NYTHA

All posts tagged NYTHA

“With friends like these….”

Posted by noonante on May 1, 2023
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary. Tagged: , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

The long-awaited national program addressing drugs in horse racing with uniform rules and enforcement was implemented on Monday, March 27. Because of legal action filed by opponents of the new law, an injunction was issued and the federal agency overseeing it suspended it until May 22. While in effect for five days, the world did not come to an end in spite of the fear-mongering and apocalyptic rhetoric of those denying the evident need for reform in racing.

Leading the opposition over the years have been organizations such as the National Horsemen’s Benevolent Protective Association, some individual state HBPA’s and the Association of Racing Commissioners International. While their legal objections focus on the purported unconstitutionality of the Congressional legislation — the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act — the quarterly publication of the NHBPA I received recently presents different concerns.

An article by Tom Law and Jennie Rees in something called The Horsemen’s Journal has the sub-heading “Overreach of [HISA] permeates the horsemen’s gathering” of the first-ever (!!!) national meeting of the NHBPA and ARCI. It provides a wealth of comments by those opposing the law and none from anyone thinking reform is long overdue. Their opening sentence summarizes the tone of the sessions succinctly, referring to “discussions offering critiques and alternatives to costly federal regulations wreaking havoc throughout the Thoroughbred industry.”

Their so-called “alternatives” are both fanciful and delusional. They do not propose alternatives to the detailed regulations of HISA concerning either track safety or medication protocols, but rather — brace yourself — voluntary interstate compacts. The NHBPA’s General Counsel said such compacts allow for “responsive and quick resolution.”

There was no explanation for why their perceived obvious and meritorious solution had not been achieved in the more than two years since HISA became law, let alone since the NHBPA establishment in 1940 nor ARCI’s creation in 1934. There are, however, two possibilities. One is that neither organization sees the need for change. The other is that neither group truly represents the racing community beyond their own parochial interests.

While the NHBPA has the word “national” in its title, it consists only of “affiliate” organizations throughout the country, but not necessarily representative groups. Among the major racetracks not included are those in California, New Jersey, Maryland, the NYRA tracks and Gulfstream Park. They make no effort to solicit input from individual horse people. Indeed, this publication neither solicits opinion nor publishes views that detract from their party line.

The ARCI consists of racing commissions. While one panelist observed: “The bedrock concept of what curbs regulators is the fact that there’s transparency, there’s accountability. And HISA lacks that.” While that comment is from an attorney, he is not stating “facts,” but rather opinion. He obviously has never witnessed a session of the New York State Gaming Commission whose actions and “public” meetings are neither transparent nor accountable.

The only other state commission I am familiar with is that of California. Their public meetings are indeed public and sometimes lengthy (one lasted seven hours). Following a raft of breakdowns in 2019, Governor Gavin Newsom overhauled the Horse Racing Board that then came up with a number of positive changes improving the safety conditions for horses and humans. They have fully embraced the HISA reforms.

Other comments from the panelists were almost completely devoid of substance. One, from a “pro bono” law firm was almost Zen-like: “Uniformity should exist across jurisdictions, but uniformity should also exist across time.”

And despite all the fake concern about Constitutional standards, the bulk of the criticisms of HISA and the law were based mostly on personal grievances or imaginary issues. When they complain about horse people not being consulted, they mean they were not. The NHBPA CEO Eric Hamelback expressed it: “[W]e want to make sure the right participants are helping to make the decisions. I see it as the right participants are in this room.” In the decades I have been among the horse people they purport to speak for, I have never had my views solicited. Nor can I vote for officers, even though that is something I do in New York’s (unaffiliated) horse persons’ group NYTHA.

The hollowness, indeed, absurdity of the objections of the group were never better highlighted than in an issue of The Paulick Report where the Attorney General of Louisiana opined in an op-ed that “Louisiana horse racing has effectively policed itself for over 200 years” and did not need intervention.

While that comment undoubtedly raised many an eyebrow among horseplayers and observers of Louisiana politics, it ran alongside a report that State Police searching a trainer’s tack room at Delta Downs (in said state of Louisiana) had discovered “59 bottles of injectable medications, 352 hypodermic needles, 256 syringes and 75 packs of Albuterol Sulfate inhalation solution.” These items are considered “contraband,” yet a six-month suspension was stayed by the Louisiana Racing Commission pending appeals.

While AG Greg Landry, the state’s chief law enforcement officer, may cite this as an example of his state’s oversight of racing, we do not know how he would respond to the information that the trainer in question, James Tracy, was licensed by the Racing Commission even though he was under an indefinite suspension by Pennsylvania. As Paulick observed in a subsequent report:  “so much for reciprocity from one racing state to another” — as required under existing requirements. Landry’s piece was featured prominently in this issue of The Horsemen’s Journal.

Landry and another opponent of the new law, Kentucky’s HBPA President Rick Hiles, prefer to raise imaginary problems rather than address substantive ones. A common object of their attacks are the “billionaires” supporting HISA who as Hines stated, are the “powerful and well-financed minority backing HISA [who] opted for class warfare.” Yet Hines cannot even keep straight what his complaint is. While complaining that the NHBPA and ARCI were not “invited to the table” discussing reforms, he boasts that the efforts of those groups have forced HISA “to make substantial improvements.”

