Spa day 1 trivia question

Posted by noonante on July 18, 2013
Posted in: Horse Racing, Saratoga thoughts. Tagged: . Leave a comment

Saratoga annually features not only the top horses in the country but also many of the best trainers and jockeys.  No fewer than 7 trainers who are stabled here are in the Hall of Fame and another two run here every year with at least a handful of horses.  One of those Hall of Fame trainers was enshrined when Todd Pletcher had just started in grammar school.

Who are the FIVE [new addition] leading trainers over the past five years in number of wins?  One is in the Hall of Fame.

Go to the Horse Racing page for the answer.

The facts are from the Daily Racing Form’s Ultimate Saratoga Players’ Guide and the web site of the National Museum of Racing. 

Iowa court decision – media blows it

Posted by noonante on July 13, 2013
Posted in: Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , . Leave a comment

In our ongoing series, here is reason #471 why the media is held in such disrepute.  As I went through Saturday’s news headlines, I was outraged by the decision from the Iowa Supreme Court upholding the firing of a dental assistant because she was “too attractive” and the dentist “worried he would try to start an affair.”  The notion that a woman would be deprived of her livelihood because of potential misbehavior by her boss kind of violated my sense of fair treatment.

Then I read the opinion of the court which you can read here.  It turns out that the assistant was not fired for either reason.  She was fired because the wife of the dentist uncovered the extent of the personal relationship between her husband and the assistant  –  although she probably did not uncover the full extent until depositions.  She then demanded the assistant be fired in the interests of preserving their marriage.

The dentist and the assistant had a personal relationship that carried over to non-work hours, although nothing in the court’s opinion would suggest that it went beyond a friendship.  While the two engaged in colloquy that could have been the basis for a complaint of sexual harassment, the relationship was consensual with the assistant never objecting to some of the more colorful comments by her boss.  One such example would be the dentist informing her that “if she saw his pants bulging, she would know her clothing was too revealing.”

The sole basis for the court’s opinion was whether “a male employer [can] terminate a long-time female employee because the employer’s wife, due to no fault of the employee, is concerned about the nature of the relationship between the employer and the employee.”  Nothing about either her appearance or his fear he may sometime want an affair.  (Indeed, a justice concurring in the opinion observed that “an employer cannot legally fire an employee simply because the employer finds the employee too attractive.” )

The reality of the court’s decision, of course, would not make for as interesting a headline as many media outlets (including The Paper of Record) used in describing this case, many based an a report by the Associated Press.  I am afraid we can also now expect a flurry of uninformed commentary from those on both the left and the right who cannot resist what appears to be a juicy controversy.  But it’s not the Sean Hannity’s of the world who worry me.  It is The New York Times.  If respect for government institutions is at an all-time low  –  for some understandable reasons  –  falsely portraying a well-reasoned court opinion does not serve the interests of those who think there should be a modicum of respect for those institutions.

NYRA Board selects new CEO in 8 minutes

Posted by noonante on June 21, 2013
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , . 2 Comments

The New York Racing Association has been without a permanent CEO for more than 13 months and the new Reorganization Board did not even begin a search for a replacement until 4 months ago, but they were able to decide unanimously on a new CEO in a mere 8 minutes.  The vote selecting Christopher Kay, an unemployed former executive, took place at the Board’s meeting on June 18.

The NYRA Board hired a search firm that, according to its representative at the meeting, conducted an international search that was able to narrow a field warranting “serious consideration” to a mere 100 candidates in a matter of weeks.  The Board’s committee charged with coming up with a candidate made its report in a closed-door Executive Session during the June 10 meeting.  While that session lasted 54 minutes, there was another item on the agenda.

While I would like to think that Board members spent more than an hour considering the merits of this appointment, one aspect I find troubling is that there was no effort at the public portion of the Board to justify the selection.   The NYRA Board, because it is an agency under the control of state government, is required by law to conduct its affairs in compliance with New York’s Open Meetings Law.  While it is permissible to go into a closed-door session to discuss aspects of certain employment matters, the NYRA Board apparently viewed its obligation to operate in public as being limited to a bare recital of aspects of Kay’s resume.

