reprivatization

All posts tagged reprivatization

The sad state of “leadership” in New York racing

Posted by noonante on June 16, 2016
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics, Saratoga thoughts. Tagged: , , , , , . Leave a comment

It was sad watching the Saratoga Springs local Chamber of Commerce and an offshoot, Concerned Citizens for Saratoga Racing, hold a rally to support legislation they claimed would reprivatize the New York Racing Association.  As the group twice did a chant on command of “WHOA Cuomo” for the TV cameras, the Legislature was passing the bills they supported.

Unfortunately, as one of the group’s leaders acknowledged in response to a question, the Legislature’s bill would guarantee the Governor control of 11 of the 15 members of a new Board.  So much for stopping the Governor.

The New York legislative session ends today (or whenever they decide to start the clock again after stopping it at midnight), and there is a need to do something about the governing structure of NYRA.  The current law that gives the state government control of the franchise expires in mid-October.

Four years ago when Governor Cuomo seized control of NYRA following bogus allegations of mismanagement, he promised his takeover would last only three years, because “state government has no role in running horse racing.”  His administration did not come up with a recommended plan by their deadline, so government control was extended another year.

This year, NYRA, charged with coming up with a proposal, did as little as possible to meet their legal obligation, although it was clear that the only opinion that mattered was sitting (sometimes) in the second floor of the State Capitol.  One house of the Legislature came up with a plan on May 25 that was soon adopted by the other chamber.  The Governor’s plan was revealed a week ago.  When you have four years to do something, I guess late is better than never.

There are two major differences between the bills:

  • The Governor’s plan would give him effective control of appointing 13 of the 15 members on a new Board of Directors;  the legislative bills would give him effective control of 11 of 15 members of the Board;
  • The Governor’s plan would take $11.5 million in revenues from the Video Lottery Terminals at Aqueduct and direct them to government expenditures and not to NYRA.

Understandably, the debate on the legislation has focused on the money the Governor would like to take from NYRA.  They project $57.5 million in VLT receipts this year, and the Governor proposes capping it at $46 million starting next year.  The Comptroller of New York, Thomas DiNapoli, released an audit last week in which he concluded that NYRA is not currently profitable without VLT revenues, nor has it developed a plan to attain self-sufficiency without the monies.  Charles Hayward, writing in Thoroughbred Racing Commentary, outlines the history of the VLT monies becoming a guarantee for 25 years, both contractually and by statute.

The composition of a future Board, however, is as significant an issue.  On the current Board, remarkably, the Governor has less than half of the appointees, although he and his loyalists have controlled NYRA without needing a majority.  There is perhaps a misperception that a “government-controlled” Board means it is composed primarily of state employees.  Only one such person, however, has served on the Board since its inception four years ago.

So when both bills purporting to “reprivatize” NYRA would give increased and overwhelming control to the Governor, one would be inclined to laugh if the prospects for New York’s racing and breeding industries were not so grim.  When one reads the Senate chair of the Racing and Wagering Committee challenging the Governor to veto their legislation, one does have to laugh.  Cuomo is in a no-lose situation  –  he controls NYRA under either scenario, and he gets to keep his seizure of NYRA’s money alive.  Someday, the so-called racing leaders in the Legislature will realize they are playing checkers while Cuomo plays chess.

We should also not minimize the possibility of a new NYRA Board moving ahead with an agenda that acts as though NYRA does not get VLT monies and budgets accordingly.  This was actually proposed in August 2013, by Cuomo’s hand-picked Board Chairman David Skorton.  In a rare instance of the NYRA Board actually commenting on something, it became an idea that was shelved quickly.  Significantly, the charge was led by one of the Senate’s appointees and John Hendrickson, a Cuomo-appointee who resigned recently because the Governor did not listen to him.

So if we have a new Board composed of Cuomo loyalists, who can be counted on to serve the interests of New York’s owners, breeders, trainers, backstretch employees and fans?  The state’s Gaming Commission?  Mostly Cuomo appointees.  The Franchise Oversight Board?  Mostly Cuomo appointees.  NYRA?  More Cuomo appointees.  There are groups representing owners, trainers and breeders, but they have been mostly silent on this debate, possibly because of their need to work with the Administration.

And when the Concerned Citizens and their legislative allies finish draining their champagne flutes after yesterday’s vote, perhaps they can consider how they will explain a new NYRA Board composed almost entirely of Cuomo loyalists as a result of the legislation they supported.

Audit exposes NYRA nonsense

Posted by noonante on June 13, 2016
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

New York State’s Comptroller, Thomas DiNapoli, released an audit of the financial practices of the New York Racing Association.  He concluded that NYRA “continues to produce multi-million dollar annual deficits in its racing operations,” and that continuing this trend means that “NYRA’s long-term solvency could be a long shot.”

While this may come as a surprise to those who believed NYRA CEO Chris Kay’s constant proclamations that the organization was finally running in the black after years of deficits, it was obvious to anyone who went beyond press releases and actually looked at their financial statements.  The audit comes at a particularly resonant time since the Legislature is due to take up legislation this week concerning the future of NYRA, including a bill proposed by Governor Andrew Cuomo that would degrade significantly NYRA’s financial situation.

The audit covers the three years ending in 2014, during which NYRA was largely controlled by the Reorganization Board put in place by the Governor and Legislature in mid-2012.  CEO Kay has been in charge for the second-half of that period.

DiNapoli concluded:

  • NYRA is incurring significant operating losses from racing unless it includes the revenues from Video Lottery Terminals guaranteed by law;
  • NYRA’s assertion that it is operating profitably without the VLT revenues is based on the exclusion of certain operating expenses, for which “there is no authoritative accounting or financial reporting justification,” and is “very misleading;”
  • NYRA had not developed a plan to eliminate deficits from racing operations as recommended by the Franchise Oversight Board;
  • As an example of questionable expenses, it cited the NYRA Board’s awarding a $250,000 bonus to CEO Kay even though he had not met goals of achieving profitability without the VLT revenues or developing a plan to do so.

Central to both the audit and the Governor’s legislation to again revamp NYRA is the role of VLT payments.  While there are those who question why racing needs the revenues from slot machines, it is an essential component of the agreement reached when NYRA transferred title to the state of the land on which its tracks sit.  One can question the wisdom of doing so, but it was a contract, the provisions of which are embodied in law.