Are there issues with HISA? Of course there are. They are attempting to implement a federal law intended to overhaul the conduct of a sport that many of its participants believe is in drastic need to not just improve but survive. The drivel that emanated from this joint conference of self-appointed representatives not only did nothing to move that ball forward, but their distorted view of “success” would jeopardize racing’s future.

A growing sense of owner responsibility?

Posted by noonante on December 23, 2021
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary. Tagged: , , , , . 1 Comment

There may not be many silver linings to a once-prominent trainer being sentenced to five years in a federal prison for doping violations or to the ongoing saga of Bob Baffert and Medina Spirit. But one salutary aspect appears to be a growing sense that it is not just trainers and veterinarians who bear sole responsibility for drug violations but owners as well. While that may obvious, so far there have been no legal consequences for owners other than losing a purse following a medication violation.

That may finally be changing. Last week two prominent racing media sites have singled out one owner for using a trainer with a history of multiple drug violations. I have a great deal of respect for The Paulick Report and Thoroughbred Daily News for their coverage of horse welfare issues, particularly when it comes to medication matters. The owner referenced is Joe Appelbaum who used Jose C. Vazquez as a trainer. Appelbaum is a significant figure in horse racing as the President of the New York Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association. But he is not even remotely in the same league as the more prominent owners who time and again entrust their horses with questionable trainers.

Appelbaum was pilloried for his racing operation, Off The Hook, using Vazquez as its trainer. I do not know either Appelbaum or Vazquez personally, and was frankly not aware of Vazquez’ reputation. So I went to the database thoroughbredrulings.com to ascertain his record. I only looked at the past four years and learned that Vazquez was listed in multiple rulings by state racing authorities, many of which can be categorized as minor or paperwork infractions. Five, however, were for medication positives over that period of time. He was also denied a license by the New York State Gaming Commission on April 18, 2018, without a detailed explanation for the reason. Since he is now racing in New York, the license was subsequently granted, again without any stated reason, vague or otherwise.

I asked NYTHA for a response to the Paulick and TDN reports and received an answer from Appelbaum directly. (It is not clear to me that either Paulick or TDN sought a comment from him.) While recognizing that the criticism of him could be valid for giving Vazquez a “second chance,” he also acknowledges that he is held to a higher standard. He has now transferred their horse to a new trainer, following an “independent veterinary screening (including blood work).”

As I said, I know nothing of Vazquez. I am leery of ascribing negative connotations to anyone based on rumors or reputation. Since 2018, while Vazquez has been cited for five medication violations, there have been none since February 27, 2020. Coincidentally, Bob Baffert has had five violations in the one year commencing May 1, 2020, working for some of the most prominent owners in the business.

In his statement to me, Joe Appelbaum accepted responsibility for retaining Vazquez. He also responded to my query promptly (within hours on a Friday afternoon) and exhibited the transparency that is so rare in racing. Would that New York’s State Gaming Commission had the same level of accountability. After all, they granted Vazquez a license after denying him with no meaningful explanation in early 2018.

Racing has plenty of room for examining the accountability of owners as I argued in this post about owners much more prominent than Joe Appelbaum. And it must be done with transparency.

As Appelbaum concluded in his response to me, “[M]aybe we should each ask ourselves; What have I done for the welfare of our horses?”

“But we love our horses….”

Posted by noonante on November 18, 2019
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics, Uncategorized. Tagged: , , , , . Leave a comment

We are approaching the completion of a full year of debate, concern and apprehension over the future of racing in the United States sparked by the fatalities at Santa Anita in the early part of 2019.  A common trope among industry insiders to deflect public skepticism is that “we love our horses.”  As with any generality, there are elements of truth in that sentiment but, as with any generality, it is not universally true.

Recent developments from New York will cause outside observers to question that commitment when top level figures in the sport do not even treat humans with respect and dignity  —  let alone meet legal obligations.  The state’s Department of Labor has announced that it recovered almost $1 million in “stolen wages, damages and penalties” from, among others,  trainers Chad Brown, Kiaran McLaughlin, Linda Rice and Jimmy Jerkens.

Among the allegations against Brown is that he violated federal and state laws by “knowingly” charging workers from other countries who need special visas $1,500 in cash per worker.  It is not Brown’s first brush with wage or immigration violations.  It was announced during the summer that the United States had reached a settlement in which he agreed to pay $1.6 million in lost wages, penalties and immigration violations.

Brown, of course, is one of the top trainers in the United States.  He has won almost $30 million in purses this year alone, and led the nation the past two years with purse winnings of $27.5 million and $26.2 million.  In the same summer he was assessed that $1.5 million by the United States, he was nonetheless able to scrape together enough coin to pay $1.5 million for a premier property in Saratoga that borders the track.  He could walk to work if he decides to live there.

Chad Brown house-9294

Below is where stable hands live while at Saratoga.  They can also walk to work since they live in the stable area.

Oklahoma dorm room-8617

In fairness to the New York Racing Association, they have done a great job in recent years to upgrade the dormitory facilities such as the one depicted above.

Just to be clear:  the almost $90 million in purses that Brown’s horses have earned in the past three years is not what is used to pay his employees.  That is the amount that his owners and Brown get over their expenses.  Brown’s owners pay a daily rate that goes to the employees, so they also are benefitting from Brown’s cheating or   —  to use New York’s language  —  stealing from the workers.