I don’t raise this because of a desire to nitpick NYRA’s compliance with the spirit of the Open Meetings Law, but because I think it reflects an attitude that public perception  –  and, more significantly, securing public approval for an important decision  –  is not of sufficient moment for this Board to spend more than a few minutes explaining their thinking.

Christopher Kay may turn out to be an outstanding leader for NYRA, and I hope he is.  However, there is nothing that was offered at the public portion of the Board meeting to give me any reason to think so.  His background is one that does not exactly distinguish him from any of hundreds of other lawyers who worked in both the private and non-profit sectors.  He also does not have a background in racing.  (I found his statement that he fell in “love” with the sport by going every summer to Cahokia Downs  –  an oval that closed its doors in 1979  –  as somewhat cringe worthy if that was his last visit to a track. )

I do not think a racing background is a sine qua non for NYRA’s CEO, although Kay’s appointment completes a rather unsettling trifecta with a Governor and Board Chairman who have each acknowledged lacking familiarity with the sport and business.  What is important, however, is that any CEO surrounds himself with knowledgeable and committed staff, and that he be willing to work as an independent figure in the industry and in the New York environment.

There are already indications, however, that Kay was not selected because he is going to be a forceful and independent voice for New York racing.  In comments after the Board meeting, Chairman David Skorton emphasized the importance of cooperating with the state government.  He described unidentified past problems as caused not by a “lack of racing savvy, but because of a lack of government savvy.”  He heralded Kay as someone who would make the connection in “the public-private partnership as opposed to the public-private war.”  In this not so thinly-veiled attack on former CEO Charles Hayward, Skorton is sending the message that Kay is a guy who will not be challenging the Governor’s agenda  –  whatever that may turn out to be.

Unfortunately, Skorton’s base of authority clearly resides on the second floor in the Albany Capitol, and not with the horsemen, breeders and fans who are so crucial to New York’s justifiably achieved ranking as the best racing jurisdiction in the nation.  Having disagreements with those in positions of power in government is not necessarily a bad thing.  A Board of Directors has a fiduciary responsibility to its charter and to its base  –  which in this case is the taxpayers of New York in addition to those horsemen, breeders and fans.  There may be times when that fiduciary responsibility requires a responsible and independent Board to disagree with the Governor so as to further the interests of New York’s racing.  I suspect that the real transgression that led to the termination of Hayward last year had nothing to do with an oversight on takeout rates, but with the reality that he was not afraid to stand up to the government to protect the interests of the New York racing community.  If we can end up saying the same about Chris Kay, then he will prove to be an excellent selection.

Random musings on The Week That Was

Posted by noonante on June 16, 2013
Posted in: Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , . Leave a comment

Some random observations on recent events:

  • What is Barack Obama thinking about with Syria involvement?  Candidate Obama talked about dumb wars.  He got us out of one of the dumbest in Iraq, andis ending our involvement in Afghanistan  –  although our initial reason for going in was valid  –  but we are getting embroiled in one of the most complicated situations in that part of the world. Yes, it would be nice if U.S. involvement would bring an end to the killings of thousands of people, but that is a Utopian fantasy at best.  The worst is being embroiled in a civil war in which I do not think one per cent of Americans could identify even two of the insurgent factions, although when you start with Al Qaeda as one, you have to ask “What is Barack Obama thinking?
  • Does not the Iran election make his involvement look even more foolish?  While it is too soon to speculate on the effect of Hassan Rowhani’s election on world events, it is clear that the Iranian people have sent a message to the theocratic dictators of that country.  If greater engagement and influence by the United States is a possibility, it is not helped by choosing the Sunni side in the Syria quagmire.
  • Thanks Bill Clinton for manning up.  Clinton’s comments that Obama could look like a “wuss” if he didn’t engage in Syria is a level of sophistication we might expect from George W. Bush.  Clinton can’t do better than that?
  • Can we debate the serious issue of government surveillance rather than Edward Snowden’s status?  It was perhaps hoping for too much to think that the release of secret government information about surveillance would focus on the merits of the snooping rather than whether the leaker was a hero or a traitor.  That, however, is what has dominated discussion in the blogosphere as well as in the hallowed halls of Congress.  I don’t care what the guy is called.  Why are my phone records going to the government?
  • Speaking of the Congress, is there a competition between the Kings for who can be the biggest clown?  Peter of New York leaped to the forefront by saying journalist Glenn Greenwald should be prosecuted for reporting on the NSA security issue.  Steven of Iowa cannot be far behind, particularly since the immigration issue is working its way to the House.
  • With the riots in France over same-sex marriage, will French Fries be replacing Freedom Fries in the Congressional dining hall?  While one does not normally associate traditional marriage values with France  –  at least traditional in our sense  –  do the riots opposing same-sex marriage mean the French will be allowed back into the right-wings theocratic fold.
  • Speaking of God, what is it with the new Pope?  Thus far, I have criticized Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, the media and Congressional Republicans.  But Pope Francis must have the Vatican insiders  –  including what he referred to as the gay lobby  –  spinning.  It is too soon whether he is a true breath of fresh air in a moribund and archaic body, but he is off to a great start.
  • Is Jon Stewart on his way to becoming the next Wally Pipp?  I don’t know if there has been a new Wally Pipp since the original, but John Oliver is not making me miss John Stewart.
  • For an athlete, is there anything more embarrassing than the hockey goalie replaced during the period?  During the Boston-Pittsburg series, Pittsburg replaced its goalie after the starter gave up three goals in the first period.  I know replacing a pitcher happens all the time  –  indeed, they are not expected to go the whole game  –  but it must be humiliating to skate off in mid-period.