The Governor is now proposing that the VLT payments for racing and capital expenditures to NYRA be reduced from $57.5 million to $46 million.  Given that there is no dispute on NYRA’s numbers, irrespective of how they are characterized, it should be obvious that this would be a devastating blow to New York racing.

NYRA finds itself in the position of possibly absorbing this hit because of its “success” in convincing the media and outside groups of a dramatic turnaround in its finances.  As the audit demonstrates, however, the supposed turnaround borders on fraud.  John Hendrickson, the Board member from Saratoga who resigned when it became clear that the Governor did not need any independent advice, dismissed the Government’s impact on restoring NYRA to profitability, saying it would occur solely because of the VLT revenues.  He put it succinctly in BloodHorse.com:

“For the Governor to say ‘I saved racing’ is like taking your friend out on a boat and throwing him over with concrete sneakers and rescuing him.”

Among DiNapoli’s criticisms of NYRA are questionable expenditures.  Because it did not occur during the period covered by the audit, we will have to wait for the next one to get his views on the Chris Kay self-tribute that is the large structure he built in Saratoga in 2015 to celebrate those who Kay thinks should be celebrated.

This year, he apparently decided to celebrate the audit findings by announcing that he had commissioned a new Triple Crown trophy.  While I am sure that this was done following a competitive bidding process, he remarkably came up with someone he worked with while at Toys ‘R Us.

NYRA does have government bodies overseeing it, including the Gaming Commission and the Franchise Oversight Board, but each entity is controlled by the Governor’s appointees.  The audit raises an issue of their effectiveness.  I have been writing about NYRA’s questionable practice of claiming profitability by moving obvious operating expenses “off the books,” but I do not recall any one in either of these groups questioning it.  (Indeed, a member of the Franchise Oversight Board questioned Kay upon hearing of his plan to expand his self-tribute at Saratoga then demurred by saying, “You don’t have to tell me if you don’t want to.”)

This all comes to the fore because the close of the legislative session is Thursday, at which NYRA’s future is to be determined.  The Governor’s bill retains his control by effectively giving him say over 13 of 15 Board members.  The legislative bills are not much better because they would give a majority of Board appointments to those decided by the Governor’s loyalists.  The Governor’s bill would also strip $11.5 million from a NYRA that an independent source has now raised questions as to its long-term viability.

I think there is an appropriate role for government involvement in a future NYRA.  I do not think the Governor should control the future Board, but rather there should be an independent and professional panel naming so-called “private” Board members.  And, if we want truly independent government oversight, put the Comptroller on the Board.

The future of New York’s racing and breeding industries is at an important crossroads.  It could all go under if responsible figures do not act responsibly.

 

 

Cuomo’s legislation increases his control of NYRA

Posted by noonante on June 9, 2016
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics, Saratoga thoughts. Tagged: , , . 2 Comments

Governor Andrew Cuomo introduced his legislation to replace the current law governing the New York Racing Association on Wednesday.  The bill not only increases his control over New York racing, but reduces revenues from Video Lottery Terminals that are now guaranteed to NYRA.

Here’s a comparison of the current law with Cuomo’s bill:

Current law

  • 17-member Board of Directors;
  • Cuomo appoints eight;
  • Legislative leaders each appoint two;
  • Five appointed by the prior NYRA Board;
  • Cuomo nominates chair of the Board to be approved by full Board.

Cuomo legislation

  • 15-member Board
  • Cuomo directly appoints four;
  • Legislative leaders each appoint one;
  • Eight appointed by current NYRA Executive Committee comprised almost entirely of Cuomo appointees;
  • NYRA CEO serves on Board;
  • Cuomo nominates Chair of the Board “who shall serve at the pleasure of the governor.”

Let’s go over this.  Under the current law, 12 of 17 appointees are made by state officials, and five are truly “private appointees.”  The Governor selects 8 of the 17.  In a bill laughingly described as a return to private control, all of the Board is selected either directly by state officials or indirectly in a process controlled by the Governor.  Cuomo goes from picking 8 of 17 to effectively picking 13 of 15.  That’s privatization?

A bill that is identical in the Senate and the Assembly is not much better, because it leaves the so-called “private members” to be selected by the Governor’s appointees.  Unfortunately, the media and outside groups persist in calling this a return to private control when the reality is that a Board picked under the legislative bills is likely to end up with a Board of Cuomo appointees.

To add insult to injury, Cuomo is also proposing to take VLT revenues currently dedicated to NYRA’s operating expenses and capital expenditures and capping the payments at $46 million.  Since NYRA’s budget for 2016 projected revenue of $57.5 million from this source, we are talking a significant reduction in NYRA’s ability to function.  I know there are those who say NYRA should not need this revenue, but it was part of the consideration for NTRA’s transferring title to the property on which the tracks sit to the state.  You know  –  just like a contract.

The sad part of this is that the groundwork for another coup by Cuomo was laid by a supine NYRA Board of Directors and an all-too complicit media.  They believed the nonsense that NYRA was profitable without the VLT revenues.  Now they are going along with a charade that this is a return to private control when the reality is that the Governor will have greater control.

John Hendrickson, a special advisor appointed by Cuomo to the NYRA Board, resigned when he saw the fix was in.  Let’s hope that leaders in the New York racing community and the media step up and follow his example, and start speaking the truth about this latest Cuomo outrage affecting racing.

NYRA loses important independent voice

Posted by noonante on June 8, 2016
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics, Saratoga thoughts. Tagged: , , , . Leave a comment

John Hendrickson, appointed by Governor Andrew Cuomo to represent Saratoga Springs on the Board of the New York Racing Association, has resigned his position.  Hendrickson expressed his frustration with a Governor and administration who “don’t care much about the industry,” according to the Albany Times Union.  He was quoted saying, “There appears to be a general dislike for racing.”

Since he was appointed as a non-voting member to the Board that was created when Cuomo seized control of NYRA in 2012, Hendrickson has been an informed and independent voice.  On a Board controlled by state government, the state’s appointees meekly sit through meaningless meetings and routinely approve whatever directions are handed down from the Governor’s office.  It’s not surprising that the announcement of Hendrickson’s departure was greeted by a typically classless statement from Cuomo’s office that was basically “Good riddance.”

Hendrickson and his wife Marylou Whitney have campaigned major horses in New York, including Belmont Stakes and Travers winner Birdstone.  The couple has also been a significant contributor to racing in Saratoga, including a program for backstretch programs that runs throughout the Saratoga meet.  In short, they are a prime example of people who are committed to racing and, more importantly, to giving their success back to the sport and the community.