The New York Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association has released a statement in which they assert that “no small business is perfectly run” and are subject to an array of “confusing” rules and a “challenging timekeeping environment.”  It is an organization that represents trainers and owners in New York.

Their argument is ludicrous.  Chad Brown is not a “small businessman” in any sense of the word.  On a sunny day in August, I stood at Saratoga’s Oklahoma training track and counted 16 of Brown’s horses coming out for a workout.  That’s 16 exercise riders on horses in what are typically multiple sets during morning training.  I would be willing to wager that the vast majority of New York’s trainers do not have 16 horses, let alone have the money to pay that number of exercise riders for a multiple sets.

If someone with hundreds of million dollars in revenue cannot keep track of his employees, he or she is not going to survive for long.  As much as his competitors may hope otherwise, Brown is not going anywhere soon  —  unless it is to the winner’s circle.  Brown may simply view law violations as a cost of business after you get caught.

And it is those competitors  –  many of whom are legitimately running small businesses, who are going out of business because they cannot compete with the behemoths such as Brown and the other “super-trainers.”  One of those super-trainers is Steve Asmussen.  He has been found liable for his third violation of cheating his workers, even though he has been running second to Brown in purse earnings in recent years, having won purses totaling over $70 million in the last three years.

If NYTHA is truly concerned about the small trainers, they should welcome the crackdown on the cheats and frauds in the business.

Just as important, however, is that it is yet another black eye for a sport that desperately needs positive attention.  Much has been made of NHL hockey star Erik Johnson’s paying the medical bills to save one of his horses who recently broke down at Del Mar.  His efforts are, of course, commendable, but the fact that the racing media views it as noteworthy means that it is not typical.

What would be even more newsworthy would be if Chad Brown’s or Steve Asmussen’s owners publicly denounced either for not treating their human employees in accordance with the law, and with respect and dignity.  We are speaking of businessmen who have made enough money that they can spend millions on horses that either Brown or Asmussen would agree to train.  Regrettably, they may not be interested in paying more on their daily rate to ensure fair treatment of those who care for the horses.

But, at least for now, can we stop pretending that powerful figures in racing love their horses when they do not have the same attitude for our fellow humans?

 

 

Rick Violette

Posted by noonante on October 22, 2018
Posted in: Horse Racing. Tagged: , , , . Leave a comment

Rick Violette passed away on Sunday from cancer.  He was a long-time trainer in New England and New York, and a recent president of the New York Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association.

He trained some top-notch horses  –  most recently Diversify  –  but his impact reached far beyond his activities at the barn.  He was a passionate advocate for the trainers and owners both nationally and in New York.

I attended many of the meetings of the New York Racing Association’s Board (back in the day when they were open).  Rick was a unique and  –  too often  –  solitary voice who was committed to the trainers and owners as well as New York racing.  He was smart, knowledgeable about recent history in the state, tough and practical.  He was approachable, funny and someone who fully gave of his time even with all his other responsibilities.

Trainers and owners may have been his “official constituency,” but he also chaired the Jockey Injury Compensation Fund.  Under his leadership at the Horsemen’s Association, programs for the aftercare of thoroughbreds were created.  NYTHA also funded programs for backstretch grooms and hot walkers who were not in the limelight, but essential to the health of the horse and the industry.

We too often fail to express our thoughts about someone while they are alive.  Rick is the very embodiment of all that is good about the people in the racing industry.  I do not think I can say it any better than Charles Hayward, former President of NYRA, expressed it here.

Random rants from the Spa

Posted by noonante on August 24, 2015
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , , . 1 Comment

One observer’s musings:

What is going on with the attendance?  Initially it appeared that the Saratoga meet was off to a great start with all-source handle and reported attendance up significantly from last year.  Recently though, the attendance reported by NYRA has been below figures from the comparable day last year.

Last year marked the start of NYRA’s imaginative new way of reporting attendance.  After counting those who actually passed through the turnstiles, it then added those who had purchased a season pass but did not actually appear.  About 6,400 such passes were sold last year, with five of six pass holders not attending on an average day.  This year, approximately 8,400 passes were sold, and I suspect that NYRA is now also adding in reserved tickets sold in advance that are not used.  (NYRA did not respond to my question on this latter issue.)

So with attendance figures being inflated by several thousand more than last year on each day, when the reported attendance falls below last year’s numbers, it is an ominous development.  On Saturday, for example, NYRA reported attendance of 36,255 compared with 40,594 from last year.  That’s a ten per cent drop even before it is discounted further by the pass holders and reserved tickets sold to those who did not appear.  It is part of at least four days in a row with reported attendance being below the same day last year.  Attendance data for this year is from The Saratogian Pink Sheet.

Now that Fabulous Fillies Day is over, what is New York doing to attract more women as fans?  Teresa Genaro wrote a column in last week’s Saratogian that I did not think was particularly provocative, but sparked outrage from one anonymous troll who was effectively denounced by other commenters (each of whom used their name).  In NYRA CEO Chris Kay’s initial press conference two years ago, he identified attracting more women as fans as one of his priorities.  He had just started, so one would not expect he had fully-formed ideas.  Since then, NYRA has continued the inane Fabulous Fillies Day where everyone wears pink and there is a celebratory lunch. but I cannot think of another initiative unless you count the equally inane concert for mothers and their girls starring someone who can now be seen in pimple commercials.