That’s it for now.

Two losses for racing

Posted by noonante on June 13, 2013
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , . Leave a comment

Horse racing suffered two losses this week, one through retirement and one because of death.

Ramon Dominguez announced he was retiring from riding because of serious injuries he suffered in January at Aqueduct.  He was not only one of the country’s best jockeys but, by all accounts, a truly decent and classy person.  It is another reminder of the risks the human participants in this sport take every time they get on the back of a thoroughbred.  We hope that there will be another role for him in the racing business.

The other loss was the passing of former Massachusetts Governor Paul Cellucci because of ALS.  Cellucci’s interest in racing came to light when his publicly-released tax returns showed income reported on a W-2G.  In states such as New York and Kentucky, success in wagering on horses may be viewed positively, but in a place like Massachusetts there is an exotic  –  if not slightly degenerate  –  aspect to a fondness for the track.  Cellucci was also a decent guy who never strayed too far from his working class routes growing up near Worcester, never losing an election as a Republican in the bluest of states.

Is NYRA Board awakening from its hibernation?

Posted by noonante on June 12, 2013
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , . 1 Comment

I thought the New York Racing Association’s Reorganization Board on Monday finally began to exhibit indications that it will be taking a meaningful oversight role over NYRA and New York’s racing.  I have described previous meetings of the body as desultory, but we witnessed a spirited discussion on a contract award to the Global Betting Exchange that even resulted in the first vote by the new Board that had dissenters.

The GBE contract is intended to enhance NYRA’s advance deposit wagering system.  It resulted from a procurement begun in 2011 that ended up with the “old” NYRA Board approving a contract award in August, 2012.  The contentious debate began with reservations expressed by Robert Megna, a Board member but also Governor Cuomo’s Budget Director.  He conveyed the concerns of the Franchise Oversight Board  –  an entity with responsibility for overseeing NYRA’s finances as well as its adherence to procedures for awarding contracts  –  that NYRA did not follow its own procedures in making the award to GBE.  According to Megna, the FOB has “serious reservations about the bidding process.”

While the ensuing discussion may have been spirited, it shed more heat than light on the matter.  Several members, including those on the Board’s Audit Committee, stated that it was the first time they had heard concerns from the FOB about the process for awarding the contract.  If a consensus emerged, it was that while the FOB may have communicated their concerns to prior NYRA management, their issues never made it to the Board, particularly the Audit Committee charged with ensuring that such screw-ups do not happen.  We even had one Board member commenting that it was important to uncover who said what to whom, and when.

Perhaps such an inquiry can be expedited if Board members go back and review their notes from prior meetings.  At the initial meeting of the Board on December 12, one member raised the “account wagering” matter as something that had to be addressed immediately.  This prompted Board Chairman David Skorton to direct Acting CEO Ellen McClain to make a report by Christmas of all issues “hanging fire,” specifically including the account wagering issue.  (This report was apparently never done.)  At the next meeting on January 25, the meeting minutes indicate that the matter of the contract was “discussed and deferred.”  During the third Board meeting on February 27, McClain informed the Board that the FOB had questions regarding the “decision-making process” leading to the selection of GBE and had asked the Board to examine the contract award.  She further informed the Board that she had looked at the process again, was comfortable with it, and referred to GBE as offering “killer technology.”