Despite their contributions and impact, Hendrickson could not even get a return call from the Governor to express his concerns about what is going on with racing in New York.  If it isn’t blatantly obvious by now to anyone who has observed the Governor, he expects complete fealty and unquestioning loyalty from those around him.

And what he now appears intent on is taking revenues from Video Lottery Terminals that support racing and redirecting them to his own purposes.  This is so even though the agreement reached when NYRA gave up control of the land on which the tracks sit gave NYRA a portion of the VLT revenues.

The Hendrickson resignation takes place in the context of proposals intended to return NYRA to private control instead of a government-run entity.  None of the proposals, however, whether it be Cuomo’s or identical bills from the Senate and the Assembly, do that.  The reality is that under either of the proposals, Cuomo will continue to control almost all of the appointees to a so-called “private” entity.

The Hendrickson resignation serves to highlight the future for New York racing if Andrew Cuomo is still calling the shots.  As BloodHorse.com reported:

“‘I really have Saratoga as my main goal.  My loyalty is to Saratoga, not the Governor….

I just didn’t feel like I could do my job if he wasn’t listening.  It turned out to be a nightmarish game of whack-a-mole,’ Hendrickson said of his time serving as the NYRA board special adviser.”

I don’t have any faith in the government-appointed NYRA Board members to step up and take a similar leadership role.  We can hope, however, that independent groups and the media will start to appreciate the latest scam by Cuomo to retain full control of New York racing.

Andrew Cuomo’s scam to keep control of racing

Posted by noonante on May 26, 2016
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics, Saratoga thoughts. Tagged: , , , , . 5 Comments

Just about four years to the day that news broke of Governor Andrew Cuomo’s seizing control of New York’s premier racing, word comes of his latest attempt to stay in charge.  According to a report in the Albany Times Union, the Concerned Citizens for Saratoga are reporting that Cuomo is circulating a plan to make permanent state government control of the tracks of the New York Racing Association.

In May, 2012, Cuomo reached an “agreement” with the privately-controlled NYRA following a campaign of threats, intimidation and false charges against NYRA board members and officers.  It called for the majority of a NYRA “Reorganization Board” to be appointed by state officials, including eight by Cuomo who would also name the Board Chair.  Only five of the 17-member Board would be private appointees.  The law required the new Board to submit a plan for NYRA to be “returned to private control, remaining in the form of a not-for-profit corporation” in 2015.  It was the only requirement of the Board, but NYRA did not do it, and the law was extended for another year.

We now have Cuomo’s idea of “private control” according to the Concerned Citizens of Saratoga, a group affiliated with the Chamber of Commerce:

  • The Governor appoints five members of the 15-member Board;
  • Each of the legislative leaders appoints one;
  • Seven “private” members;
  • While not in the CCS statement, I have been told that the Cuomo plan calls for the 15th member and the Board Chair to be appointed by NYRA’s CEO;
  • The State’s Gaming Commission would be able to “manipulate NYRA’s budget and operations”;
  • Funds from the Video Lottery Terminals at Aqueduct would be “transferred” from NYRA.

So whatever else this is  –  other than yet another naked power grab by the Governor  –  it does not return control of the Saratoga, Belmont and Aqueduct race tracks to private control.  Seven of 15 members would be government-appointees, and an eighth  –  the Chair  –  would be appointed by someone hired by the current government appointees.  It’s beyond ludicrous to suggest that this is a return to private control.

The State Gaming Commission, while a reliable issuer of regulations and adjudicator of disciplinary matters, is not what one would call independent.  Of its seven members, five are to be appointed by the Governor.  And as uninformed as you may think the NYRA Reorganization Board is, the Gaming Commission has not demonstrated any familiarity with the day-to-day aspects of running race tracks.

Additionally, the proposal takes VLT money that supports racing and directs it to the state’s coffers.  As the statement from CCS points out, “New York State was given $1 billion in real estate at NYRA’s three tracks in return for the granting of a 25-year franchise agreement and a legislatively-approved revenue sharing formula from the VLT [sic] at Aqueduct.”

Should this occur, it would complete the trifecta of government actions this year that are harmful to the state’s racing and breeding operations.  The Gaming Commission awarded a casino license for a facility that will be only 29 miles from the Finger Lakes Racetrack.  There is a harness race track,  123 miles away, that will be getting “hold harmless” protection from the likely effect of “cannibalizing” gambling revenues from competing facilities.  Yet, the thoroughbred track, an integral part of New York’s breeding industry, gets no such protection and is facing dire consequences as a result.

Then we have the placement of an additional 1,000 VLT’s at Aqueduct for the benefit of an off-track betting facility on Long Island that will be competing with the other VLT’s that contribute a share of the wagers to support NYRA racing.  Now, admittedly I do not understand why an entity not running the costly enterprise of a racetrack, but only needs a building, computers and a bunch of patronage employees to take wagers on those tracks needs subsidies, but that appears to be unfortunate state of things in New York.

It’s no secret that the Governor does not like racing.  That’s fine, no one has to.  It doesn’t mean, however, he should be working to destroy it.  He is being aided in that effort, unwittingly I believe, by those who do not bring him to task for the obvious nonsense spouted over the years by the NYRA Board he controls.

The first bit of nonsense is that the “new” NYRA has brought the organization to a profitable status without consideration of the VLT revenues.  This “accomplishment” is the result of changing the concept of operational costs to exclude tax obligations and pension costs.  The VLT revenues go to meet those responsibilities and take enough off the books for NYRA to make its claim of profitability.

Then there is the NYRA Board’s plan to return the operation to private control.  At its April 12 meeting, they presented three options.  One was to retain the status quo, which even the Governor would not contend is privately-controlled.  One had no government appointees, the other had a total of four.  The so-called private appointees in each plan, however, were to be nominated by Cuomo’s appointees on one committee of the current Board and approved by another committee composed mostly of Cuomo loyalists.  These plans are described in more detail at this post.

Yet in the media, both mainstream and racing, the description of NYRA’s proposals were described uncritically as a return to private control.  The Concerned Citizens of Saratoga endorsed NYRA’s efforts because of this belief.  Having approved a plan in which all of the so-called “private” board members would be appointed by the Governor’s people, they face the rather delicate situation of describing the difference between that and a Cuomo proposal that would have him actually appoint three more people in addition to having his loyalists appoint the remainder.