The NYRA Board continues to be a club for white men.  Of the twenty who have been appointed by the Governor, legislative leaders and the “old” NYRA, there has been but one woman, and she has since resigned.  There has yet to be a Latino/a or non-white appointee.  The Governor has two vacancies to which he can make appointments, but has not done so in a while.

When I was writing about the disputed election for the presidency of the New York Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association, I read the transcript of the appeal hearing.  NYTHA Board members Linda Rice, Leah Gyarmati and Tina Bond each asked pointed and relevant questions getting to the heart of the issue.  It made the standard NYRA Board meeting, by contrast, look even more pathetic.  So there are knowledgeable women in the business who could make a contribution, but I guess their talents would be wasted if the current leadership is only interested in more yes-men.

Speaking of women and NYRA, it’s good NYRA did not give in to the salary demands of the now-former horse identifier.  Writing in the Racing Form this week, David Grening reported on the departure of Carol Dolan, a 31-year employee of the Horse Identification Office.  Dolan had assumed the duties of chief horse identifier following the resignation of her predecessor, Janet Reid.  When Dolan’s salary requests were not met, she resigned.  I don’t know what she was thinking.  This NYRA clearly does not value those who are not only professional horse people  –  and one who plays an important role in the integrity of the game  –  but long-time employees.  After all, when you have to  to pay a Chief Experience Officer  –  whose salary is the same as the General Counsel  –  you are not going to get that coin by charging for picnic tables.  At some point, Chris Kay is sure to tell us what has been accomplished by this brain storm of his.

I’m sorry, but what racing are we talking about here?  Growing attention is being paid to the influence of performance-enhancing drugs in Track and Field.  As the New York Times reported, the “doping drumbeat is hardly new to track and field, but it is back to deafening levels amid recent allegations of widespread doping by Russian and Kenyan athletes and reports of suspicious blood values recorded by many leading athletes in endurance events in the 2000s.”

I laughed, though, when I read the defense of the sport by a representative of the International Association of Athletics Federations:

If you don’t follow the rules, they’ll take you down.  So why are we getting torn down as a sport for that?  Do you think other sports would take some of their biggest stars and let you know that they did something very wrong?  No.  Track and Field does, but since track and field does that, we get torn down.

Kind of sounds like those who are still in denial that horse racing has a doping problem.

 

 

Spring cleaning

Posted by noonante on March 30, 2015
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics, Saratoga thoughts. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

There are a number of things I failed to comment on promptly, so here is an attempt to do some catching up:

  • Now that’s a March surprise:  No not the NCAA’s, but the Israeli election.  Candidates in American elections fear the “October surprise” from their opponent  –  an event so close to the election that there is no time to respond.  Bibi Netanyahu delivered not one, but two such shockers.  First there was the renunciation of the two-state solution to create a distinct Palestinian country.  Then on election day he tweeted about the “droves” of Arabs turning out to the polls.  While he has walked back from the first and apologized for the second, I wonder what his enablers in our Republican Party thought of those two developments.  The two-state solution has been a long-standing tenet of United States foreign policy, although the GOP apparently now thinks it is OK to have its own foreign policy at opposition to the elected leadership of the country.  I fear that many may secretly admire Netanyahu for blatantly playing the race card.  Incidentally, for a disturbing account of seemingly wide-spread anti-Semitism in Europe, read Jeffrey Goldberg’s piece in this month’s Atlantic.
  • Speaking of the GOP, buy this guy a dictionary:  I have long thought that Representative Steve King of Iowa is one of the biggest nitwits to hold elected office.  He is the one who talked about Mexicans with calves the size of cantaloupes from carrying backpacks filled with drugs into the country.  More recently, he made a typically asinine comment criticizing Democrats who boycotted Netanyahu’s speech to Congress for being “Democrats first and Jewish second.”  When Representative Steve Israel demanded an apology, the always erudite King responded that “I defend Israelis from Leftists & misogynists.”  Huh??  It was reminiscent of a state legislator from Massachusetts who once defended himself from charges that he was anti-immigrant by saying, “I am not a bigamist.”
  • Saratoga Springs does the right thing  –  so far  –  on monstrous parking garage:  It’s good to know that the big-money interests don’t always win.  First, the City Council decided against applying for a casino license, and now the Zoning Board of Appeals has voted down a five-story garage to be built on city property that would have been a monumental eye sore near the center of town.  Interestingly, Mark Baker, President of the City Center was a leading opponent of the casino, but the major proponent of the garage.  If a parking garage is the most desirable use for this valued parcel in downtown  –  it’s already a parking lot  –  the ZBA decision gives time for a rational planning process.
  • NYRA equine fatalities decline remarkably:  There was no shortage of publicity when there was a dramatic increase in racing fatalities on Aqueduct’s inner track.  There were 14 catastrophic injuries suffered in less than two months in December and January.  Since January 26, however, there has been one racing fatality and another on the Belmont training track.
  • Why was NYRA not planning to race on Dubai’s World Cup day?  Were it not for the large number of weather-related cancellations, NYRA  would not have run a card this past Saturday even though it is one of the biggest days on the racing calendar.  NYRA now focuses on its own “big days,” but doesn’t growing the sport mean educating a potential fan base that there are big races in addition to the Triple Crown and Travers?
  • New York’s disputed election ends up with right result:  I have written previously about the hotly-contested election for President of the New York Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association.  Unsuccessful challenger Terry Finley lost to incumbent Rick Violette by 14 votes from over 1,200 cast. The NYTHA Board conducted an appeal process and made their decision earlier this month upholding the results.  I know that there are loud dissenting views  –  this is, after all, horse racing  –  but I think a fair-minded observer would conclude that the appeal was taken seriously and the decision-making process was fair.  NYTHA posted all of the written submissions on its web site, as well as the transcript of the hearing and then its written decision.  That is not the behavior of an organization with something to hide.  The hearing transcript was particularly revealing.  Board members had obviously gone through the voluminous evidentiary submissions and asked pointed and pertinent questions.  It was thorough and professional.  I hope we can move on from what has, unfortunately, had an unnecessary personal aspect.
  • NCAA tournament is, once again, riveting:  Several years ago I decided against filling out a bracket because I did not want to be rooting for heavy favorites in order to win some cash.  Now I can just enjoy the games, and this year’s tourney has been worth it.  Of course, there are the inevitable annoying commercials and the suspicion that the NCAA is able to cram more of them into a 40-minute game than even the National Football League can with 50 per cent more time.  But my personal most-hated spots are the Rob Lowe ones and the promos for Tru-TV programming.  People actually watch that dreck?
  • A final note of sadness:  Racing lost one of its true giants with the passing of Allen Jerkens.  I did not know him other than by observation, but it was one the highlights of my life when I met him on the Saratoga backstretch a couple of years ago after another one of his patented upsets in a graded stake.  Others can write more knowingly of him (see Steve Haskin here and Teresa Genaro here), but it is unfortunate that his type of horsemanship is fading from the scene.

