By Bloodhorse.com
ARCADIA, Calif. (Oct. 20, 2016) –Members of the California Horse Racing Board made a commitment to decide the highly contentious Northern California 2017 racing dates dispute at its regular October meeting, but at the conclusion of a nearly 2 1/2-hour discussion Oct. 20 at Santa Anita Park, the regulatory agency could not reach a resolution.
The CHRB commissioners in attendance voted 3-1 to approve a dates proposal for the region, but because only four of seven member seats were filled, the three votes did not meet the required four needed to pass the measure.
CHRB chairman Chuck Winner and fellow members George Krikorian and Steve Beneto voted to approve the proposal, while Alex Solis provided the only “no” vote. Commissioners Madeline Auerbach and Jesse Choper were not in attendance and the seat previously held by Richard Rosenberg is vacant.
The proposal would have assigned Golden Gate Fields dates from Dec. 26-June 20, the Alameda County Fair at Pleasanton from June 21-July 11, the State Fair at Cal Expo in Sacramento from July 12-Aug. 1, the Sonoma County Fair at Santa Rosa from Aug. 2-22, the Humboldt County Fair at Ferndale from Aug. 23-Sept. 5, Golden Gate from Aug. 30-Sept. 19, unassigned dates previously held by the San Joaquin County Fair at Stockton from Sept. 20-Oct. 3, the Fresno Fair from Oct. 4-17, and Golden Gate from Oct. 18 to Christmas.
The dates dispute will be readdressed at the regularly scheduled November meeting, which will take place at Del Mar Nov. 17.
After industry stakeholders from the region largely repeated stances they’ve expressed since talks commenced in June, Solis said, “At this point, I don’t know if I can vote on any of this. … I’d like to see the full board participate to really get something (done) to help racing. We’re supposed to look out for the best for racing, the best for horsemen, and the best for California. … (Tracks that) perform the best should get rewarded.”
The dates in contention have been clear for months. Santa Rosa, the only fair stop with a turf course, wants to move its August dates back in the calendar to avoid clashing with the local school year. Ferndale wants the current overlap with Golden Gate to cease so it can capitalize on lucrative host fees. Golden Gate wants more summer dates, because their representatives feel those good-weather dates are disproportionately dominated by the fairs. Both Pleasanton and Golden Gate want the unassigned Stockton dates alone.
These points were all reiterated by various people representing the region’s industry stakeholders Thursday morning and afternoon.
At one point Krikorian asked Golden Gate representative Scott Daruty if he wanted “the board to shut the fairs down so Golden Gate can stay open?”
The dates dispute is also tied to stabling in Northern California. A Golden Gate presentation said the region’s Stabling and Vanning Fund has operated at a $2,850,007 deficit since 2011.
Both the California Authority of Racing Fairs and Golden Gate are considering closing down auxiliary stabling options in 2017. CARF officials have expressed an unwillingness to pay for auxiliary stabling at Golden Gate during the summer, which would require to horsemen to move their strings from fair to fair every two to three weeks, and Golden Gate has expressed an unwillingness to pay for auxiliary stabling at Pleasanton during the winter and spring.
Multiple CHRB members, along with representatives from the Thoroughbred Owners of California and California Thoroughbred Trainers cautioned the stakeholders on the implications of each.
“What happens to all the employees? What happens to all the people who live there?” Winner asked about the potential closure of Golden Gate as a training facility when it doesn’t have live racing.
At the end of the dates discussion, after the vote did not total the required four for passage, Winner also made a parting plea.
“I’m begging you—I’m imploring you—as stakeholders to get together,” Winner said. “I think everybody agrees that this is an impossible situation for this board and I would love to see the stakeholders try to get together, and I ask CARF and Santa Rosa especially, to see if you guys can come together and figure out something that works for everybody.
“We keep trying to put this puzzle together and we can’t do it. Eventually we’re going to have to impose the dates and obviously, as you can see, there’s disagreement on the board like there’s disagreement out there. Hopefully at the November meeting we’ll have six members and that’ll make it easier to get four votes.”
Also during the session, the CHRB moved forward on a proposal that would require advance-deposit wagering sites to “geolocate” wagers placed on their platforms. If the bets are placed on a mobile device or laptop within 100 meters of a racetrack, the wagers could be considered on-track. This would give racetracks a larger slice of the takeout on those bets. The proposal was sent out for a 45-day public comment period.
The CHRB also took no action on a proposed amendment to its whip rule, which would prohibit jockeys from “using the riding crop more than four times in succession during the last sixteenth of a mile … without giving the horse a chance to respond.” The current rule limits consecutive whips at three during any part of a race.