of these cars, while also allowing a better competitive landscape for a segment of cars that is currently not well served by the category.  We anticipate that this will achieve the core values of increasing participation as well as helping to satisfy a range of economies and commitments. It is time to change from the formula based classing system to subjective classing for Street Touring and to facilitate that, the allowances between the various classes need to be as similar as possible.  Subjective classing will enable us to class new cars in the most appropriate class and to move cars between classes to keep the category healthy and growing.  Some of the proposed rule changes are to try and make the class allowances as similar as we can, but there may be “take backs” and compromises that may need to be made.  But that is why the proposal is out for member feedback, to get input and ideas from you. Despite what you might hear or read on an internet forum, no rules change is a done deal until it is approved by the SCCA Board of Directors.  The most recent example is the rule changes to the Street Touring body work rule which was referred back to the SEB for changes by the Board.  The SCCA is a member driven organization and all rule changes are submitted for your feedback.  That said the SEB does not make recommendations to the Board based solely on the number of members “voting” for or against a proposal.  The best feedback you can give us is to tell us why you like or dislike a proposal and, if you have an alternative, tell us what it is and the reasoning behind the alternative.  Please read the proposal published in the February edition of FasTrack and send your comments to www.sebscca.com. One more thing, the only official source for rules changes and proposals is FasTrack, the minutes of the SEB and Board of Directors are published there and that is official.  Anything posted on an internet forum by an advisory committee member, SEB member or a Director is not official and is their personal opinion.