NYTHA election again – The Blood-Horse spits the bit

Posted by noonante on February 22, 2015
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary. Tagged: , , , . 1 Comment

In Eric Mitchell’s column in The Blood-Horse, he calls for a new election for President of the New York Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association.  Mitchell, apparently, accepts the arguments of challenger Terry Finley without looking at the contradictory evidence provided by NYTHA officials.  Further, he attacks the integrity and transparency of NYTHA.

As for the purported lack of transparency, NYTHA has posted the submissions from all the principals on its web site.  So anyone, including Mitchell, can go to those submissions  –  made under oath  –  and evaluate the competing claims.  I’ve done that, and what follows is based on the submitted evidence, and not on what I have been told by any of the principals.

Mitchell bases his conclusion that a new election is needed on three assertions:

  • 30% of eligible voters did not receive a ballot;
  • Receipts required for NYTHA to issue a replacement ballot were not available at the law office where the votes were counted;
  • There was a separate voting list maintained by NYTHA that was not provided to the law firm.

Needless to say, making ballots available to eligible voters is an essential component of any fair election.  NYTHA’s ability to identify those voters is the heart of the dispute here.  NYTHA eligibility has two components:  being a licensed owner or trainer in New York, and starting a horse at a track of the New York Racing Association in 2013 or 2014.  While the identity of licensees is available on-line at the web site of the New York Gaming Commission, the Commission had refused to provide addresses to NYTHA, citing privacy concerns.  Finley’s attorney was initially denied access to the addresses, but eventually obtained them following the intervention of New York’s Committee on Open Government.

The next piece of the puzzle is to then identify those owners or trainers who raced at a NYRA track.  The affidavit of Jim Gallagher, NYTHA’s Executive Director, describes the steps taken by NYTHA staff to identify those owners and trainers by going through each day’s racing program and searching available data bases.  That, however, would not identify those individuals who own a horse through a partnership, such as Finley’s own West Point Thoroughbreds.  For that, NYTHA contacted the managers of 55 such partnerships to provide contact information for its members.

So, identifying the pool of eligible voters is not as simple as coming up with a voting list in Saratoga Springs  –  although NYTHA eligible members can simply register on NYTHA’s web site and provide contact information.

Finley retained an expert witness to  estimate how many eligible voters there were in NYTHA.  (Mitchell’s article did not identify the witness as being paid by Finley.)  Now, “expert” is not synonymous with “infallible.”  Such a witness is generally proffering an opinion, and is often subject to challenge by the opposing party.  In this instance, a key “fact” leading to her conclusion that 30% of voters did not receive a ballot had been disclaimed by the source for her information before she completed her affidavit.  Much was made of NYTHA Board member Steve Zorn’s statement that NYTHA had between five and six thousand members.  In an earlier stage of this litigation, Zorn submitted a sworn statement essentially saying he had no factual basis for making such a comment.

The expert’s affidavit (Exhibit D to Finley’s Supplement 1) actually lends support to the difficulty NYTHA confronted in coming up with a comprehensive list of voters when she stated, “between 2,488 and 6,028 owners were presumptively eligible to vote.”  That is a level of precision that clearly means that the Finley camp’s assertion that 30 per cent of voters were not mailed ballots is nothing more than a wild guess.

The second major point made by Mitchell pertains to a requirement of NYTHA’s by-laws that a replacement ballot can only be issued if the voter submitted a signed receipt indicating the original was not received.  In Finley’s initial submission he argued that NYTHA issued replacement ballots “without obtaining a single receipt.”  That assertion was later watered down to the receipts not being at the office of the outside law firm that oversaw the election.  Why that is a matter of any significance is beyond me, but Mitchell does not state that copies of more than four dozen such receipts are part of the evidence submitted by Jim Gallagher.