At the Board’s fourth meeting on April 11, there was a more extended discussion of the GBE contract award.  McClain distributed a written report at the meeting which at least two Board members said answered the questions that needed to be answered and that the selection process was a good one.  Chairman Skorton emphasized that the Board should proceed at its own pace, in part because the McClain report had been delivered recently and partly because of the FOB concerns.  When Board member Megna was asked what his concerns were, he said the question was whether NYRA had followed its own procedures in awarding what he described as a sole source contract, and that the FOB had other questions that needed to be answered.  While Megna did not specify those questions, he thought the contract could move forward once they were addressed.  Chairman Skorton then announced he would convene an ad hoc committee that would review the FOB concerns, address them, and then move forward.  He assured the Board at the April meeting that there would be no need to wait for the next Board meeting before taking action on the contract.

It was, therefore, surprising to listen to the discussion at the June 10 meeting by Board members purportedly being blindsided at learning that the FOB had questions about the process used to select GBE.  While Bob Megna stated that it was not a new issue and that FOB had been raising it, his statements carried little weight with the Board, although one member did state that these were issues that had been discussed at prior meetings.  While most members had no recollection of the prior discussions  –  including Skorton’s commitment to an ad hoc group that would resolve the matter  –  there was no hesitancy in affixing the blame on prior NYRA management, which can only mean Ellen McClain.  When one Board member lamented the fact that this Board was now a governmental body and it is not how government acts, I had to laugh  –  as a former long-time government employee.  It is precisely how government all too often acts.  When you mess up, blame those who are no longer there to explain themselves.

So here is what was decided at the meeting:  the FOB will be asked to provide a written explanation of their issues with the GBE selection “within 48 hours;”  and, the Board will execute the GBE contract unless the FOB memo points out “substantial variance” from NYRA’s procedures on procurements.  You do not need to have attended law school to realize that a standard of “substantial variance” means this dispute is going to continue, since the state’s oversight agencies  –  not only the FOB but the State Gaming Commission, whose Acting Director chairs the FOB  –  will not be satisfied unless the award is cancelled.

It may be difficult to come up with a more glaring example of the effect on New York’s racing from a lack of leadership than this one.  The GBE contract may seem to be an esoteric matter, but NYRA estimates that it will lose between $3 and $5 million in the last three months of this year if the contract does not go forward.  And, no one, including the FOB and Bob Megna, has any questions about the value of GBE’s product.  But what is most frustrating is that this is a matter that could have been resolved with minimal effort over the past ten months since the contract award.

Unfortunately, there is no one, with the exception of the terminated Ellen McClain, who took the initiative to resolve this issue  –  and she is now being blamed for it.  (Significantly, no one at the June 10 meeting mentioned the McClain report that had been distributed prior to the April 11 meeting and was cited as answering the necessary questions.)  All one had to do is sit down with the Chair of the FOB, ascertain the problems and respond to them in writing.  If there really is a problem, then start over.  One person could have done this.  While members of the Board warrant criticism for not having done this  –  acknowledging that they are not paid for their service  –  the paid state employees deserve more than their share of criticism.  NYRA is, after all, an enterprise that is important to the state.  Depriving it of the $3 to $5 million this dispute could end up costing over just three months does not help with their financial viability.  Both Bob Megna and the Gaming Commission’s Acting Director have questioned previously whether NYRA should continue to receive revenues from Video Lottery Terminals.  Could they not have at least taken the initiative to resolve this?

NYRA takeover a year later

Posted by noonante on June 5, 2013
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , , , . 2 Comments

It’s been a year since Governor Andrew Cuomo made his move to take control of New York’s thoroughbred racing.  It’s a good time to step back and see where we have gone.

