To be fair, during the time I was on the ITAC, we had more than a few requests that got bogged down INSIDE that body - primarily questions re: weights on older or more obscure cars, or for make/model examples for which there were lots of variants or changes represented by a spec line (Volvos, Mustangs come to mind). The ITAC can't be expert on the details of all of the options in the book and the processes/practices in place over the past 2 years required a substantial degree of due diligence, for example to try to understand how update/backdate options influenced starting-point stock power figures.
The most important decision during this time was the "power factor" question. To do that in a repeatable, transparent way is a tough balancing act that requires time. And for this (and other information) the ITAC was counting on the kindness of members who were more expert in the cases under consideration. You can't just say, "Dammit, man - I need to know the difference between the '86 and '88, and I need to know it NOW."
Requests that didn't come with appropriate documentation should (I think) have been returned to the member submitting them. In this day and age, it's completely reasonable to ask members to do their homework (e.g., scanning FSM pages or similar information) before considering changes to specifications or rules...
But those cases represent only a small portion of the requests that didn't get decisions over that period of time, however. Looking back, I blame a couple or organizational issues that could be improved REGARDLESS of the processes applied within the Ad Hocs (which are not by the way governed by any rules or Club policy that I've been able to find) and the CRB:
** There should be one and only one "official" channel of referrals to the CRB from each Ad Hoc, and it should be done in writing with formal recommendations. Actual RECOMMENDATIONS alone should travel through this distinct channel, separate from other informal communications.
** The CRB should have to report out "aye" or "nay" on every item sent up to them. I'm personally not very comfortable with the practice of sending a recommendation back to the Ad Hoc to be "scrubbed down" or whatever but if there has to be an allowance for that, instances of its use must be documented so no request gets lost in an infinite loop or falls into a crack.
** The Club should report each request (verbatim), the resulting Ad Hoc recommendation (verbatim), AND the CRB (and Board) votes on each item. If there's an argument that room prohibits all that from being in Fastrack, it should be documented online. Every time something is summarized or restated, something gets lost in the translation, or more importantly someone can impose their own intentions on the policy.
There's been grumbling about time, money, and working on a database system to keep track of all this. I don't believe that the lack of a techology solution is a fair excuse for not doing it right since this could all be accomplished with an Excel spreadsheet.
The wobbly practices involved here have grown up in an organizational culture that is completely OK with - in fact, is greased by - organized disorganization. If I were on the ITAC, I could tell every consituent I talk to that I'm doing a different thing, if there's no official documentation. And that's a problem.
K