The Senate Chair of the Racing Committee has also drafted legislation, but the most significant departure of that bill from Cuomo’s approach is that the New York Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association and the New York Thoroughbred Breeders would each have a voting membership.  It is an improvement, but merely an incremental step in a bill as flawed as proposals from the Governor’s office.

If there is one thing that Andrew Cuomo is good at  –  I would even call him a genius  –  it’s manipulating the Legislature and, often, the media to get what he wants.  The NYRA reprivatization proposals, as bare bones as they were, had to first be approved by Cuomo.  So, once he gets approbation from the media and groups such as Concerned Citizens, he can now tinker with the plans to get what he really wants.  In this case, I think what he really wants are the VLT revenues.  He is hoping that gets lost in the fight over whether he has five actual appointees or two, when the reality is that he has almost all of them.  And the uncritical reporting of NYRA now operating at a profit further enhances his ability to grab VLT revenues needed by the tracks for his own purposes.

There is no one who will be covered in glory in this matter.  We have known for four years that there had to be a plan for reprivatization.  The Legislature did nothing.  The NYRA Board has been a useless appendage of the Governor’s office since its inception.  The media has been too accepting and the racing organizations have not put forward their own plans.

There are three components that a new NYRA board must have:  integrity, competence and independence.  The current NYRA Board has amply demonstrated that it lacks the last two attributes.  Any legislation that allows them to appoint the “private” members going forward means that we are destined to a continuing lack of competence and control by the Governor.

It doesn’t have to be that way.  There are ample examples of private groups screening appointees for public positions.  In some states, that is how judges are selected.  Cuomo himself demonstrated the utility of that approach when he named an independent panel of experts to examine the increase in fatalities at Aqueduct in early 2012.  The result of their work was a widely-acclaimed Report that has led to an impressive reduction in catastrophic racing fatalities in New York and that is a national model.  Indeed, I would argue that this Report is the most significant contribution the Cuomo Administration has made to horse racing.

There is no shortage of committed and knowledgeable people in racing who could come up with a list of qualified (and diverse) individuals who would similarly constitute a national model for how racing can be run.

The Governor’s plan and the proposal from the Senate merely perpetuates the current framewqrk, except now it would be on a permanent basis.  Indeed, of the proposals currently in play, the next NYRA Board could consist solely of members from the current Board except that CEO Chris Kay would become a member.  New York has an opportunity that is too valuable to waste.  It would actually be better if the current system were continued for another year rather than throwing that opportunity away.

NYRA farce continues Cuomo’s control of racing

Posted by noonante on April 13, 2016
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , , . Leave a comment

The New York Racing Association’s Board of Directors approved a report on Tuesday with two proposals that would  –  according to them  –  return NYRA to private control.  Each of the proposals, however, would ensure that Governor Andrew Cuomo would retain control of the NYRA franchise for the foreseeable future.  And despite their self-serving rhetoric, either of the “new” Boards could very well consist of nothing but current Board members.

The Board, known as the Reorganization Board, was established by legislation in 2012 following the seizure of NYRA by the Governor.  The stated purpose was to have racing controlled by a government-appointed board of directors for three years and then “returned to private control, remaining in the form of a not-for-profit corporation.”  When they could not meet the legislative deadlines in 2015, the deadlines were extended for a year.

The NYRA report outlined three options.  The first two would create a 15-member board with NYRA’s CEO being a member.  Here is how the remaining members would be selected in each option:

Option 1:  Governor appoints two; Senate President and Assembly Speaker each appoint one;  ten members appointed by the Cuomo loyalists on the current Board.

Option 2:  Fourteen members appointed by the Cuomo loyalists on the Board.

Option 3:  Continuation of the current 17-member Board, with eight appointed by the Governor, two each by the Senate and Assembly, and five from the prior NYRA.

Under the first two proposals, the so-called “private” members would be recommended by the Board’s Nominations Committee and approved by the Executive Committee.  The Nominations Committee has five members, three appointed by the Governor and one appointed by the old NYRA.  The fifth Member is Michael Del Giudice who was appointed by the Assembly, but is such a close confidant of both Governor Cuomos that he has been quoted saying “Andrew is like a younger brother to me.”  The Executive Committee has six members: Del Giudice, three appointed by the Governor, one by the Senate and one by the old NYRA.  Of the 11 seats on both groups, there is only one on each that is not a government-appointee.  Andrew Cuomo controls eight of the seats.

There is perhaps a misperception that the current Board consists of actual government officials or employees.  In fact, of the more than 20 individuals who have served on the Board since its creation, only one, Bob Megna, was actually employed by the government.

The remaining members, except for the five NYRA-appointees, were all appointed by government leaders.  While this Board is widely-recognized as government-controlled, how can a Board appointed by the Governor’s loyalists not also be viewed as government-controlled?  Are there benighted souls out there who think that a Cuomo appointee is going to suddenly start acting independently?  If he does  –  and all his appointees are men  –  it will be his last act as a Cuomo-appointee. What we can expect, however, is that a Board appointed under this process will have many of the current members.

Michael Del Giudice, who serves as Chair of the entire Board, said that these three options to be presented to the Governor and the Legislature are the only ones.  Of course, they are not.  There are any number of options, so he must have meant that these are the only ones that perpetuate the Governor’s control.  I set forth a proposal in this post that would not only move towards real private control, but is based on a model that this Governor used when he addressed the crisis caused by fatalities at Aqueduct in early 2012.

Del Giudice made some revealing comments when he addressed a suggestion that the Board include as voting members, instead of their current ex officio status, representatives of the New York Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association and the New York Thoroughbred Breeders. The former represents all owners and trainers who race in New York;  the latter those who breed New York-breds.

He summarily dismissed the comment by Rick Violette of NYTHA:  “We heard you.  We like it the way it is.”  In subsequent comments reported by David Grening in DRF.com, he added, “Expressing an opinion is one thing, but then voting their interests against NYRA interests potentially could create a conflict.”

That’s right.  One group that represents the trainers whose livelihood depends on a successful NYRA in addition to the owners who spend tens of millions  –  if not hundreds of millions  –  could somehow conflict with NYRA.  The same for the breeders who also expend tens of millions and contribute directly to New York’s farm economy.  Does Michael Del Giudice think people come to NYRA’s tracks to see him give away a trophy?

His statements are typical of the arrogance and ignorance we have come to expect from the Cuomo Administration’s control of New York racing.  “We like it the way it is.”  You will not find that sentiment often expressed on the backstretch or in the grandstand.

This is an opportunity for New York to take a major step forward in restoring it to a leadership position in the industry.  That will not be accomplished if the next NYRA Board is just more politics as usual.