While one might think that a state government’s seizure of a significant industry would only happen after considerable public debate, the Cuomo effort  –  at least the public part of it  –  moved from an initial assault to enacted legislation in a mere eight weeks, with but a single dissenting vote in the Legislature and no serious discussion in the media.  It began with an “Interim Report” by the State Racing and Wagering Board about an incorrect takeout percentage on certain wagers made on New York’s races over 15 months.  When the error was identified during an audit by the state’s Comptroller, the New York Racing Association corrected the percentage and repaid more than half of the $1.1 million over payment it had received to those bettors it could identify from its records.

Even though the Report was “interim” and had significant shortcomings  –  it does not appear the Racing Board interviewed anyone –  NYRA’s Board fired CEO Charles Hayward and General Counsel Patrick Kehoe a week later on May 3 without conducting their own review of the circumstances.

When the NYRA Board sought to replace the terminated executives, the head of the Racing Board and the chair of the Franchise Oversight Board  –  two of the four state agencies with oversight responsibility for NYRA  –  sent a letter on May 15 purporting outrage at what they described as illegal appointments.  Without citing any authority to support their claim of illegality, the two Cuomo officials also directed that revenues from Video Lottery Terminals  –  essential to NYRA’s finances  –  instead be held by the state, again without any reference to their legal authority for such an action.  In case members of the NYRA Board were still missing the message, the Cuomo Administration’s two top officials on racing proceeded to question the integrity of members of the Board, saying they may have had a “conflict” if they had “financial interests in horse racing.”  (This could mean, for example, the financial interest held by Board members Stuart Janney and Ogden Phipps in their two-year old colt named Orb.)  The letter additionally threatened an investigation into members “character and fitness” to determine whether racing licenses should be revoked.  This letter was sent just four days after The Saratogian reported that a “high-ranking source” said the Governor was considering making more appointees to the Board in addition to the state appointees already on the body in order to take control of it.

Having “prepared the battlefield” as they say in military campaigns, on May 22 the Governor quickly secured the “agreement” of an embarrassingly complicit NYRA Board to surrender control over racing and to amend the law so that 12 of the 17 Board members would be appointed by the Governor and legislative leaders, with Cuomo having eight of the appointments including the Chair.  He waited another 3 1/2 weeks to file the actual legislative language, doing so on the Saturday before the Legislature’s Thursday adjournment for the year.  While enacted in June, he did not sign it until October 1, and then made his appointments to the NYRA “Reorganization Board” on October 18.

Despite the bluster about the problems with the prior Board, five of the 12 state government appointees were on the former Board or had served previously.  (The “old” NYRA had the remaining five appointees;  its picks served on the prior Board.)  The Governor’s signature appointments were chef Bobby Flay and Jane Rosenthal, a founder of the Tribeca Film Festival who had no prior experience with racing.  The remaining 15 members were older white men with backgrounds in real estate, finance or the law.  Many of the new Board (including Flay) owned horses, which supposedly was a matter of great concern when Cuomo began his attack on the “old” NYRA.  The new Board has met five times, including its last meeting on April 29 which lasted 30 minutes, half of which was spent in a closed-door Executive Session.

So what has the “new” NYRA accomplished?

Equine health and safety has been the major priority of Chairman David Skorton, a policy for which he is to be commended.  Last year witnessed a significant number of fatalities at Aqueduct that in March led to the appointment of a Task Force to analyze the causes and make recommendations.  The Task Force consisting of widely-respected industry figures completed its report in August, but Cuomo did not permit its release until September 28.  If the number of fatalities is the sole measure of progress, Skorton has thus far succeeded.  In 2012, there were 22 racing fatalities at Aqueduct on both racing surfaces;  this year there were 9.  Through May 27 of each year, Belmont had two.

The Task Force recommended changes in the administration of legal medications by increasing the time between a race and the last administration of two particular drugs.  New York adopted the changes, and it is anticipated that other states in the mid-Atlantic will follow suit.

One of the most significant recommendations of the Task Force was to overhaul the management of race track veterinarians and the protocols under which they operate, and to hire an Equine Medical Director who would report to the oversight state regulatory body.  Chairman Skorton, however, decided that the position should be at NYRA, resulting in a dispute with the regulatory body (now the State Gaming Commission), that Skorton lost.  The result was an unnecessary delay, meaning that more than nine months after the Task Force concluded its work, there is still not an Equine Medical Director.

