Yet we are just finding out about it now? Maybe not a "secret" meeting but certainly one in which the details were not released voluntarily. What would you call it instead? This has been an ongoing practice by officials. Can't be fought on issues if no one knows about them. Then we hear the excuse, "The meeting was open".... Well that's convenient. Drivers just don't go. What about the closed session coming up in which this will be discussed? Drivers are not invited. Perhaps secret meeting is not the right term but I'm not sure what else this practice should be called. The fact remains that it did happen, we were not informed and information was not made readily available. Bottom line, and no offense, but that's a weak response to the question I asked and only relates to the current issue. You used the word "always". So I'll ask again, what other issues? As I recall every issue I've addressed has ended up being exactly as I presented it.

There were other things about this meeting that I have been told about that lead me to believe things were not handeled properly or fairly, but will not go into detail until further confirmation. Suffice to say, not alerting drivers when there are so many avenues available to so so, from the region websites to the division, is to me a lie by ommission. If they can take the time to publish news about the worker of the year they can certainly give a brief summary of the meetings. There is no excuse to do otherwise other than a need to contain potential recourse.

As it relates to John, we spoke for a long time. He's worried about workers. I don't think the solution to that problem is down sizing. Improving the product, fixing some problems and expansion is the answer. We are shrinking and facing more and more competition every day. NASA just pulled what I see as the coup of the century in taking not only our MO Runoffs date but as I understand it, a number of other abandoned dates. We need more dynamic thinking management, a more efficient and pragmatic worker/steward system and more than anything, less chiefs and more indians. As I've asked before, why do we need 27 stewards for a race with 110 cars? It's totally out of control. Now if we allow one region and track to get control of the whole division I think we run a sever risk of perpetuating the current modus operandi and that just sinks up deeper and deeper into the muck to the point it will be a matter of time before eliminating more races.