Returning New York racing to private control – a proposal

Posted by noonante on March 30, 2016
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , , . 1 Comment

At the meeting of the New York Racing Association’s Reorganization Board on March 10, CEO Chris Kay announced that a proposal for returning NYRA to private control would be presented for the Board’s approval during the week of April 11.  While government control of New York racing is supposed to end, the anticipated plan will continue to ensure that the racing franchise remains under the control of Andrew Cuomo.

When Governor Cuomo seized control of NYRA with a complicit legislature in 2012, the stated purpose was to have state government run the racing franchise for three years.  Of the 17 members of the Reorganization Board, 12 were state government appointees.  The Board was to present a plan by April, 2015, to return to private control by October, 2015.  Even though this was the only specific responsibility assigned the Board, it did not do it, and new legislation extended both deadlines by a year.

NYRA’s General Counsel presented a proposed plan at a Board meeting in November, 2014.  It can be viewed at NYRA’s web site here.  The 29-page PowerPoint presentation could have been done on a single page of paper, and there are only two components of the plan that might be controversial.  The first is a reduction in the size of the Board.  The other is the method for selecting the new Board.

The prior NYRA Board had 25 members;  the Reorganization Board has 17 slots, although only 15  are active because the Governor has not filled one of his vacancies and another of his appointees has been on a leave of absence.

The stated rationale for reducing the number of members is that a smaller board would be “small enough to be agile;  large enough to represent multiple perspectives.”  Lack of agility has not been an issue with this Board.  Despite the myriad of significant issues confronting racing in general and New York in particular, they complete most of their meetings in less than an hour.  There is rarely any discussion, and to the extent there are votes, they are on minor matters.  Most of the votes taken by this Board since it began in December, 2012, have been the approval of minutes from the prior meeting.

Representation of multiple perspectives would indeed be a refreshing change.  Since the initial Board was appointed more than 41 months ago, only two women have been appointed, one of whom resigned.  There has never been a Latino/a member or a non-white member.  It has been older white businessmen.  Some have been owners and breeders;  others have no background in racing.  The organization representing horsemen does not have a vote, nor does the group representing New York’s breeders.

That brings us to the most troublesome aspect of the NYRA proposal  –  the method for selecting members of a new Board.  The 2014 proposal called for new Board members “to be selected by the current Executive Committee of the Board upon recommendation of the Nominations Committee after consultation with all Board members.”

The Nominations Committee has five members:  three appointed by the Governor, one by NYRA, and one by then-Speaker Sheldon Silver.  The Silver appointee, Michael Del Giudice, has been a close confidant of the Cuomos going back to Mario Cuomo’s tenure as Governor.  He also serves as the Chair of the Board since Cuomo’s nominee to be Chair, Anthony Bonomo, has been on a leave of absence since being a prominent figure in the federal corruption trial of then-Senate President Dean Skelos.

The Executive Committee has six members:  three appointed by the Governor, one by Skelos, one by NYRA, and Del Guidice, serving as the Chair of this Committee.

There is only one member of each committee not appointed by a state government leader.  Four of the five members of the Nomination Committee are effectively controlled by the Governor.  Four of the six Executive Committee members are Cuomo loyalists.  There is the possibility that these groups will simply name themselves or other members of the current Board to a new Board.  The notion that NYRA will be returned to private control when all of the new Board will be appointed by the Governor’s hand-picked cronies is as farcical as it is ludicrous.

I think any fair-minded observer would agree that the three attributes most needed in a new NYRA are integrity, independence and competence.

New York’s residents have observed a lengthy and persistent strain of corruption among its elected officials.  When both the Assembly Speaker and Senate President are convicted of corruption just months apart in 2015  –  not to mention the myriad of other convictions of legislative figures  –  no New Yorker can be confident that decisions are based on merit and not political contributions or illicit money.  And while the Governor has not been accused of illegal conduct, his most recent nominee to chair the NYRA Board, Anthony Bonomo, figured prominently in the federal corruption trial of Dean Skelos.  Skelos was convicted of several crimes, including soliciting a bribe  –  successfully  –  from Bonomo, who has been a major political contributor to the Governor.

Independence is a prerequisite for any Board of Directors that takes its fiduciary obligations seriously.  It is especially necessary in the hyper-political environment of New York.  While Governor Cuomo’s micromanagement of the smallest details of state government is legendary, it is Michael Del Giudice who can give us the best perspective.  He was quoted in Michael Shnayerson’s Cuomo biography, The Contender, discussing the prior NYRA:  “Andrew is like a younger brother to me, but if there’s ever a moment when he can take political advantage, he’ll cut someone off at the knees, me or anyone else.”  From someone who may play the most prominent role  –  if not the only role  –  in selecting a Board under the NYRA plan, it’s not exactly a comforting message for the tens of thousands who depend on New York racing for their livelihood, let alone racing fans.

As for competence, there is little this NYRA Board has done that suggests it is up to the task of leading New York racing in the 21st century.  Its most recent Board meeting provided yet another disturbing example of how badly it is in over its head.  The topic was federal legislation introduced in July, 2015, and co-sponsored by Congress Members Andy Barr and Paul Tonko, who represents Saratoga Springs.  The legislation isn’t complex  –  it’s not a 2000-page bill overhauling the health care system.  Its central feature is one that would create an anti-doping agency similar to one that exists for human athletes.

Even though regular readers of the racing media are familiar with this controversial legislation, it appeared to come as news to the NYRA Board members.  One thought that it was a NYRA proposal and did not understand why the feds had not yet acted.

They ended up supporting the bill with almost no discussion  –  let alone an informed one  –  as a token gesture of support.  They did so with an erroneous conclusion that New York could continue with its anti-doping efforts even though the legislation specifically states the new agency “shall have exclusive jurisdiction for anti-doping matters.”  That’s right  –  one of the two most significant racing entities in the United States took eight months to get around to this bill, did not understand it and concluded they had little influence over it.  (I no longer count Churchill Downs as a major racing organization since they appear to be primarily a casino company and only care about two days of racing each year.)  If that is the level of involvement in a major issue in national racing, one can only be apprehensive about their commitment to coming up with a new structure for NYRA.

There is, however, an approach to selecting a new Board that will address the matters of integrity, independence and competence.  And, it’s something New York tried the last time it sought to address a crisis in public confidence at NYRA.