While important matters concerning equine safety have been raised, the NYRA Board and Gaming Commission continue to engage in the public relations foolishness of special security procedures for races, but only Grade I races around two turns for three-year olds, continuing their Travers and Wood Memorial protocols for the upcoming Belmont Stakes.  One would think that if these are meaningful and necessary precautions, they would have figured out a way to make them more universal since last August.

While this focus on equine safety is welcome, we should not lose sight of the fact that many of the steps that have been implemented were begun before the new NYRA Board took control.  Unfortunately, when we look beyond these measures, it is hard to identify any significant changes this Board has accomplished in what is now the eighth month of its tenure.

The most conspicuous shortcoming so far is the failure to appoint a successor to Hayward, who was fired more than a year ago.  Ellen McClain had the job three days short of a year, but press leaks back in August from those “high-ranking Cuomo Administration sources” indicated that she would be fired.  If that was the decision, fine, but why is NYRA  —  heading into the Belmont Stakes and the Saratoga meet  –  now being run by a three-person committee while the search process for a permanent replacement goes on?  Incidentally, I never saw any reason why McClain would not have been an excellent choice to lead NYRA.  If you see any improvements in the NYRA experience over the next several months, it is the result of changes begun by Hayward and continued by McClain  –  some of the more visible examples being a much-improved web site, possibly a viewing stand for the public at the Oklahoma training track and a new wagering platform by the Belmont fall meet.  (One change not begun under the old NYRA will be the plaque hung at Saratoga commemorating the 150th anniversary of the track’s first race.  The new Board may not have done anything yet, but their names will be on the plaque.)

While going over a year without leadership for what is the nation’s premier racing is bad enough, it will pale in comparison if significant long-term questions are not addressed.  Here are four:

  • Will NYRA continue to receive the VLT revenues that are so instrumental to its financial viability?  It’s not only the “high-ranking officials,” but the Governor himself who have floated the possibility of redirecting racino revenue that now goes to NYRA to other purposes.  Both Robert Megna, Cuomo’s Budget Director and appointee to the new Board, and Rob Williams, Acting Director of the State Gaming Commission, said last summer that NYRA must “end its reliance on VLT subsidies.”
  • Is management of the race tracks going to be outsourced to a private for-profit entity?  This is another concept raised by that recurrent anonymous source, this time about bringing in a Churchill Downs, Frank Stronach’s Magna Entertainment, or another for-profit business from the “entertainment” industry to actually manage the tracks.
  • What form will “NYRA” take once the current legislation expires?  The NYRA “Reorganization Board” is an entity that is supposed to expire three years after it was appointed on October 18, 2012, and has 30 months from then to recommend legislation for the form NYRA is to then take.  Having frittered away a good portion of the first year, the new Board now only has 22 months to come up with the new approach.
  • What will be done to grow the fan base?  If there is a universal question confronting the entire racing industry, this is it.

Now, I would not expect an organization that has immediate, pressing needs  –  such as hiring a CEO  –  to spend much time on long-term planning.   But the reality is that if you do not focus on it, it will always be pushed into the background by that day’s crisis.  Chairman Skorton has appointed a committee to do some of that planning, with a deadline to report by July 1.

It is also important to bear in mind that NYRA, albeit without leadership, has been functioning.  A good reason for that is what appears to be a contingent of dedicated and capable staff, as well as a group of outside advisors who have been contributing their time and expertise to improving New York’s racing.  One of the changes from the old NYRA is that its Board meetings, and some committee meetings, have been open to the public and are broadcast (and saved) on the NYRA web site.  This allows anyone to observe some of the workings of an entity that has all too often been the subject of  undeserved and baseless criticism.  It has also been an opportunity to observe the Board and high level staff in action  –  at least in the context of a public meeting.  I have not only been impressed by much of the NYRA staff, who are holdovers from the Hayward/McClain administrations, but people such as Alan Foreman, head of the national Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association, Dr. Scott Palmer, a nationally-recognized veterinarian, and Michael Peterson, Ph.D.,  the country’s leading expert on racing surfaces, each of whom has contributed valuable  –  and fact-based  –  information at the public Board meetings.  There are also Board members with important perspectives and institutional knowledge that is sometimes added to the discussion.  While the full Board meetings tend to be desultory affairs, the Committee on Equine Health and Safety has demonstrated that a public meeting can have robust and informative discussions on significant issues.