Finally, Mitchell appears to be arguing that there was a secret “master list” of eligible voters maintained by the NYTHA office that was not provided to the outside law firm.  NYTHA had retained the independent law firm to run the election after NYTHA’s Counsel, Alan Foreman, spoke with Finley in August and was convinced that he would “challenge every aspect of the election.”

Ballots were mailed to the firm which retained possession of them through the counting of the ballots at their office.  An attorney with the firm submitted an affidavit (Halder Affidavit) describing efforts to verify that the ballots were eligible voters by matching the returned ballots against voting lists provided by the NYTHA office, and annotating the voting list with the date the ballot was received.  The list of voters who returned ballots is part of the evidence.  It can be examined on the NYHTA web site as part of the Halder Affidavit.  There was no “master list” kept by NYTHA and not provided to the law firm.

This latter assertion is a particularly puzzling one.  The identities of those who voted are in evidence.  It is a relatively simple matter to go through the Halder exhibits, count the ballots received by the law firm, and measure that against the final vote tally.  If there was a separate list not provided the law firm, it would be obvious.  Interestingly, Finley does not claim that there is a discrepancy in the vote tallies, instead relying on the secret “master list.”

It is disturbing when a regular columnist for a leading industry publication impugns the integrity of one of the sport’s major organizations without bothering to do even basic research into the validity of his claims.  The evidence presented by both sides in this bitter dispute is there for all to see.  Yes, it requires a lot of work to go through hundreds of pages of documents, but that should be a prerequisite before calling into question the integrity of others.

New York racing election dispute – the other side of the story

Posted by noonante on January 30, 2015
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , , . 1 Comment

The parties in the disputed election for President of the New York Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association have now presented their evidence.  Challenger Terry Finley filed his side of the case on December 8.  Now, President Rick Violette, NYTHA’s Executive Director Jim Gallagher and Counsel Alan Foreman have filed their statements.  The complete papers are available on the NYTHA web site.  A NYTHA committee will review the competing submissions and rule on Finley’s challenge.

Before release of the statements by Violette, Gallagher and Foreman, the racing media dutifully reported Finley’s claims that the election was mired in incompetence, fraud or both.  None of the NYTHA personnel were responding to media inquiries, but now have stated their positions under oath.

I have read the entirety of the papers filed by Finley, as well as the complete filings from those responding to his charges.  I have not spoken with any of the parties, but have exchanged emails with Finley.  What follows, therefore is derived from publicly available documents in addition to the emails with Finley.

The election was conducted by mailing ballots to those on the membership list maintained by NYTHA.  Eligibility for NYTHA membership was determined by two factors:  one had to be licensed as an owner or trainer by New York state, and also had to race at least one horse at a track of the New York Racing Association between January 1, 2013 and October 1, 2014.  Membership was automatic, but one could register as a member on the NYTHA web site to ensure NYTHA had accurate contact information.

Ballots were counted at the office of an independent law firm on December 2.  According to Finley, the vote tabulation showed that Violette won by 14 votes, 625 to 611.  Finley filed a challenge of the election on December 8.

Finley’s challenge raises a host of issues regarding the conduct of the election, as well as alleged improprieties by Violette, Gallagher and Foreman.  Each of his claims is disputed vigorously.  Without specifically describing each charge, there are two broad categories into which they fall:  1)  NYTHA failed to maintain an accurate list of eligible members, resulting in up to 1,700 members not being sent ballots;  2)  members favoring Finley were deprived of ballots, thereby skewing the election in favor of Violette.

Membership list:  Although 3,410 ballots were mailed to NYTHA members, Finley claims that another 1,700 eligible members were not sent ballots.  His estimate is based on a statement by Steve Zorn, a member of the NYTHA Board of Directors, that the total membership was between 5,000 and 6.000.  Zorn, in his affidavit, does not dispute saying that, but acknowledges that he is neither authorized to speak for NYTHA, nor does he actually know the number.  He described his statement as being based on the “lore” within NYTHA, not fact.

Finley further attacks NYTHA for not engaging in “reasonable efforts to confirm the identity and address of each member eligible to vote.”  While one might think it is a reasonably simple matter to maintain an accurate membership list, it is not.  Eligibility is straightforward  –  being licensed in New York and racing at a NYRA track  –  but obtaining addresses is not simple, nor is it easy to determine which licensees actually raced a horse.

The licensing of owners and trainers is done by New York’s Gaming Commission, and a list of licensees is available to the public on the Commission’s web site.  What the Commission will not do, however, for the purpose of protecting privacy, is release the addresses of its licensees.  While Finley’s attorney tries to obfuscate this point, he does not actually provide contrary evidence.  Indeed, when he sought information on licensees from the Commission, he notably did not ask for addresses.

Jim Gallagher’s affidavit enumerates the steps taken by the NYTHA office to obtain addresses.  From each day’s racing program, they record the name of every owner who starts a horse, and then examine databases maintained by NYRA, and the track offices of the Gaming Commission and The Jockey Club to obtain updated contact information.  In addition, they sought current contact information through their newsletter and by sending emails.  They emailed the managing partners of 55 multi-owner partnerships to obtain contact information for their partners.  The upcoming election was covered by the major racing media.  And, an eligible member could register on NYTHA’s web site in a manner of minutes.  In short, NYTHA officials took substantial steps to ensure they had an accurate mailing list and that members were aware of the need to ensure that NYTHA had their accurate mailing addresses.