Here is a proposed approach (all members have voting rights):

  • Governor appoints three members;
  • Senate President appoints one;
  • Assembly Speaker appoints one;
  • Comptroller or Attorney General appoints one;
  • New York Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association appoints one;
  • New York Thoroughbred Breeders appoint one;
  • Nine members appointed by Special Committee.

The Special Committee would be comprised of recognized industry leaders who have had hands-on experience in managing some aspect of the racing business.

There is a precedent for New York to address a crisis in racing by turning to a panel of recognized experts.  In early 2012 when a rash of catastrophic breakdowns plagued the Aqueduct inner track, government officials and NYRA appointed the New York Task Force on Racehorse Health and Safety to investigate the causes and recommend improvements.  The four members –  Dr. Scott Palmer from New Jersey, Alan Foreman from Maryland, Dr. Mary Scollay from Kentucky, and retired jockey Jerry Bailey  –  produced a lengthy report.  Their product was widely praised and could serve as a guide for tracks around the country in improving equine and human safety.

While the NYRA executives and the Reorganization Board may believe their press releases about the great job they are doing, it is not a sentiment shared in either the backstretch or the grandstand.  The only way to restore confidence is to come up with a new Board that promotes integrity, independence and competence.  Governor Cuomo knew that when he directed the head of NYRA in 2012 to “hire a qualified independent investigator or team of investigators” to review the circumstances of the Aqueduct fatalities.  And it worked  –  I have never seen any criticism of the work done by the Task Force, and racing fatalities at the NYRA tracks have declined over the past four years.

The Special Committee envisioned by this proposal would consist of persons from within New York and outside.  There is no shortage of respected, knowledgeable and committed figures who could serve on such a group.  Indeed, the members of the Task Force serve as a useful starting point.  The Committee can prepare a list of 15 nominees from which the current Board, voting in a secret ballot, can select nine of their successors.

Such an approach may not be perfect, but it would be insulation from a charge that “it’s just New York politics as usual.”  It will maintain a level of involvement by New York’s government without ceding complete control to them.  One reason the report by the Task Force on equine safety was accepted so readily was that the members had earned wide respect in the racing industry and were independent.  While the NYRA Board members identified in the draft proposal to name new Board members may have their strengths, independence is not one of them.

It is important that New York get this right.  There is too much at stake for this to be treated as just another exercise in political gamesmanship.

 

 

 

Audit slams NYRA mismanagement

Posted by noonante on October 19, 2015
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , , , , . Leave a comment

Thomas DiNapoli, New York State’s Comptroller, sharply criticized the management of the New York Racing Association for its failure to plan capital expenditures.  The findings are not surprising to anyone who has observed the government-controlled agency in action, but is yet another disturbing red flag for the future of racing in New York.

Under New York law, the operator of the racino at Aqueduct pays a share of its net revenues to NYRA:  a defined percentage is for capital expenditures, another for purses and a third for operating expenses.  The audit examined what NYRA does with the money for capital expenditures.

DiNapoli concluded  –  unremarkably one would think  – that “[s]ound business practices include both long-term and short-term capital project planning,” but “NYRA’s planning was weak.”  Particularly disturbing is that the Comptroller’s office cited NYRA for similar deficiencies in 2007, shortly before NYRA filed for bankruptcy.

While NYRA did submit capital plans to its Board of Directors, the documents were apparently not worth the paper they were printed on.  DiNapoli’s office found that over $7 million was spent on projects that were not included on the submitted plans, and another 114 projects that were on the lists were not initiated during the audit period.

As an example of the lack of planning, DiNapoli cited the Longshots simulcast facility and sports bar that was built at Aqueduct.  Genting, the racino operator, was committed to paying $5 million with NYRA being on the hook for anything over that amount.  In large part because of change orders, the cost spiraled to $9.4 million.  According to the report:

“The three largest change orders, exceeding $1 million, related to the installation of audiovisual equipment and HVAC-related work.  Because these items were basic to an indoor simulcast center, we question how and why they were overlooked to such an extent in the original planning and design of Longshots.”

That fiasco  –  the project was also delayed by two years  –  is typical of NYRA’s “management” of capital projects.  The DiNapoli audit also faulted NYRA for not adhering to basic components of any capital plan:  “its annual plans lacked pertinent details regarding the projects to be financed, such as completion dates, and support for their associated costs.”

In addition, DiNapoli faulted NYRA for using funds intended for capital projects on routine maintenance.  That allows NYRA to maintain its well-publicized fiction that it is now operating in the black without consideration of VLT revenues.  Of course, when VLT revenues for capital projects are reducing the need to rely on operating revenues, it becomes the NYRA version of three-card monte.

NYRA responded to the audit by denying any deficiencies in its planning, while not disputing any of the factual conclusions in the audit.  As they are wont to do when criticized, they blamed others for any issues.  Genting was to be blamed for Longshots because they were in charge of the project, ignoring that when you are exposed for what turned out to be almost half the costs, a responsible manager would intervene.  The state’s Franchise Oversight Board  –  a group like the NYRA Board composed largely of Cuomo appointees  –  was identified as having approved the plans NYRA submitted.

NYRA also cited what it has done for long-term capital planning.  It appointed a Long-Term Planning Committee at one of its first Reorganization Board meetings almost three years ago. To the best of my knowledge  –  and I have attended or observed every Board meeting  –  this Committee has never done anything, other than recommending an $800,000 consultant to advise it on long-term planning.

NYRA further said it “has been, and is currently, engaged in significant long-term planning for Saratoga.”  They are referring to a comprehensive plan for the track prepared by Turnberry Consulting, and available on its web site.  One of the most significant changes recommended by the report is eliminating the parking inside the fence along Union Avenue, and replacing it with an expanded area for picnic tables and an amphitheater.  At a Saratoga preview held at the Museum of Racing  –  across the street from the site of the parking area  –  NYRA’s CEO and President Chris Kay had no idea that this was being proposed.  So much for NYRA’s “engagement.”

It would be one thing if this the lack of capital planning was an aberration  –  and, of course, not identified as a deficiency eight years earlier prior to a bankruptcy filing  –  but NYRA’s inability to plan is a major problem. The 2014 Belmont Stakes was not a fiasco because of the unexpected, but because of a lackadaisical approach to even the most rudimentary planning.  The NYRA Board has been talking about restoring off-track betting to  New York City for the three years of its existence, yet nothing has happened.