It is not the level of talent and knowledge that has me concerned;  rather, it is the leadership of Chairman Skorton and the man who appointed him, Andrew Cuomo.  Skorton, President of Cornell University and a cardiologist, is obviously a very talented and skilled person.  That does not mean, however, that he should be the leading figure in New York’s thoroughbred racing as he has been since his appointment in October.  He readily admitted having no knowledge of racing when he was appointed.  “Having no knowledge of racing” is something that applies, of course, to each of us at some point in our life.  And I do not think it is a prerequisite that the chairman of the Board  –  or, for that matter, NYRA’s CEO  –  has a racing background, since there is any number of capable individuals who could prove to be excellent racing executives.  That assumes, however, that they surround themselves with knowledgeable people and, just as important, have the independence to function.

It is that independence that is the biggest question mark for me, as it would be for any top administrator serving in any capacity in the Cuomo Administration.  Skorton and one other Board member are the ones clearly calling the shots on the Reorganization Board.  Skorton sets the agenda, and only those matters acceptable to him are put to a vote.  In the four months of Board meetings, there has yet to be a dissenting or abstaining vote.  This is so even though there are matters on which individual members have strong views  –  one example being Skorton’s decision to have the Equine Medical Director report to NYRA, and the other being the continuing failure to make a decision on the Global Betting Exchange contract.  It is this latter issue on which the other prominent Board member has been in the fore.  Robert Megna has been prominent throughout the past year on NYRA matters.  As chairman (at the time) of the Franchise Oversight Board, he was a co-author of the threatening letter to NYRA’s Board members last May;  he has advocated ending the VLT subsidies to NYRA;  and, he has single-handedly put the hold on the GBE contract for reasons that, at least on the surface, appear to be flimsy.  But as the Cuomo’s Budget Director, he is clearly doing the Governor’s bidding on the Board.

For his part, Chairman Skorton has yet to articulate anything approaching a vision for the new NYRA, save for his focus on equine health and safety issues.  Even on this issue, however, he has yet to express any views on issues such as the use of race-day Lasix or, for that matter, the role of permissible drugs in racing.  On another significant issue  –  that of casinos  –  he has essentially said it’s a decision for Albany.  In an interview with Tom Precious published in Blood Horse, he said, “‘I have to be a little vague on this,’ citing the still-emerging casino expansion plans in Albany.”  When you consider that one of the purported reasons for the state’s takeover of NYRA was the changing gaming environment, including “first passage of a constitutional amendment on commercial casinos,” it is not unreasonable to think the head of NYRA or its Board would have had some discussion of the issue.

Unfortunately, open and candid discussion of important policy issues is not the way this Governor likes to operate.  In the year I have been following the NYRA story closely, not only have I not seen any evidence that the Governor allows his managers to function independently but rather have witnessed numerous examples of the opposite.  This is an Administration, after all, that fired a low-level bureaucrat working in the Adirondacks who had the temerity to speak to the local newspaper without authorization from Albany  –  and his comments were praising the Governor.  We have seen a Governor who announces major initiatives  –  gun control, casinos and, most recently, tax-free zones  –  but refuses to release details, let alone actual legislation, for fear it would derail what he believes to be important initiatives.  As we witnessed with the gun control law, his ramming a bill through the Legislature without legislative or public input results in significant screw-ups.  He is now seeking a repeat of that process with his casino and tax-free zone proposals.  Each has significant complexity and implications, yet we sit days from the Legislature’s adjournment on June 20 without legislative language being available.  Of course, the Legislature is as much to blame for this as the Governor if it allows him to consistently get away with these tactics  –  just as it did a year ago with the NYRA takeover.

On the subject of the Governor’s tactics, nothing has come of the personal assaults made on the character of NYRA’s officers and Board leading up to Cuomo’s takeover of racing.  The “interim” report of the State Racing Board on the improper takeout percentage was referred to the state’s Inspector General who has not published a report more than a year later.  The Audit Committee of the NYRA Reorganization Board, chaired by a former Inspector General, concluded, however, that the improper takeout rate that was the ostensible reason for the state’s precipitous action was “unintentional.”  Nor has anything materialized from the allegation against the character and fitness of prior Board members other than that nine of them were appointed to the new Board, and two of them with a “financial interest” in racing won the Kentucky Derby.