Distribution of ballots:  Finley is alleging fraud by NYTHA:  “By limiting the number of ballots sent to members whose political leanings were unknown, or failing/delaying to send ballots to members thought to be favorable to me, the incumbent administration was able to maximize the weight of each ‘pro-Violette’ vote, thus fabricating his razor-thin majority.”  In his appeal submission, he filed what he said are “sixteen” affidavits from people saying they were denied the right to vote, and if they had voted, they would have voted for Finley.

Finley makes the superficially appealing point that if only 15 of those votes had been counted, he would have overcome the 14-vote margin by which he lost.  I was able to only find 15 affidavits that made that point, so let’s call them the “Finley 15,” and see what Jim Gallagher attests to in his affidavit.

One of the 15 actually voted, but states “I came close to not being able to vote….”  Let’s call them the “Finley 14.”

When I first read Finley’s submissions, I was struck by a curious omission in seven of the affidavits (Exhibit Y in the Finley appeal).  Although there were only two requirements for membership  –  being licensed and having raced  –  none of these seven stated they had raced a horse during the required time frame.  According to Gallagher’s affidavit, three of them had not raced a horse during the applicable period.  Another stated, “[i]t is my recollection that I never received a ballot” although Gallagher attests that one was mailed.  Two others were mailed ballots, and neither contacted the office nor opened a reminder email sent by NYTHA.  The seventh affiant was not on the list provided by his racing partnership, nor could NYTHA find any other information that he had raced a horse.

Three more of the “Finley 14” claimed they received their ballots too late to vote (Finley, Exhibits BB and Z).  According to Gallagher, they were not on the list provided initially by their partnership, but were on a second list provided on November 20, and then were mailed a ballot.  A fourth person claimed that his ballot was mailed to the wrong address, even though he had given NYTHA the correct one.  Gallagher states that he was actually mailed three ballots  –  each to a different state  –  after his office called NYTHA.

Gallagher stated that another person called (the 12th of the “Finley 14”), was told the ballot was mailed, and NYTHA did not hear from him again.  A 13th person had problems registering on NYTHA’s web site.  NYTHA acknowledged the problem and corrected it on November 7, several weeks before the deadline for submitting a ballot.  NYTHA emails to her were returned with a SPAM prevention reply.  She did not vote.  Finally, the managing partner of a racing partnership was sent an email on September 22 requesting contact information for the partnership.  While he opened the email, he did not provide NYTHA with his own mailing address until November 18, at which time he was mailed a ballot.

In short, the affidavits of the “Finley 14,” when matched against that of Jim Gallagher, fail to demonstrate that they were deprived of their opportunity to vote (unless, of course, they were not eligible), or that NYTHA did not undertake reasonable efforts to provide them with ballots.  Nor is there even a shred of evidence that any of the issues they may have confronted were motivated by an animus to steer votes away from Terry Finley.

 

Once the key issues are addressed, what is left is a potpourri of allegations made by the Finley campaign alleging a flawed election process.  They are too numerous to address, but an interested person can read them, as well as the rebuttals, on NYTHA’s web site.  (Finley is also disputing the procedures established by NYTHA to decide his appeal.)  There are, however, a couple of interesting issues.

One is the sometimes contradictory positions taken by the Finley challenge.  That is partly the result of flinging so many allegations that at some point you will get caught up in contradictions.  An example is the Finley protest complaining that NYTHA did not contact all managers of racing partnerships, and that when it did it was too late.  Then he claims that NYTHA was asking the partnerships to “act against their own perceived economic interests by revealing in writing who their investors were….”  That seems like the restaurant patron who complains “the food is horrible and the portions are too small.”

Then there were the personal attacks on the integrity of NYTHA officers and staff.  In one, Finley accused Alan Foreman of misrepresenting his position on race-day medication at a November meeting of the Maryland THA.  (Foreman’s affidavit says he did not speak at the meeting about the election.)  Finley, in his campaign statement said:

What matters is having a board and members not duped into believing the “Lasix issue” is the only important matter on the table  –  this is NOT a single issue election  –  as Rick Violette would like you to believe.

(Emphasis in original.)  Since Violette is well-known for his position favoring the continued use of the race day medication, this would strongly suggest Finley is opposed.  Finley was also endorsed by the Water Hay Oats Alliance (WHOA), an organization that supports “the passage of federal legislation to prohibit the use of race day drugs in horse racing.”  Yet in response to what he characterized as Foreman’s misrepresentation, Finley’s attorney stated:

Mr. Finley has always made clear that he is not in favor of Lasix being eliminated as a race day medication, and that he is not in favor of the federal government being asked to regulate any medications administered to thoroughbred racehorses.

It is understandable that in a closely contested election, the unsuccessful candidate might resort to avenues of appeal.  Challenging the process is one thing, although both the Gallagher and Foreman affidavits point out that Finley was elected to two terms on NYTHA’s Board of Directors under the same procedures, and neither has any recollection of Finley suggesting changes to the process.

Finley’s challenge is clearly weak.  Even after running at least two full-page ads in Thoroughbred Daily News seeking disenfranchised voters, he was only able to muster the 14 individuals who filed affidavits, all of which are rebutted effectively by the Jim Gallagher affidavit.