There is one area, however, that is the most troubling.  The one thing that the NYRA Reorganization Board was required to do in the legislation written by the Cuomo Administration was to come up with a plan to return New York’s premier racing to a not-for-profit entity instead of a government-controlled one in April of this year.  It is the only thing they were required to do.  The transition was to happen this month.  They did not do it, and the budget for this fiscal year extended both deadlines for a year.

If this persistent, demonstrated incompetence is not enough to cause you concern, ponder this.  A proposal drafted by NYRA’s General Counsel and presented to the Board last November called for the current Board to appoint the new one under a reorganization plan.  That’s right, the idea to get the government out of running New York’s racing was to have the government appointees select their successor.  What could go wrong with that idea?

 

 

 

Why did NYRA start cooking the books on attendance?

Posted by noonante on August 3, 2014
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics, Saratoga thoughts. Tagged: , , , , . 6 Comments

In my review of the second week of racing at Saratoga, I opined that the increase in attendance was the big story for the week.  After a drop in 2013 attendance from the preceding year, NYRA reported an 11 per cent increase over 2013 and six per cent over 2012 for the same days.  (I omitted give-away days because NYRA had changed the reporting of those days from counting each purchase of a give-away coupon as attendance instead of just reporting those who actually pass through the turnstiles.)  It was good news for those hoping that New York racing thrive.

On Wednesday this week, I watched the racing from the backstretch.  The emptiness of the grandstand was of concern, particularly since the preceding Wednesday saw a three-year low of 8,044 in attendance.  When I say empty, I’m not talking about empty seats;  I’m talking about empty sections, some of which literally had no one sitting in them.  So I was flabbergasted when I saw that NYRA reported attendance of 18,500 for the day.

On Friday, I went over to the backstretch again, but this time took photos:

These two are of the clubhouse:

DSC_1917       DSC_1920

These are of the last six sections in the grandstand:

DSC_1926      DSC_1928

These photos were taken around 3:00, about halfway through the card.  Back in the grandstand area, there were minimal  –  if any  –  lines, at betting windows or concession stands.  The area around the paddock had a number of patrons, but I saw empty picnic tables.

NYRA reported attendance of 24,205 for Friday.

I’m no expert on estimating crowds from personal observation, but 24,000 people have to go somewhere, and these photos indicate they are not in the grandstand.  (I apologize that the club house photos are not that clear.)  A partial explanation arrived with a news article by Paul Post in The Saratogian.  He reported that NYRA counts all season passes in the attendance total whether or not the pass holder attends that day.  NYRA heavily promoted the passes this year before they “sold out,” and ended up selling 6,370 this year compared with only 1,402 in 2013.

Post quoted NYRA spokesperson John Durso:  “This policy is not new and was in place last year.  It is also the same policy used by professional sports such as Major League Baseball and the NFL.”

Neither part of Durso’s statement is actually true.  Let me rephrase that.  If the first part is true  –  that counting the passes as attendance is standard policy  –  those running NYRA should have some serious concerns.  It would mean that the 8,044 attendance on that Wednesday included 6,370 pass holders and only 1,674 paid admissions.  Monday of that week’s paid admissions would have been 2,974.

Durso’s comments regarding other professional sports also cannot be accurate.  The NYRA clubhouse season pass costs $50, as compared with a pay-as-go approach of $320 for the 40-day meet.  I could call the Boston Red Sox ticket office to see if they have a similarly discounted season pass, but know what the answer would be.

If Durso means that baseball and football count reserved seat tickets in the attendance whether or not the patron shows, that sounds right.  (Indeed, those same Red Sox were being ridiculed two seasons ago for claiming sell-outs when there were clearly thousands of empty seats.)  But, if he is talking about the reserved seat sales for Saratoga, that raises the question of whether those admissions are being counted twice.  The holder of a reserved seat ticket does not present it at the admission gate because the cost of the ticket does not include the admission price.

When NYRA changed its policy of counting “spinners” in the attendance on give-away days, Chief Experience Officer [sic] Lynn LaRocca said that the inflated attendance “adversely skewed the far more important business metric of on-track per capita spending.”  CEO Chris Kay has identified per capita spending as the measure of customer satisfaction with the NYRA experience.

As a matter of simple logic, if you include in the attendance figures people who are not there, you lower per capita spending  –  meaning, according to Kay, dissatisfaction with NYRA.   Monday, Wednesday and Thursday of the past week provides a remarkable contrast to the same three days last year.  According to NYRA’s attendance figures, total attendance for the three days in 2014 increased by 14,071, a remarkable 41 per cent boost.  What is more remarkable, however, is that the total handle decreased.  So, 14,000 more people were in attendance and bet less money!  The average daily per capita wagering fell from $175 in 2013 to $119 in 2014.  So, if we use Chris Kay’s formulation, customers are about 2/3 as happy with NYRA as they were a year ago.

I also did a simple calculation to determine what the real attendance figures might be this year compared with 2013.  I subtracted giveaway days from the total attendance.  Then I assumed that one-half of the increased pass holders actually showed up each day  –  a generous assumption I thought  –  and subtracted the other half from the total.  The result?  Attendance is down from 2013.

To answer the question of why did NYRA start cooking the books, I think the key day is that Wednesday when attendance was only 8,044.  I think they panicked, and saw their talking point of a vastly improved NYRA going down the drain.  So they came up with a way of inflating the attendance figures.

Spokesperson Durso came up with the typical refrain, according to Paul Post, that the “paid attendance figures are consistent, accurate and  –  as opposed to the past where spinners were counted in attendance figures  –  fully transparent.”  Well, we’re not talking about spinners.  NYRA’s change in that regard is the correct one.  We are talking about six sections of empty grandstand when NYRA reports attendance of over 24,000.

The NYRA response is the opposite of transparent.  They can report actual attendance figures but, according to Post, declined to do so.  (Durso also did not respond to my requests for information about either the make-up of handle figures or whether they have changed the way they counted attendance between this year and last.)

Why is true transparency  –  or honesty, if you prefer  –  important?

  • Call me a naive fool in Andrew Cuomo’s New York if you will, but I think government agencies  –  as NYRA is  –  have a legal and moral imperative to be open, accountable and truthful;
  • Obscuring the true attendance figures obfuscates the effect of the admission price increases NYRA implemented this year;
  • Inflating attendance figure prevents a meaningful comparison of Cuomo Administration’s NYRA policies and performance with those of the prior NYRA.
  • NYRA is supposedly preparing to return racing to a non-public structure as required by the law establishing the government-controlled NYRA.  The need for accurate attendance figures should be painfully obvious;
  • Most importantly, it prevents a meaningful assessment of the state of New York racing and the nation’s premier race meeting for 2014, and inserts in its place political calculation and manipulation.