So here we are, a year into the Cuomo experiment with taking control of one of New York’s signature industries and no one can say with any level of confidence that things are better, or that improvement is even on the near horizon.  It is an industry that has been buffeted by the economic downturn that I hope is over, and continues to struggle at growing its fan base.  It is an industry desperately in need of stability and leadership, but we have yet to see either.

Is the honeymoon with the “new” NYRA over?

Posted by noonante on May 20, 2013
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , . 1 Comment

In a sign that the honeymoon with the Reorganization Board of the New York Racing Association is over, we have seen recent media attention paid to a fiscal issue between NYRA and the Thoroughbred Breeding and Development Fund.  The Fund is a public benefit corporation that distributes incentives to promote “breeding, raising, and racing of quality thoroughbred horses in New York State.”  It derives its revenues not from taxes, but from New York’s thoroughbred tracks as well as a growing portion from Video Lottery Terminal revenues generated by the state’s racinos.  NYRA is the entity now controlled by state government that runs New York’s quality horse racing programs at Saratoga, Belmont and Aqueduct.  NYRA paid more than its correct share to the Fund between 2008 and 2012 to the tune of $1.2 million and is now seeking repayment.

Local media, including Albany’s Time Union newspaper and the NPR affiliate WAMC have paid attention to the story but, as typical of their other forays into New York’s racing, have shed considerably more heat than light on the issue.  The TU “broke” the story on May 13, but “broke” is a relative term since the issue is one that has been publicly known for some time.  According to The Saratogian, NYRA demanded a repayment on March 15.  The Saratogian also quoted a member of NYRA’s Board as saying it was a matter that “had not come up in our board room,” even though he was present at the April 11 meeting when it was raised as an outstanding matter, and it was also reported in the minutes for the meeting.  The manner in which it was raised at the meeting also made it clear that it had been an outstanding issue known to the Board members.  WAMC’s contribution to the fog was a discussion on their daily Roundtable program where they described NYRA as seeking reimbursement of the over payment from the state.  The Times Union published an editorial Sunday in which they decried the “tiresome games” played by NYRA’s Reorganization Board in distinguishing between the “new” NYRA and the “old” NYRA, adding, “[s]o it’s the new NYRA when it has its hand out for money from the state.”

Both WAMC and the Times Union also conveniently conflated moneys owed by NYRA to New York State that were discharged in a bankruptcy proceeding with what they each describe as a new demand for money “from the state.”  I have always operated under the assumption that bankruptcy proceedings are designed to both protect creditors and allow an entity to get back on its feet, and debts that are discharged  –  and must be approved by a federal court  –  are, you know, “discharged.”  It doesn’t mean that the bankrupt entity continues to owe an obligation.  More significantly, however, is the Thoroughbred Breeding and Development Fund may be a state-created entity, but it is not the “state” in the sense that the taxpayers are responsible for its obligations.  While that is not exactly a subtle point, it is one that both the capital’s “paper-of-record” and NPR station are willing to overlook in order to keep going what they see as a controversial story.

(Not so incidentally, the Thoroughbred Breeding and Development Fund has been twice cited by New York’s Comptroller, most recently on November 14, 2012, for failing to perform tests to prove they were getting the proper commissions.  The Comptroller’s report said they were getting the proper commissions, but it is not clear that was a result of the Comptroller actually doing his own testing.)

This is not intended to excuse NYRA for making improper payments, but I see this as more of an accounting issue than a significant matter warranting the attention being paid to it by influential media outlets.  I think NYRA deserves considerable scrutiny, particularly since it is now controlled by state government.  But what I found so disturbing about Governor Cuomo’s seizure of New York’s racing a year ago remains true today.  We are being poorly served by a media that seems more intent on the cheap sound bite than actually doing even a minimum level of actual reporting and digging to ascertain what is truly going on.  The Times Union also pulled out the tired trope that NYRA “was in the headlines too often for its corrupt behavior.”  They do not specify what that “corrupt” behavior was, but are instead apparently relying on a public willing to accept it on faith.  Of course, if they did any actual reporting on these issues there could be an informed discussion on the good and bad of NYRA.