But alleging fraud and the rigging of an election is a charge one should only make if there is evidence to support it.  In going through all of Finley’s papers, I found no evidence of fraudulent behavior by anyone associated with NYTHA.  At the risk of over-stating the obvious, ours is an industry that does not need unwarranted negative publicity.  Regrettably, the allegations are out there and believed by many.  It is one thing to take steps to correct a perceived grievance;  it is another to make baseless personal attacks with nothing to back them up.

 

 

New York racing’s election dispute – update

Posted by noonante on December 19, 2014
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary. Tagged: , , , , , . 1 Comment

 

Now that we have gotten beyond the ceaseless advertising and robo-calling of the election season for political offices, a dispute over another election is roiling the waters of the New York racing community.  Earlier this month, Rick Violette was re-elected President of the New York Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association, reportedly by a razor-thin margin of 14 votes from over 1,200 cast.  His opponent, Terry Finley, is challenging the outcome claiming, among other things, that over 1,000 eligible voters did not receive ballots.

NYTHA is an organization that represents owners and trainers in New York and also administers programs to assist workers on the back stretch.  In addition, NYTHA has a non-voting seat on the Board of Directors for the New York Racing Association.  Violette is a long-time trainer on the New York circuit.  Finley is the founder and president of West Point Thoroughbreds that markets and manages racing partnerships.

The election was important, particularly in light of the fact that NYRA must come up with a reorganization plan by April to return the organization to private control from its current structure as one controlled by New York’s state government.  While there are several owners on the NYRA Board, Violette is the only trainer and the sole member with a designated constituency to represent.

What first caught my attention about this election, however, was a level of personal invective coming from the Finley camp.  This is from his campaign position statement:

What matters is having a board and members not duped into believing the “Lasix issue” is the only important matter on the table — this is NOT a single issue election – as Rick Violette would like you to believe. We must develop collaborative solutions to issues like race day medication and out of competition testing. It is also important to have an open-minded, rational leader with the right temperament – not one who antagonizes those with opposing views – as Violette does on a regular basis.

Now, Violette unapologetically believes that race-day Lasix should continue to be permitted.  (Incidentally, West Point’s thoroughbreds regularly race with the medication.)  But Violette is more than a one-trick pony.  I have heard him advocate passionately for the interest of New York owners and trainers on a variety of subjects, such as the importance of continuing a program of winter racing in the state.

It is also surprising to see him criticized as not being “rational” with the “right temperament.”  I have seen every meeting of the NYRA Board since it started conducting public meetings two years ago.  He is one of the few Board members with an historical perspective, and forcefully articulates his views, but always in a respectful and diplomatic manner.

So there must be something else going on here.  The essence of Finley’s arguments challenging the election results is a not-so-thinly veiled claim that NYTHA conducted the election in either an incompetent or fraudulent manner  –  and perhaps both.  According to Finley’s appeal, over 1,000 eligible voters were not mailed ballots, and NYTHA’s staff deliberately skewed the mailings to benefit Violette.

The racing media has been reporting Finley’s claims, but the NYTHA leadership has not been commenting.  I think the reason for that silence is pretty obvious  –  NYTHA is holding a hearing on Finley’s claims and any comments by Violette or NYTHA executives would be perceived as prejudicing that process.  (I did not attempt to contact NYTHA because they have not been responding to other media sources seeking comments.)

But what is known about the election process indicates that Finley’s assertions should be viewed with a considerable level of skepticism.

Eligibility for NYTHA membership is rather simple  –  if you owned or trained a horse that raced in New York in the preceding two years, you are “automatically” a member.  The NYTHA web site has a brief registration form that provides NYTHA with the information needed to contact you.

So if an owner or trainer does not fill out that form, how does NYTHA mail you a ballot?  That’s when it gets complicated.  Owners and trainers must be licensed by the state’s Gaming Commission in order to participate in racing.  But, according to published reports, the Gaming Commission says it is precluded by law from releasing addresses.

Owners and trainers are, of course, listed in each day’s racing program, but their addresses are not.  And many owners  –  for example, “West Point Thoroughbreds”  –  do not list the actual names of the individuals making up the partnership.

It is, therefore, difficult to ascertain what Finley thinks NYTHA should have done differently to ensure a fair process.  Given what we just described, how can anyone make a good-faith claim that over 1,000 eligible voters were not mailed ballots?  Knowing the number of licensed owners and trainers does not get you there because one must also have raced in New York.

One must also wonder what responsibility owners and trainers have for ensuring they are listed as an eligible voter.  It is clear that state records cannot be relied on, so an interested voter must take that extra step of registering to vote  –  an on-line process that takes less than a minute.

NYTHA has announced the process it will follow to adjudicate Finley’s claim, including evidence presented by actual people under oath.  Finley will get his chance to make his case.  The constant drumbeat criticizing the fairness of the election should wait until he puts real facts  –  not speculation and rumor  –  on the table.

UPDATE:  Terry Finley has emailed  me regarding this post.  He stated that he has “received an avalanche of notes from people not getting ballots or were so late they could not submit.”  He included two such notes from individuals saying that even after requesting a ballot from NYTHA, it required follow-up before they actually obtained one.  In one case, the writer had to Fed Ex the ballot in order to get it in on time.