The NYRA approach on this issue assumes we are all stupid.  No one with whom I spoke last week believed the NYRA attendance figures.  Some even laughed.  But there are thousands of livelihoods dependent on New York’s continuing to have vibrant racing and breeding industries.  I understand that those running the show may have different personal or political agendas, but please stop playing us for fools.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NYRA’s summer and the future

Posted by noonante on July 6, 2014
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , , , , . Leave a comment

The New York Racing Associations has announced scheduling changes for the Saratoga meeting beginning on July 18.  Among the differences from last year:

  • A small reduction in the number of races, with only nine flat races carded for Mondays, Wednesdays and Thursdays;
  • Steeplechases on both Wednesdays and Thursdays, with the post for those events being 12:25;
  • Loading up the card for Whitney Day, August 2, by moving two Grade I races, the Test and the Alfred G. Vanderbilt, to that Saturday.

I think the first two changes are positive, although there are some who prefer longer programs.  I realize you are not being handcuffed to a seat to prevent you from leaving before the nightcap, but my personal preference is for fewer races, hopefully producing better quality racing.  Increasing the days on which there are steeplechases will appeal to fans of the jumps, and by making the post time 35 minutes before the standard 1:00, those who do not care for the events won’t be bothered (and the earlier race will not factor into the pick 5).  NYRA is to be credited with coming up with these changes that I think should only be viewed positively.

Loading up the Whitney card by moving two grade I’s from other days is an effort to repeat the increased handle that NYRA believes resulted from a similar approach on Belmont Stakes Day, when they moved Grade I’s from Memorial Day to have a card with six Grade I’s as well as four other stakes.  Martin Panza, the senior vice president for racing, was quoted by Thoroughbred Daily News as saying, “Instead of handling $40 million, we hope to be handling $80 million.  We hope … 50,000 people show up….”

This notion of creating “big” days as a way of enhancing attendance and handle, as well as attracting new fans, is one of the innovations by NYRA this year.  My view is that 100,000 showed up on Belmont Stakes Day not because there were six Grade I’s, but because California Chrome was going for the Triple Crown.  NYRA’s stated purpose in moving three Grade I’s from Memorial Day was to give Belmont Stakes Day insurance against the Crown not being at issue.  I would hazard a guess that at least half the crowd that day had no idea what a Grade I is. The increased handle, on the other hand, very likely was the result of one of this year’s most enticing race cards.  It undoubtedly came at the expense, however, of what I surmise was a seriously lower handle on Memorial Day.

So NYRA’s theory as espoused by Panza will be put to the test on this year’s Whitney day.  My prediction is that the attendance will be about what it was last year, despite what I anticipate to be a heavy marketing campaign by NYRA.

Speaking of attendance, I was at Belmont on Saturday and Sunday two weekends ago.  Both days were absolutely perfect early summer days.  On Saturday, 6,060 other fans joined me; Sunday’s crowd was 5,414.  By contrast, Monmouth Park attracted 40 percent more people over the weekend.  Even Suffolk Downs, cozily nestled between huge oil storage tanks and train tracks in East Boston, attracted a Saturday crowd that was more than half of Belmont’s.  The Monmouth cards did not come even close to approaching the quality of NYRA’s offerings  –  and we need not go into the “quality” offered by Suffolk, a track that may well be on its last legs.

Even more significantly, this weekend’s heavily touted “Stars and Stripes Day” drew a mere 11,118 for a terrific card of racing featuring two Grade I turf races and the Dwyer and Suburban.  Now I realize that Andy Serling works for NYRA, but when he mentioned the “great crowd” as I was looking at tens of thousands of empty seats, I had to wonder if working for NYRA comes at the expense of any pretense of integrity.

The Belmont numbers are not atypical.  They do, however, point to a significant issue concerning the future direction of racing in New York state.  With the exception of Saratoga and Belmont Stakes Day, attendance at New York’s tracks rarely hits five figures.  New York’s handle, from all sources, nonetheless accounts for 20 per cent of all wagers on thoroughbreds in the country.  It may not matter, then, what on-track attendance is when that amount of handle is being generated.  At the very least, however, it is a conversation worth having, particularly since the closing of NYRA’s other down-state track, Aqueduct, is frequently raised.

It is not the only subject worth discussing about New York’s future.  The Governor’s top racing figures have openly mentioned removing revenues from Video Lottery Terminals that currently go to the thoroughbred purses.  The legislation creating the current state-controlled NYRA expires a little over a year from now, and a recommendation on the future structure of NYRA must be filed in less than 10 months.

In addition, there are industry-wide issues that need to be addressed.  Tom LaMarra recently wrote in BloodHorse.com about the significant drop in both recent foal crops and the number of owners. Yet there is not even a peep from NYRA’s so-called leaders talking about these issues.  Chairman of the Board David Skorton rarely says anything about the future of the racing and breeding industries in New York.  He came to the job almost two years ago with neither a background in racing nor any knowledge of it.  I am not sure he has ever been to a horse race.  His pick for NYRA’s CEO, Chris Kay, similarly has no racing background.  At least he had been to a race, albeit 40 years before his appointment.  While his pre-Saratoga press conference demonstrated his knowledge of the eligibility for a free scoop of ice cream at the Spa’s traditional open house on July 13, the next interesting thing he says about the direction of the racing and breeding industries will be his first.

New York should be a national leader in the racing, particularly given the dramatic decline of Churchill Downs as either a racing venue or voice for the industry.  Neither Skorton nor Kay has demonstrated any aptitude  –  or interest  –  in assuming that role.  The NYRA Board that has 11 government-appointed members out of 16, is as useless an entity as exists in racing.  Its last meeting  –  the only one it will have over a six-month period  –  lasted all of 56 minutes, except for an executive session, even though it is facing these significant issues.

According to The Saratogian, Board member Charles Wait said that the preliminary report on returning NYRA to a non-government controlled entity is expected in August.  It is a report that should be made public in order to encourage a much-needed discussion about the future of NYRA.

If past performances are any indication, however, NYRA will refuse to release it.  It’s not as though a Board consisting entirely of older white men could not use some input that the 30,000 people dependent on the racing and breeding industries might have.  Last time I looked, “older white men” is the only demographic amply represented by racing patrons, a concern that should be paramount to an organization that is purportedly interested in expanding its fan base.