Is CMRA ready for the DPS OFFICE to regulate the racers

[Ted Phillips]

So, BoD, you DON'T need to be certified by the DPS to teach the CMRA class. Not because you teach procedures and policies but because nothing you teach applies to public highways, it's not advertised to teach public roadway skills and of course race bikes aren't street legal.

We've all known that for months, some of us for years:

The CMRA was given an exemption from having to be certified in the eyes of DPS. The licensing school does not teach riding skills. It teaches procedures. The DPS has been asking providers for years to comply with this law. Enforcement awareness started at the end of 2011. Enforcement started in 2012.

There was nothing that needed taking action on.

[Brandt Dillon]

We've all known that for months, some of us for years:

Strange. Several months ago all the tracks received certified letters advising them that ALL motorcycle instruction was to stop unless the schools and every single instructor working for them were certified by the state. This included, at the time, race race schools, private instruction and even dirt bikes. Nancy said in this thread that DPS certified Instructors were required to teach the CMRA school, by the CMRA as if this needed to be so that we were being compliant. Maybe the club required DPS certification just to require it... for the hell of it and I assumed incorrectly.

What I just posted is effective today... brand new.

I wish the DPS had known what you knew months or even years ago and not tried to enforce this stuff on road race schools. It would have saved a few of us a lot of time, trouble and few bucks.

Anyway, for those of you who didn't know... road race instruction is exempt as long as you meet the guidelines above.

[Greg Gilstrap]

This included, at the time, race race schools, private instruction and even dirt bikes.

Hi Brandt,
I believe in this sentence you meant 'road race schools'?
Thank you for following up on this!

[Steve McNamara]

I wonder if Peyton can get us our fees back? Nice to see that some clarifications have been made.

[Ted Phillips]

I wish the DPS had known what you knew months or even years ago and not tried to enforce this stuff on road race schools. It would have saved a few of us a lot of time, trouble and few bucks.

My reply was referring to the CMRA's exemption only. There was no action for the BOD to take when this thread was started months ago since the CMRA's class was never in any danger.

I think I may have allowed the tone of your post muddle my interpretation of its overall intent.

Should I have read this line:
Originally Posted by Brandt Dillon
So, BoD, you DON'T need to be certified by the DPS to teach the CMRA class. Not because you teach procedures and policies but because nothing you teach applies to public highways, it's not advertised to teach public roadway skills and of course race bikes aren't street legal.

As:
Originally Posted by Brandt Dillon
So, BoD, Ridesmart and its Instructors DON'T need to be certified by the DPS to teach the CMRA class. Not because we teach procedures and policies but because nothing we teach applies to public highways, it's not advertised to teach public roadway skills and of course race bikes aren't street legal.

If a situation has been cleared up involving you, Ridesmart, and the DPS then I share in your relief, but I want to make clear that there was never any "BS" involving the BOD, the CMRA or the DPS. Long before and since this thread was started the Club has remained fully prepared to license students.

[Peyton Inge]

I wonder if Peyton can get us our fees back?

Nope. By willfully agreeing to comply with DPS' prior interpretation of the law, track day organizations that previously obtained "approval" are now bound by the original terms of that approval, provided you offer instruction for consideration. See para. 5.

To Ted's point, seeking an "exemption" instead of saying "screw you," did the track day community, which is where most of our members originate, a diservice. You helped create an environment where DPS expects to regulate and monitor any track instruction when the skills developed could be used on the street. The reporting requirements will drive up participation costs at track days due to insurance concerns, among other issues.

That said, for now DPS wants nothing to do with classes designed to teach track skills only. Offline, I'm happy to talk about hypothetical scenarios as they pertain to DPS' new official policy.

[Brandt Dillon]

My reply was referring to the CMRA's exemption only. There was no action for the BOD to take when this thread was started months ago since the CMRA's class was never in any danger.

I think I may have allowed the tone of your post muddle my interpretation of its overall intent.

Should I have read this line:
Originally Posted by Brandt Dillon
So, BoD, you DON'T need to be certified by the DPS to teach the CMRA class. Not because you teach procedures and policies but because nothing you teach applies to public highways, it's not advertised to teach public roadway skills and of course race bikes aren't street legal.

As:
Originally Posted by Brandt Dillon
So, BoD, Ridesmart and its Instructors DON'T need to be certified by the DPS to teach the CMRA class. Not because we teach procedures and policies but because nothing we teach applies to public highways, it's not advertised to teach public roadway skills and of course race bikes aren't street legal.

If a situation has been cleared up involving you, Ridesmart, and the DPS then I share in your relief, but I want to make clear that there was never any "BS" involving the BOD, the CMRA or the DPS. Long before and since this thread was started the Club has remained fully prepared to license students.

I'm really lost here.

Here.... i'll rephrase it.

Thanks Peyton for having the DPS clarify that race schools are exempt, as of 1/15/13. Considering that about 3 or 4 months ago the DPS sent certified letters to all the tracks which resulted in all motorcycle instruction, without certification, being shut down I appreciate you working efficiently to have this law, that was being enforced by the DPS, revised.

Additionally, in case the CMRA was confused about the certification, this revision now clearly makes folks who desire to teach the licensing school exempt from certification. The CMRA can now choose anyone. But you may have already knew this.

Thanks again, Peyton.

[Ted Phillips]

To Ted's point, seeking an "exemption" instead of saying "screw you," did the track day community, which is where most of our members originate, a diservice. You helped create an environment where DPS expects to regulate and monitor any track instruction when the skills developed could be used on the street. The reporting requirements will drive up participation costs at track days due to insurance concerns, among other issues.

Well that's a unique perspective. I suppose if trackday organizations wanted me to look out for their best interests they could vote me on their Boards too.

[Steve McNamara]

Funny,
In my line of work I rarely say screw you to anybody. As far as a disservice, I can't imagine how complying with a state mandate qualifies. If anything our insurance is lower because we have our state license. I never had a problem with the requirement because I could meet all of the prerequisites and $45.00 is less expensive than an attorney to fight for clarificationary change. It appears that some people have tried to bring the CMRA into their personal issues. The club required its providers to comply with a state regulation which has now been changed. Let's move on.

[Brandt Dillon]

Let's move on.

I agree. It's too cliquish around here anyway.