New Search
MOTO SHEET ANALYSIS <br /> At that same meeting on March 25, 2005, the original complainant wanted the <br /> investigation to continue therefore he directed us to the track's MOTO sheets, which he claimed <br /> at the time, would accurately show the amount of registration fees obtained by the track on a <br /> particular race day. Based on that information, he suggested that we could compare registration <br /> fees to bank deposits. He suspected that bank deposits were no larger than the registration fees, <br /> and from that we could conclude that Mr. Snook diverted parking revenue. A meeting was <br /> scheduled for April 21, 2005 to meet with the current President, Lance Maguire, and review the <br /> MOTO sheets. <br /> After the review, the original complainant explained to the Department that the MOTO <br /> sheets are not entirely reliable in terms of determining racer entry revenue. They do show the <br /> number of racers, and their expected fee can be calculated; however, if a racer is a State or <br /> District Champion they race for free, or if a racer has a "chit" their race fee is reduced by 50 %. <br /> There is no record of incoming money on the MOTO sheets and no documentation whether a <br /> particular racer paid or not, only the names of the racers Therefore, the MOTO sheets can not <br /> be relied upon to determine the parking revenue or the lack of. <br /> In response, the original complainant has told our office to call all of those racers listed <br /> on the MOTO sheets and ask if they paid the full amount or used a chit. The numbers of racers <br /> per race day ranges from 12 to 161. He also instructed the Department to extrapolate the <br /> concession income listed on the IRS 990, averaging for peak season, and then compare that to <br /> bank deposits as well. The evidentiary value of extrapolating the annual concession income <br /> from the IRS 990 and adjusting for peak season to only determine an average concession income <br /> for one race day is very skeptical. However, a comparison between projected race entries, Mr. <br /> Snook's record of race registration deposits and actual deposits made into the bank account was <br /> attempted. It is difficult to match deposits to specific events; however, a few deposits appear to <br /> be consistent with race entries. That seems to support the original complainant's suspicion; <br /> however, other deposits are larger than expected, suggesting that parking revenue and <br /> concessions are included in the deposit. <br /> • <br /> CONCLUSION <br /> The Department reviewed all documents the original complainant submitted or referred <br /> to. It is clear that Mr. Snook commingled funds and failed to keep accurate records. Since Mr. <br /> Snook resigned and is no longer affiliated with EVB, we don't feel it is prudent to take action <br /> against him for the commingling or records issue. Based on the available information and <br /> recognizing that Mr. Snook had contractual claim to excess funds, it is not clear that Mr. Snook <br /> wrongly diverted funds. We do not believe that records available from the track, or any other <br /> known resources, can be deemed a preponderance of evidence for the purpose of proving that <br /> Scott Snook diverted parking revenue. We continue to only have incomplete and fragmented <br /> records and the inconsistent recollection of a few track participants. <br /> This audit exhausted all possible avenues for new information and we do not believe that <br /> any new information presented would be sufficient to alter this conclusion. <br /> 6 Racers are allowed to park for free while racing at the track i !, <br /> Final Investigative Report 6 of 7 CAS09342.DOC <br />